Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJune 1, 2006 P&Z Minutes Meridian Planning & Zoning June 1, 2006 Page 55 of 64 Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to forward onto City Council recommending approval of AZ 06-009 and PP 06-007. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carried. Thank you folks for all coming in. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 13: Public Hearing: AZ 06-022 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 9.98 acres from RUT to an R-4 zone for Prato Villas Subdivision by Kevin Harris of Briggs Engineering - 4052 & 4202 W. Daphine Street: Public Hearing: PP 06-022 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 32 building lots and 3 common lots on 9.98 acres in a proposed R-4 zone for Prato Villas Subdivision by Kevin Harris of Briggs Engineering - 4052 & 4202 W. Daphine Street: Item 14: Rohm: Okay. The next item on our agenda -- I'd like to at this time open Public Hearing AZ 06-022 and Public Hearing PP 06-022, both for Prato Villas Subdivision and begin with the staff report. Hood: Thank you, Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission. Prato Villas Subdivision is an annexation and zoning of just over ten acres. As you can see on the map on the board, it's north -- just of McMillan Road and east of Black Cat. The yellow, which represents city limits -- everything in color is city limits, represents Volterra Subdivision. So, as you can see, this project is adjacent to Volterra and that's their path of contiguity to the city. There is an existing public street that loops -- I guess it -- it L's back in from Black Cat to McMillan. You will see here in just a minute on the preliminary plat they do not propose to have any access -- direct lot access to this road, although they are just local roads. There is a public street that comes in and, then, they have got their access internally. A stub street was provided from Volterra to this property. They are extending it. These are two of the five acre lots that were platted. I guess he didn't put down when Black Cat Estates Subdivision Number Two was platted, but they are two platted lots in Black Cat Estates Subdivision Number Two, so there are some remaining five acres. We have -- just FYI, I've talked with quite a few of those people out there about redeveloping their five acres, so you will probably be seeing more of -- in the area in the near future. Here is an aerial view. You can see some of the estate lots and the homes along those lots -- it looks like it's two lots. Here is the aforementioned preliminary plat. The applicant just before the last hearing did submit to me a hand drawn revised plat that depicts staff's concerns and I guess I'll get to those here. Let me see if I can -- this is another one of those where I got the applicant's comments yesterday and I hope you all did, too, but we are 0 for two so far, so I won't hold my breath. But, basically, the -- the applicant's comments are -- I guess staff's comments -- the density of this project is 3.2 dwelling units per acre. It is shown as low density residential on the Comprehensive Plan future land use map. Staff recommended that they lose two lots to be consistent -- the Comprehensive Plan does say up to three dwelling units per acre. The applicant has agreed to remove two lots. There was some discussion in the past 48 hours about what do you do with that area if you lose the two lots. Do you just give a portion to all of Meridian Planning & Zoning June 1, 2006 Page 56 of 64 the other buildable lots? Staff recommended that they actually provide some, quote, unquote, usable open space for the 30 homes in this subdivision. The open space being provided is in their roadside swales. To count towards open space, trees are required in those detached planters. I don't think ACHD is going to allow them to have both their swale and trees in there. At least that's what has happened in that past. So, to meet the five percent requirement for open space, staff and I think the applicant, based on this, is -- we are on the same page that they are using about half of these two lots, which are just over 10,000 square feet each. They are going to add to the back side of these -- maybe if I just throw it on. So, as I mentioned, the two lots that are in the center -- now the lot lines are kind of going together, but they are -- here is a separation between the two lots and the middle lots four and five. What they have done is take just over half of that and made a common lot out of that and, then, added portions of the six adjacent lots to do those areas. So, they increased those lots -- I can't read it from here. It looks like those are up over ten or nine eight or something like that. But they are up near the 10,000 square foot range anyway, which is pretty consistent with the rest of the lots in the subdivision. So, I think that that actually complies with what staff had envisioned when making that comment and I don't remember which comment that was in Exhibit B. I may be able to find it here real quick. 