Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMay 17, 2007 P&Z Minutes Meridian Planning & Zoning May 17, 2007 Page 3 of 38 speak. If, in fact, there is not somebody that's speaking for a homeowners association, then, each individual has three minutes to make their case. Once all public testimony has been taken, the applicant has an opportunity to come back up and respond to each and every comment from the public. Once that's completed, the hearing is generally closed, unless someone on the Commission specifically has a question of an individual, but this is -- doesn't turn into a debate. it doesn't -- the applicant. once he responds to any questions from the public, generally speaking a hearing will be closed. At that time we will deliberate and either continue or make a recommendation to City Council at that point. Item 4: Continued Public Hearing from May 3, 2007: PFP 07~001 Request for a Preliminary / Final Plat approval to subdivide Lot 13, Block 3 of Vallin Courts Subdivision to create two (2) new lots for Benewah by Walker Homes, Inc. - 2673 North Ridgebury Avenue: Rohm: So, with that being said, I would like to at this time open the continued Public Hearing from May 3rd, 2007, of PFP 07-001, related to Benewah and begin with the staff report. Hess: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. The application before you is a request for preliminary/final plat approval. The subject property totals approximately half of an acre and is located within the Vallen Court Subdivision. This is the Vallen Court Subdivision right here. The subdivision is generally located south of Ustick Road and West of Meridian Road. The applicant proposes to subdivide Lot 13. Block 3, into two new lots. The new lot sizes total approximately 8,900 square feet and 10,600 square feet. Fast forward to the plat there. The subject subdivision is currently zoned R-8. Access to the development will be from Meridian Road by either Salisbury Lane or Clearbrook Estates Subdivision. That's these two subdivisions right here. Each of the proposed lots will have individual driveway access to North Ridgebury Avenue. The only issue to mention here is that perimeter fencing was not depicted on the preliminary plat and staff requests the applicant provide testimony this evening as to whether fencing will be constructed around the proposed subdivision. Staff has no concerns with the proposal. therefore, staff is supportive of the subdivision as submitted. And that is all staff has, unless the Commission has questions. Rohm: Good. Thank you very much. Any questions of staff? Siddoway: Just one. Rohm: Commissioner Siddoway. Siddoway: Amanda. can you just clarify what -- why the larger lot was there in the first place? Was it originally a stormwater lot or anything like that or was it a building lot? Hess: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commissioner, there was actually an existing home on the one lot at the time. Meridian Planning & Zoning May 17, 2007 Page 4 of 38 Siddoway: Okay. Hess: And I'm assuming they wanted a larger lot, but now I think the home has been demolished. Siddoway: Thank you. Rohm: Okay. Would the applicant like to come forward, please. Do we have an applicant for the Benewah project? That's -- we may be moving so fast that they are just not here yet. How about that? That's a first. Well, I don't think I want to -- let's -- we are going to see if anybody has signed up to testify to this application. Okay. Mr. Baird. Baird: Mr. Chair, if you're looking for some direction on how to proceed, it's a pretty straight forward application. There is no requirement that he would receive any testimony from the applicant. You have the application before, the staff comments. If it's the pleasure of this body, you can proceed with your decision. Rohm: Yeah. I think that the only thing that I wanted to hear is from the staff report she actually wanted the applicant to speak to the perimeter fencing and without having that testimony I guess we could make a motion to just making that a requirement and make it specific to the application and move forward. And maybe that's the right thing to do. We do not have anybody that has signed up to testify to this application, so I guess we will -- is there anyone from the audience that would like to testify to this application? Okay. Discussion? Any discussion before we move to close the Public Hearing? Moe: Mr. Chair, of staff, as far as perimeter fencing, you're just looking at three sides of fencing? Is that what you're looking for? Hess: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, yes, the north side of the lot -- there is a micro pathway, so there would be a required -- which I'm assuming is already in Vallen Court Subdivision, but just in case -- I'm getting direction from my associate here that it is in already. So, what we would be looking at would be just the perimeter -- I also gather from my associate that the west is also in. So, it looks like there already is existing perimeter fencing around the entire lot, so -- Moe: Therefore, there wouldn't be a need -- Hess: Correct, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. Moe: Oh. Okay. Rohm: Okay. Moe: And we are sure of that, so we don't need to deal with that, then? Meridian Planning & Zoning May 17, 2007 Page 5 of 38 Hess: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, I'm pretty sure that -- my associate Sonya Watters was the -- did work on the final plat for the subdivision, so she's pretty aware of what happened out there. Rohm: Okay. Good. All right. Well, with that being said, then, could we get a motion to close the Public Hearing on Item PFP 07-001? Moe: So moved. Siddoway: Second. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to close the Public Hearing on PFP 07-001. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Moe: Mr. Chairman? Rohm: Commissioner Moe. Moe: Is there any other discussion? After considering all staff -- no applicant and no public testimony, I move to recommend approval to City Council of file number PFP 07- 001 as presented during the hearing of May 17th, 2007, with no other modifications. End of motion. Newton-Huckabay: Second. ROhm: It's been moved and seconded to forward onto City Council recommending approval of PFP 07-001. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 5: Continued Public Hearing from May 3, 2007: PP 07-009 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 52 residential lots, 2 office/commercial lots and 10 common lots on 19.80 acres in an L-O zone for Meadowlake Village North by Touchmark of the Treasure Valley, LLC - SEC of Franklin Road and Touchmark Way: Item 6: Continued Public Hearing from May 3, 2007: CUP 07-008 Request for a Conditional Use Permit approval to create 52 residential lots. 2 office/commercial lots and 10 common lots in an L-O zone for Meadowlake Village North by Touchmark of the Treasure Valley, LLC - SEC of Franklin Road and Touchmark Way: