Ammon Park development heading to Pocatello City Council with recommendation of denial from P&Z Commission
Published at | Updated at
POCATELLO — Following Wednesday’s public hearing, which lasted roughly three hours, the Pocatello Planning and Zoning Commission voted unanimously to recommend denial of a proposed development at the city’s Ammon Park.
The proposal to develop 86 townhomes at the park will now go to the Pocatello City Council, with the commission’s denial recommendation.
During the public hearing, more than 25 residents spoke in opposition to the proposed development, while none spoke in support of it. Two residents did speak from the point of non-commitment, though one of those speakers, former City Council candidate Lydia Noble, said she was opposed to the plan but chose not to speak from the point of opposition as she does not live in the neighborhood.
At the conclusion of the four-hour meeting, commissioners briefly discussed the proposal, stating the pros and cons they were being asked to consider.
On one side, the commissioners said, there is a concern that adding the 86 townhomes to an already congested community would introduce a population density that is “way too high” for the area. However, they agreed, there is a housing cost issue that would be alleviated — at least slightly — by the addition of 86 new townhomes.
After the discussion, the commissioners voted 6-0 to recommend the development be denied by the City Council.
The discussion regarding the Ammon Park development proposal began with a brief statement from Brent McLane, the city Planning and Development Services Director.
McLane asked to address the “bevy of lies, misinformation and accusations” being circulated on social media about the development proposal. He said that, despite claims shared online, land was not being donated by the city for the development.
“Ammon Park is not being developed into housing, Ammon Park is remaining Ammon Park,” he said.
Joel Dixon, from Knudsen Engineering which represented the applicant developer CMJ Holdings LLC. presented the proposed “Park Place Townhomes.” The 10.34-acre development, he said would include the 86 townhomes, two common space areas, a clubhouse and walking trails. The graphic he displayed during his presentation appeared to show townhomes and communities amenities taking up much of what is now Ammon Park.
As a parade of residents filed to the podium, they addressed not just the commission and applicant, but a packed council chambers, filled with dozens of fellow residents who seemed to be unanimously opposed to the plan.
They addresses numerous issues — from overpopulation and increased traffic in an area already limited on space to the loss of a popular park and dangers of a proposed runoff pond.
Because children are not allowed to speak at these hearings, one of the speakers chose to user her time reading a statement from her small child.
“Please, I beg of you, leave my neighborhood and park alone,” the child wrote in part.
Greg Cates, a Pocatello police officer and former Bannock County Assessor candidate spoke in opposition to the park.
“I see this whole thing as a for-profit disaster,” he said. … “It’s crazy, 86 townhomes in that small corner.”
Several speakers spoke to the idea of the plan being, as Cates called it, “for-profit.”
“A Utah developer is going to come in and destroy that neighborhood. Period,” one speaker said.
Given to opportunity to offer rebuttal, Dixon addressed that claim, saying that: “a lot of the members of the LLC” grew up or spent time in Pocatello.
“We’re not distant from this area,” he said. “We do — both the engineers and the developer want to see this done correctly. … We want this to be successful, not just for us but for everyone.”
As for overpopulation and traffic concerns, Dixon added:
“Every development has added traffic. A lot of the concerns that have been spoken of have been outside of our control.”
When Dixon was done, McLane returned to the podium to explain to the crowd and commission that no matter what the volunteer commissioners decided at the meeting, the proposal would eventually go before the elected city council, where it will again be subject to a public hearing.
The Park Place Townhome development is not yet included on any upcoming agendas for the council, according to city spokeswoman Marlise Irby-Facer.