1.1.3. A maximum of 30 dwelling units and, then, incorporate a common park lot for the homeowners association. After I drafted this -- if there is a change, I guess, that I would recommend you make, it would be that -- something to the effect that, you know, at least half of those -- those -- that 20,000 square foot, roughly, or -- is dedicated towards a common open space. That was just not a little ten by ten common lot or something. I don't think they would try to do that, but just so you can get some usable area, didn't put a square footage on it, just so you can quantitatively or you accept this one and say a 12,000 square foot or something like that. But I think at least -- at least ten -- ten thousand square feet would be a decent size. For 30 homes it would be a decent area that people can go and walk their dogs or do something like that. I guess the other question I would have -- or clarification from the applicant would be if there are any amenities, if they are going to put a picnic bench in there or a gazebo or a walking path or something like that. It's not required, but just a question, if it's just going to grass with a couple few trees, would just be a question, I guess, because that's not on the landscape plan, but, anyway, I think I will stop rambling and stand for any questions that you may have on this. Rohm: Thank you, Caleb. Any questions of staff? Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Chair, I just have one clarification. Caleb, you said a lot of the properties around this one you would -- will be coming in soon, you suspect? Hood: We have -- Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission, we have had preliminary discussions with a few of the -- and I don't even know if they are owners or potential clients or if they have options on the property or who they are necessarily, but we have had discussions with a few of the property owners in Black Cat Estates Subdivision Number Two about developing -- redeveloping their properties. Meridian Planning & Zoning June 1, 2006 Page 57 of 64 Newton-Huckabay: Okay. Thank you. Rohm: Would the applicant like to come forward, please? Harris: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, Kevin Harris, 1800 West Overland Road in Boise. First off, I apologize to your staff for giving them that late revision. My clients are from out of town and this is, really, the first time we had a chance to get together with and do something up real quick. But, you know, that works for us. If it works for your staff, that's great. As for the use of the open space, I guess per square footage, you know, 10, 12 thousand, that's fine with us if you're going to condition it to that square footage. Using that open space -- we don't have a problem putting a pathway through there and add some trees and bushes. One thing I will say is that we have a couple gravity irrigation lines that run through this property and Settler's Irrigation does not allow any trees to be put in their irrigation easement and before on the plan we had the easement running through our common lot, our landscape buffer, and we really don't like the idea of taking the trees out of that. which Settlers told us after the fact that we made this -- the landscape buffer there. So, now that we would be proposing moving that irrigation easement up this side and through this open space and, then, reconnect over here. It starts right here. So, up this side and through here. So, where ever we can put trees and landscaping in this open area, we definitely will. With that I'd stand for any questions. It's pretty straight forward. These guys are wanting to do a nice subdivision. The lots are great size, you know. So, I'd stand for any questions. Borup: Mr. Chairman, maybe just a comment, you know, since you're talking about that area. Again, just my personal feeling. I don't see in that location where a pathway really has a lot of benefit. I mean they are probably looking at, you know, maybe throwing a football in there or whatever they are doing and it's such a short distance, that a pathway -- I don't know that it serves a big -- probably some type of trees or something would be nice, though. Harris: Sure. And they agreed to that before I walked up. You know, put some trees and bushes in and landscape it and if your staff wants a path, we can do that. If not, that's fine, too. We will work with your staff. Borup: Yeah. I don't think the staff made it a recommendation either way. Harris: Okay. Borup: They just were wondering if you had something in mind. Harris: Definitely a landscape for sure and grass and trees and shrubs. Rohm: I think it would be more usable without a path. Borup: Yes. Meridian Planning & Zoning June 1. 