Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutApril 4, 2002 P&Z Comm MinutesMeridian Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting April 4, 2002 Page 2 Borup: I will be open for a motion, perhaps, on adjustment on the Agenda. Zaremba: Mr. Chairman? Borup: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I move for this evenings hearings we take Item 10 of our agenda, PP 02-005, and move it to the next item before we hear Item 4. Centers: Second. Zaremba: Motion and second. All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Item 10: Public Hearing: PP 02-005 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 4 building lots and 1 other lot on 20.01 acres in a C-G zone for Willey Subdivision by Roylance and Associates -- 3710 East Franklin Road: Borup: Okay. I'd like to open Public Hearing PP 02-005, request for Preliminary Plat approval of 4 buildings lots and 1 other lot on 20.01 acres in a C-G zone for Willey Subdivision. I'd like to open this hearing and start with the staff report. McKinnon: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. I will go through this pretty quickly. I assume that you all know where the R.C. Willey building is right now on the corner of Franklin and Eagle Road. On the overhead there is some pictures of the existing site, R.C. Willey, and then just to the -- just to the north of Lanark Drive right there you can see where the vacant land would be, part of one of the new lots looking at R.C. Willey from Eagle Road. On the overhead now you can see a site plan showing where all of the existing lots will be placed upon approval of the Preliminary Plat. We went through the landscaping and I'd like to move back to this ordinance. This overhead right here and there is just a few comments that the staff has in addition to the staff report you have in front of you tonight. On Page 3 of your staff report, Item Number 6 states that a landscape buffer shall be required on Eagle Road and Franklin Road. That landscape buffer, according to ordinance, is required to be on a common lot. In the past few months the Commission and Council have granted waivers to that, to make it a requirement they can place that in an easement. Staff does not have any problem with that being an easement, rather than on a common lot. You may want to modify Item Number 6 on the staff report to reflect an easement, if you so choose. If you can turn with me to Page 5 and 6, actually. There is some discussion concerning tiling of the Evans Drain. The Evans Drain runs, according to the overhead you have in front of you, it runs east and west, parallel to Franklin Road on the north side of the property. It has not yet been filed. As part of the original approval for this property when it was annexed the property was to be tiled, as it says in the staff report. R.C. Willey requested a Variance to that. The Variance request was denied, because the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting April 4, 2002 Page 3 pipe that was required for that was not larger than 48 inches and you will find in the file there is letters from Nampa Meridian reflecting that. They had another meeting, the Council -- Councilmen Bird said that they would be granted a waiver at that time, but when the property to the east developed, it should be done. We do have a bond right now for 120 percent of the fee for the tiling. We can hold that in perpitude or you can make it a request tonight as part of this subdivision that the property be tiled. You will find that there are two options for you to choose from, either to require them to tile it this time or continue to hold the letter of credit. Those are really the only staff comments that we have that are not specifically worked out in the staff report and I turn the time back over to you. Borup: Any questions for staff from the Commission? Centers: Yes, Mr. Chairman. Could we go back to Items 5 and 6 on Page 3, your suggested modification would be -- McKinnon: Page 3, Item Number 6. The statement itself says per Ordinance 1213.10.03, all landscape street buffers shall be on a separate common lot maintained by a business owners association. Staff would be agreeable to modify that to read it could be placed in the easement, rather than on a separate common lot. Zaremba: And you're meaning a Cross-Access Easement? McKinnon: Excuse me.'? Zaremba: Or just a simple easement? McKinnon: Just a simple Landscape Easement. Actually, two reasons for that, one is that, and then they don't have to count that as the property line from which they measure their setbacks. The second part of that is it would remain a taxable part of the property. If it's on a separate common lot it's not an assessed piece of property. Centers: Thank you. Borup: Is the applicant here and would like to make a presentation and come forward. Jensen: Ladies and gentlemen, R.C. Willey is agreeable to -- Borup: You need to go ahead and give -- Jensen: My name is Marv Jensen. I'm with R.C. Willey in Salt Lake City. We are agreeable to the easement idea. That's fine. Borup: Okay. Then probably the only other item that wasn't -- have you had a chance to read the staff report? Any questions on that, other than -- that was one of them. The other one was concerning tiling of the ditch. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting April 4, 2002 Page 4 Jensen: The only thing I would say on the tiling of the ditch, that has been an ongoing issue, I understand. I was involved in all of the discussions and waivers and whatnot on that. The letter of credit that you have -- as I understand it has two conditions, that the money would be released to the City of Meridian to do the tiling if, indeed, R.C. Willey didn't do it. I understand those two conditions to be, Number 1, that both the city and the Irrigation District agree in writing that it must be done. I believe you have a letter from the Irrigation Distdct indicating that since it's under 48 inches that they anticipate the size and that it, therefore, be done. The second item, as I understand it, is that the property to the east owned by Mr. Van Auker has been developed and the ditch has been tiled. That hasn't been done yet. I did meet with Mr. Van Auker today and he indicated to me that they are going to go ahead, develop that property and that they are planning at this point to tile the ditch. If, indeed, that occurs, then R.C. Willey recognizes its responsibility to continue that tiling on across its property. Zaremba: Do you save any money by waiting and doing it at the same time they do it or is there some reason that knowing you're going to have to do it that you'd rather delay? Jensen: Well, we are down in Salt Lake and they are up here. My conversation with Mr. Van Auker today was that if, indeed, they are going to do it, it would make sense that we have -- if engage the same contractor and have ours done at the same time. Those are our preliminary discussions we are both in agreement to that. That's likely what will happen. It will be easier for us to do it that way, than to try to establish somebody up here on our own to do it and so we are planning to move that direction. Borup: So you're comfortable thinking that that was part of the requirement that it would be done at the same time? Jensen: Given the fact that Mr. Van Auker hasn't pulled his permit yet and started that, I'm not sure of the timing. His indication was today that he was going to do that soon and right away. Borup: That's what I meant. At the same time, that he did his. Are you comfortable with that as a requirement? Jensen: I think we would be comfortable with that, yes. Centers: Mr. Chairman, it's normal with a plat approval - that the ditches be tiled with he plat approval. Would you be acceptable to the standard subdivision requirement, which I just stated, and that would be tied to the issuance of future Building Permits, that it would have to be in prior to that and or Occupancy Permits? Jensen: On some of these lots that we are anticipating creating by this subdivision, is that what you're talking about? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission Mee{ing April 4, 2002 Page 5 Centers: Right. Correct. It would have to be done by that time -- before a Building Permit was issued, it would have to be done. Why would you be against that? Jensen: I don't know that we would be against it, because, in fact, it does provide a little more space on a cup of those lots in which to landscape and provide parking. I don't know that we would be opposed to it. Centers: Okay. Good. Thank you. Borup: Any other comments you want to make? Jensen: There was one other item in here that I noticed that I think is perhaps incorrect. Item 4 under the Preliminary Plat, site specific comments, it indicates that a new five foot wide sidewalk must be built along Eagle Road and Franklin. It exists on Franklin already. We put that in when we built the store. All the way from Gaudians Avenue to Eagle Road. That is there and so that should be corrected. The reason we did not install a sidewalk along Eagle Road at the time is because the Highway Department could not tell us where to put it. I don't know that they can still do that so if that requirement, indeed, is in here, it needs to be couched with something as to when the Highway Department can determine where it needs to go. Zaremba: If I'm picturing the property correctly, there is a pretty good slope pretty close to the roadbed. Is there enough reom even to put a sidewalk there? Jensen: It depends on where they put their line. You're right, there is quite a slope there, and we have landscaped -- Zaremba: Well, I'm not sure how close it is to the roadbed. Jensen: Right. We have landscaped this to where we believe our property line goes, but I don't know where the road is going to go and where they will want that sidewalk. If we could put on there the overall site plan -- there we go. Right along here -- all right. Here along Franklin that sidewalk goes all the way to the corner, but there is not a sidewalk down here. That would have to be addressed with some kind of a time schedule or a formula for determining that. My understanding is that Touchmark, who is doing the development over here, is going to bring the sewer line along here. This lot Number 1 we want to be sure has a tie to that sewer line. I'm sure Mr. Van Auker will want to be sure that his property has a tie to that sewer line, too. When that's installed that provisions are made so that these two properties can tie to that. It's my understanding also that he will request this road tie-in to the moved a little further north. Other than that, I don't know of any other items that need pointing out. Any other questions I could help with? Centers: Well, the last sentence on paragraph four that you refer to, the sidewalk design, and location should be coordinated with the lTD for Eagle Road and with ACHD. I think that would cover your situation. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting April 4, 2002 Page 6 Jensen: I think it would. If you mention time and-- location and the time. Centers: Yes. If you can't get ACriD off the dime, you know, the city is not going to cOme after you. Jensen: Well, I'm sure they have a time schedule, but, you know, I don't want our subdivision approval to be tight or held up because they don't know what they are going to do yet. It needs to be worded in such a way that when they determine what they are going to do, then we will comply with that. Centers: Okay. McKinnon: And, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, we will request a bond for all the improvements or a letter of credit for all the improvements prior to the signature on the Final Plat. We can include sidewalks as part of that. We will have the funds in place for that if the timing is off. Borup: David, are you -- Eagle Road is under jurisdiction of the Idaho - McKinnon: Idaho Transportation Department. Borup: Right. Now are they waiting for the -- that reconstruction of the intersection there before they determine some of that or do you know?. Have you had any -- McKinnon: I wish I could tell what lTD was doing all the time. Borup: They are widening Franklin in 