Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMarch 15, 2007 P&Z Comm Minutes Meridian Planning & Zoning March 15, 2007 Page 20 of 49 presented in the staff report for the hearing date of March 15th, 2007. And I don't have the spot where that would go, but adding to the site plan showing sidewalk extended to Cherry Lane. Moe: This would be the revised plat; right? Borup: Yes. The revised plat. And I'm not sure what paragraph that needed to be inserted in, but I think staff can figure that out. End of motion. Moe: I would second that. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to forward onto City Council recommending approval of AZ 07-003 and PP 07-005, to include the staff report, with the aforementioned modifications. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. T\NO ABSENT. Item 9: Continued Public Hearing from March 1,2007: PP 07-004 Requestfor Preliminary Plat approval of 16 residential lots (proposed to contain 64 multi-family units) and 3 common lots on 5.7 acres in an L-O zone for Doubletree Subdivision by Ron Babneau - 1105 W. Pine Street: Item 10: Continued Public Hearing from March 1,2007: CUP 07-002 Request for a Conditional Use Permit approval to construct a multi-family development consisting of 64 multi-family dwelling units (4 plexes) on 16 lots in an L-O zone for Doubletree Subdivision by Ron Babneau - 1105 W. Pine Street: Rohm: Thank you folks for coming in. Okay. At this time I'd like to reopen the continued Public Hearing from March 1st, 2007, of PP 07-004 and CUP 07-002, both items related to the Doubletree Subdivision and begin with the staff report. Lucas: Thank you, Chairman Rohm, Members of the Commission. The applicant has applied for preliminary plat approval and Conditional Use Permit approval for a multi- family development consisting of 64 multi-family dwelling units within 16 four-plexes on 16 building lots and three common lots, all on 5.7 acres in the existing L-O zone. The site is located on the south side of Pine Avenue approximately 1,000 feet east of Linder Road and the project site is commonly known as Lot 2, Block 1, of the Treymore Subdivision. And the site is currently vacant. I'll give a brief context of what's going on around the site. The zoning map will help. To the north is the Treymore Senior Apartments, which are located right here. You can probably see those even on the aerial. This structure right here on Pine Avenue. To the east is the Rock Creek multi- family development, zoned R-15. It doesn't show up on the aerial, but it's actually -- almost all of those buildings, from what I understand, are just being finished right now. And to the south is the Union Pacific Railroad line and the large land holding that they Meridian Planning & Zoning March 15, 2007 Page 21 of 49 have down there. And to the west is the Sunbridge Living Center, which is this entire -- well, it goes up and around like that. Entire parcel right there. Just to provide a little bit of background beyond that context, this site was previously approved as the Roundtree Subdivision back in 2006 and for various reasons the approvals for that Roundtree Subdivision lapsed this last year and now the applicant is reapplying for, basically, the same project that was previously approved, but due to the fact that the UDC has been adopted since the original approval, staff did do a detailed analysis to make sure that the project meets current code. Once a project lapses it's, basically, gone and they have to start from scratch. One issue that should be made clear is that as part of their previous approval, the applicant's didn't do it -- it's not that they did not do anything on the site, they did install sewer and water and these facilities were tested, from what I understand. Is that correct, Mike? Were tested by Public Works and so the sewer and water has been installed. So, this ground is vacant, except for the utilities, which are installed underneath it. With that context and a little bit of background, we can move on to the specifics of the site. Just to reorient ourselves, this would be north. Here is Pine Avenue. I oriented it this way, just because it fit better on the slide this way. As you can see, the applicant takes primary access off of Pine Avenue across this cross-access driveway, which was previously constructed with the Treymore Apartment complex. The street, then, crosses over the Nine Mile Creek at that location and this is the design as it is currently shown. There is also one other access point connecting right here to the Rock Creek Apartments, so there are two points of access into the site, one up through Rock Creek right there and, then, this one right here. The landscape buffering requirements along Pine were previously installed with the Treymore Subdivision and this -- all this section of that -- of that drive aisle has also been previously improved with the Treymore Subdivision. Approximately 16.3 percent of the site has been set aside for open space and the applicant is providing various amenities, which includes public art, open grassy areas, walking trails and pathways, sand volleyball courts and a half basketball court to serve the residents of this multi-family development. Other than that, the Comprehensive Plan designation is high density residential on this site, which would -- this project complies with. And the applicant has provided some -- some elevations that we can go to. Here is the landscape plan. This shows some of the amenities that can go over. Here is some open grassy area. They propose some public art here, half basketball court, and, then, walking trails and things along -- along the Nine Mile. These are the proposed elevations, which staff also reviewed and found to be -- to meet the minimum requirements as outlined in the UDC. I think other than that overview, there was one specific issue that came out of -- that came out of staff's analysis that's worth a little bit of discussion and that is when this project was previously approved, the parking situation in the UDC has changed a little bit. Under the old code there was no requirement for covered parking within a multi-family development, but under the current UDC it's very clear. In UDC 11-3C-6A, which requires multi-family dwellings with two or more bedrooms have a two car covered carport or garage for each unit and currently as proposed the applicant has not shown any covered parking for this site. But staff, as described in the report, to conform with current code, recommends and has a condition included in the report stating that the applicant needs to provide a minimum of eight covered spaces for each of these units, which would, then, bring this project into compliance with the UDC when it comes to the parking. Other than that, staff is Meridian Planning & Zoning March 15, 2007 Page 22 of 49 recommending approval for this project with the conditions as outlined in the staff report. And I will stand for any questions. Rohm: Thank you. Very good report. Any questions of staff? Would the applicant like to come forward, please? Dulin: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, my name is Shawn Dulin, I'm with Rennison & Sodray. We did the engineering on this project. We are at 430 East State Street, Eagle. We concur with the staff's report and we will be providing carports over -- for all the parking and that will be resubmitted prior to the City Council. We are also providing a -- we will be providing fencing -- vinyl fencing to match the adjacent Rock Creek Subdivision, as well as the subdivision to the west and chain link fencing along the creek per the staff -- Rohm: Per the staff report? Dulin: -- per the staff requirement. Rohm: Thank you. Could we put some -- the elevations back up there, please? Lucas: Sure. Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, I'd also like to add -- I failed to mention -- it's in the staff report. I do mention that the applicant should verify the type of fencing that they are going to include in this. I did not include that as a condition, so if the Commission deems that the vinyl fencing as proposed by the applicant is necessary, it may be wise to include that as a condition in the report also. Rohm: Okay. Thank you. The reason why I asked him to put the elevation up gives the Commission an opportunity to take a look at it and if, open to discussion, the Commission feels that that's got enough difference in materials and just broken up in a -- Commissioner Moe, do you have any comments on the elevations provided? Moe: Mr. Chairman, I guess I would just be curious -- are we looking at vinyl siding or is this wood siding or-- Dulin: I believe it's wood siding. Moe: All wood siding? Dulin: With -- yeah. And, then, a couple different color patterns in it. I know there was - - when we first originally brought this to you a couple years ago there was some issue with the way the buildings looked. They were really -- they were really blocks and as part of getting that approval we -- they ended up modifying a lot of the features of the buildings. Added the porches on the front and whatnot, so -- Rohm: Commissioner Borup, do you have any comment on the elevations provided? Meridian Planning & Zoning March 15, 2007 Page 23 of 49 Borup: Well, there is quite a contrast from the previous -- I mean it's apartment, basically, so -- they are better looking ones and there is many many others that are not as good designs. Rohm: I think the big issue was, really, the covered parking, make sure that you understood that you had to have two parking spaces covered for each living unit and then -- and, then, I think addition of the verbiage of the vinyl fencing to the staff report and as along as you're in agreement with everything else, unless you have other comments, I don't have anything else. Dulin: No, sir. Rohm: Okay. Thank you. Okay. We didn't have anybody signed up to testify to this application, but if there is someone that would like to, this is that time. Okay. Seeing none, could I get a motion to close the Public Hearing. Moe: So moved. Borup: Second. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to close the Public Hearing on PP 07-004 and CUP 07-002. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. TWO ABSENT. Moe: Mr. Chairman? Rohm: Commissioner Moe. Moe: After considering all staff, applicant, and we did not get any other testimony from the public, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of file numbers PP 07-004 and CUP 07-002, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of March 1 st, 2007, with the one modification that the applicant will provide vinyl fencing within the project. Borup: Second. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to forward onto City Council recommending approval of PP 07-004 and CUP 07-002, to include all staff report with the aforementioned modification. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carried. Thank you coming in. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. T\NO ABSENT. Item 11: Continued Public Hearing from February 1, 2007 (Re-noticed for Modification): AZ 06-065 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 22.30