Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJanuary 5, 2006 P&Z Minutes 't '" Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 5, 2005 Page 14 of 93 Zaremba: I agree. It would be wise to include this. This is a Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District letter of 17 November 2005, received by the City Clerk December 2, 2005, is included in my motion. Moe: I will second it. Rohm: It has been moved and seconded that we forward onto City Council recommending approval of AZ 05-053 and PP 05-055. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 9: Item 10: Item 11: Continued Public Hearing from December 1, 2005: AZ 05-056 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 6.08 acres from RUT to TN-R and 4.07 acres from RUT to C-C zone for Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision by JBS Enterprises, LLC - 1845 West Franklin Road: Continued Public Hearing from December 1, 2005: PP 05-058 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 29 residential lots, 7 commercial lots and 7 common lots on 10.15 acres in proposed TN-R and C-C zones for Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision JBS Enterprises, LLC - 1845 West Franklin Road: Continued Public Hearing from December 1, 2005: CUP 05-051 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a mixed-use development within 300' of a residence for Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision JBS Enterprises, LLC - 1845 West Franklin Road: Rohm: Thank you. Okay. At this time I'd like to open the public hearings on AZ 05- 056, PP 05-058, CUP 05-051, and start with the staff report. Guenther: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision is a mixed use development approximately near the existing Harks Corner, which has the sports bar, gas station, Arctic Circle -- it's all in there. This is also immediately north of the Ten Mile Creek and also just north of Whitestone Estates. There is several issues that come up with this site. This is saying that this is a six acre site. It's, actually, a ten acre site -- well, there it is. Is says it's 4.07 for the TNR. With that, there is an existing water feature for irrigation and fire protection on site that is a portion of the amenity for the sports bar that is in the Harks Corner Subdivision, I believe, is what it's name was under. With this, the applicant is proposing seven commercial lots, four of them fronting on Franklin Road, as well as two in the corner over here, which would be attached by a commercial cross-access into the Harks Corner Subdivision. And also use the water feature as an amenity. With that, there will be 29 residential lots, which are incorporated as townhouse developments in the central portion. The northern portion and kind of at an angle here is what the commercial C-N district will come through as. The neighborhood commercial district -- or community Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 5, 2005 Page 15 of 93 commercial C-C district is a little bit more limited type of uses. They are not just as intense as a general commercial district. With that, we do have the requirements for additional landscaping between land use buffers, which would be north of the service drive, which would be the alleyway serving the rear-loaded townhouses, as well as another 25-foot landscape buffer to the existing residents west of this site. West of this site is projected to change significantly, probably as soon as sewer and water are available to that site, but it is currently a residence and it does require the 25-foot land use buffer. The applicant is not showing the 25 feet at these two required locations, but they are going to propose to file for alternative compliance and use intensive vegetation at the rear of this alley, as well as to put in a 15-foot landscape buffer to the west, which staff is supporting if the applicant provides a landscape design that is suitable to the director. The overall site plan is submitted as conditional use due to the fact that this is a mixed use property that is within 300 feet of a residence. As you can see with this -- there, now it's working again. There is the property line about 100 feet north of the Ten Mile Creek. This is an off-site improvement that the applicant will be signing into with the development agreement to install the multi-use pathway on the Ten Mile Creek corridor that would only go to the bridge that is existing. There is a wooden bridge on the Ten Mile Creek that accesses a common lot in Whitestone Estates. Currently the southern portion of this site, which is listed as Lot 19 of the proposal, is shown conceptually in this design as condos, but according to the applicant those potentially could be an additional phase of townhouses. With that, this is utilizing a different type of a design with the traditional neighborhood residential to allow these townhouses in there. There are a mix of four townhouses and as well as two and three in there -- in the traditional neighborhood residential district. The other portion to be aware of is that these legs of these roads are currently shown as Lot 5, which one of the conditions of approval is with ACHD to make these at a minimum a private street with a design of a 42 foot wide roadway. If you look at this design, if they loop this road, that is essential for addressing all of these properties in this location with a named street, as well as to provide unobstructed access. The applicant is currently showing it as a service drive, but they are acceptable to the condition. You should have received a letter dated January 4th with the application tonight. There is one correction. That would be the Lot 22 should be Lot 21, which is the open space lot in approximately the location between the two commercial uses along the eastern property border and along the water feature and the applicant, after -- after we have had the discussions, has also still proposed new language. There is several ways that the applicant can address the private street or public street. They don't need to have these in a separate lot, but it would help in order to facilitate either a dedication or a design of a public or private street for future connection to the south and, then, condition number 2.15, we have had discussions with public works, which is a public works condition, that is going to most likely