Teton Realty Blog

Teton Region Real Estate Market Stats, Articles & News

City of Driggs Area of Impact Draft

By Leave a Comment

The City of Driggs held a public hearing on March 13th to present a proposed new area of impact overview to the Driggs Planning and Zoning Board. While the state statute on adopting area of impact is vague, the City of Driggs is hoping that their plan will align with the county as they have been working together on the project. The current plan would still need to be approved by the city council before being presented to the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC).

An area of impact is an area outside the limits of City Driggs in county jurisdiction. It is an identified area of unincorporated County land outside of a city limits. The area is defined and agreed upon by both city and the county. The area is under the county’s jurisdiction, however, specific plans and ordinances are agreed upon by both the city and the county that dictate annexations and other planning and zoning procedures.

Most applications in this area for development would require a joint meeting between the city and county planning and zoning departments.

The proposed amendments to the area of impact are generally expected to decrease. The only area expanding from the previous impact area is to encompass the wastewater treatment plant area on the West side of the City along Bates Road. The revised and proposed boundary are areas that are reasonably expected to be annexed into the city in the next 10 years, though the primary focus will be the wastewater treatment plant and ends of the airport runway as necessary with an already approved runway shift, which is a large consideration as part of the amended area of impact.

Properties outside of the area of impact can still request to be annexed into the city, but any areas outside of the proposed boundary the city would not be able to annex under their current plan.

Tributary is expected to be required to annex before future development of additional phases of the development can occur.

The new Driggs area of impact land is intended to have its own effective land development code when fully adopted. It will have specific zoning districts under the county’s jurisdiction specific to these areas.

Teton County Land Development Code Amendments – Workshop

By Leave a Comment

A workshop has been underway to redline several items in the Teton County Land Development Code (LDC). This review and workshop is ongoing, stay tuned. Please note that much of the information below is an interpretation of the March 12th Planning and Zoning meeting, always verify information with Teton County, Idaho and the most recently published Land Development Code. Just because items below are listed, does not mean that they will be amended. Items that were redlined in the review document (linked here) are in BOLD below.

Teton County has noticed grammatical errors in general errors from public and county staff. Two work sessions were held to review those items with the planning and zoning commission in January 2024 and the county commissioners in March of 2024.

– inaccurate numbers and citations
– table revisions edits in clarifications
– confusion as to when permits are needed
– beekeeping
– ADUs including ADUs in the IR zone (When the new land development code was passed a previous amendment was missed allowing up to two attached ADUs in the IR zone district
– application procedures, land division review and short plat errors
– scenic overlay changes

Notes on the most discussed topics are listed below.

Setbacks
A red line was made with respect to uncovered or unenclosed porches or debts awnings etc that may extend into a required front or side setback up to 2 ft or up to 6 ft into a rear setback. Previously unclosed patios, decks, balconies, porches and so forth were able to encroach into a side or rear setback up to 10 ft. This is likely to avoid issues relative to properties with small setbacks.

Beekeeping
Commercial beekeeping is now defined as 16 hives or larger and discussion about not requiring commercial permits for fewer than 16 hives. Further clarification on what defines a hive (a box, or a stack) was recommended.

Campgrounds
Campgrounds were further defined as campsites with individual water, sure, and or electrical hookups for 2 to 60 tents, recreational vehicles, cabin sites, or travel trailers.

Accessory Dwelling Unit, Attached
Redlines were added in the IR Zone district to accommodate two attached units as an ADU, a code update previously approved prior to the new code, but not included in the final revision to the new code, an inadvertent oversight. The maximum size of the ADU shall not exceed 1500 ft² for either one or two units. The applicant will need to provide verification of wastewater treatment system based on Teton counties septic capacity evaluation form. Applicant is responsible for any fees associated with reviews. ADUs may not be short-term rented in the IR Zone district.

