Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFebruary 1, 2007 P &Z Comm Minutes Meridian Planning and Zoning February 1,2007 Page 5 of41 Item 7: Public Hearing: AZ 06..062 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 1.12 acres from RUT to a C-C zone for Hoyd Annexation by Kendall Hoyd - east of N. Meridian Road and north of E. Fairview Avenue: Rohm: With that being said, at this time I'd like to open the Public Hearing of AZ 06- 062, item for Hoyd Annexation and begin with the staff report. Watters: Chairman ROhm, Members of the Commission, the application before you is an annexation and zoning request for the property located on the northeast corner of North Meridian Road and Carmel Drive, approximately a quarter mile north of Fairview Avenue. Fairview is right here. The subject property is right here. Carmel Drive runs right to the south of it. The site is currently vacant with residential property to the north, zoned R-1 and commercial property further to the north, Hartz Music Shop, zoned L-O. Just a little bit of information here. The property to the north, both parcels there, are currently in process requesting a rezone and annexation for commercial designation into the city. To the east is residential property zoned R-8. To the south is vacant land zoned R-1. And commercial property further to the south that contains a child care facility zoned C-C. Rural residential property to the west. It has a single family house and pasture ground. Here is an aerial view of the property. The property is currently zoned RUT in Ada County and the applicant is requesting to annex and zone the 1.12 acre parcel with a C-C, community business zoning district, which complies with the Comprehensive Plan designation of commercial. No new development is proposed at this time. However, the applicant is intending to construct to two story 14,000 square foot office building on the site in the future. The applicant has submitted conceptual site plan and elevations with construction materials, showing how the property may develop in the future. The site plan right here. The conceptual site plan submitted with this applicant shows access to the site being provided from Carmel Drive with no direct access to Meridian Road. A driveway is shown at the north boundary for future cross- access with the parcel to the north. Off-street parking is shown on the plan as you can see there. No landscaping improvements are required at this time, but will be required on development of the property. Staff is requesting that a development agreement be required for this property to insure that future cross-access is provided to the property to the north, to limit the hours of operation for future businesses between the hours of 6:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m., since the property is adjacent to residential uses, and to insure that the development or the property substantially complies with the conceptual site plan and elevation submitted with this application and to require an elevation certification be submitted for the future building. And other just standard development agreement provisions. Staff is recommending approval of the requested annexation and zoning as requested by the applicant and stated in the staff report. That's all staff has, unless the Commission has questions. Rohm: Thank you very much. Any questions of staff? Moe: Mr. Chairman? Rohm: Commissioner Moe. Meridian Planning and Zoning February 1,2007 Page 6 of 41 Moe: Sonya, I just want to -- the site plan that you had up there, that is the current site plan, not the one that's in this packet right here? Watters: It is. There was a revised -- there was a revised one submitted. The correct one is in the staff report. Moe: Okay. Thank you. Watters: This is a copy of the elevation submitted here for the proposed building down the road. Rohm: Okay. Good. Thank you very much. Any other questions? Borup: Just one. Do we have any drawings on the rear elevation or whichever elevation is going to be against Meridian Road? Watters: All I have is -- excuse me, Chairman Rohm, Commissioner Borup, Members of the Commission, the only elevations I have are those submitted by the applicant. It looks like they show the front elevation and kind of a front side view of it. I do not have -- Borup: Okay. We have got that. So, anything else? Watters: Yeah. I'm not sure of how the building is going to be -- Borup: The same -- this is still a corridor, so some of the corridor design standards apply as far as the -- Watters: This is not in the entryway corridor. Borup: It's not considered that. Watters: No. Borup: Okay. Maybe we will get some information from the applicant. Thank you. Rohm: Thanks, Sonya. Would the applicant like to come forward, please? Hoyd: I'm Kendall Hoyd. My address 10835 West Treeline Court, Boise, Idaho, and I'm the applicant on the piece of property. And so is there a particular question I can answer before -- Rohm: Yeah. I think, basically, you would speak to the staff presentation or have you had an opportunity to read the staff report -- Meridian Planning and Zoning February 1,2007 Page 7 of 41 Hoyd: I have. Rohm: -- to validate whether or not you concur with it or -- Hoyd: There is nothing in there that presents a problem for me. Rohm: Okay. And, typically, on a single dwelling that would be the case like this. would ask you is your rear elevation, is it going to be similar to the frontal elevation? Hoyd: The elevations are actually -- yeah, it's going to be -- the front and the back of this building are going to be actually a little dressier than what you see right here. We have just had an architect start to work on this -- on the esthetics of