Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning And Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission sends contested East Garland rezoning request back to planning commission
Summary
After lengthy public and staff discussion, the commission voted to return Ordinance 599 — a request to rezone a ~19.75-acre East Garland parcel from Ag Heritage to A-0.5 — to the planning commission to craft a plan that preserves frontage housing and keeps rear acreage in agriculture.
The commission debated Ordinance 599, a rezoning petition for a roughly 19.75-acre parcel in East Garland that would change the property from the Ag Heritage Zone to an A-0.5 (0.5-acre) zone. Scott Lyons (introduced earlier) reviewed the zoning history: the request was initiated when the land was unzoned, the planning commission recommended approval, and subsequent community planning led to adoption of an Ag Heritage Zone and removal of the A-0.5 zone from the code; because the applicant applied before that removal, the request has a grandfathered status.
Property owner and applicant Brody Caldwell described the family’s development intent and said they purchased the parcel in 2017 to keep it in the family and to allow smaller frontage lots so their children could live nearby: "...the AHC zone doesn't work for our family...we'd be open to R-1, R-2," Caldwell said, explaining the desire for a frontage-focused solution that preserves farming in the rear. Commissioners questioned access (road width, 30-foot dedication), infrastructure, and how many lots could be created under different zoning; staff said the developer would be required to dedicate 30 feet from the centerline and that the parcel's frontage and acreage limit the number of lots under various scenarios.
After extended exchange about consistency with the general plan and the planning commission’s prior recommendation (which considered an unzoned-to-A-0.5 proposal), Commissioner Perry moved (and Commissioner Bingham seconded) to return the application to the planning commission so staff and the applicant could develop an approach that allows frontage homes while preserving the back acreage for agriculture. The motion passed unanimously.