be addressed by doing phasing of the plats. The applicant can submit for the first seven lots, which would be the commercial lots, so there would be a commercial Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision and a residential Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision phasing. And with each phase those installments and improvements can be addressed in a better manner, so that they don't have to bring all the improvements for the residential development at the same time as they bring all the commercial development, which would be all the roads, services, sewer, water, et cetera. So, I believe that has been resolved as well. And just Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 5, 2005 Page 16 of 93 a point of note. The fire and police have issued a couple of conditions which require all alleyways to be 24 feet and this is a condition that has been discussed at quite length, because the police and fire are not entirely supportive of the traditional neighborhood residential designs. However, with this design they do allow for rear parking, they are required by the TNR district to have photometric cells on the rear of the property, so that all of the alleys will have a minimum of two lights per home on that alley which will be motion censored, as well as would come on at nighttime. So, these will not be dark alleys, they will be reduced sections, but staff feels that the concerns of the fire and police have been met with this type of a design, which was that they can have their clear vision corridors and there is hiding places and such, which should be addressed with the conditioning that is in the staff report and so for the residential districts, the conditions of the applicant as cited which are just 3.9 and 3.23 would not apply to the TNR district and that is written into the staff report as a portion of the analysis. With that I believe I have covered everything I have needed to. I will stand for questions. Rohm: Thanks, Joe. Any questions of staff from the Commission? Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Chair, I have one. Joe, so is this the final configuration or is it the one with the two legs? Guenther: At this time this is the plat that is being proposed. Newton-Huckabay: Okay. Guenther: And it should have just the one lot. It's kind of this half a ladder shape here. These legs right here are 42 foot wide, which would be either -- they would need to be redesigned in order accommodate a private street or for possible dedication to a public street. 1.1, while I have got you, is Lot 19 -- if it comes in with the condominiums, you would see this development again, because multi-family developments would require a Conditional Use Permit. If the applicant decided to do another phase of townhouses, we would need another plat. So, you would see this application again. So, regardless of any design elements of these roadways, we are going to be able to see this applicant again for the rest of the units on the southern portion of this proposal. Rohm: Thank you. Any other questions? Newton-Huckabay: I had one other question. Never mind. There were elevations. I'm sorry. Zaremba: I think the last discussion confused me. Go back to the new drawing, if you would. That one. Am I correct that at the moment we are only considering a piece of property -- we are not actually considering this part, we are only considering north of that line? So, the other is just conceptual? Guenther: Yes. Chairman Zaremba, at this time this lot right here, which is listed as Lot 19 in this plat, is not being developed with this application. It is being annexed and Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 5, 2005 Page 17 of 93 improvements will be made to the site, but at this time this -- we are not approving condominiums at this site. This is a concept plan with a Conditional Use Permit and this is the overall phasing plan that they have submitted, which we will see that lot again. Zaremba: Thank you. Guenther: And, Commissioner Newton-Huckabay, this is one of the multi-family units. The commercial units. And these will be the traditional neighborhood four-plex -- or four dwelling unit townhouses. Newton-Huckabay: How did you get -- could you go to the first one? That's a four- plex? Is that what you said? Rohm: No. That would be one of the condominium elevations. Newton-Huckabay: Oh. Okay. Thanks. Guenther: Mr. Chairman? Rohm: Yes. Guenther: Our Public Works representative wants a say. Rohm: Yes. Go ahead. Cole: I don't mean to jump in the middle of the elevation discussion, but to the applicant's request on Public Works comment 2.15, if you can just add Exhibit 8, page 4. 2.15. If you could just add at the end of development -- all development improvements for each phase of this development, would adequately address your concerns to that condition. Rohm: Thanks, Mike. Cole: Thank you. Rohm: Okay. Any further questions of staff by the Commission? Okay. Hearing none, at this time I'd like to invite the applicant to come forward, please. Suggs: Good evening, Commissioners. My name is Jane Suggs, 200 Louisa Street, in Boise. And I'm here representing Franklin Center, LLC, and the Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision and I know you have a busy agenda, so I'm going to be a little brief, but I don't get a change to talk to you much and this is a little bit different, because it is part of the TNR. We are pretty excited to be working with the new code and with the Traditional Neighborhood Residential Code, too. The developers of this project are Larry Van Hees, who has been doing some development around the valley here for years, both commercial and residential, and Dave Wilson and Dave is actually -- is a '. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 5, 2005 Page 18 of 93 builder in Ketchum, he's a Premier home builder there and he's, actually, the nationwide president of the National Homebuilders -- Association of Homebuilders. So, he couldn't be here tonight, because he's probably lobbying for homebuilders in Washington or something. I think the staff did a really good job. This is a little more complicated. I'm sorry for the confusion about the large parcel that's not being developed at this time. We did submit the conceptual plan, because it is being zoned and it is being annexed and we wanted to show what that could be, using that same TNR zone. The project is on Franklin. We were a little bit constrained with Franklin Road, because it's a busy street and there is some industrial light uses above, so we didn't want to put our residential right on Franklin, so we did put our commercial there. But you can see we have got a lot of interconnectivity. We do bring the commercial down along the east side and kind use it as a buffer -- a nice little buffer with the existing Harks Corner there. And especially opening up that open space, the little pond, and keeping that open, so it can be visible and usable by both the businesses and the residents that live there. The designer was Sharon McKibben. I think she did a great job of putting this together and kind of utilizing that existing amenity. And, then, also one of the things is -- as you look at some of those elevations you will see there is a connection between the architecture to the peak roofs on the commercial buildings, the same type of classic architecture that's being used in the town-homes. We have worked with the Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District. Larry has met with them personally and they have agreed to allow us to go into not only the 60 -- there is a 60 foot area that they call out as their land for the creek itself, but just above that is another 60 foot swath of land that's their land, but is part of that portion that we are going to develop here. So, just right down here is all the 60 foot additional land that they own. You can see it when they put up the map of the area. They have agreed, they said, just as long as we allow some access to their creek, they are pretty excited about us turning that into sort of a park-like setting that would be beneficial to the residents. And so we think that's pretty exciting that we can utilize that land and kind of make it part of that -- in your Comprehensive Plan you call for some sort of connecting pathway there and we can do that and you can see -- if you will go to the concept plan, the one that confuses everybody? Thanks. You can see how we want to connect that through the entire development, so that people feel like it's a place that they can go -- get to, even if you're in the -- working in the commercial area, it would be a short walk to go back and enjoy a park-like setting with some additional trees there. As I mentioned, the little pond that's already existing, it's heavily landscaped already, it's a really nice amenity, and we do leave that open corridor right here. We are asking to be zoned with two different zones, the commercial zone for the properties here in the L shape. And, then, the residential zone is a TNR residential zone. What happened is we really wanted to do the condos and, then, we even had started talking about how we would build them and who would build them -- well, not exactly who, but how we would envision them. We went to Langston and Associates, Sam Langston, who helped us do a market and found out at that price point, with the quality that we are planning on for the entire development there wasn't a market right now. We think that it won't be long, but we don't want to short change ourselves. We might find that those town-homes that are connected, that they may be the thing that actually is really popular in that area, because you can -- I mean it's still like owning your own little home there, instead of living on top of someone. We will be submitting a plan .4 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 5, 2005 Page 19 of 93 to you, as Joe said, and that leads me to the only, I guess, condition that I'd say might still be outstanding and that is the one about going ahead and calling these private streets at this point. What I'd like to do is ask you if you would allow that to remain as a lot. They are 42 feet wide here, which will suffice as a public or private street, but right now we'd like to leave it as a lot, so we can determine what type of street it should be, instead of us calling it private now and finding out we might want to make it public, or there is an option still, depending on how this is developed, it could still be a service drive. If it was just to service this one apartment unit, there wouldn't be a reason to be a street around it, because that's not typically how that's done. So, that still could be a service drive. So, we were just asking that you not require us to dedicate that as a public or private street now, that you allow that to remain as a lot and that's the only change that I would ask and, let's see, I will stand for some questions if you want to talk about it some more. Rohm: Okay. Before we do that, I'd like to ask staff to comment on your request to make that a lot, as opposed to a private street. And, Joe, would you like to comment on that, please? Guenther: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The condition only says that that section, if it's going to be providing access to homes on the southern portion of it, that it be public or private. How she does that in a lot -- a separate lot by easement, is going to be up to them. If they are going to eventually dedicate that, if you guys -- if this Commission wishes those to be public, then, you probably should request that those be in a separate lot. If you don't mind that they are going to be private, then, the way that they are configured would work. Rohm: Okay. That makes sense. Thank you. Suggs: So, let me make sure I understand, too. We can make those separate legs separate lots, so they can be anything they want to be, just take the alley service drive out and that would be fine. That would be great. We can turn that -- just means a few more common lots, basically. Okay. Rohm: Thank you. Commission -- any Commissioners have any questions of the applicant? Moe: Yes. Rohm: Commissioner Moe. Moe: Just more or less just a question. I'm somewhat curious that you are aware that the property to the north there on Franklin where Sanitary Services does have a transfer station going in up there right there and you don't have a problem with that being industrial property over on that side of Franklin Road that close to this development? -" Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 5, 2005 Page 20 of 93 Suggs: We think we are one mile from downtown Meridian and we think it's a great place for people to live