Employee Housing
A controversial element suggested in the code was that the number of employees per unit shall not exceed the number of bedrooms. Planning and zoning commissioners argued that this standard should be limited by fire code requirements or square footage requirements by other entities. *This seemed to be of the greatest concern for the planning and zoning board. Discussion was made to strike this and revert to the septic capacity limits.

Application Subject to Final Decision by the Administrator
As noted below, Scenic Corridor Reviews was added to the list of items that may be at the discretion of the Administrator, more on this is reviewed below.
Temporary Uses
Limited Uses
Agricultural Land Divisions
Sign Permits
Scenic Corridor Reviews
Boundary Line Adjustments, and
Modifications to a Temporary Use

Temporary Uses – Expiration and Revocation
Temporary use permits may not be used in place of a special use permit for an ongoing use – effectively limiting anything more than 180s consecutive days to a special use permit.

Short Plat Land Divisions
The review procedures for the short plat land division process were changed

Preliminary Plat Review
A review criteria was added stating impacts presented from any studies requested related to natural resource overlays, economic impacts, or traffic studies.

Expiration
The application for final plat must be submitted within (previously 36) 24 months of the date of the BOCC’s final decision on the preliminary plat.

Floodplain
Floodplain requirements were amended to be aligned more closely with FEMA requirements.

Grading and Drainage
Amendments were made to the grading and drainage section to add requirements but also intended to reduce the number of permits for special work running through the county. Concern about existing code language including requirements for grading and drainage permits when driveways are elevated more than 6” from existing grade were questioned by the Planning and Zoning Commissioners. Development of an agricultural exempt building, as determined by the building official may now require a grading and drainage permit was also in question.

Riparian Buffers – General Development Standards
Additional language was added to general development standards for any development activity within riparian buffers.

Wildfire Hazard Areas
Small modifications to fuel brakes were discussed and Planning and Zoning Commissioners suggested professional opinions before implementing further changes.

Scenic Resource Protection
*This was an important aspect of my consideration based on special requirements for those close to scenic corridors including State Highways and Ski Hill Road. A general statement was added in applicability that Permits to develop within the scenic corridor may be approved administratively if all development standards are met. At the discretion of the planning administrator, any applications that do not fully meet the standards will require a public meeting to review the application and the planning and zoning commission who will act as the decision-making body.

Submittals
Additional submittals in the section were added for site plans, applications, including the latest recorded deed to a property, affidavits of legal interest if applicable, and landscaping plan including height of landscaping and plant species.

Summary
The Planning and Zoning moved to recommend approval with conditions with a condition to strike the redline limit on employee housing occupancy and continue discussions on defensible space and grading and erosion.

A Short and Sweet Update on Targhee Expansion Plans

By Leave a Comment

It’s always in and out of the rumor mill, so I decided to attend a Board of County Commissioners meeting jointly between Teton County Wyoming and Idaho – Grand Targhee is an inholding in Wyoming surrounded by National Forest, but accessed from Driggs, Idaho.

Teton County Idaho’s Rob Marin gave an overview of the expansion proposal plans which included:

– A new lift North of Blackfoot to supplement the existing Blackfoot lift, and a new lift South of Dreamcatcher to supplement the Dreamcatcher lift.
– A proposed restaurant at the top of the Dreamcatcher lift with 6,000 square feet of space, including 3,000 square feet of open deck.
– A proposed restaurant at the top of the Sacagawea lift with 6,500 square feet of space, including 2,000 square feet of open deck.
– An additional phase, referred to as the “Mono Trees,” which includes approximately 6,000 acres of expansion below the recently installed Colter lift, as well as additional expansion South of the Colter lift referred to as the “South Bowl” expansion.
– Tree grading (or removal) and snowmaking, which would be a first for Grand Targhee.
– Converting the main Dreamcatcher open lift to a gondola hybrid AKA “chondola”.