2004. McKinnon: Right. As part of the project, I don't know. There is an interesting jog to the property dght now, as you can see on the west side of the property, and that was set up for mass transit. They -- I don't think that they are going to go any wider than what they have shown right there. As part of the mass transit, they have a place so the larger vehicles can pull off, pick up, and drop off. I don't believe that they are going to go wider than what they have currently requested for dght of way at that location. Borup: But are they wanting an intersection design before they can get placement for curbs and gutters? That's probably -- Jensen: Since they don't have a sidewalk on either side of the street there, I think it makes sense to wait, let them do what they are going to do and then add the sidewalks to it. Borup: That's why I wanted that to -- part of why they don't have a location yet and don't have the final - thank you. Any other questions from any Commissioners? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting April 4, 2002 Page 7 McKinnon: Mr. Chairman, I have a question, if I could ask just one. Just a point of clarification for both the applicant and the Commission. If we allow the landscaping to be placed in a 35-foot easement, rather than on a common lot, an additional requirement to that would be that the landscaping is installed pdor to the Building Permits being issued for any building within that lot in the subdivision. Jensen: I understand. McKinnon: Okay. Borup: Anything else from any of the Commissioners? Thank you. Do we have anyone from the public to testify on this application? Seeing none, Commissioners? Zaremba: I move we close the Public Hearing on PP 02-005. Shreeve: Second. Borup: Motion and second. All in favor?. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Borup: It looks like we have about three items that -- Centers: I think -- I'd like to make a motion and we will take it from there. Mr. Chairman? Borup: Commissioner Centers. Zaremba: So let me put in one item of discussion before you make a motion, if I may. Centers: Okay. Zaremba: On Page 3, the Item 6 that we have already talked about, the last two sentences are a choice that I believe we are being asked to make. That is whether or not we want to see the plat again before it goes to the City Council. The decision is to tell the applicant to bdng it back to Planning and Zoning 10 days before it comes to us or to tell the applicant to beat the Council Meeting by 20 days. I'm not sure we need to see it again if the applicant will submit everything 20 days before the City Council meeting. Let's make that choice then. Borup: I agree with that. Centers: Yes. I don't think -- well, I think - you know, that the landscaping be done prior to the issuance of Building Permits was the key to it. So -- I would like to make a motion that we recommend approval to the City Council for -- actually, it's Item 10 on our agenda. PP 02-005, request for Preliminary Plat approval of 4 building lots and 1 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting April 4, 2002 Page 8 other lot on 20.01 acres in a C-G zone for Willeys Subdivision by Roylance and Associates, including all staff comments and amending Page 3, Paragraph 4. The applicant states that the sidewalk is in on Franklin Road and that would be noted. Of course, it has to be and the sidewalk on Eagle Road to be coordinated with the Idaho Transportation Department and be put in when that coordinated effort is complete and the Idaho Transportation Department gives the go ahead. In addition, on Page 3 modify or amend paragraph six where staff has stated that landscaping could be placed on the easement and any and all landscaping must be in prior to issuance of Building Permits. It would be included in the motion that we would not have to see this application again. In addition, Page 6, Item 1, I would recommend that we require the applicant to adopt the standard subdivision requirement that the Evans Drain be tiled and that tiling could be tied to the city signature on the Final Plat for the issuance of future Building Permits or issuance of future Occupancy Permits. End of motion. Zaremba: I will second. BOrup: Motion and second. Any discussion? All in favor?. Any opposed? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Item 4: Public Hearing: ZA 02-001 Request for amendment to Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance by Jim Jewett and B & A Engineers: Borup: Thank you. Okay. The next Public Hearing, Items Number 5 and 6 -- or 4, 5, and 6. Let -- David, I think it might be appropriate to handle four by itself-- McKinnon: Absolutely. Borup: -- before we go into 5 and 6. ZA 02-003, request for amendment to the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance by Jim Jewett, B&A Engineers. I'd like to open this Public Hearing and start with the staff report. McKinnon: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. There is a whole lot in this little application. I have kind of broken it down into basically seven items that are major in discussion that we as staff felt were important that I'd like to just mention briefly and then turn the time over to the applicant and to you for questions and comments. The first comment we have is that this is essentially an ordinance that's trying to clarify some of the ambiguity that we have in our own ordinance about what is an attached single-family dwelling. What's a townhome, what's an apartment, what's a 4-plex, what is a duplex, and what are the standards and how do they apply for each one of those? They have given us some clarification as far as what they believe attached single-family dwellings should be and how they should be defined. Attached single-family dwellings would be similar to a duplex in appearance. The difference would be is there is a zero lot line. Rather than being on one lot, you have two separate lots joined with a zero lot line in the middle. Attached single-family dwelling, according to the new definition, would only allow for one common zero lot line wall. If there is