Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMay 4, 2006 P&Z Minutes !; Meridian Planning & Zoning May 4, 2006 Page 59 of 84 Rohm: I'm ready to hear a motion. Zaremba: Commissioner Newton-Huckabay closed the hearing. Newton-Huckabay: I did not. Borup: Actually, I did. Mr. Chairman, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of file RZ 06-002 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of May 4th. End of motion. Moe: Second. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded we fOlWard onto City Council recommending approval of RZ 06-002. All those in favor say eye. Opposed same sign? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 15: Public Hearing: PP 06-020 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 23 commercial lots on 31.37 acres in a C-G zone for Centrepointe Subdivision by Winston H. Moore - northwest corner of Ustick Road and Eagle Road: Rohm: Okay. Okay. At this time I'd like to open the Public Hearing on PP 06-020 related to Centrepointe Subdivision and begin with the staff report. Hood: Thank you, Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission. This one's almost as straight fOlWard as the last, but I think we better spend a little bit more time on it. It is Centrepointe Subdivision. The map that's on the screen right now is not quite accurate. The property does include this RUT piece and it goes around the -- about nine acres that will be Kohl's here very shortly. So, it kind of goes around like that. There are 23 commercial building lots on this site. It is all zoned C-G now, so the RUT that you see here is not accurate. It has been rezoned. There is an ordinance to rezone that to G-G. Our mapping just hasn't quite caught up with that yet. So, we are on the northwest corner of Ustick and Eagle. There are 31.37 acres. The proposed subdivision is right here. So, that Kohl's site is the out-parcel along Ustick Road. The applicant is proposing to -- and I have got another exhibit here to follow this up. This is a public street that aligns with the street in Sadie Creek to the south and there are a couple other access points somewhere in here. I can't quite make them out. I think that's one there that aligns and, then, I believe there is one right there that also aligns. Maybe I'll go to that other exhibit real quick. So, the boundaries of -- let's see if I can get oriented here. Borup: You're one slide too far. Hood: Yeah. I was just going to show you the overall master plan for the public -- right now that street ends somewhere in here. And it will be extended in the future to go up .~ Meridian Planning & Zoning May 4, 2006 Page 60 of 84 to Cartwright as a pretty major thoroughfare and, then, out to the future light at Wainwright, which is at the half mile. So, I just wanted to show you that exhibit. It's a temporary -- will be a temporary public street dead end, but there will be, I believe, a street that -- maybe Jonathan does have that on this exhibit -- that comes out -- back out to Eagle Road. So, again, that public street will be extended. This is a private driveway now that one of the three access points that were approved to Eagle Road for this site. There is, I believe, another nine or ten acres further to the north -- 20 acres, excuse me, that's further to the north that is not a part of this application either that will be a future phase, basically, of Centrepointe. But this is the first 23 lots in here. I think I'm going to just jump to the applicant's response letter dated May 3rd and just touch on a couple of the proposed modifications from the applicant. I think we are in general agreement, we just want to make sure that all the T's are crossed here and everyone is on the same page. I hope you all have that letter, because that's what I'm going to base, basically, my staff report from here on out on. The first couple of sentences in that, basically, are just statements. There is some clarification by the applicant, but I don't believe that there is anything that's -- you can feel free to change them if you like, I don't think there is anything substantial there that we don't see eye to eye on, they just want some clarification that they are even further complying with some of our codes. The first one I'm going to talk about is Exhibit B, 1.1.10, and there has been a little change -- I apologize, because I used an old condition for this one. Since I don't know how -- how many of you all know about Destination Place, there is kind of this -- long story short, the director has determined that irrigation pump houses are public utilities and public utilities are allowed within street buffers. So, we are allowing those. We -- in the past the determination was is that those had to be outside of required street buffers. Being a public utility, though, it seems more and more to be the case that they do need to be within those landscape buffers. Now, we do want to make