2006 Page 58 of 64 Rohm: You can play badminton or any number of activities. Zaremba: Mr. Chairman? Newton-Huckabay: Who plays badminton? Rohm: They sell those things down at Target all the time. Zaremba: Horseshoes. Rohm: Volleyball. Newton-Huckabay: Sorry. I digress. Zaremba: Mr. Chair and Mr. Harris, I know you said you looked through the staff report. I just want to make absolutely certain that you understand the Public Works statement that sewer will not be available right away, maybe not quite on your time frame. Harris: Commissioner Zaremba -- Zaremba: You're Willing to deal with that. Harris: Absolutely. We understand that and, you know, hopefully, you know, it gets done faster than Public Works is anticipating, but we know that that's up in the air, so absolutely. Zaremba: Thank you. Rohm: Any other questions of the applicant? Harris: Thank you very much. Rohm: Thank you. Hood: Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission, just one clarification point. I went through the applicant's letter again. I just wanted to let the Commission know -- and it looks like they didn't get the landscape plan put in here. The applicant does go on record to state that there is a 35 foot wide pressurized irrigation easement along the frontage there of Daphine Street and there is a bunch of landscaping shown there right now, but there aren't going to be any trees. So, I didn't want it to be misleading and I think that one should probably be amended to state if allowed by -- you're to change -- with your change you don't have it running along there anymore? Okay. You told me it was moving, but I wasn't sure if it was going over there. Okay. Meridian Planning & Zoning June 1, 2006 Page 59 of 64 Harris: Yeah, Craig. Our gravity irrigation easement did run along the front here and this is the landscape buffer that we were proposing, you know, with trees and landscape and a berm and after the fact I talked to Nathan at Settler's Irrigation and he stated that he did not want any trees in their easement. So, in the letter I did state that the proposed trees in this landscape buffer would have to be revised, the landscape plan. That is prior to the copy that we have seen a minute ago changing that easement. So, this landscaping should be able to stay the same, which we want to landscape it very nice with trees and shrubs. So, that is our -- our proposal is to leave it as it is on the landscape plan. Cole: Mr. Chair? Rohm: Mr. Cole. Cole: Thank you. Do you know if the easement associated with that canal is a recorded easement or is it just a prescriptive easement that -- Harris: Prescriptive. Cole: Thank you. Rohm: Thank you. Harris: Thank you. Rohm: Okay. Is there anybody else that would like to speak to this application? Seeing none. Zaremba: Mr. Chairman, I move we close the Public Hearing on AZ 06-022 and PP 06- 022. Moe: Second. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded that we close the Public Hearing on AZ 06-022 and PP 06-022. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Zaremba: 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 numbers AZ 06-022 and PP 06-022, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of June 1, 2006, with the following modifications: On Exhibit B, page one, prior to site specific requirements preliminary Meridian Planning & Zoning June 1, 2006 Page 60 of 64 plat, I would add an annexation and zoning statement that the developer will enter into a development agreement with the city. Details are in the staff report on page seven. Starting on page seven. Within site specific requirements preliminary plat, also on page one of Exhibit B, I would add to paragraph 1.1.1 that the preliminary plat being approved, shall be similar to the hand drawn modification shown at the hearing of June 1 st, 2006, showing two less building lots, with six other lots enlarged, and a common open space between them. And also the irrigation easement moved to that common open space. And another sentence on that same one, that the applicant will supply new preliminary plats ten days before the next hearing. End of change. End of Motion. Newton-Huckabay: Second. Borup: Second. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded that we forward onto City Council recommending approval AZ 06-022 and PP 06-022. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carried. Thank you folks for coming in. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 15: Public Hearing: CUP 06-015 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for retail use as determined by Development Agreement for Meridian Gateway - Walgreens by White-Leasure Development - 1601 S. Meridian Road: Rohm: The last item -- well, at this time I'd like to open the open Public Hearing on CUP 06-015 for the sole purpose of -- Zaremba: Mr. Chairman, I move we continue CUP 06-015 to our next regularly scheduled meeting of June 15th, 2006. And the applicant I believe has been notified that they need to provide notice. Moe: Second. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to continue Public Hearing CUP 06-015 to the regularly scheduled meeting of June 16th, 2006. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 16: Discussion of Procedures of Meetings Ordinance I Brought Forward from May 18, 2006 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting: Rohm: Okay. All right. The last item on our agenda is a continued discussion of the procedures of meeting ordinance brought forward from May 18, 2006, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. I believe that we had quite a healthy discussion and the