Unanimous Council Decision
The recently unanimously approved plans for the new development agreement and master plan for Old Farm Estates (OFE) drew a lot of interest from residents. I thought I would summarize why I voted to approve the new plans. Also, as we have an election coming up, and there are at least two of us running for the seat I currently hold (Timothy Frogue is the other candidate for the two-year council seat 2022-2024), my discussion here will give you a better idea of my approach on some issues and if you want to vote for me in November.
Moving to Sugar City...
I talk with people who grew up here or in this area wanting to return and needing more housing options to choose from. I talk with long-time Sugar City residents, now retired and wanting to downsize without having to move out of their beloved city. I talk with young college couples wanting to move here for a relatively short time. (I always get a bit sentimental when I see a young couple unloading the little U-haul in front of their first apartment together—those were the days!) I talk with people from other places moving here because they are searching for a wonderful place to live, one better than where they are coming from. I’m not nervous about who might move to Sugar City.
New Agreement and Master Plan
A version of the development agreement, including both the Teton Heights apartments and the Peregrine Estates townhouses in OFE was already approved prior to this most recent vote. However, for months, the city negotiated with the property owners to see if we could come up with a better agreement and master plan. What the council voted on was whether or not we thought the new proposals were more favorable for the city than the old plans.
Considering the Vote
I studied the reports from the various city staff members (city engineer, code enforcement, public works, city attorney, etc.), the input from the public and the recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Commission, and the thoughtful comments from the mayor and my fellow council members as I considered my vote. Also, I drew heavily from the city’s current comprehensive plan (2015) for guidance.
Comprehensive Plan Considerations
Our comprehensive plan expresses the residents’ desire to maintain Sugar City’s “small-town, family-focused character.” The plan recommends ways to accomplish this in the face of “near-term growth [that] may double or triple the city’s population.”
One suggestion from the comp plan to maintain the city’s “character” is to have a “predominance of single-family dwellings.” I don’t want to get too bogged down here in a debate over the definitions of “family”—I consider a single adult living on her own, a family—or “single-family dwelling,” which I think most people interpret as an independent separate structure on a single lot—even though in today’s housing economy, such a structure may be home to multiple unrelated residents or could be used as a rental property or as an Airbnb-style property, etc.
There are other suggestions in the comp plan to help maintain the “small-town, family-focused character” we want in the city. For example, the plan encourages the city to work with property owners to create “cluster developments,” defined as “grouping residential properties in a proposed subdivision closer together than in a traditional subdivision in order to utilize the rest of the land for open space, recreation, or agriculture”—basically, allowing greater density than may be usual in exchange for additional open space for public use.
The comp plan also stresses the importance of the city maintaining the ability to provide all residents with proper water and sewer services. And it says that the city should work to use secondary irrigation or “surface water for irrigation where feasible” to water the parks and other open areas rather than using our precious potable water.
Other areas of the comprehensive plan that I thought important for this decision was the directive to provide quality-of-life recreational opportunities for residents, such as biking and walking paths, parks and other interconnected recreational open spaces.
Vote "aye"
So, as I contemplated all of these elements, the question became pretty straightforward. The question was did the current agreement or the newly proposed agreement and master plan more fully meet the goals stated in our comprehensive plan. It seemed clear to me that a vote for the new agreement and plan was the responsible decision to make.
The new agreement and plans:
- Include future opportunities for more usable open space, including paths and connected walkways
- Provide more park space, including a new 6+ acre central park (with parking and playground area) and a fenced-in playground park just north of Peregrine Townhouses
- Provide for the developer to pay for the parks’ construction
- Provide for the developer to install a secondary irrigation system for parks and other open space
- Allow for better and safer positioning of driveways in the Peregrine project
- Require turning lanes on roads coming into the development
- Shift the Teton Heights project west to allow for a more accessible, usable, and central location for a large city park
- Create better transitioning between the various
types of housing and commercial areas
- Provide improved landscaping throughout the neighborhoods
- Create a wider variety of housing types and
looks and heights, more effectively avoiding the “cookie-cutter” neighborhood
look
Optimism and Reason
When making decisions, I try to use optimism and reason. I'm happy to discuss zoning and density levels with Sugar City residents or to discuss any of my decisions and what our shared vision is or should be for our great community. These discussions are necessary and can be had with optimism and reason guiding our approach. You can contact me at gdayley@sugarcityidaho.gov or 480-296-8478.
I’m quite optimistic that with careful planning, we can grow reasonably and improve our quality of life at the same time. It’s not an either-or issue for me. If we need to reduce and better define our density levels in our zoning, if we need to create a wider variety of zoning with more finely-tuned definitions and density levels, if we need to rework our comprehensive plan to more accurately reflect current and future economic and social conditions in our area and state and nation, then let’s role up our sleeves and debate and discuss and get it done. (And, in fact, the city is currently working on these things.)
Overall, I think the city is taking the right steps to keep our community strong, safe, enjoyable, and economically vibrant. Even with the inevitable challenges that come with growth, I’m optimistic about our future. It is the great people that make the great community. I would appreciate your vote in November so I can continue to serve you on our city council.