sure that what -- that the housing of those pump stations is in tune with the neighborhood and the development. We currently do not have any design standards. Some of them look better than others. They are all pretty general in size, ten by ten or 12 by 12, roughly, pump houses, but that condition 1.1.10 we can remove. I do not even need it to be modified. The impervious surfaces are prohibited in street buffers,. but, again, this is not an impervious surface by definition and so it's a public utility. The next one on the applicant's letter -- also that's 1.1.10 that I recommend that we just remove that whole condition. Exhibit B, 1.1.13 talks about the Fair Housing Act. A commercial subdivision, the Fair Housing Act does not apply. I apologize for -- I don't even know how that one got in there, to tell you the truth. I think someone snuck it in. But that one can be -- 1.1.13 can be struck as well. Exhibit B, 1.1.5, there is just clarification that they have already complied with that condition or they are working towards compliance, so I think that one should remain. It sounds like they aren't going to have a problem meeting it, I just wanted to clarify where they are at kind of in that review process with the Layton Lateral Association. I'm going to skip -- and the applicant can sure expand on these if he wants. I'm going to touch on the ones that I think that need to be clarified anyways. And that's .- 2.8 I did talk with Mr. Cole today a little bit about 2.8. That's a standard condition. It says that the pressurized irrigation pump station shall be located on its own lot and that last part of the sentence -- you know, not in any required street -- required landscape buffers, if you could strike that last part of that sentence. It does need to be ~ Meridian Planning & Zoning May 4, 2006 Page 61 of 84 on its own lot. It does not -- it can encroach within our required landscape buffer. We will probably require some additional screening of that structure and such, but it can be in there. And, then, I'm going to jump to -- I'll let the applicant talk about 2.1. -- no, I'll talk about 2.14 as well real quick and, Mike, feel free to jump in here, too, if I -- we are kind of going in a Public Works section of the report here. My understanding is that Mike's okay with the applicant's language in the letter, so if you can just insert that language, remove the existing stuff. It, essentially, says the same things. It will allow them to pull foundation permits, basically, but not allow them to begin constructing the buildings or anything that's combustible before all those required improvements are in. So, it does allow them to do some construction. 2.16 is the last one in there and I do have language that I'll read into the record that Mike would also like to strike the existing condition and replace it with: Sewer, comma, water, comma, pressurized irrigation, comma, and any life safety development improvement shall receive final approval prior to occupancy. Other required development improvements, such as fencing, micropaths, and landscaping may be bonded for prior to obtaining certificates of occupancy. So, effectively, it's letting the applicant -- requiring the applicant to construct these things that we don't allow you to bond for, sewer, water, those types of infrastructure things. The other non-life safety things they can bond for as in a typical subdivision, landscaping, if it happens to be wintertime and they can't put those type of improvements in, that we take in sureties and we can allow temporary occupancies until weather permits. So, just to kind of put that in context a little bit there. I think I'm going to just stop there. I'm sure I missed something and Jonathan will go ahead and add to that, which -- I have got some things that I believe he's given Barb a site plan here and anything else that he wants to talk about, I guess. I did -- maybe one more thing just real quick is the landscape buffer along Eagle Road. I did mention it in the staff report. The applicant -- first thing -- I believe it was Monday -- submitted an application for a variance to use some of the existing right of way on Eagle Road to count towards their 35 foot wide landscape buffer. The main reason -- and I haven't gotten through their application fully, but pre-app'd it and I'm pretty aware of what the reason behind this request is. ITD has a huge right of way and with what they are doing -- what we starting to see now from the interstate to Franklin Road and the center divider and not making the commitment to not widen this to a seven lane freeway, it's going to be, you know, two lanes with turnarounds and that's what the street's going to be and we are not making it any wider, there is a pretty good chunk of right of way that's left over after you get through with their plan in the Eagle Road corridor study. So, the applicant's proposing to use some of