Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOctober 19, 2006 P&Z Minutes Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 19, 2006 Page 22 of 84 Jewett: And thank you, Chairman and Commissioners. Rohm: You bet. Just due to the nature -- we are going to take a 15 minute break here and continue it at 8:35. (Recess. ) Item 6: Public Hearing: RZ 06-009 Request for a Rezone of .57 acres from an 1- L zone to an R-8 zone for Vicki Garton by Vicki Garton - 435 W. Broadway Avenue: Rohm: Okay. At this time we'd like to continue our regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission and begin by -- okay. At this time I'd like to open the Public Hearing RZ 06-009, request for a rezone of .57 acres from an I-L zone to an R-8 zone for Vicki Garton and begin with the staff report. Watters: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. The application before yo.u is a rezone for the property located at 435 West Broadway Avenue. The applicant has requested this property be rezoned from the I-L, light industrial, to the R-8, medium density residential zoning district. The subject property is generally located on the south side of West Broadway Avenue, west of West 4th Street, adjacent to the railroad tracks. The vicinity map on the overhead here highlights the property here in blue. The site is a residential property that contains an existing single family home and associated out building. To the east and west of the property are single family homes zoned I-L. To the north are single family homes zoned R-15. The property abuts the railroad tracks on the south. South of the railroad tracks is industrial property zoned I-L. This property and other neighboring properties to the east and west were originally developed as residential properties, but were rezoned at some point supposedly for industrial redevelopment that never occurred. The applicant would like to rezone the property so that the existing residence can be considered a conforming use in the zone for financing purposes, as most financial institutions will not finance a nonconforming use or property, because if the structure is significantly damaged it cannot be rebuilt. The only issue highlighted in the staff report for the Commission is that the applicant needs to submit a legal description and associated documents stamped and signed by a professional land surveyor that meet the city's and State Tax Commission's requirements prior to Council approval of the rezone ordinance. Staff is recommending approval of their requested rezone from I-L to R-8 as stated in the staff report. That's all staff has, unless the Commission has questions. Rohm: Any questions of staff? Zaremba: Mr. Chairman, actually, I do have one. I agree with the reason for changing the zoning, but it was my understanding when the Old Town zone was established that we would not go out and force people to change their zoning, but if and when they asked for any change, the change would be to Old Town, and I -- and that would still Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 19, 2006 Page 23 of 84 allow the use that they are wanting to make it, but would still be a correct use in the Old Town zoning. I'm wondering why we are not making this Old Town. Watters: Commissioner Zaremba, that -- this particular piece of property is not within the Old Town -- Zaremba: Oh, it's outside of it? Watters: -- designation on the Comprehensive Plan. Zaremba: That's the right answer, then. Thank you very much. Watters: It's designated as medium density residential. Rohm: Thank you, Sonya. Watters: Any additional questions? Rohm: Would the applicant like to come forward, please, and state your name and address for the record. Garton: Mr. Chairman and Commissioners, I'm Vicki Garton. My address is 1900 East Blue Tick Street in Meridian and I have applied for a rezone of the existing property for the purpose of financing. As you know it's currently zoned as I-L and our primary purpose is to purchase this and we are unable to obtain financing for a residential loan without a rezone. George and Viola Nelson are the current owners of the property and as I understand they have been trying to sell the property for quite some time. They are in failing health and need to sell the property, but they, like I said, have been unsuccessful in doing that. We have requested that it be taken back to medium density or R-8. I don't know the particular -- necessarily if R-8 is a big issue, but we have -- to me have spent quite a bit of time and to me a lot of money to rezone that so we can purchase it and I'm not an experienced real estate investor, but it's my understanding that by zoning it to R-8 it would increase the value at some point along the way in the future. I don't know if that's true or not, but that's my understanding, so -- Rohm: Thank you. Any questions of the applicant? Newton-Huckabay: I have none. Rohm: There is quite a number of people signed up and so I guess if you don't have anything else we will just go through the list and -- Garton: I do just want to make it clear that, you know, we plan to use the existing structure as a residence. My daughter is going to be living there. She's going to college at BSU. We have put about 10,000 dollars into the existing residence to remodel that so we can keep that residence, because we do like -- Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 19, 2006 Page 24 of 84 Rohm: Okay. Thank you. Okay. I guess we will just start at the top and -- Shelly Fisher. Fisher: My name is Shelly Fisher. I reside at 22900 Conrad Court in Middleton and I