Victor Council to Vote on Reconsidering Market Street Denial
Victor City Council votes Wednesday on reconsidering its April 8 denial of the Market Street rezone, after the owner cited the Order's own findings.
VICTOR — The Victor City Council will decide Wednesday whether to reconsider its April 8 denial of the Market Street rezone, after the property owner's attorney filed a May 6 letter arguing that the council's written Order denies an application its Conclusions of Law say meets every applicable Victor Municipal Code standard.
The council voted 3-0 on April 8 to deny the rezone and a related short plat for a 7.42-acre parcel at the northwest corner of Baseline Road and Highway 33, halting a phased mixed-use project of up to 99 rental units and small-scale retail. Property owner East Idaho Holdings LLC, represented by Merissa A. Moeller of the Portland law firm Stoel Rives LLP, filed the reconsideration request on May 6.
Wednesday's vote is a procedural threshold, not a merits redo. The June 3 staff report frames three motion options: deny reconsideration and let the prior decision stand; grant reconsideration and schedule a new noticed public hearing; or grant reconsideration and direct staff to redraft the written decision based solely on the existing record. The council takes no public comment on the question.
The reconsideration letter argues that the council's April 23 Order fails to comply with the Idaho Local Land Use Planning Act (LLUPA), which requires land-use decisions to explain how an application meets or does not meet specific code criteria. "While the City identified the applicable approval criteria in the Order, the Order does not explain how the Applications fail to meet those criteria based on the evidentiary record," the letter states. If the council does not reverse the denial, Idaho Code §67-6521 makes judicial review in district court the owner's remaining avenue to challenge it.
In Conclusions of Law v and ix, the Order states that each application "meets all applicable standards specified in Title 10 of Victor Municipal Code, as more fully described in the Findings of Fact above," even as it denies both. The Order's "Things to Change to Obtain an Approval" section lists fewer residential units, for-sale housing, deed restrictions on at least half the units for local workforce housing, a prohibition on short-term rentals, or some combination. The letter argues none of those items corresponds to a finding that the applications failed to meet any specific approval criterion in the city's Land Development Code (LDC).
Four months before the Market Street denial, on December 9, 2025, the council approved a rezone to Commercial Mixed Use (CX) for Peak Property Ventures LLC at 7895 South Highway 33, from prior Commercial Corridor (CC) and Residential Multi-Family (RM-2) zoning. The Peak Order, signed on December 16, found that all nine of the LDC §14.7.12.B approval criteria were met. Its Conclusions of Law state that the rezone "meets all applicable standards specified in Title 10 of Victor Municipal Code, as more fully described in the Findings of Fact above." The Market Street Order uses the same phrase in its Conclusions of Law while denying both applications. Stoel Rives argues the record identifies no principled, criteria-based distinction explaining the two outcomes.
At the April 8 hearing, the council cited the unresolved wastewater situation, the volume of multifamily housing already in Victor's pipeline, and a comprehensive plan it said needs updating before the city approves more density along its edges. Councilor Sue Muncaster summarized what she'd heard from constituents: "too much, too soon, too fast." Mayor Will Frohlich and City Administrator Jeremy Besbris urged the developers to stay engaged. Frohlich said he believed the project aligned with the comprehensive plan.
What to watch: The council meets Wednesday at 6 p.m. in council chambers. If the council grants reconsideration, the matter returns either as a new public hearing or as a redrafted written decision based on the existing record.
Update: The council unanimously voted to redraft the written decision.