Loading...
January 5, 2006 P&Z Minutes r <, '~ Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 5. 2005 Page 88 of 93 Newton-Huckabay: End of motion. Rohm: Okay. It's been moved and seconded that we forward onto City Council recommending approval of AZ 05-052, PP 05-053, and CUP 05-049. All three of these applications pertaining to Sadie Creek Promenade Subdivision. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed? Zaremba: No. And I would like to state for the record that my objection focuses mainly on the access to Eagle Road. Most of the rest of the project is what you would expect, but if the access to Eagle Road goes away, then, there would need to be some redesign. That's the whole purpose of my objection. Rohm: Okay. Motion carries and objection noted. Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE NAY. Item 25: Item 26: Item 27: Item 28: Public Hearing: AZ 05-057 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 17.25 acres from RUT and R1 to R-8, R-15 and C-G zones for Bienville Square Subdivision by Red Cliff Development, LLC - 2935 North Eagle Road: Public Hearing: RZ 05-019 Request for a Rezone of 10.05 acres from C- G to R-8, R-15 and C-G zones for Bienville Square Subdivision by Red Cliff Development, LLC - 2935 North Eagle Road: Public Hearing: PP 05-059 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 54 single family residential lots, 22 multi-family residential lots, 14 common lots and 7 commercial lots for Bienville Square Subdivision by Red Cliff Development, LLC - 2935 North Eagle Road: Public Hearing: CUP 05-052 Request for Conditional Use Permit for Mixed Use Regional project within 300 feet of a residence for Bienville Square Subdivision by Red Cliff Development, LLC - 2935 North Eagle Road: Rohm: Because everybody has taken the time and effort to stick it out with us until this hour, I would not be opposed to opening the last item on our agenda and at least hearing it out and given the people that have taken the time to come before us to speak to that. Does anybody on the Commission have a significant objection to it? Borup: I don't. I think -- Mr. Chairman, I would be in favor of that. I don't know that we, necessarily, vote on it tonight, but I think in my mind it's important to get the testimony from those here, in case it would require any redesign, it would be important to have that tonight, rather to continue it on any longer. I don't know that it necessarily would, but -- " Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 5, 2005 Page 89 of 93 Guenther: Mr. Chairman? Moe: Mr. Chairman, I'm confused. We received a letter from the applicant and they are actually requesting -- and Commissioner Zaremba brought it up earlier. They are requesting, you know, a deferral for one month in regard to this project, so I don't know what we are all going to hear tonight that's going to do us any good, because they want the -- Newton-Huckabay: Do it again in a month. Rohm: I guess the reason I want to open it, more than anything else, is because I want to give the audience an opportunity to speak that has stayed here until ten minutes after 12:00 and if there is testimony that any of them want to make, we can open it, take testimony, and continue it to a later meeting, but they will have an opportunity to speak tonight if that can still -- Guenther: Commissioner Rohm? That -- we don't have an analysis or conditions of approval and staff wouldn't be able to assist this at all on any type of rebuttal or answering of any questions, so I'm not sure if testimony is appropriate. Baird: Mr. Chairman? And, furthermore, one, we don't have a full staff report, evidently, you don't have a full application, complete application, so the comments from the public, although useful, would be incomplete and they would probably want to come back and comment again later. So, my suggestion would be is that you open it to hear from applicant regarding his motion to continue and take action on that first. Just one step at a time. Rohm: I think that's an excellent idea. Borup: I still wonder if it would be appropriate, maybe, just to hear from one representative from the -- Guenther: Mr. Chairman, again, the applicant has told me that his reason is that his application changes that he wants to make are so substantial that it affects all testimony for tonight and he's here to explain that to you. If we open it, allow him the explanation for why he is going to continue it, what he's probably projecting -- you can ask him questions and the audience would be able to understand why they sat here so long, hopefully. Rohm: Okay. That's -- I'm -- Borup: Makes sense now. Rohm: Fair enough. Okay. With that being said, I'd like to open the Public Hearing on AZ 05-0S7, RZ OS-019, PP 05-0S9, and CUP OS-OS2, and due to the fact that we do not . Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 5, 2005 Page 90 of 93 have a complete staff report, we are going to forego the staff report and go straight to applicant's shortened presentation. Unger: Mr. Chair and Commission Members, my name is Bob Unger, I'm with Redcliff Development. Our address is 787 East State Street, Suite 125, Eagle. 