Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFebruary 21, 2008 P&Z MinutesMeridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 21, 2008 Page 32 of 37 All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? That motion carries. Those will be continued to the 20th of March. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 7: Continued Public Hearing from February 7, 2008: CUP 07-022 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a medical office in the O-T zoning district that does not meet the criteria of the Downtown Meridian Design Guidelines for Meridian Eye Care by Dr. Dan Thieme - 125 West Cherry Lane: Moe.: At this time I'd like to reopen the continued Public Hearing for CUP 07-022 concerning Meridian Eye Care and start with the staff report, please. Wafters: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. The application before you is a request for a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a new medical office in the Old Town zoning district that does not meet all of the criteria listed in the downtown Meridian design guidelines. The property is located at 125 West Cherry Lane on the southeast corner of Cherry Lane and West 2nd Street. North of the site is rural residential property, zoned RUT in Ada county. To the east is a former residence in transition to commercial use, zoned OT. To the west is a church, zoned R- 4. And to the south are single family residences in Wilson Addition Subdivision, zoned R-4. This is an aerial view of the site. It shows the existing residence that is proposed to be removed upon development of the site. Anew 3,600 square foot medical office building is proposed to be built on the site in its place. The site plan has been submitted as shown that shows how this property is proposed to develop in the future. Because this property is located in the OT, Old Town, zoning district, all new structures are required to comply with design guidelines per the downtown Meridian design guidelines. Because the site and proposed building do not comply with all of the criteria listed in the design guidelines, a Conditional Use Permit is requested by the applicant, as required by the Unified Development Code. Staff has included analysis in Section 10 of the staff report detailing which guidelines the applicant does and does not comply with. Access to this residence on this site is currently provided from West Cherry Lane. However, when the site re-develops access will be provided from West 2nd Street with no access to Cherry Lane. The existing development agreement for this site requires that cross- access be provided to the property to the east. The applicant is requesting a development agreement modification, along with the Conditional Use Permit to remove this requirement. A little history on this property. When this property was rezoned, it was also rezoned with the property directly to the east and a development agreement was entered into with the city for both sites. And the applicant submitted a landscape plan for the site as shown. There are five existing mature trees on the site. Three will be retained, one is dead., and one will need to be removed, as it is located where the driveway is proposed right here. The applicant is required to provide mitigation for the existing healthy tree that is proposed to be removed and protection during construction for the existing trees that will remain. Street buffers and buffers between land uses are not required in the Old Town district. Building elevations were submitted with this Meridian Planning 8 Zoning Commission February 21, 2008 Page 33 of 37 application as shown.. Exterior building materials are proposed to consist of stucco, with cultured stone accents, and fiberglass shingles. Staff has no objections to the elevation proposed., as they comply with the maximum building height and minimum number of stories for new construction in the Old Town district. Staff is recommending approval of their requested Conditional Use Permit as stated in the staff report, subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit B. Staff will stand for any questions the Commission may have at this time. Moe: Thank you very much. Any questions of staff? Okay. Would the applicant like to come forward, please? Gibson: Mr. Chair, Commissioners, my name is James Gibson and my address is 38 North 1st Street in Eagle. I'm the project architect representing the project this evening. First, we have worked pretty closely, I think, with staff and we have no disagreement with the proposed conditions and feel that they are really very -- very appropriate. Just a couple of things that we want to mention. The reason for the site plan being the way that it is, the project is an optometry office. Heath care, but optometry. And that requires rooms of a certain size and dimension in it in order work to properly for the optometry exam rooms. That, then, reflects itself in the size and the shape of the building, and we have tried the building on the site in a different configuration, placing it more east and west and along Cherry Lane. That was our first idea. Then our friends at ACRD decided that they wanted more property to -- for the future widening of Cherry Lane, more than was originally indicated. That shot the first concept out of the water, so this is what we have come up with, placing the building toward the east of the property, again, though, with the entrance from the west from 2nd Street. The building design we think is really compatible with other buildings that are in the neighborhood there. We are very aware of the Old Town design guidelines and certainly understand the appropriate nature of those guidelines in Old Town. But this property certainly was never part of the Old Town,.the portion of downtown that is or in the foreseeable future would ever be developed along those guidelines. Therefore, we are proposing a building that looks like the other buildings in this area. Physically, it would be possible to, of course, to redesign the appearance of the building to look more like an Old Town building. However, my opinion is that that would look rather strange in this location. A building harmonious with the neighborhood would seem more appropriate, especially since there is a residential development existing and probably will be existing for some time right next door. We are anxious to retain the mature trees and have worked with Mr. Huff and he's been very helpful in trying to figure out what to do and how to retain the trees. We note that at the southwest corner there is a large existing tree, which our plan proposes to retain. Of course, one of the motivations for retaining the trees is to avoid a substantial mitigation fee. We have worked with the neighbor, the property owner to the south and he indicates his preference would be to remove the tree. We have no objection to removing the tree if that be the direction of the Commission. However, if that is the direction, we don't want to be responsible for paying a substantial mitigation fee if we are told to take the tree away. So, that's -- we have to, shall we say, throw yourself -- throw ourselves on our mercy with that -- that question. The tree is -- we have tried to retain the tree, but if it is ours to take away, we are receptive to that Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 21, 2008 Page 34 of 37 also. Basically, we think that the project would be a vast improvement to the immediate neighborhood there. Hopefully, you have had opportunity to look at the property recently and, frankly, it could probably use some improvement. So, we think this would be definitely an improvement and just appreciate your consideration. If you have questions, we will try to address those. Moe: Any questions of the applicant? Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Chair? Moe: Commissioner Newton-Huckabay. Newton-Huckabay: What was the neighbor's logic for wanting the tree removed? Is it just so large -- Gibson: He said that it was a dirty tree and dropped its droppings on his property. It is a very large tree and it does extend over onto the neighbor's property. Newton-Huckabay: What kind of tree is it? Gibson: I think it's a sycamore tree. I -- though I'm not an arborist and I -- Newton-Huckabay: No. No. That's okay. Moe: Okay. Newton-Huckabay: So, your only disagreement with the Old Town guidelines was just not to like the parapets and that kind of thing? Gibson: Pardon? I didn't understand quite correctly. Newton-Huckabay: Just the architecture of the building was your only -- Gibson: Yes. Yes. We wanted the building to look like something that would logically be built in this location, rather than in the center of Meridian and we think that something that would be built right in the center of Old Town would look a bit strange in this location. Newton-Huckabay: Uh-huh. Thanks. Moe: Okay. Any other questions? Thank you very much. Dan -- is it Thieme? Thieme. You signed up. Did you want to speak? Okay. From the audience he has nothing more to add. No other names are here. There is only one other person in the audience. Do you want to come up and speak? There is no other one wanting to speak and so, therefore, there is really no rebuttal I don't think we need to worry about. Having said that, Commissioners? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 21, 2008 Page 35 of 37 Rohm: Mr. Chairman? Moe: Mr. Rohm. Rohm: Could -- I'd like to make a motion to close the Public Hearing on CUP 07-022. O`Brien: Second. Rohm: It has been moved and seconded to close the Public Hearing on CUP 07-'022. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? That motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Moe: Mr. O'Brien, do you have any comments on the project? O'Brien: No. I have to agree with the applicant, Ithink -- you know, we can look at things that might fit better downtown in Old Town; specifically building this kind of structure would maybe be out of place, so I'm inclined to agree with what staff has recommended. Moe: Okay. Mr. Marshall, would you have any other comment? Marshall: I agree. Ithink that went with staffs recommendation that it was right on the edge of OId Town and that this was a better transition to the other uses around it, the other zones around it, and that it fit better. Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Chair? Moe: Yes. Newton-Huckabay: That wasn't staffs recommendation, was it? Moe: Yes. Newton-Huckabay: Okay. Thanks. Moe: I would say that's why when the applicant was saying he was in favor of the staff comments, but, then, he went into discussing the OId Town look, that's probably where you got confused. Newton-Huckabay: I guess I read what I wanted to hear. Moe: There you go. I'm sorry, Mr. Marshall, did you have any other comments? Meridian Planning 8~ Zoning Commission February 21, 2008 Page 36 of 37 Marshall: No. I'm sorry it didn't work out so that we could have hid the parking lot behind the building, but I understand the change now, because of the additional right of way required, that can't -- that's not feasible and that this is a decent alternative. Moe: Okay. Mr. Rohm, any comments? Rohm: No comments. Moe: Commissioner Newton-Huckabay. Newton-Huckabay: I would only comment that I would somewhat disagree that the Old Town design guidelines wouldn't apply here.. Having -- I was telling Commissioner Rohm -- grew up on West 1st Street and lived on West 1st Street as an adult -- I'm putting my old stories of Meridian on the record again. I always felt like I had lived in a part of downtown Meridian and I think if new -- as new buildings were added and get that Old Town flair, that I think that that would add to that -- that feeling, so -- but it's certainly not a deal breaker for me. It's not like they are proposing an unattractive building. But I would say I believe the west -- or I guess it's U.S. Bank now, that building is -- complies somewhat with the -- it has the parapets and that type of thing on it, so I would just -- it wouldn't be out of place in my mind. Rohm: Okay. Newton-Huckabay: But it's a substantial improvement over what is there now. I do agree with that. Moe: I would agree entirely with that. I do have one question of staff, just so that I -- that I do understand.. Within the conditions and whatnot, the access to Cherry Lane would go away if, in fact, this came to commercial property; correct? Wafters: Chairman Moe, that is correct. Yes. Moe: Okay. Just wanted to make sure of that. Beyond that, I would say that I concur with most of the others, that I happen to like the exterior elevations, very nice, and I think it will blend into the area very well. And that's about all I have left. So, could I get a motion from someone positive? Rohm: So, there is no changes from the staff report? Wafters: No. Moe: Not that I'm understanding of any. Rohm: Okay. I think I can make a motion, then. Mr. Chairman, I move that we approve CUP 07-022 for the Meridian Eye Care, with no changes to the staff report. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission February 21, 2008 Page 37 of 37 Newton-Huckabay: Second... Moe: It has been moved -- pardon me? And seconded -- Wafters: That is correct. This -- as a development agreement modification that accompanies the conditional use it does need to go to Council. Moe: Therefore, then, it has been moved and seconded to approve CUP 07-022 and send it onto City Council for that approval. All those in favor of that signify by saying aye. Opposed same sign? That motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Moe: At this time, since we already took care of Item No. 8, there is only one more item to do. Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Chair? Moe: Commissioner Newton-Huckabay. Newton-Huckabay: I recommend we adjourn. Rohm: Second. Moe: It has been moved and seconded to adjourn Opposed? Motion carries. 9:00 p.m. MOTION CARRLED: ALL AYES. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:00 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.) APPROVED All those in favor say aye. ~ ~ DAVID MOE -CHAIRMAN DATE APPROVED ATTEST: JAYCEE HOLMAN, CITY CLERK