that. And I don't want to get into this too terribly much, but the site plan and the landscape plan, preliminary plat, all depict the landscape buffer fully on their property and outside of the right of way. The variance will probably catch up with this application at City Council and they are the ones that will effectively act on it, but I did want to make you aware. It is a little bit different and something we are going to evaluate here in the next few weeks. So, just to point that out as well. So, with that we are recommending approval of the application with the conditions listed in the staff report and I will stand for any questions you may have. Rohm: Thank you, Caleb. Any questions of staff? Jonathan, you're on. Meridian Planning & Zoning May 4, 2006 Page 62 of 84 Seal: Good evening, Chairman and Commissioners. Jonathan Seal, W.H. Moore company. 1940 Bonito, Meridian. Could you -- thank you. Just before I get -- I have a couple -- one clarification on this letter I'll get to, but I'd like to just give you a very quick overview on this project if I can. First, as he mentioned, this line right here is for the Kohl's department store. We have already come in for a Conditional Use Permit approval. I'm pleased to say -- and this has been a lengthy process, that starting Monday we are going to start construction on this building. And that's not been an easy task, but we are real excited about that. And that's, really, been the straw that's really going to stir the drinks of this entire project. Having said that, one of the things -- to just give you a very quick overview -- that we agreed with with Kohl's on is we are going to put it -- as Caleb said, we are going to put in this public road back here, which will at this point stop right here right now, but ultimately will continue to Wainwright. This will be an ACHD road, of course, built to their standards. There will be a traffic signal down here. We have got ACHD to agree that we could put a traffic signal down here with the Kohl's department store, so we will be putting that in. We will also be doing landscaping along this entire thing. We will add landscaping here. It will be 35 feet. And, then, also 35 feet along this area. We will also landscape ten feet on either side of this public street. Now, our other intention is we talked a little bit about the parking and being able to do the parking as part of the plat process. What we are intending to do is put these drive aisles in that will connect from Eagle Road to this -- I believe what will be referred to as Sadie Creek. Also this drive aisle right here, this drive lane right here. We will put -- with parking in for Kohl's, and what I would call as probably phase one parking, we will put this parking also in. This parking area up here right now, we don't have any plans to do it at this point, we are simply asking for that, because it gives us a little bit more flexibility and this is -- this is somewhat fluid and this may change. So, obviously, we will come into the building department with plans. But I just wanted to give you a flavor on that. The other thing is, as Caleb had mentioned to you, we have also agreed with the access points at Eagle Road. Winston Moore -- we are going to do -- if you could flip over to that one with the -- yes. That one right there. And this is only part. What we are going to do is we are going to be installing dual left-hand turn lanes and the intersection both north and south of Ustick. We will have right turn lanes here. We will have deceleration lanes into our project and we are also installing curb and gutter along the entire length of our project. We will install curb and gutter partially on this side and, then, also south of Ustick and Winston Moore's paying for that himself. If you can flip back to the other -- as far as the pump station goes, as I mentioned, this will be located down here. We had to put it down here, simply because of the design. It's really not the place we would like to put it, we would have preferred to put it up here, but it just didn't physically work and I'm not a civil engineer, so I would do a lousy job of trying to explain to you, but we looked at it every way we could and this was the only place we could put it. It certainly will be of a quality I think -- I think I'm comfortable in saying with Winston Moore, he builds quality projects. This will be no exception. And certainly with the fact that this is going to be a very visible thing, it's going to be attractively done. We are going to actually try to lower it as much as we can, so it's as little visible as possible. We can certainly -- we have no objection to putting that in a common lot down there. I think with the exception of that, I just wanted to, as I say, give you a quick overview. We, obviously, would ask you today to approve this project to enable us to move . Meridian Planning & Zoning May 4, 2006 Page 63 of 