and there is a great community asset right there at Harks Corner and people would really like to live there. We think that that's really doable. And with the building there along Franklin there is a little bit of a buffer, but I think you're going to find people more and more want to live close to downtown and in some homes like this where the maintenance is taken care of and that's one of the things that we work out later is through the CC&Rs is generally in developments like this all the maintenance for the homes, the town-homes, is taken care of by the homeowners association. So, this is definitely a lock and go kind of place for young professionals, for singles, for people with small families. Rohm: Thank you. Other questions of the applicant? Zaremba: Mr. Chairman, it's not, actually, a question, but included in our packet among your application materials is a page that shows the neighborhood meeting that you held on June 1 st, 2005, and the sign-in sheet and I just wanted to say I appreciate having that. That's-- Suggs: Oh, thanks. Zaremba: It's very helpful to confirm, one, that you had a neighborhood meeting and, two, that people came to it. Suggs: They did. We had it right there at Harks Corner and so people like to come around that was really well attended and we had a good discussion, so -- Rohm: Good. Thank you. Any further questions of the applicant at this time? Thank you. Suggs: Thank you. Rohm: Okay. We do not have anybody signed up to speak to this application, but at this time anyone that feels so inclined you're welcome to come forward and offer testimony. Seeing none, I would turn it back to the Commission for comments prior to closure. It doesn't appear as if anybody has any specific comments, so -- Newton-Huckabay: I just wanted to make sure I understand -- we reconciled the applicant's letter to the staff report and the only change we are actually going to make is, of course, the correction of Lot 22, 21. And, then, the addition to 2.15; is that correct? Those are the only two? Rohm: I believe so. Newton-Huckabay: So, 1.11 is okay upon clarification. 2.15 we are changing with the comments for each phase. 1.8 we are making -- this is just semantics. Lot 22 should be Lot 21. And that was it; right? <l Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 5, 2005 Page 21 of 93 Rohm: I believe so. Newton-Huckabay: Just one or two? Okay. Thank you. Rohm: Any other comments of the Commission? At this point I'd like to request a motion for closure. Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Chair, I recommend we close the public hearings on AZ 05- 056, PP 05-058, CUP 05-051. Rohm: Second. Rohm: It's been recommended that we close AZ 05-056, PP 05-058, and CUP 05-051. All in favor say aye. All opposed same sign? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Borup: I do have a clarification question. Rohm: Yes. Borup: On 2.15. Commissioner Newton-Huckabay, you stated that it's your understanding we are adopting this new language? Newton-Huckabay: No. We are just adding that 2.15 would read: All development improvements for each phase, including, but not limited to sewer, fencing, micro-paths, pressure irrigation, and landscaping, shall be installed and approved prior to obtaining certificates of occupancy. Borup: Okay. And that was my question. Does that landscaping also include the landscaping buffer on Franklin Road or just the interior landscaping? Cole: If the phase that they weren't platting at that time included up to Franklin Road, then, yes, it would. If they decided to plat the residential phase, the lower portion first, then, no, it would not. Borup: So, we could have the whole residential development built out with weeds and undeveloped land along Franklin Road with that scenario? Guenther: The residential development will have to be secondary to the commercial, because they are going to have to improve those streets and bring the sewer down first. Borup: But the landscaping is tied to a certificate of occupancy I thought. . Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 5, 2005 Page 22 of 93 Guenther: And one point of clarification. All townhouses receive certificate of zoning compliance application, so they have to come back to staff for landscaping on all these lots as well, as well as for all the commercial buildings. Borup: My question was -- yeah. Let me -- my specific question is are we looking at the possibility of having perhaps all the townhouses built with no landscaping on Franklin Road? Guenther: No. The landscaping on Franklin Road, regardless of which phase is first, is a perimeter landscaping and is required by ordinance to be installed. Borup: All right. That clarifies -- that's what I originally assume, but with this new language I wasn't sure. Rohm: Okay. Thank you, Commissioner Borup. Newton-Huckabay: Are we ready for a motion? Zaremba: I'm ready for a motion. Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Chair, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of file numbers AZ 05-056, PP 05-058, and CUP 05-051 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of January 5th, 2006, and the preliminary plat dated October 2005, with the following modifications to the conditions of approval: In Exhibit 8, on page four, comment 2.15 will be modified to read all development improvements for each phase, including but not limited to sewer, fencing, micro-paths, pressurized irrigation, and landscaping shall be installed and approved prior to obtaining certificates of occupancy. And comment 1.8, we will change Lot 22 to Lot 21. So, it's lot 21 that is the open space lot. And that is the end of my motion. Moe: Second. Rohm: We have a motion to forward onto City Council recommending approval of AZ 05-056, PP 05-058, and CUP 05-051. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carries. Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 12: Continued Public Hearing from December 15, 2005: AZ 05~055 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 35.33 acres from RUT to R-8 zone for Ambercreek Subdivision by Dyver Development, LLC - North Meridian Road and West McMillan Road: Item 13: Continued Public Hearing from December 15, 2005: PP 05-057 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 175 single-family residential building lots and 16 common lots on 35.33 acres in a proposed R-8 zone