83616. We have requested deferment for a month for a redesign of the project. I'm going to make this very very short. First of all, it was to work with the developers of the Sadie Creek Promenade project on the cross-accesses, et cetera. But in addition -- and one of the main reasons we submitted this request, was that we have been approached by a user who is extremely interested in the project, but the combined projects, and as such we are working on a redesign with them right now for not solely our part, but even, possibly, a portion of the Sadie Creek Promenade properties. One of the first things that we are going to do is all of the residential that we have proposed here will go away, which I think all of these neighbors are going to love that. And, then, the -- and we do anticipate having this resolved within the next week. Once those revisions -- once we have made those revisions and they are complete, we would get together with your staff to review those revisions, to make a determination as to whether our change is substantial enough that a new application needs to be submitted and our current application withdrawn and we will work with your staff to make that determination and that is primarily where we stand right now. I think, you know, we understand cross-access agreements and certainly the developers over here on Sadie Creek Promenade, we have discussed this back and forth, we are all aware of it. And there were never any real issues there. I think that it's huge that we are going to make these changes and, to be perfectly honest with you, it appears that we will have to withdraw and resubmit. And it very well could be -- and I don't know this at this point, but it may include more than just our portion, it may also include some area over here, too, in theirs also. So, that's why we are requesting this -- this postponement for one month. And also we want to let the neighbors know and you know that once we get these changes done, we will notify neighbors and have a new neighborhood meeting to review the revised plan with them. I think they are going to -- I have spoken with a couple of their representatives here this evening prior to getting to this point this evening and kind of explained where we were going and what we were going to do with the project. They seemed to be very interested and much happier than what we have shown up to this point. So, at that point that's -- that's where we are at, why we are asking for this postponement. Borup: You're right. That explanation helps a lot. Rohm: And your explanation, in my mind, kind of leans me towards withdrawal and a new application, if the residential portion is going away and the reason why I state this -- Borup: Let's let staff decide that. Rohm: Well-- .. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 5, 2005 Page 91 of 93 Guenther: We will go through it probably next week when they have a better understanding -- that if they are going to change it or not. Rohm: If you're going to drop the residential or -- Unger: Yes. Rohm: I guess that that's just a big if, but it sounds like that's more than likely the -- I guess the reason why I even bring this up is if you were to withdraw it, is it a complete different process for them to ask for a continuance? I guess we can do the continuance and, then, if they need to withdraw-- Borup: We just won't put it on the agenda. Rohm: We just won't hear evidence at the time that it's scheduled for. Baird: Mr. Chair, the continuance just allows them to keep a place in case they choose to go forward and, then, you're correct, it would go away and you would get a new application rescheduled, so -- Rohm: All right. So, with that being said, what's the date that you would like to see this continued to? Unger: We'd like to see it continued for one month or whatever hearing date coordinates with -- Zaremba: That would be February 2nd. Rohm: February 2nd. Unger: That would be sufficient to suggest. Rohm: Thank you, sir. Unger: Thank you. Zaremba: Just a personal comment that I'd like to make. I would encourage you -- I don't know if anybody else feels this way -- to try and move your access to Eagle a little farther south on the property if you're redesigning it anyhow. And go for full access with a signal, if ITD might go for that. Unger: Could I comment on that? Rohm: Absolutely. Exactly. Unger: We are receiving the same thing you are. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 5, 2005 Page 92 of 93 Zaremba: Thank you. Rohm: Thank you. Newton-Huckabay: I have a -- Mr. Chair, I have a question or a comment. Borup: Which is it? Newton-Huckabay: It was probably a little bit of both. Joe, if -- you, obviously, knew this was what they wanted to say earlier when you made your comment. If their project is going to impact the Sadie Creek project, which we just recommended for approval and you knew full well we were going to recommend it for approval, if that's where we were going, why did you not make comment to that fact, so that we won't have sent onto City Council something that likely is an incomplete project? Guenther: Because there is no guarantee that this is going to be withdrawn. There is no guarantee that the Sadie Creek project won't be developed as it's discussed and if the Sadie Creek project final plats their 22 lots, they have all rights to sell two or three or four or five or all 22 to this developer. So, it's still an active project. Newton-Huckabay: We talked about it, that, eventually, why -- I mean at that point I likely would have been more likely to vote with Commissioner Zaremba. Baird: Mr. Chair and Members of the Commission, Councilwoman Newton-Huckabay, in deference to the applicant, you're required to act on the application that's before you. They have asked you to act on it and you did and you did it appropriately. So, I would just call it a day. Newton-Huckabay: Okay. A good day at work. Rohm: I'd also like to say that it's kind of like that buffer on the previous application, they are two separate issues and we acted appropriately on the first one and we are addressing this one and we still got an open set of hearings here, so I would entertain a motion to continue. Zaremba: So moved. Borup: To February 2nd. Rohm: To February 2nd. Zaremba: To February 2nd, 2006. Moe: Second. ,I Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 5, 2005 Page 93 of 93 Rohm: It's been moved and seconded that we continue Items AZ OS-057, RZ 05-019, PP 05-0S9 and CUP 05-052, all relating to Bienville Square Subdivision to our regularly scheduled meeting of February 2nd, 2006. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Moe: Mr. Chairman? Rohm: Commissioner Moe. Moe: I move we adjourn. Zaremba: Second. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to adjourn. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 12:23 A.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.) APPROVED: I I DATE APPROVED MICHAEL ROHM - CHAIRMAN ATTESTED: WILLIAM G. BERG JR., CITY CLERK