Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOctober 3, 2002Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting October 3, 2002 Page 15 of 84 Borup: Commissioner Zaremba. Zaremba: I move the Public Hearing be closed. Mathes: Second. Borup: Motion and second. All in favor? Any opposed? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Borup: Do we have a motion? Zaremba: Mr. Chairman? Borup: Commissioner Zaremba. Zaremba: I move that we forward to the City Council recommending approval of PP 02- 017, request for Preliminary Plat approval of six building lots on 13.77 acres in a C-C zone for Silverstone Subdivision No. 3 by Sundance Investments,, southeast corner of East Overland Road and South Eagle Road, to include all staff comments. Mathes: Second. Borup: Motion and second. All in favor? Any opposed? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Item 6. Public Hearing: AZ 02-021 Request for annexation and zoning of 5.26 acres and rezone of 2.40 acres from RUT and R-4 zones to R-8 zone for proposed Tully Cove Subdivision by Ted Mason -west of North Linder Road and south of West Ustick Road: Item 7. Public Hearing: PP 02-018 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 39 building lots and 10 other lots on 7.30 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for the proposed Tully Cove Subdivision by Ted Mason -- west of North Linder Road and south of West Ustick Road: Borup: Thank you. The next item is Public Hearing, AZ 02-021, request for annexation and zoning of 5.26 acres and a rezone of 2.4 acres from RUT and R-4 zones to an R-8 zone for proposed Tully Cove Subdivision by Ted Mason. The adjoining application is PP 02-018, request for Preliminary Plat approval of 39 building lots and 10 other lots on 7.3 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for the proposed Tully Cove Subdivision by Ted Mason. This is at west of North Linder Road and south of Ustick, across from Tully Park. We would like to open both these Public Hearings at this time and start with the staff report. McKinnon: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. If I could, again, direct your attention to the overhead. Showing you the location of the subdivision. As you can see, it's directly across the street from Tully Park, which is located, approximately halfway between Ustick and Cherry Lane on the Linder Road. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting October 3, 2002 Page 16 of 84 proposed subdivision has 36 attached single-family homes and three detached single- family homes. I'll go to the site plan really quick. It's just showing the location. It's a vacant field. Onto the Preliminary Plat. Within the preliminary the applicant has shown that he has got 36 building lots and three building lots that would not be attached homes. Those three building lots -- there is one located -- if I can get my pointer to work -- one in the north, one is located centrally, and one located, if I can remember right quick, it's -- Zaremba: That one? McKinnon: Thank you. R fight there. There a re three detached single-family h omes within the subdivision. The remainder of the subdivision, again, is attached single- family homes. There are two somewhat large landscape lots, approximately an 8,000 square foot landscaped open area in the south central portion of the property and up in the northeastern -- northwestern, excuse me, corner of the property there is about a 9,000 square foot open space lot. Within the subdivision there is a number of open landscape buffer lots. All the homes within the subdivision actually -- well, actually front onto open space or landscaped lots, they actually do not front on each other, they actually front to the landscaped lots. Within the subdivision, the applicant has asked for a .reduced street width, 29-foot street sections, and ACHD has approved those street sections and we, as staff, have no concerns with the reduced street sections. The applicant has agreed to provide for no parking mainly on the 29-foot street sections down in this corner where parking would only be allowed on one side of the street. Staff supports the project. They have submitted a new revised site plan. You should have all received a copy of the revised plan. I have been in contact with the Ada County Highway District and you should have a copy of the a-mail sent to me by Craig Hood stating that Ada County Highway District does not have any concerns with the revised site plan. It was submitted to them. ACHD is in support of this project and we are in support of this project as well and it provides a connection to the Turtle Creek Subdivision and it provides for multiple housing types within one project. The open space makes up approximately 8.5 percent of the project. It is a project that we can approve. One thing that we did have a problem with from an ordinance standpoint was the proposed