Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developer withdraws Sierra Vista rezoning after residents cite safety, buffer and traffic concerns
Summary
After a lengthy public hearing and extensive resident testimony raising concerns about taxiway easements, a 100-foot buffer, steep grades on Bonanza Drive and potential incompatible by-right uses under CMU, the applicant withdrew the Sierra Vista rezoning and minor-subdivision application; staff noted many design details would be resolved at site-plan stage if the project returns.
The applicant for the Sierra Vista rezoning told the Erie Town Council on April 28 that it would withdraw its rezoning and minor-subdivision application after extended public comment and council questioning over safety, buffer distances and traffic.
Principal Planner Christopher LaRue outlined the staff recommendation for a rezoning of roughly 60 acres northwest of Highway 7 and Bonanza Drive, proposing to rezone about 15.9 acres to an airport (AP) district and the remaining acreage to community mixed use (CMU). LaRue said utilities are available and staff found the proposal consistent with many comprehensive-plan goals, but noted some applicant commitments (height limits, buffers) were listed as plat notes and not strictly enforceable.
Applicant representatives said they had adjusted the plan to increase CMU frontage along Highway 7 and shrink the AP footprint, and committed to a 100-foot setback along the north property line. Becca Bailey of Norris Design and Heidi Majerik (owner's representative) said a navigation consultant, Mead & Hunt, found the rezoning was not expected to increase airport traffic.
More than a dozen residents from the adjacent Erie Airpark and nearby neighborhoods testified in opposition during the public hearing. Speakers repeatedly described an active recorded taxiway easement that runs along the north property line (a 40-foot aircraft easement that would sit within the proposed 100-foot buffer), and argued the offered buffer is insufficient given aircraft maneuvering needs and public safety concerns. Others cited the parcel's steep grades and a crest on Bonanza Drive that they said could create inadequate sight lines for any new access points; one resident warned that the intersection geometry and an inadequate sight-distance standard would create a "deadly combination" for vehicles exiting the site.
Residents also raised zoning concerns: community mixed-use (CMU) allows a wide range of by-right uses, including higher-density residential and many commercial functions that critics said might be incompatible directly adjacent to rural residential lots. Commenters urged a north'to'south transition or alternative zoning that would better step down intensity toward the Airpark.
Councilors pressed staff and the applicant on how the taxiway easement, the 100-foot buffer, and future site planning (including a final traffic-impact analysis and access locations) would be enforced or reviewed. Staff and the applicant responded that many of those details are resolved at the site-plan stage and that a final TIA would consider grading and sight-distance when actual uses are proposed.
Given the breadth of community concern and several councilors' stated difficulty with criteria that require compatibility with nearby properties, the applicant chose to withdraw the application rather than seek a vote. The public hearing was closed and the council recorded that the applicant withdrew the rezoning; the item may return if the applicant re-files a revised application.
The council and staff reiterated that future site-plan applications would require further community engagement, technical traffic review, and potential referral to FAA or other agencies for aviation-related easement issues.