am actually here just representing the owners of the property, Viola and George. They are elderly and aren't able to speak for themselves at this and so I have been -- I'm just a family friend and have been helping them try to sell the place for the last several months and we ran into, actually, three contracts that ended up in a problem, because of the zoning. They weren't able to get financing for a residential home and so that's why the Gartons, when they decided to purchase the home, they wanted to go and get the rezoning, so they can qualify for it. What actual zoning is determined is up to you folks, but the one thing that I would request is that if there is conflict over the R-8 that we come to some sort of solution this evening. Viola and George have purchased another home and moved just around the corner to a small home that's no stairs and has handicapped accessible facilities and they are unable to continue with both properties and need to get this other one closed and as soon as we get the rezoning, then, they can go ahead and close. So, it's critical that we make a decision as quickly as possible, so that they are not put in the situation with having both homes and unable to close on the other one. Rohm: Thank you very much. Zaremba: Mr. Chairman, on the question about which zone it was, I'm satisfied it shouldn't OT, but it seems to me that the dimensions of the lot probably would require that it has to be R-8. I'm not sure that's open for discussion, is it? Watters: Excuse me. The dimensions of the lot would be -- Zaremba: Would have to be an R-8. If-- Watters: It's a rather large lot. Zaremba: It's too small for an R-4, isn't it? Watters: It's a point -- I want to say 57. Yeah. .57 acre lot. It's quite large. Zaremba: Okay. Wrong again. Sorry about that. Rohm: Okay. The next name -- Wilson. Okay. Mr. Nelson will not be testifying and we will just go to the next person. Connie -- Connie says she's not going to testify. Borup: Mr. Chairman, maybe there is a long list. You might just ask if anybody wants to testify. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 19, 2006 Page 25 of 84 Rohm: That works for me. We will just take them in order as you come up. So, who ever would like to testify just come up and say your name and address for the record. Watson: I'm Mary Ann Watson. I live at 424 West Broadway. I live on -- directly north of the property that is here. We did have a neighborhood meeting concerning the rezoning of this property. All neighbors were in agreement that there would not be a problem with rezoning the property to a residential as long as there were no immediate plans to demolish the residence or put up multiple dwellings. At the public -- at our neighborhood meeting the future owners stated they'd utilize the residence as their home and operate a home business out of this residence. When we got the notice it was zoned to R-4, which is the classification of the medium density. Upon doing some research on your planning and zoning website it states that, of course, in order to have a home occupation business it must be either an R-4 or an R-8. One of the reasons that they needed the property rezoned was so they could get the residential financing for it. They basically -- under either one of these R-4 or R-8, the home occupation cannot disturb neighboring residences with noise. They have -- we are concerned that they could have gone to an R-4 classification for that property. I did look and I did not see any size restrictions that would negate it from going to the R-4. Most of our property that is surrounding this is all single family dwellings. We don't want any -- at this present time don't want any four or eight-plexes going in on the property. We have noticed with the future owners there has been remodeling done. We are assuming that it will -- if they are going to have the home business in there, there would still be room for a renter as well. We are just concerned that we want this to stay as a single family dwelling, a nice neighborhood, not have a lot of traffic. Right now we are dealing with Head Start on the corner of 4th and Broadway, which has parents and guardians picking up children, causing massive congestion. If there is a home occupation business down there, that's fine. If they want to live there, that's fine. We believe, though, it probably should go to an R-4 versus an R-8. Thank you. Rohm: Thank you. Before we take additional testimony I have a question for staff. On the R-8 with this being a .57 acre lot, would they -- if they were to receive the R-8 designation, would they, then, be able to re-plat it to multiple lots? Watters: Chairman Rohm, I believe that they would be able to and would meet the dimensional standards of the R-8 zone should they redevelop the property into more than one lot. Rohm: Okay. Thank you. All right. Would anybody else like to come forward and testify? Thompson: Sir, my name is James Thompson. I live at 401 West Broadway, two lots -- three lots east of the effective property. I think the neighbors are -- or at least my concern is -- is what -- like Mary Ann just said, I have no problem with it becoming an R- 4, we just do not want to set a precedence -- or let me rephrase that. I kind of have a little bit of a hard feeling towards setting a precedence if all of a sudden it's zoned for something larger than just single family dwellings. I would -- I'd personally -- I would be Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 19, 2006 Page 26 of 84 very willing to compromise if you guys -- if you found it in your -- in fitting