landscape buffer on top of the berm they propose to have athree-foot fence and the Landscape Ordinance does not allow fencing within the landscape buffer. The removal of the three-foot tall fence from the landscape buffer would bring this plat into compliance with all sections of the Meridian City Code and Subdivision Ordinance. With that I would ask if there is any questions? Borup: Questions from the Commission? Zaremba: We have in our packet a copy of the letter from the applicant to ACHD asking for an exception to the separation distance between two streets. Is it your assumption that the a-mail that you just referenced also incorporates approval of the way the applicant wants that to be? McKinnon: That's correct. Zaremba: Okay. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting October 3, 2002 Page 17 of 84 Centers: And, Mr. Chairman -- and this has been an issue in previous subdivisions with narrower streets and the Fire Department issue and --which I don't have a problem with, but in that particular case they wouldn't install no parking signs -- without me going into your comments. Did you require no parking signs every so many feet and has the applicant -- or you didn't address that? McKinnon: It's addressed -- the applicant has actually got on his site plan that he would provide for painted curbs. As far as signage -- Centers: Curb? Right. McKinnon: Painted curb. For fire lanes. Centers: Good. McKinnon: One of the issues that we come down to with the no parking on one side of the street is that who is going to enforce that? If the city puts up the signs, then the city is required to enforce that and then we are enforcing a subdivision. The applicant has addressed that by providing the striping in the southern area and up in the northern area around the cul-de-sac for no parking. Centers: Which is probably is better. Borup: David, would that be addressed in the covenants? The homeowners association would take care of maintenance on the painted curbing? Centers: Good point. McKinnon: I haven't looked through the CC&R's -- Borup: Or does ACHD do that? McKinnon: That would be something that the applicant would do Borup: Okay. So that should be included, I assume, in -- McKinnon: The applicant is here tonight and he would be the best person to address that. Borup: Okay. Any other questions from the Commission? Would the applicant like to make a presentation? Mason: M r.Chairman, M embers of t he C ommission, my n ame is T ed M ason. Bob Rainford and I are co-developing this property. Bob has owned this property since 1995. We h ave o n o ffice a t 4323 N orth Sharon D rive i n M eridian. I appreciate t he opportunity to address the Commission this evening. I have held several meetings in the neighborhood with the surrounding property owners. Both in their homes and at Tully Park and I have also attended a meeting of the Turtle Creek Homeowners Association board meeting and have resolved a lot of the concerns and issues with the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission MeeBng October 3, 2002 Page 18 of 84 neighbors at that time -- at those times. We are proposing single-story homes for downsizing empty nesters here. The homes will be 1,200 to 1,600 square feet in size. Above average finishes. We are targeting buyers who have owned a home and in many cases this will be their last home purchased. The homes will sell for 120,000 to 160,000 dollars. There is extensive landscaping that has been eluded to by staff this evening. The front yard landscape and the common area landscape of each home will be done in common, as will the snow removal, that would be paid for by homeowners dues, so homeowners will feel comfortable in leaving their homes for a month or a few weeks or however long they choose to leave in the winter or summer and know that things will be looked after. We feel this is an ideal location for the retirees to downsize that we are targeting, because of the proximity to Tully Park and shopping and feel that this is a compatible -- compatible with the surrounding land uses and in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and I agree to all of the staff report conditions and I respectfully request your approval this evening. Borup: Any questions for Mr. Mason? Centers: Yes, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Mason, do you intend to maybe take trades? Yes. I know your project visually, because directly behind my office, which sits at Emerald just east of Orchard, you came in and did an in-fill with the same type -- you're going to have townhouses built in duplex form. Mason: Yes. That's correct. Centers: And I think, what, you put in 16 to 18 back there? Mason: That's correct. Centers: And I think most of them are sold. Mason: Yes. Centers: And I commend you with the idea and thought -- and, in fact, I spoke to one of the buyers recently and he was just ecstatic and he was a downsize, empty nester, and I think Meridian needs something like that. Your location is -- you're lucky that it -- Borup: Would it be -- turn back to my question on the painted curbs. Would that be part of the homeowner's maintenance? Mason: Yes. It would be included in the CC&Rs. Borup: Is it included at this point? Mason: I don't -- Borup: Probably not. Mason: Is it not at this point, but we can certainly include that. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting October 3, 2002 Page 19 of 84 Borup: Okay. I agree with what Commissioner Centers -- I think had mentioned that that's probably -- do more good than the signs, but after 10 years and that's all gone and faded, it wouldn't be any good at that point. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Mason. Mason: Thank you. Borup: Do we have anyone else to testify on this application? Seeing none -- Centers: I think the applicant should be commended for meeting with the neighbors. He must have done his job and homework. We don't have any neighbors. That's great. Borup: I was going to comment on that, too, but I think that shows what having the neighborhood meetings prior to can accomplish. Centers: Right. Borup: Thank you for doing that. Zaremba: Just as a comment, I'm not familiar with the project that Commissioner Centers mentioned earlier, but I can see this as a good addition to Meridian. It's a little higher density project than the ones around it and that's good, right on a major thoroughfare. There will be plenty of transportation access on Linder Road and I think building greater densities near the transportation corridors is a good idea. It sounds like it's a good design. They will benefit by being near Tully Park and a few denser projects will eat up less farmland. Centers: Well, in addition, irregardless of what t he school d istrict says, I d on't think there is going to bean impact to o ur school system, because I know the neighbors behind me and Mr. Mason's project, so we have got tax monies with no children to impact the school, so -- I'd like to move that we close the Public Hearing. Zaremba: Second. Freckleton: Mr. Chairman? Borup: Mr. Freckleton. Freckleton: If I could jump in, please. Borup: Please do. Freckleton: Hoping that -- I had not seen the landscape plan until just a few minutes ago. Looking at it, I'm noticing that they have got some building footprints that are encroaching in an easement. There is an existing piped Settler's Irrigation Ditch that runs right across here and comes down and then south through Turtle Creek. I looked through my packet here tonight and I don't see that we have any comments from Settler's Irrigation District as far as what kind of requirements they would have. Maybe the applicant's representative could address that. Mathes: There is one in the packet from Settlers. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting October 3, 2002 Page 20 of 84 Centers: I read that, too. Freckleton: Is it brief? Could you read it? Mathes: Sure. Settler's Canal currently is tiled along the .northern boundary of the property. The the and easement must be protected. It also appears that all storm drainage will be retained on site. Therefore, no further review is necessary. Freckleton: Okay so no encroachments would be allowed within that easement. Zaremba: That just restricts the size and shape of whatever building would be on -- Freckleton: Lot 12. Zaremba: -- the lot where the pipe makes a turn. Borup: Which would be 11 and 12; would that be correct? Freckleton: Yes, lot's 11 and 12. There is -- where it does make an angle change in the middle of Lot 12 right up here, there is a manhole in those people's backyard, so, you know, access issues to the manhole probably should be addressed. Zaremba: The hearing is still open, so please speak. Hornick: My name is Lance Hornick. I work far Treasure Valley Engineers. Business address is 1117 Caldwell Boulevard in Nampa. Earlier we were talking about up there - - it's hard to see the lot numbers -- pull out my viewpoint here. Lot 13, as you see, is a common lot. There is -- that's -- right there. The canal -- the canal does pass through that lot. The building in Lot 11 and 12 will be configured to stay outside that easement. The landscape plan that you may have had in front of you was a concept to show that buildings with either be attached or detached single-family homes. They don't necessarily reflect the actual footprints of the buildings, just as the Commission has indicated. The homes will be designed to fit into those areas. The Irrigation Company should be able to go ahead and access the back of that lot through that common lot on the west. We have got about 20 feet into the property line and that's not uncommon on a lot of these other developments and as Settler Irrigation has said in their letter, they have looked over the plan or the plat and they have no further comments or need for review. Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, if I might, while he's still up there, I would recommend -- I believe that there is an existing fence along the north boundary that separates this project from the Turtle Creek common area. Access to that manhole would be kind of hard with that fence there. I would recommend that there be a note on the plat that specifically notes the existence of that ditch and the easement and restricts the encroachments within the easement. There may be -- this may be something for their legal counsel to look into, but there may be a -- it might be a good idea to have something in the CC&Rs that -- for those two lots, you know, that talks about the existence of a pipe and the access to the pipe and the manhole can't be restricted. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting October 3, 2002 Page 21 of 84 Centers: Well, again, providing access through the common lot, Lot 13, would be adequate, wouldn't it, Bruce? As he stated. From this property. Zaremba: That gets you about -- that gets you w ithin 20 feet of the manhole, but it doesn't get you to the manhole, if I understand. Borup: So you have got a common area -- you have got a common area by Lot 13. Freckleton: Correct. But there is nothing to prevent them from erecting a fence on this boundary as well, so -- Zaremba: Just to mull it through. Whatever is developed on this lot in particular, if it has to stay short of that easement whatever building goes there, and the association is going to care for common area, might it not make sense to extend this common area and shorten that lot a little bit. So that the common area, this lot, actually goes to the fence here, and would include the manhole in that common area. Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, as you will recall, typically when we have a ditch like this we require that this easement area be included in a common lot, but it's not even -- we don't allow an easement of a ditch across a building lot. This one -- there is two lots that are affected. It's affected pretty minimally. I think it would kill this back lot if you excluded that easement area and made it a common lot. It would also create kind of a weird little hiding place back there. Mathes: How hard is it to move the manhole? Is that difficult? Freckleton: That's a big ditch. Mathes: Oh. Okay. Hornick: It would be extremely difficult to move the manhole. Zaremba: Yes and typically they want manholes where it changes direction. Hornick: Absolutely. Borup: Will you state your name again, please? Hornick: Excuse me. Lance Hornick, Treasure Valley Engineers. It would be difficult to move the manhole. The manhole is there, as you have indicated, specifically for change in direction. What we could do is between Lots 12 and 13, make a requirement that if there is any type of fence, it would be a fence with a removable section, so if any type of maintenance is required, they could get a vehicle back in there for maintenance. Centers: You mean 11 and 13. Hornick: I mean between 12 and 13 you could access that manhole. And there are no other manholes on the -- Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting October 3, 2002 Page 22 of 84 Centers: This is -- okay. I had it marked wrong. I have seen it on deeds, permanent access easements. You could do that with lot 12 only. As Mr. Freckleton stated, if it stayed on the plat, then the buyer of Lot 12 understands that with that -- and, you know, you would have to consult your legal beagle, but permanent access for maintenance of -- that could be in the deed. Hornick: Sure. Centers: For Lot 12. Hornick: And the way that the Irrigation District has that easement, it's there to protect their rights to get in and maintain that. Centers: Someone has the right to walk in that person's backyard is all that you're telling the world when you record that. Borup: Well, the deed that's already recorded is there, but I think a good reason to put it in the plat is most people don't pay any attention -- Centers: When they buy it. Borup: -- to that and that's just --that's just further notification. Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, that was simply the purpose that I had, was we just get it out there for the world to see. They don't have to go and search a recorded document in county records, it's right on the face of the plat, the buyer of that lot is going to see it, so Hornick: We have no objection and we would be willing to put that note on the plat Borup: I think that makes good sense. Hornick: If there is nothing else, Iwill -- Centers: Very good. Thank you. Zaremba: Yes. I would support making sure that the buyer of that lot has no surprises. Centers: We have a motion and a second. Borup: Yes, we do. I'm sorry. Centers: That's all right. I just wanted to remind you. Zaremba: Call the motion. Borup: We have a motion and second. All in favor? Any opposed? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission MeeBng October 3, 2002 Page 23 of 84 Borup: That motion was to close the Public Hearing; right? Zaremba: Correct. On both items. Borup: Right. Do we want a little bit of discussion before we formulate a motion or are we ready? We discussed the note on the plan for access on lot -- Centers: Well -- and I think specifically it should be on Lot 12. Borup: Yes. Centers: On the plat. Right on the Lot 12, that -- however the legal person wants to word it, that the Settler's Irrigation District h as access to their canal via the manhole cover in the back. Borup: Right. The plat shows the easement, but a note saying that they do have an access -- Centers: To come and maintain the -- Wollen: Excuse me, Commissioner Centers. Would that be on both Lot 11 and 12? Centers: Not my understanding. Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, I would recommend putting it on both lots. In the note reference both lots. The easement goes right across both lots -- the manhole is on Lot 12, but Imean -- Borup: Right. The pipeline is the whole way. Freckleton: Exactly. It isn't a big issue when it's a common lot, but there is two home lots there that -- I think it's --Imean if you can reference one, it's just as easy to reference two. Make reference to the recorded easement document in that note, the instrument number. That would be right on the final plat as well. Centers: Which, Dave, and his department, approved anyway, so -- well, I'd like to make a motion, Mr. Chairman. Borup: Commissioner Centers. Centers: I'll make a stab at it. I'd recommend approval to City Council of Item 6, AZ 02- 021, request annexation and zoning of 5.26 acres and rezone 2.4 acres from RUT and R-4 zones to R-8 zone for proposed Tully Cove Sub by Ted Mason, west of North Linder Road and south of West Ustick Road, including all staff comments. Zaremba: Second. Borup: And by staff comments, did you mean the item on -- never mind. I'm sorry. just caught on. We have a motion and second. All in favor? Any opposed? Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting October 3, 2002 Page 24 of 84 MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Borup: Thank you. Centers: And continuing, I would like to recommend approval to the City Council on Item 7, PP 02-018, request for Preliminary Plat approval of 39 building lots and 10 other lots on 7.30 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for the proposed Tully Cove Subdivision by Ted Mason. It is west of North Linder Road and south of West Ustick Road and -- with a time out here. The acreage doesn't total up. In the annexation and zoning, we have 7:66 acres and in the Preliminary Plat agenda, we have 7.30. Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, the reason for that is because the legal description for annexation and zoning includes adjacent right of way. Centers: Okay. Freckleton: The legal description for a plat is exclusive of the right of way. Centers: Okay. Thank you. Continuing on and recommend approval of the aforementioned, including all staff comments and, in addition; the Final Plat would have wording across Lots 11 and 12 noting to potential buyers that the Settler's Irrigation District requires access through their property or would require access through their property should they need to go in and maintain the pipe and canal. End of motion. Zaremba: Second Borup: Motion and second. Any discussion? All in favor? Any opposed? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Item 8. Public Hearing: CUP 02-025 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a wireless communications facility consisting of a 125 foot monopole and supporting equipment in an I-L zone for Verizon Wireless by Mericom Corporation - 3735 North Ten Mile Road: Borup: Thank you. Item Number 8, Public Hearing CUP 02-025, a request for Conditional U se Permit for a wireless communication facility consisting of a 1 25 foot monopole and supporting equipment in an I-L zone for Verizon Wireless by Mericom Corporation at 3735 North Ten Mile Road. We would like to open this Public Hearing and start with the staff report. McKinnon: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. Again to the overhead. The site that we are going to be discussing tonight for a new cell tower is located adjacent to the City's Wastewater Treatment Plant, the highlighted portion of the map in front of you. The bolded area is the Ten Mile Mini Storage area and that's where the proposed cell tower would go. The proposed cell tower would be approximately 650 feet to the west of Ten Mile Road. Here is a picture of the site. Currently on the site Ten Mile Mini Storage is constructed to this point. It's about 600 and some odd feet back from Ten Mile. The proposed cell tower would be located adjacent to -- a few