Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJuly 5, 2007 P&Z Minutes Meridian Planning & Zoning July 5, 2007 Page 22 of 62 appropriate or not grant it with whatever direction you think is necessary for them to accomplish that. Did I read you correctly? Rohm: I think you encapsulated it very well. Thank you. Moe: That's why he is the attorney. Rohm: Yeah. Thanks. All right. Boy, with that being said, could we get a motion to continue this item to the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning and Zoning and Commission? Siddoway: Mr. Chairman, I move that we reopen the Public Hearing for CUP 07-014, for the sole purpose of taking additional testimony on the elevations and the site plan as related to the cross-access agreement and continue this application to our next regularly scheduled meeting of July 19th, 2007. Moe: Second. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to continue Item No. CUP 07-014 to the regularly scheduled meeting of July 19th, 2007. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 9: Item 10: Item 11: Continued Public Hearing from June 7, 2007: RZ 07-011 Request for a Rezone of 0.77 of an acre from C-C to an O-T zone for Shaylee Estates by Tealey's Land Surveying - 1402 & 1404 N. Meridian Road: Continued Public Hearing from June 7, 2007: PP 07-010 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 2 office building lots, 6 single-family residential building lots and 1 common lot on 0.77 of an acre in a proposed O-T zone for Shaylee Estates by Tealey's Land Surveying - 1402 & 1404 N. Meridian Road: Continued Public Hearing from June 7, 2007: CUP 07-010 Request for Conditional Use Permit to construct 6 town homes in a proposed 0- T zone that do not meet the criteria of the Downtown Meridian Design Guidelines for Shaylee Estates by Tealey's Land Surveying - 1402 & 1404 N. Meridian Road: Rohm: At this time I'd like to open the continued Public Hearing from June 7th, 2007, of project RZ 07-011, PP 07-010, and CUP 07-010 and begin with the staff report. Watters: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. The applications before you are a Rezone, Preliminary Plat, and Conditional Use Permit request for Shaylee Estates. The property is .77 of an acre in size and is currently zoned C-C Meridian Planning & Zoning July 5, 2007 Page 23 of 62 business district. The subject property is located at 1402 and 1414 North Meridian Road on the east side of North Meridian Road, approximately a quarter mile south of Fairview. The property is bordered on the north by commercial property, zoned C-C. To the east by commercial property and a residential mobile home park, zoned C-C. To the south by residential property, zoned C-C. And to the west by residential property, zoned R-4. The property currently has two existing homes that will be retained for office buildings. The rest of the site is vacant land. The applicant is requesting that this property be rezoned to the OT, Old Town zoning district, which complies with the Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation of Old Town for this property. A preliminary plat is proposed for two office building lots here in the front, six single family residential building lots for town homes, and one common lot. The proposed development complies with the maximum building height and minimum number of stories required in the OT district. Additionally, all new construction and exterior modifications in the Old Town zone are subject to design review standards per the downtown Meridian design guidelines. Because no new construction or exterior modifications are proposed to the existing structures proposed for office use, design standards are applicable to this portion of the development. The applicant is requesting Conditional Use Permit approval to construct six townhouse units that do not meet the criteria of the design gUidelines as required by the UDC. That applicant has submitted a landscape plan for this site that complies with the UDC standards. The 25 foot wide landscape buffer is required adjacent to Meridian Road. A buffer between land uses is not required in the Old Town zone. Staff has requested that the landscape plan be revised to reflect no new trees be planted within the common lot here at the east end of the property, as there is an existing sewer line within this lot. However, the existing trees may remain. Access to the site will be provided via North Meridian Road. The plat depicts a 20 foot wide ingress-egress and public utilities easement for access to the parking area for the commercial uses and the townhomes. A driveway is proposed right here between the two existing structures. Staff is requesting that this driveway be constructed as a private street for addressing purposes. ACHD and staff are supportive of the proposed location of the driveway between the two existing structures. The driveways are also stubbed to the property to the north and south here for future connectivity. Off-street parking is provided for the commercial uses and the townhouse units in compliance with UDC standards. Staff would like to note that the applicant Mark Johnson of Talon Construction is currently operating a business at this location without approval from the city. A certificate of zoning compliance approval is required for changing use of the property from residential to commercial. Staff is requesting that the applicant obtain certificate of zoning compliance approval for Talon Construction currently in operation on the southern property proposed as Lot 9 prior to issuance of any future CZCs on this site. I did talk to the applicant earlier today about this and he is aware of this requirement. He is in the process of getting this application together, so it should be in soon. Staff is recommending approval of the subject application with that conditions stated in Exhibit B based on the findings in Exhibit B of the staff report. That's all staff has, unless the Commission has questions. Rohm: Thank you very much. Any questions of staff? Okay. Would the applicant like to come forward, please? Meridian Planning & Zoning July 5, 2007 Page 24 of 62 Davis: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, Andrew Davis BRS Architects, 1010 South Allante Place in Boise, representing the applicant Mark Johnson. We are in agreement with the staff report, with the exception of just a couple of issues. The issue of the trees on the rear common lot -- this plan was put together at a time when we were going off of surveyed information on the location of the sewer line as it's been physically located, It is only a couple feet from the property line and, therefore, the easement for that does not cover that entire lot. So, I would ask that you revise condition of approval 1.2.2 to say that no new trees will be located within the sewer easement that they may actually remain on that lot in an area outside of the easement. Another concern is condition 1.2.10 for the 25 foot wide street buffer along North Meridian Road. We are asking to rezone this to OT and it is the applicant's intention to develop the front two buildings in the future as an OT district project and the 25 foot wide street buffer is in conflict with the downtown Meridian design guidelines front setback requirements to build the building to the property line. So, a 25 foot landscape buffer there seems to be in conflict with the future development per the city zone design guidelines, so we'd like a clarification on that as well. Rohm: We will have to get staff to comment on that. Thank you. Davis: Okay. Thank you. And I can stand for any further questions, otherwise, we are in agreement with staff report. Siddoway: One question, Mr. Chairman. So, the road -- this is going to be a private road coming in, not just a driveway; is that correct? Davis: That is one of the requirements of the staff report, yes. Siddoway: Okay. And will that include a sidewalk? Davis: There is intended to be sidewalk on both sides. Currently, because the buildings are existing, a 24 foot wide drive, which we are currently showing 20 -- the private street would be required to be 24. The sidewalks will have to be narrowed in width and will not be five wide, but will be approximately four feet wide, because we don't have room between the existing structures, Siddoway: Okay. Davis: That will also affect the landscape planters on either end of the parking area as well. Siddoway: Follow up to staff. With the private street standards, does it only require sidewalks on one side for -- for a street this size? Because we may want to do full size sidewalks on one side and, then, you can meet the requirements of the private street, because the sidewalks are not detached; right? They are attached? Meridian Planning & Zoning July 5, 2007 Page 25 of 62 Davis: Yes. They are attached. In fact, they will go from face of structure to the street, because we don't have adequate room for -- we do not have 34 feet between existing structures, so -- Siddoway: Okay. That's alii had. Rohm: Could you change to one of the other sites that shows the roadway itself a little bit more clearly? It seems to me that -- is there differing products for the roadway itself being proposed, concrete on a portion of it and asphalt on -- on the balance? Davis: The private street will terminate at the south -- or the -- I'm sorry, the east portion of Lots 1 and 9 and that part will be paved. The townhomes will have a concrete driveway that connects them. That will be considered a driveway, not part of the private street. Rohm: Okay. So, all of the roadway coming in off of Meridian Road is all asphalt? Davis: Correct. Rohm: Okay. Siddoway: And the existing concrete here would be removed; is that right? Davis: That is correct. Rohm: Oh. Okay. That's where I was having a problem with the concrete that is shown there currently and that will come out and -- Davis: Yes. This is actually a survey showing existing improvements and the plan showing the future improvements has been eliminated. Rohm: Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much. Davis: Thank you. Rohm: Okay. Mark Johnson is signed up. Do you want to speak, Mark? Johnson: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, my name is Mark Johnson, 12389 West Bowmont Street in Boise, Idaho. I'm also the owner of 1402 and 1414, the two properties that are in the application. We'd just like to say that this survey here was originally done for my zoning compliance certificate and one thing led to another and we acquired the neighboring property and I, actually, have my zoning compliance -- Certificate of Zoning Compliance filled out last August. Sorry. Thank you. Rohm: Okay. Thank you. All right. Bond and Shelley Campbell. Bond, would you like to speak, please? Meridian Planning & Zoning July 5, 2007 Page 26 of 62 Campbell: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, I'm Bond Campbell at 9536 West Hillsgate Drive in Star. I'm the owner of the property immediately south of these two parcels and I just wanted to state that I was in agreement with the -- the favorable OT zoning and I, too, plan to develop this parcel in a similar fashion. Mark and I worked together on these three parcels and so I know what he's proposing. My project won't be exactly like his project, but I do want to mention that OT zone that allows us to build up to the property line in the front, would fit well with my project and I'm in favor of that. And I'm in favor of Mark's proposal as well. So, I think at some point I'd like to hear staff's rebuttal to that comment on that OT zone and that -- being able to build to that front property line. Rohm: I think that's an excellent idea. Davis: Okay. Thank you. Rohm: Okay. Shelley, you're signed up as well. Did you want to speak? From the audience she said, no, thank you. Okay. Would staff like to comment on the applicant's desire to have additional build-out available out to the roadway? Watters: Yes, Chairman Rohm. The applicant is correct; a 25 foot wide buffer is not required in the Old Town zone. That is an error in the staff report. The Old Town district does require that new construction -- new buildings be built on the property line in front, so -- Rohm: It's hard for me to imagine Meridian Road being built out as such, based upon its current configuration, but I'm sure that that was taken into consideration when the ordinance was drafted. So, thank you very much. There is no nobody else that is signed up to testify to this application, but the floor is still open, so if you'd like to come forward, please, do so and state your name and address for the record. Hadley: Hi. I'm Susan Hadley. My address is 11938 West Silver King Drive in Boise and this is in reference to the apartments at 1423 North Main, which is the adjacent trailer home park and, basically, my mother owns that apartment complex and a power pole was placed on her property without her permission and, then, after the fact they tried to get her to sign an easement, which she refused to do and we were just wondering is the power pole going to be removed and what is the agreement going to be for power access to the new development. Rohm: We don't have the answer to that -- Hadley: Okay. Rohm: -- and, you know, the bottom line is that is between the applicant and the utility company, but we don't get involved in easements for power pole placed or removed. Meridian Planning & Zoning July 5, 2007 Page 27 of 62 Hadley: Okay. Thanks. Rohm: All right. Is there anyone else that would like to testify to this application? Seeing none, could I get a motion to close the Public Hearing? Siddoway: So moved. Moe: Second. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to close the Public Hearing on RZ 07-011, PP 07-010 and CUP 07-010. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT. Rohm: Discussion? Commissioner Moe, do you have any final comments on this application? Mae: I don't have any problem with this property at all. Nice little addition to put that in there. I am a little bit -- confused a little bit as far as the trees in the back. I realize they may be outside of the easement, but when trees start growing -- how wide is that easement? Rohm: Typically, utility easements are like five foot on either side of center line. Siddoway: A sewer main is usually 20. Rohm: Is it 20? Siddoway: I don't know which one it is. We can ask staff. Steckline: Commissioners. At this time there isn't an easement over the proposed sewer -- or the existing sewer line. When we go through a final plat we will require a 20 feet, ten foot on each side of the sewer line. Personally, I think if the trees are planted outside that easement that we should be okay. Rohm: Okay. Thank you very much. And, typically, utilities used to install their services with the assumption that it's serving the property and there would not necessarily be an easement required, but -- and I think they call it proscriptive path or something to that effect. But, in any case, when this project is done I believe an easement would be in order to follow the utility lines as they currently lie. Moe: I guess just one other thing I'd just like to point out. It's refreshing to see that the applicant wants to put in trees, as opposed to removing trees, so I do appreciate that as well. Meridian Planning & Zoning July 5, 2007 Page 28 of 62 Rohm: Okay. Commissioner O'Brien, do you have any final