Loading...
February 17, 2005 P&Z Minutes Meridian Planning & Zoning February 17, 2005 Page 40 of 76 Zaremba: Any other questions? Yancey: The other thing I'd like to add, if I could, is this is consistent with the master plan that was done in 2001. In that plan it provides for a Conditional Use Permit for each of the buildings as they were being developed. So, we are at that point now, so that's why we are coming back. Okay. Zaremba: We don't appear to have anybody signed up. Does anybody care to add any testimony? Any comment? All right. Thank you. Commissioners? Borup: Mr. Chairman, I move we close Public Hearing CUP 04-055. Moe: Second. Zaremba: We have a motion and a second. All in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Borup: Mr. Chairman, I move we forward to City Council recommending approval of CUP 04-055, to include all staff comments and conditions of staff's memo dated February 3rd, 2005, for the hearing date February 17th, 2005, as written. Rohm: Second. Zaremba: Okay. We have a motion and a second. All in. favor say aye? Any opposed? That motion carries. Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 11: Public Hearing: PP 05-001 Request for an amendment of the Preliminary Plat for phases 7 & 10 of Saguaro Canyon Subdivision consisting of 21 single family residential building lots on 6+/- acres in a R- 4 zone by Farwest - 6210 North Meridian Road: Zaremba: Next is Item No. 11 and I will open the Public Hearing for PP 05-001, request for an amendment of the preliminary plat for phases seven and ten of Saguaro Canyon Subdivision, consisting of 21 single family residential building lots on six plus or minus acres in an R-4 zone by Farwest, 6210 North Meridian Road, and we will begin with staff comments. Canning: Chairman Zaremba, Members of the Commission, Josh went home sick today, so I'm filling in for him tonight. This is just an amendment to the original Saguaro Canyon Subdivision approval. As you may recall, it's located north of McMillan Road between Meridian and -- that would be Locust Grove; right? There we go. And this is the proposed preliminary plat at this time. I'm going to come back to it. I want to show Meridian Planning & Zoning February 17, 2005 Page 41 of 76 you the original one. The area in question is circled and, in particular, you will notice the large six-acre property that's under developed with this -- as a single lot. And I also noticed that the angled road lines here -- go back to the proposal before you tonight. This is a proposal for approval of 21 single-family residential building lots on approximately six acres. It was previously parts of phase seven and ten of Saguaro Canyon Estates. The proposed preliminary plat depicts lots, which range in size from 6,808 square feet to 20,861 square feet. We haven't drawn an exact circle around it. You can see the area generally in here. You can mostly see the phase lines here, but it is an amendment to this area in general. It had been shown as the large six acre piece on the original Saguaro Canyon, because of the property owners, the original property owners, the Boyaks, wanted to retain that property and you may recall they wanted to put a single family home on there, probably previous -- or before the rest of the development got up there and there was quit a bit of discussion about a little 24 foot flag that goes out to Meridian Road to access -- or provide access for that one single lot. So, that was this area that's being amended. Okay. I told Mr. McKinnon, since I cut him off earlier, I'd try to make it short, so I'll move on. If you go to the preliminary plat special considerations, I did want to point out a couple things. The phasing of the subdivision, we did add that, just so that this area could be phased with the rest of the development. Once you -- once City Council approves the preliminary plat, they have a certain amount of time before they need to get in the final plat. All we have said is that this amendment doesn't need to follow a different course than the original Saguaro Canyon. So, this will just be phased according to the original approval. So, each year they have to get a successive final plat, then, and this will just be one of them. So, if they take a year for each plat, this might -- the first one of this approval amendment may not be for seven years, would be -- it's not likely to happen that slowly, but theoretically. I wanted to point that out. The street sections, the applicant did work with the fire department and we are proposing that -- well, the question was how to measure the 30 feet from face of curb to face of curb on a rolled curb and the fire department has gone back to the measurement of 33 feet from back of curb to back of curb. So, relating to that, we are proposing to eliminate condition number two on the site-specific conditions. And, then, we are also proposing that the -- or would recommend that the Planning and Zoning Commission add a condition of approval that is not included in here. It relates to the private drive -- the original private drive. The original Saguaro Canyon had a condition of approval and I have a copy of that, but the applicant is in agreement with what I'm going to say, so I don't think it's necessary to go into the full details, but, basically, the condition was that 24 feet -- you can't take access from it once this re- developes and you may need to sell it to somebody either to. the north or the south. Well, the applicant's representative had said that they are going through negotiations to sell it to Mr. Priddy, who is on the north side of the drive. so, we do believe that condition will be taken care of, but we ask that the condition still a condition just referencing back to Item No.8 and page eight of the development agreement regarding removal of the 24-foot lane. Finally, on general conditions -- or fire department conditions. I'm sorry. Number eight, again, that references 33 feet of measuring from face of curb and it should be changed to back of curb. I also noticed on condition number nine, that Josh forgot to fill in the X's. That would be the proposed 21 lot subdivision, would have an estimated population of 61 residences at build out, and the Meridian Planning & Zoning February 17, 2005 Page 42 of 76 applicant is in agreement with all the conditions of approval, even as amended on the fly here. So, if the Commission has questions, I would be happy to answer them. Zaremba: Commissioners? I did have questions, but you hit them all and answered them. Canning: Okay. Zaremba: The easement was one of them. Borup: No questions. Just another typo on -- it's the top part of this -- I don't think -- it wouldn't be part of the motion, but on page two, owner of record, I'm assuming that is incorrect. Canning: One would think, but I'm not sure. We can ask. It says Tuscany. No. Zaremba: Okay. No further questions, we are ready for the applicant. McKinnon: Thank you, Chairman, Members of the Commission. Dave McKinnon, 735 South Crosstimber representing the applicant. We have read the staff report and we agree with the comments that Anna has made tonight, and ask if you have any questions. Zaremba: Would you clarify who the owner of record is? McKinnon: The owner of record would be Farwest Development. It may be under one of the owner's actual names. It may be under Justin Martin's name. It is part of Farwest development. Zaremba: If there is no questions, anyone else? McKinnon: Thank you. Zaremba: Again, I don't believe we had anybody else signed up to speak on this issue. If anybody wishes to, speak now. All right. Thank you. Commissioners? Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Chair? Zaremba: If we need an opinion, it seems pretty -- it fits in with the previously approved plan and it just continues it. Newton-Huckabay: I think it's an improvement. Mr. Chair, I recommend we close the Public Hearing on PP 05-001. Moe: Second. Meridian Pianning & Zoning February 17, 2005 Page 43 of 76 Zaremba: We have a motion and a second. All in favor say aye. That motion carries. Newton-Huckabay: I didn't make good notes to make the motion. Borup: Mr. Chairman? Zaremba: Commissioner Borup. Borup: Maybe I made enough notes. I move we forward to City Council recommending approval of Public Hearing PP 05-001, to include all staff comments and conditions of staff memo dated February 11th for Public Hearing date of February 17th, with the following exceptions. On page three under street sections, delete paragraph two on the preliminary plat condition. And was that the place to add the other notation, director? That would be the appropriate place to add the reference to refer to? Canning: You could substitute the reference for that. Borup: Okay. Okay. Yeah. So, for paragraph two, substitute -- that should make a reference to item eight, page eight, of the development agreement of the previously approved Saguaro Canyon and also on page six, paragraph nine -- paragraph eight, last sentence, these measurements shall be based on the back of the curb dimensions, paragraph nine, of the proposed 21 lot subdivision, it should read in the first part of the sentence, but a total estimated population of 61 residential at. build out. That concludes my motion. Canning: And, Chairman Zaremba, just for the record, on that first -- regarding number eight, page eight, that was of the development agreement. Borup: Okay. Oh, I didn't mention that. My notes said it -- but, yes, it was a development agreement. Rohm: Did you want to state the owners of record to Farwest Development? Borup: Well, yeah, maybe if -- yeah, I don't think that is necessarily in the staff recommendation. About page two of the -- a report, the one of record, is Farwest Development. Rohm: Second. Zaremba: Okay. We have a motion and a second. All in favor say aye. Any opposed? That motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 12: Public Hearing: CUP 04-054 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development for retail uses in a CoN zone for The Shops at