The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutStaff Comments l CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 10,2006 STAFF REPORT City Council Hearing Date: 1/10/2006 Mayor and City Council Craig Hood, Current Planning Manager cM'e;/d i !!!4 \ \ I Ll,\HO ~ '~ )- ,(",L- ""v ....".("" -"'~t1_o[oOI. I',~,~~,)<\~,,"!.--/ - "f..! TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Miscellaneous Application - MI-O5-016 Request to Modify the Recorded Development Agreement for Resolution Subdivision by Removing Lot 7, Block I, from the Requirement to Obtain a Conditional Use Permit Prior to Operation and Construction of an Office Building, by Conger Management Group. 1. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST The applicant, Conger Management Group, has submitted a Miscellaneous Application (MI) requesting modification to a Development Agreement for approximately 2.5 acres located on the south side of Overland Road, on the west side of Millennium Way, in an L-O (Limited Office) zone. The subject Development Agreement, dated July 18, 2000, was recorded on July 20, 2000, as Instrument No. 10056508, records of Ada County Idaho. The applicant is proposing to amend Item 4.1 on Page 4 of the recorded Development Agreement for RZ-00~003 (Resolution Subdivision No. I). Item 4, "Uses Permitted by This Agreement" states: 4.1 The uses allowed pursuant to this Agreement are only those uses allowed under "City" 's Zoning Ordinance codified at Meridian City Code Sections 11-7-2 G which are herein specified as follows: Œ-o) Limited Office District: The purpose of the L-O District is to permit the establishment of groupings of professional, research, executive, administrative, accounting, clerical, stenographic, public service and similar uses. Research uses shall not involve heavy testing operations of any kind or product manufacturing of such a nature to create noise, vibration or emissions of a nature offensive to the overall purpose of this District. The L-O District is designed to act as a buffer between other more intense nonresidential uses and high density residential uses, and is thus a transitional use. Connection to the Municipal water and sewer system of the City is a requirement in this District. With the further restriction that all uses and development of the subject real property shall be governed under the conditional use permit process as a planned development. For the construction and development of a planned commercial development. 4.2 No change in the uses specified in this Agreement shall be allowed without modification of this Agreement. The applicant is proposing to amend the Development Agreement to remove the obligation for future uses on Lot 7, Block 1, Resolution Subdivision No.1, from obtaining Conditional Use Permit approval (see Applicant's Submittal Letter, dated November 22,2005.) Item 22.1 on Page 11 of the recorded Development Agreement for this property states: Resolution Sub Development Agreement Mod / MI-05-016 Page I ¡ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 1O, 2006 22.1 No condition governing the uses and/or conditions governing development of the subject "Property" herein provided for can be modified or amended without the approval of the City Council after the "City" has conducted public hearing(:~) in accordance with the notice provisions providedfor a zoning designation and/or amendment inforce at the time of the proposed amendment. The City has sent out notices of the subject request in accordance with the current standards for public hearings (see Section 4 below for publication dates.) There are no required findings for a miscellaneous application/development agreement modification. Below, in the History/Staff Analysis section, staff has provided the most pertinent facts and analysis related to the proposed development agreement modification. 2. LOCATION & SURROUNDING USES The subject property is located on the southwest comer of Overland Road and Millennium Way, in Section 20, Township 3 North, Range 1 East. The following uses surround the subject property: North - Movie theatre and other future commercial uses (approved Destination Place Subdivision), zoned C~G South - Multi.family residential and offices, zoned L-O East - Office, zoned L-O West - BanklMedicallDental offices, zoned L-O 3. OWNER OF RECORD The property owner of record is EDGE, LLC, and David McKinnon of Conger Management Group, has submitted the subject application. 4. PROCESS FACTS a. Miscellaneous applications are not currently addressed in Title 11 of the Meridian City Code. It has been detennined by the City's Legal Department that a miscellaneous application to amend a recorded development agreement will in fact require a public hearing before the City Council. b. Newspaper notifications published on: December 19th, 2005 and January 2nd, 2006 c. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: December 16(\ 2005 d. Applicant posted notice on site by: December 31 S\ 2005 5. mSTORY/STAFF ANALYSIS In addition to being subject to the Development Agreement for RZ.00.003, this property was part of the conceptual Conditional Use Pennit (CUP) for a Planned Development (PD) proposal in 2000 (CUP-OO- 017). In 2000, G.L Voigt applied to rezone 37.6 acres from R~4 to L-O (RZ-00-003). Concurrent with the rezone application was a preliminary plat application (PP-00-006) and a conceptual CUP application for a planned development (CUP-00-017). CUP.00-O17 included multiple parcels, with a wide range of uses including office, retail, multi-family residential, a day care, a seminary and an ice arena. Also submitted with the above-listed applications was a CUP application for 200 multi-family units (CUP-00-015), and a CUP application for an 86,160 square-foot ice arena (CUP-00-OI6). Because the approval of CUP-OO-O 17 was conceptual in nature, the City required, through a Development Agreement tied to the rezone (RZ-OO-003), detailed CUP approval for all uses in the development. The Resolution Sub Development Agreement Mod / MI-05-016 Page 2 ! CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEARING DATE OF JANUARY 10,2006 condition to obtain detailed CUP approval when conceptual approval has been granted was a standard requirement of the City at the time. This requirement allowed the City to evaluate each phase to ensure that developers comply with the approved uses of the conceptual CUP as well as design standards. (A single retail building was originally shown for this lot on the approved concept plan for the resolution development.) We have found, over time, that the issues associated with the proposed office use within the Resolution Subdivision could have been addressed at the staff level. Although the applicant has submitted a conceptual site plan for this lot, the applicant has not provided staff with copies of the building elevations for either of the conceptual office buildings shown on the site. Therefore, staff is unable to verify that the buildings will be architecturally consistent with the other office buildings that have been approved in Resolution Subdivision No.1, a principal reason for originally requiring a CUP for this property. Further, the Unified Development Code (UDC) does not have specific architectural provisions that could be addressed by staff through a Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC). However, if the applicant agrees to submit design review applications for the proposed office buildings that comply with UDC 1l~3A-19, that are compatible with the construction style and quality on the neighboring properties; staff believes that a CUP for this lot should not be required. If the Council approves the proposed Development Agreement amendment as proposed by staff, each building on the subj ect property will be required to submit a Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) application and a Design Review (DR) application, prior to construction of any building. Please note that both the CZC and the DR applications are approved at the staff level and do not require a public hearing. Staff believes that this recommendation is a good compromise in that future users will not have to obtain a CUP, and go through the public hearing process, unless required by the UDC. The staff-proposed Development Agreement amendment will still allow the City, through staff, to control site design and use issues required by ordinance, while allowing timely approval and construction ofthe proposed office uses on this site. RECOMMENDATION: This is the 3rd DA amendment for the Resolution development that the City has processed. This is the [mal lot within the Subdivision that has not received construction entitlements. The City Council may want to consider replacing the CUP requirement for all of Resolution Subdivision. This will facilitate the changes and/or reuse of structures in the future. Staff recommends that an amendment to the recorded Development Agreement for this site (RZ-OO-003) be approved, which amends the requirement for Lot 7, Block 1, Resolution Subdivision No.1, from submitting CUP applications for buildings/uses that would not otherwise be required to obtain CUP approval, as detennined by the City's Unified Development Code, but does require the future buildings on Lot 7, Block 1, to comply with the provisions ofUDC 11-3A-19 (Design Review) and UDC 11-5B-l (Certificate of Zoning Compliance). Staff recommends that Item 4.1 of the Development Agreement (Instrument No. 10056508), insofar as it affects the subject property only, be amended by modifying the sentence to read: "With the further restriction that all uses and development of the subject real property shall be governed under the conditional use permit process as a planned development, except for Lot 7. Block 1. All uses and buildim!s on Lot 7. Block 1, shall be floverned under the Otv's Unified Development Code and shall be sub;ect to administrative desifln review as set forth in UDC 11-3A-19. " Staff further recommends that the Mayor and City Council direct the Legal Department to draft an amendment to the subject as stated above. Resolution Sub Development Agreement Mod / MI-05-016 Page 3