comments? O'Brien: No, I don't have anything to add or to ask about. The OT or Old Town scenario is still new to me, so I'm not familiar enough with the -- all of the processes. Rohm: Okay. Thank you. Commissioner Siddoway? Siddoway: I really like the compromise there in 1.2.2 to keep the trees out of the easement, but they could still be located on that common lot, as long as they are outside of the easement. Regarding the street buffer out front, I do agree with the idea of pulling the buildings up toward the street. I would, however, like to go on the record that I would like to see them and try work around those existing trees. It appears that there is some fairly mature existing trees right at the front property line and I'm not sure, you know, how those can be worked with, but it's going to be quite a lot of mitigation if they have to be removed, so, I don't know, those are in conflict with one another. We got some -- we have got requirements that the existing trees remain on site unless they are prohibited, which I don't know if they are. I doubt that they are. And the Old Town requirement of building up to the wider sidewalks. You know, when they come in with future additional buildings -- and that's not part of this application tonight, but, you know, we are going to have to look at those sidewalks and street trees that would be built as part of that, so just as much as possible those existing -- the existing trees that are out there, especially if they are mature, ought to be worked with. So, that's all I have. I like the proposed conditions on the development agreement that staff has suggested, so -- I don't know if there is any clarification needed on the private street sidewalk, as whether a -- I assume that can just be handled at the staff level when it comes through with the requirements that are currently in place; is that true? Watters: Yes. Chairman Rohm, Commissioner Siddoway. There is actually no sidewalk requirement in Old Town District, but the applicant has expressed to me that he would like to construct a sidewalk on both sides of the private street extending from Meridian Road, so-- Siddoway: Okay. Thank you. Rohm: Commissioner Moe, do you have anything to -- Moe: I was first, remember? Rohm: Oh. Okay. I just thought I'd give you one more chance -- Moe: No more to add. Rohm: No more to add. Okay. With that being said, could we get a motion to move this project fOlWard? Meridian Planning & Zoning July 5, 2007 Page 29 of 62 Siddoway: Mr. Chairman, after considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of file numbers RZ 07-011, CUP 07- 010, and PP 07-010, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of July 5th, 2007, with the following modifications: Modify 1.2.2 to state that no new trees may be located within the easement. However, the trees may be located on the common lot if they are outside the easement. And -- was it 1.2.10, modify that one to comply with the Old Town requirements for street buffers, which there is no specific width. Why don't we just strike 1.2.10. Also to include all proposed development agreement requirements. End of motion. Moe: Second. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to forward onto City Council recommending approval of RZ 07-011, PP 07-010 and CUP 07-010. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT. Rohm: At this time we are going to take a short break for about ten minutes. (Recess.) Item 12: Continued Public Hearing from June 21, 2007: PP 07-011 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 18 commercial building lots on 18.5 acres in a C-G zone, for Paramount Commercial Southwest by Ustick Marketplace, LLC - Northeast corner of North Linder Road and West McMillan Road: Rohm: At this time we'd like to reconvene the regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission and begin by opening the continued Public Hearing from June 21st, 2007, of project PP 07-011 and begin with the staff report. Watters: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. The application before you is a preliminary plat request for the proposed Paramount Commercial Southwest Subdivision. The property is 18.5 acres in size and is currently zoned C-G. The applicant is concurrently requesting approval of a development agreement modification to remove the conditional use requirement and, instead, require design review approval of all commercial uses in a C-G and L-Q zone. The Commission is not required to make a recommendation on the DA modification, only the preliminary plat. The subject property is located on the northeast corner of West McMillan Road and North Linder Road. The property is bordered on the north by rural residential property, zoned RUT in Ada County and a high school currently under construction, zoned R-8. To the east of the property, approved for single family residences, is Paramount South 60 Subdivision, zoned R-8. To the south by rural residential property, zoned RUT in Ada County, and to the west by single family residences, zoned R-8 and future commercial uses zoned C- G. The site consists of vacant, undeveloped land, with a residential home at the