what you would go with to be an R-4. I mean that's -- that would be kind of a compromise in what they are requesting versus what -- keeping the neighborhood established as single family dwellings. And that's basically alii really have. Thank you. Borup: Mr. Thompson? Mr. Chairman? Rohm: We have a question for you, sir. Borup: I was just interested in your feelings on if it stayed industrial use. It sounds like you may almost prefer it staying like it is, rather than going to a residential zone. Thompson: The biggest problem I have with that is -- is like your planner just said, I live on that side of the street. If something -- I more than likely, at some point in time, will be talking to you folks about requesting an R-2, and R-3, R-4, or something like that, low to medium density for my own property, because I live there. If something catastrophic happens to me, your -- Borup: Have you looked into the permitted uses in an industrial zone like it is right now? Thompson: As far as -- Borup: I mean they can put in a car wash, storage facilities, you know, just a lot of different uses without even having a Public Hearing because it's a permitted use. Thompson: Well-- yes, and -- Borup: Once it goes to residential, then, those would not be an option and have to be a strictly residential use. Thompson: And that I understand that, but on the single lot such as that it -- the main concern is -- is if they acquire more lots or if somebody were to say, gee, that precedence has been set as an R-8 there and somebody comes in and buys the three- quarters acre beside it or the half acre at the other side of it or whatever, all of a sudden we end up with 20, 25, 30 units that we have just -- you have just blown up our single family residence -- neighborhood there. Borup: I understand. Thank you. Thompson: The Trex Electrical and places like that, commercial utilizations on that side of the street at present, they are very -- very minimal impact on what transpires within the neighborhood, so to be honest -- Borup: It sounds like they are a good neighbor. Thompson: They are a good neighbor. Very good neighbors. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 19, 2006 Page 27 of 84 Borup: Okay. Thank you. Rohm: Okay. Next. Downum: Good evening. My name is Craig Downum. My wife and I live at 417 West Broadway, which is just two houses east. Next door to Jim. Basically agree with Jim. I think that whole side would be better served if it goes back to residential and some of the information I have seen, that's the intent of the future. Ironic that businesses have finally came in there, now the city thinks it needs to be residential again. I think it needs to be the R-4, as Jim said, because it is such a neutral area when these lots become available, if we set precedence for the R-8 or the higher density, it will be developed -- a developer will not take that size of a lot and just put a house on it, they will utilize it to a large gain and put four-plexes or apartments on it to whatever degree. So, that's -- you know, that's our position on it. Rohm: Thank you. Before we continue, I think staff has some comments. Hood: I was just going to make one comment. Regardless of zoning, any future subdivision would require another Public Hearing. So, even if you did -- regardless of what zoning designation, if you decide to approve a zoning designation, a preliminary plat would require this Commission and the City Council to act on that regardless of what zone. So, I just wanted to make that clear to every one that if someone were to subdivide this property it does have to come back to the city and go through this exact same process, so -- Vera: I think this is Old Town, because I'm charged a different rate for my water and that was explained to me difference in my water -- Rohm: Could you state your name and address. Vera: Shirley Vera. 522 West Broadway. Rohm: Thank you. Vera: So, I think this is Old Town. It was explained to me that that's why my water was different than everybody else's. It was a cheaper rate, so -- but I agree with everyone else, the four -- R-4. Rohm: Thank you very much. Zaremba: And, actually, part of the reason that I originally asked that question is that in the staff report, paragraph 6-0, it says the city recently approved a rezone from I-L to OT for the property located at 608 West 3rd. That must be somewhere in this vicinity. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 19, 2006 Page 28 of 84 Watters: Commissioner Zaremba, if you look here just east of the site, there is a couple Old Town properties right there. I'm not sure if -- if she lives there or -- that's the Head Start? Okay. But the boundary for Old Town is -- let me -- Zaremba: Is right there. Hood: The boundary for Old Town is -- I can't remember which parcel it is, but it breaks -- I think it's right there. So, this is, essentially -- if you look, this is 5th; right? 