The revised expansion proposals have come on the heels of the recently installed Colter lift which was previously designated as a cat skiing area. Concerns expressed by those on the Idaho side included water consumption for snow making and wildlife migration in the proposed Mono Trees and South Bowl expansion areas. Teton County, Idaho also expressed support of Grand Targhee Resort as an economic partner, but affirmed concerns about the scale of the proposal and its impacts. The largest public concerns included wildlife, scenery, traffic and parking, social economic impacts such as housing, labor supply and public services as well as recreation impacts including those impacts to backcounty skiing.

A link to the county meeting can be found here.

But… That Lot is Smaller!

By Leave a Comment

I know I have written about this before, and I’m sure there is an article buried in the archives harping on the same issues here, but I think it’s an important topic.

Whether you are a Seller looking to value your own land, or a Buyer looking to acquire land of your own in the Tetons, understanding what impacts value is extremely important. This comes up time and again, particularly when it comes to the size of a parcel when compared with another. While the size of a parcel can obviously have an impact on value, it may not always be as much as you think. As an example, the difference in value of a 2.5 acre parcel compared with a 3.2 acre parcel (despite a 20%+ difference) will often be negligible. To further elaborate the example, the value of a 1 acre parcel adjacent to a 2.5 acre parcel in the same development may not only be negligible, but in many cases the smaller parcel could carry significantly more value. With that being said, let’s go through my list of value considerations when comparing parcels or lots that are otherwise “like in kind”, such as those in the same development, or in nearby developments.

In particular order, and of most significance to least in terms of my opinion of value, take a look, below.

1: View. While I wouldn’t necessarily always put this attribute on top, it is often of great consideration, particularly in subdivisions comprising 1-5 acre parcels, which is a typical size throughout the county. A parcel with view protection by way of building envelopes, terrain, roadways or otherwise can have significantly more value than one with some type of obstruction, or potential for obstruction. This can become even more important when it comes to Teton views.

2: Location. I’m not necessarily talking about location inside of a particular area, but location compared with another property sale or listing. A parcel adjacent to a main county or state roadway would often be considered of lesser value when compared with one nearby that might have more privacy. Location considerations can also come in the form of nearby features, which leads me to the next point.

3: Features. As indicated above, features and location often correspond with one another. A row of trees, a fire suppression pond, a berm, canal or any number of property features (which don’t necessarily need to be on the properties themselves) can impact value or bring added value.

4: Subdivision Attributes. While the property that one might be investigating may not even be in a subdivision, the chances are likely that one in the market for a building site is going to be looking at properties that are. However, not all subdivisions are created equally. Some offer advantages such as paved roads or favorable covenants and restrictions. In many cases, properties with minimal restrictions or no restrictions at all can bring more value than one with firm design criteria or subdivision restrictions. On the flip side, a development with great quality as a result of a well-organized homeowner’s association with robust design guidelines can also create an advantage compared with another nearby development that does not. These considerations can come in many different shapes and sizes. Another great example is rental restrictions.

5: Environmental or Adjacent Property Considerations. Examples can be wide-ranging, but might include high ground water which could prohibit certain construction types or add cost to construction methods, nearby factors such as farm equipment or older homes, and so on. The list can go on from here, but like many of the other considerations above, can also dovetail with some of these other listed items.

6: Size. Last, but not necessarily always least as I prefaced in the beginning of this article, size. I hope this article has made it easier to understand why acreage and its impact on value can be deceiving. Remember that a larger parcel often carries the same benefits with respect to flexibility and rights that a smaller property may have. If you’ve read many of my other articles, you’ll know that typically when it comes to subdivision parcels, most properties can accommodate a single family home and guest quarters, whether it’s 1 acre or 100 acres. Further, splitting land can challenging and oftentimes impossible. Teton County’s land development code does not provide opportunities for additional dwelling units without specific and rare zoning considerations. While size can definitely have an impact on value, it needs to be significant enough to the point that it may no longer be comparable with another property. These limitations on smaller parcels could include room for livestock, limitations on building a barn, or providing ample space for a detached guest house.

Recent Testimonials

Teton Valley Realty