84 forward on developing the balance of the center. We are very encouraged with Kohl's and we can announce that next Monday to the world, even though everybody already knows it, but officially we can do it. There has been a lot of retailers been sitting on the sidelines waiting for them to commit and once they do we are going to see a lot of activity in here. But it's kind of a herd mentality, so -- going back to the staff report -- and I guess I just want to make sure that I am clear on this. Going back to page two, the item 2.14, when it talks about requiring street signs, water systems, fencing, drainage, and everything, my understanding -- we are doing over at Grandview right now, is as long as there is an emergency road and there is fire on there, you can pull your building permit and build your building. What concerns me -- I heard over here is that we can start only our foundation. And so I want to get clarification. What we want to be able to do is to be able to build our building. If we have the fire-hydrants in place, if we have -- we have the road in which emergency vehicles can get on site in the event that there is an emergency, that we are allowed to build a building. You still have the thing with the certificate of occupancy and to me that's the critical item here. What I don't want to do is only be able to start part of a building on -- when, in fact, we have these items. So, I want to get clarification. I think Mike and talked earlier. I think we were both on the same page on that, but I just heard a couple things from Caleb that concerned me, so -- Cole: Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission, to Jonathan's point on 2.14, his -- his wording of that we believe can stand as it is. What -- I believe what Caleb had said was we allow the foundation permits before the water line is activated, but you have to have water hydrants -- activated hydrants, emergency vehicle access, the road base down and approved, before you can start building your combustible. I think you just maybe misheard the way he said it. The way you have worded it is basically the intent of the condition and so we have no problem with the rewording that you gave for 2.14. Seal: Okay. Cole: And, then, 2.16, I believe, that you are -- Seal: We are in agreement. Cole: Okay. Thank you. Seal: Yeah. We are in agreement on that, so -- other than that, I have nothing else to offer, unless there is any questions. I know it's late and we'd all like to go home, so -- Rohm: Thank you for your presentation. Any questions of the applicant? Seal: Okay. Thank you very much. Rohm: Okay. We do not have anybody that is signed up to speak to this application, but if someone would like to, this is that time. Seeing none, it looks like this project has moved along very well with staff and the developers have tried to work very closely to .. Meridian Planning & Zoning May 4. 2006 Page 64 of 84 come up with a product that meets the staffs objectives and I see no reason to stop this at this point. Zaremba: Mr. Chairman? Rohm: Commissioner Zaremba. Zaremba: I move we close the Public Hearing on PP 06-020. Borup: Second. Moe: Second. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to close the Public Hearing on PP 06-020. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Zaremba: Let me have a short discussion with Caleb to make sure that I understood what it is we want to say. Basically, all staff comments as modified by the Winston Moore letter of May 3, with the exception of the very last sentence -- very last paragraph referring to Exhibit B, 2.16 of Winston Moore's letter. And for that we are going to substitute the paragraph that you read earlier. So, I can re-read it. That works. Okay. Then, the only other thing -- and this is a suggestion and maybe it's overkill. Under general requirements, preliminary plat, on page three of Exhibit B, top of that page 1.1.6, standard statements, that's failure to site specific ordinance provisions or terms of approved preliminary plat does not relieve the applicant of responsibility for compliance. Would it be overkill or would it be a good idea to add a sentence to that that also says the existing development agreement remains in force. I don't see it mentioned anywhere else and I don't think it's a bad idea. Hood: You sure can. It may be a better place -- we try not to monkey with those general requirements too much. It may be if you want to just add it as 1.1.16 that may be -- or even 1.1.1 -- Zaremba: Yeah. Okay. Let me put it up in the specifics. 1.1.16. I would put it there. Okay. In that case, Mr. Chairman? Rohm: Commissioner Zaremba. Zaremba: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of file number PP 06-020 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of May 4, 2006, with the following modifications. On Exhibit B, page two, under site specific requirements of preliminary plat, I would add a paragraph 1.1.16 that states that the existing development agreement remains in force. Then, throughout the staff report I would reference the Winston Moore letter dated May i Meridian Planning & Zoning May 4, 2006 Page 65 of 84 3rd, 2006, addressed to C. Caleb Hood and accept the modifications stated in that letter, with that exception of the very last paragraph on page two, which refers to Exhibit B, 2.16 and that modification will be as follows: This is the wording for 2.1 -- for 2.16. Sewer, water, pressurized irrigation and any life safety development improvements shall receive final approval prior to occupancy. Other required development approvals, such as fencing, micropaths, and landscaping, may be bonded for prior to obtaining certificates of occupancy. And that encompasses all changes. End of motion. Hood: Mr. Chair? Rohm: Mr. Hood. Hood: Question for the maker of the motion, please. I asked -- and it's not in the letter from the applicant, but condition 2.8 on page three, that pump station does need to be on its own lot. The last part of it being outside of a landscape buffer, though, can be struck, so it's kind of a -- part his letter, part our -- we still want part of that condition to remain. So, if that works. Zaremba: We would incorporate that it does need to be in its own lot, but it does not need to be outside of the landscape buffer and appreciate that applicant's offer to make it look attractive. End of motion. Rohm: Do we need to re-second it? Borup: Second. Mae: 1-- Borup: Did you second it before? Moe: I was just noting Caleb's point on 2.8 was to just strike the -- a portion of that sentence out. Borup: Yeah. The last -- Moe: After own lot, just strike the rest of that. Zaremba: That works. Mae: And I'll second that. Zaremba: That's much simpler than what I said. Moe: Yes. , Meridian Planning & Zoning May 4, 2006 Page 66 of 84 Rohm: It's been moved and seconded that we fOlWard onto City Council recommending approval of PP 06-020, to include all staff comments and attached letter from W.C. Moore, with verbalized modifications to each. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 16: Public Hearing: AZ 06-021 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 77.66 acres from Ada County RUT to C-G General Commercial and R-15 Medium-High Density Residential zones for Kenai Subdivision by Kenai Partners, LLC - south of East Overland Road and west of South Eagle Road: Item 17: Public Hearing: PP 06-019 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 101 single-family residential and multi-family residential lots with 6 common lots in a R-15 zone and 32 commercial lots with 19 common lots in a C-G zone for Kenai Subdivision by Kenai Partners, LLC - south of East Overland Road and west of South Eagle Road: Rohm: Okay. I don't know if I've got enough time to do this last one, we better call it a night. Okay. Good. At this time I'd like to open the Public Hearing on AZ 06-021 and Public Hearing PP 06-019, both related to Kenai Subdivision and begin with the staff report. Veatch: Mr. Chair, Commissioners, I will be presenting the staff report for Joe Guenther. The Kenai Subdivision will ask to have annexation and zoning of 77.66 acres from rural to R-15 and 31.78 acres to general commercial. Let me see here. I may have that incorrectly here. I think the total of the annexation and zoning is 77.66 and of that 31.78 will be to R-15 and 45.88 will be to general commercial. The preliminary plat is for 64 single family detached residential lots, 24 alley loaded attached single family residential lots, nine multi-family residential lots, 25 common lots and 32 commercial lots. Staff is recommending approval of the subdivision with modifications to the proposed layout. Lots 56 through 59 of Block 3 shall be amended. These lots do not have road frontage and do not meet the minimum standards for the UDC. The bulk of these lots may be transferred to Lot 60, Block 3, with a common lot being created to provide the spur connection. You will have to forgive me, this is not one I'm familiar with. Okay. In addition, Lot 8, Block 3, contains a multi-use pathway through the addition to the Kiwanis park and the pathway should be extended along the western property boundary to connect with Overland Road. A Conditional Use Permit shall be required for all multi-family units and a private street application shall be required for the 42 foot wide private drive in the commercial portion and I believe -- to comply with the standards of the UDC. So, that if there is an emergency that they can be able to address those and know where they are going. With ACHD's report -- let's see. I believe that they had both that they were in agreement with the internal roads meeting their policies. They were still discussing the need for a right-in, right-out driveway and they felt that the applicant should provide an analysis of why these as the combined