4th. 4th. So, it's everything west of 4th is residential, everything east is Old Town. Rohm: Thank you. Is there anyone else that would like to testify in this application? Watson: My name is Paul Watson. I live at 424 West Broadway Avenue. None of us want to affect George and Vi from selling their house. We all care a lot for them. But as far as us living there, I would rather see it go R-4 than R-8. Period. That's alii have to say. Newton-Huckabay: Thank you. Rohm: Thank you. Colley: Hi. My name is Shane Colley, I live at 423 West Broadway. I'm here on behalf of Sid Brewer, the owner of the property, and he would like to see it go R-4 as well, rather than R-8. Rohm: Thank you. Is there anybody else that would like to testify in this application? Would the applicant like to come back forward, please. Garton: I would just like to let the Commissioners know that I don't have a problem going with R-4. We just want to buy the property. That's the bottom line. So, we are prepared to do that upon -- as soon as it's rezoned. Moe: Mr. Chairman? Ma'am, I do have a question for you. It was noted earlier that there is a home business planned for this as well. When you first talked you didn't mention that, so I was curious what that is. Gorton: I just do day trading on the computer. Moe: Okay. Thank you. Rohm: Thank you. I guess my question of staff is if the application before us is for an R-8 and it's the consensus that an R-4 will be more desirous and the applicant has no objection, can we act on that? Watters: Yes, Commissioners Rohm, we can. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 1 g, 2006 Page 29 of 84 Rohm: Okay. Thank you. Zaremba: At the risk of being wrong again, I would clarify that we could down zone -- I mean it's been noticed as an R-8 and my understanding is we would be able to make it an R-4, we would not be able to make it an R-15 without re-noticing. Right? Watters: Yes. Zaremba: Hey. Rohm: One in a row for Commissioner Zaremba. Zaremba: Excuse me, I think I better go home now. Rohm: Okay. All right. Could I get a motion to close the Public Hearing? Newton-Huckabay: So moved. Zaremba: Second. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to close the Public Hearing on RZ 06-009. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Chair? Rohm: Commissioner Newton-Huckabay. Newton-Huckabay: I move to recommend approval to the City Council of file number RZ 06-009 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of October 19th, 2006, with the following changes to the staff report: That the zoning be designated as R-4, rather than R-8. I don't know, Sonya, what bullet point you want me to make that, though. Or if I need to. Rohm: I think that's sufficient. Newton-Huckabay: End of motion. Rohm: Everybody knows. Watters: Yeah. I think that's sufficient, Commissioner. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded that we forward onto City Council recommending approval of RZ 06-009, to include all comments in the staff report, with one modification Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 19, 2006 Page 30 of 84 to an R-4 zoning. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carried. Thank you all for coming in. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 7: Public Hearing: AZ 06-043 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 20.51 acres from R-R to R-8 zone for Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision by Spurwing Limited Partnership - NEC of N. Ten Mile Road and W. Chinden Boulevard and west of N. Spurwing Way: Item 8: Public Hearing: PP 06-045 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 73 residential building lots consisting of 46 attached single-family units and 27 detached single-family units and 6 common/other lots on 20.51 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision by Spurwing Limited Partnership - NEC of N. Ten Mile Road and W. Chinden Boulevard and west of N. Spurwing Way: Rohm: Okay. At this time I'd like to open the Public Hearing on AZ 06-043 and PP 06- 045, both items related to the Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision and begin with the staff report. Watters: Thank you, Chairman, Members of the Commission. The applications before you are for an annexation and rezone, preliminary plat, and variance request for Spurwing Patio Homes Subdivision. The property is 20.65 acres in size and is currently zoned rural residential, R-R, in Ada County. The applicant has requested this property be rezoned to the R-8, medium density residential zoning district. The subject property is generally located northeast of the North Ten Mile Road and Chinden Boulevard intersection and is an existing lot in Spurwing Subdivision. If you look on the overhead here, this is the vicinity map of the area. The red arrow points to the subject property here. Look at the next. This is the aerial view of the property. It's surrounded with golf course and the existing Spurwing Subdivision here to the north. Residential one acre lots. The property further east of the proposed subdivision down in this area is the proposed Knight Sky Subdivision, zoned R-4, R-15, and C-C. Further west of the subject site are one acre residential lots and Westwing Estates Subdivision and agricultural land, zoned R-R. South of the golf course is Chinden Boulevard, which is bordered on the south by the proposed Irvine Subdivision, zoned R-8, and rural residential properties zoned RUT. The plat consists of 73 single family residential building lots, consisting of 46 attached units and 27 detached units, and six common lots on 20.51 acres. All lots meet the minimum dimensional standards of the R-8 zone. The gross density of the proposed subdivision is 3.56 dwelling units per acre, which generally complies with the Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation of medium density residential. The average lot size in the proposed development is 9,067 square feet, with the lots bordering the existing one acre residential lots to the north being 4,595 to 6,042 square feet or approximately 1/1oth of an acre, with minimal overall house sizes of 1 ,400 square feet. The applicant is proposing 18 percent open space, with landscaped common areas, pond, and connecting stream channels. A