Touting what he described as a mandate by the city of Hailey's comprehensive plan to generate growth, developer Jeff Pfaeffle is pushing the City Council to allow a 94-unit housing development just south of the city limits on Broadford Road.
Called Colorado Gulch Preserve, the development would be built on what is now the Stevens family ranch. But several neighbors are pushing back, including some that would be forcibly annexed into the city.
Pfaeffle, in partnership with Grant Stevens, hopes to annex about 38 acres of pasture and floodplain property into the city limits, thereby increasing allowed housing density, and—most likely—profits.
Current county zoning laws restrict density in the area to only one unit per acre, or 21 homes.
"The city needs growth and it cannot be all in-fill," Pfaeffle's attorney, Jim Laski, told the City Council on Monday.
He compared his client's annexation request to those in Boise and Meridian, where he said property owners regularly seek annexation from city officials. He also said Blaine County Regional Planner Jeff Adams and Hailey Planning Director Beth Robrahn support the plan.
"It is hard to find where it is not in general conformance with the comprehensive plan," Laski said.
Pfaeffle said he would provide a trail along an irrigation canal and through floodplain portions of the property, as well as improvements to Broadford Road, in exchange for the annexation, which would allow the developer to hook up to city water and sewer services.
< <
An existing trail between Heagle Park and Colorado Gulch Bridge, close to the Big Wood River, has been used for generations. Laski described this as "historic trespass" by many Hailey residents.
The Planning and Zoning Commission denied a similar annexation request by Pfaeffle in November. However, that request did not include the 17 acres of unbuildable property on the floodplain offered Monday.
A primary reason for the denial was the need to forcibly annex three property owners into the city against their will to "square up" the city's boundaries. The developer has offered to pay these holdouts for the expenses they would incur having to hook up to city services.
But so far the offer has not lessened nearby residents' opposition to the proposed annexation and development, which they contend will bring traffic problems and inappropriate housing density to Broadford Road.
"It is the most beautiful drive in the valley," said Broadford Road resident Sean Flynn, who joined five others in opposing the development. "It's a sanctuary. Why do you want to change that? There are plenty of other places you can get more density."
Cathy Barfus' four-acre horse property would become isolated within city housing densities if the plan succeeds.
"I would like to see equestrian properties there like the rest of Broadford Road has," she said.
Pfaeffle's engineer, Brian Yeager, said only nearby residents, representing a "not-in-my-backyard" element, were opposed to the project, which would bring benefits to the city as a whole.
"We see that every day. Where is the rest of the community?" he asked.
The council will review the annexation request and hold a public meeting for deliberations on Monday, Feb. 22. However, that meeting will be closed to public comment unless new information regarding the proposed annexation is presented to council before the Feb. 22 meeting.
Tony Evans: tevans@mtexpress.com