this building in the last couple of days and it's going to house an engineering firm and a design firm. From our perspective that needs to reflect a certain professionalism with respect to design and so it -- you know, there will probably be much more texture to the building vertically with respect to there will probably be a little bit more -- Rohm: Relief? Hoyd: There will be relief. That's a good word. Yeah. There will be much more relief and I think that the -- the zone accents that we end up using will -- there will be much more that runs the height of the building. Borup: And that was my question. I was a little concerned with the way you have presented it now. Hoyd: Yeah. Borup: Are you familiar with some of the design guidelines that they have on the entranceway corridor -- Hoyd: I'm not. Borup: -- buildings? It's basically -- I think it's some of what you have described, but it talks about having some projections and maybe some facades and stuff like that, but -- Hoyd: These are the things that are currently underway. Unfortunately, the box that's drawn there looks a little bit like a barracks and I don't think that would reflect well on either one of our firms that we intend to house there. Borup: So, are you comfortable with going by the other guidelines, do you feel? guess that's hard to say without -- Hoyd: Not knowing specifically what they are, 1-- Borup: But it sounds like you're in line with what those would be. Meridian Planning and Zoning February 1,2007 Page 8 of 4] Hoyd: Yeah. Our intent is for this to be an attractive building, because, you know, that's necessary to its purpose. Borup: Thank you. Rohm: Thank you. Any other questions of the applicant? Moe: I have none. Rohm: Thank you. Okay. We do not have anybody else that has signed up to speak to this application, but now is that time. So, if there is someone that would like to come forward, please, do so. And seeing none -- Moe: Mr. Chairman, I make a motion to close the Public Hearing on AZ 06-062. Borup: Second. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to close the Public Hearing on AZ 06-062. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT. Moe: I think before I make another motion, I guess I would anticipate that after hearing the applicant, I would anticipate that when they do come forward, you know, the designs will I think be looking what we are looking for as far as esthetics and whatnot. Or the elevations. Borup: Come forward of where? Moe: Well, when they come back through the process for the building itself. Not through us, I'm just saying that -- Borup: Through staff. Moe: Right. Borup: Okay. Yeah. Staff's been real good and careful on the other ones and I think have watched some of the other buildings going up and I think it's accomplished what we'd like to. Moe: I guess the whole point is I don't have a problem per the staff report. So, in that case, then, Mr. Chairman? Rohm: Commissioner Moe. Meridian Planning and Zoning February], 2007 Page 9 of 4] Moe: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to City Council of file number AZ 06-062 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of February 1 st, 2007. Borup: Second. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to forward onto City Council recommending approval of AZ 06-062. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carried. Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 8: Continued Public Hearing from December 7, 2006: AZ 06..057 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 9.91 acres from RUT to an R-15 zone for Jericho Subdivision by Heron River Development, LLC - 6055 & 6185 N. Jericho Road: Item 9: Continued Public Hearing from December 7, 2006: PP 06..056 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 73 residential units and 10 common lots on 9.52 acres in a proposed R-15 zone for Jericho Subdivision by Heron River Development, LLC - 6055 & 6185 N. Jericho Road: Rohm: Okay. At this time I'd like to open two hearings related to the same project. Continued Public Hearing AZ 06-057 and continued Public Hearing PP 06-056 and begin with the staff report. Hess: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. The application before you is the Jericho Subdivision. The subject applications were scheduled to be heard before the Planning and Zoning Commission on December 7th, 2006. At that time the applicant proposed annexation of 9.52 acres from RUT to solely R-15, medium high density residential and preliminary plat approval of 73 single family lots, ten common lots, and two private street lots. The applicant also originally submitted a variance application for reduced rear yard setbacks for the proposed townhouse units. Staff had recommended denial of the project. The applicant has submitted a revised preliminary plat, which staff believes is more compatible with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code. The application proposes annexation and zoning and preliminary plat approval for 68 single family residential lots, ten common lots, and two private street lots on 9.52 acres within the R-4, medium low density residential, and R-15, medium high density residential, zoning designations. The subject site, as you can see on the PowerPoint presentation, is generally located on the west side of Jericho Road, approximately a fifth of a mile south of Chinden Boulevard. And that is right here. Eight detached single family homes will take direct lot access from Jericho Road and that is these eight right here. Two streets will connect with the adjacent residential subdivision, Hightower Subdivision, over here, one at the west property line, this here, and one at the north property line. And these two