Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSeptember 4, 2003 P & Z CommMeridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting September 4, 2003 Page 73 of 96 Powell: Chair, maker of the motion, would it be appropriate to include a revised Landscape Plan because that was discussed as part of that item. Zaremba: Yes. I would add that to paragraph seven to say a revised Preliminary Plat and a revised Landscape Plan. Centers: I still second Borup: Okay. Motion and second. All in favor? Any opposed? Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Item 12. Public Hearing CUP 03-038 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a tri-plex in an R-15 zone for Troy Palmer Tri-Plex by Troy Palmer - 1236 East 2 '/2 Street: Borup: Okay. Next item is Item Number 12 Public Hearing CUP 03-038, request for a Conditional Use Permit for a tri-plex in an R-15 zoning for Troy Palmer -- tri-plex by Troy Palmer at 1236 East 2 '/z Street. Open this Public Hearing and start with the staff report. Hood: Thank you, Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission. For the record, Craig Hood, Planning and Zoning staff. Troy Palmer, the applicant, is proposing to convert an existing single family home located at 1236 East 2 '/z Street into a tri-plex within the R- 15zone. I'm just going to briefly touch on some of the issues, based on the submitted Site Plan slash Landscape Plan that staff has on page four outlined and just ask the applicant to kind of clarify some of those issues with the conversion -- proposed conversion. The first one has to do with the intentions regarding the refuge and garbage, where that's going to be picked up and on-site enclosures for the garbage. One of the other issues is the proposed use is of a higher use than the existing single family home that is to the north of the subject site. I just want to let the applicant know - - and this body as well, that the existing garage on the site and -- is fairly close to the side property line and doesn't allow for a large landscape buffer when you put the driveway in, as the applicant's proposing. Meeting the City Codes fora 20-foot wide landscape buffer, which would be required in this case, will be difficult, so I just wanted the applicant to know that he will be required to install a landscape buffer per code. That is not shown on this Site Plan, so if he's proposing to do something that isn't per code, then, we do need a Variance application to be submitted and we did speak about alternative compliance. I -- that is up to Anna, I guess, and she is looking that way. I was reading through that portion earlier in the hearing and it did say prior to submitting an application, but that may be an option as well as something -- because there are some circumstances here that just -- it justly doesn't make sense to require the full landscape buffer. I know that the adjacent property owner is here, he may have some compromise that may be able to be reached, so all the parties have some way to mitigate this higher use, if you will, adjacent to this -- to the proposed use. I guess I will Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting September 4, 2003 Page 74 of 96 stop with that. Those seem to be just some of the things that need to be clarified on this submitted Site Plan you see before you now. I'll stand for any questions. Borup: Questions from the Commission? Okay. Would the applicant like to make their presentation? T. Palmer: Good Evening. Troy Palmer -- Borup: Go ahead and speak up, so we can -- T. Palmer: Good Evening. My name is Troy Palmer I'm here to talk about the tri-plex. Borup: Go ahead and state your address, too. T. Palmer: I'm sorry. The property address? Borup: No. Your -- T. Palmer: 5450 North Larkwood. Borup: Okay T. Palmer: The two issues that you talked too -- commented on, the intent of the trash refuge. My intent was to provide two 90 gallon containers in the garages that are on the north end of the property to be brought out to the street to handle the trash issue, which I have talked to Brad down at the -- in our preliminary meeting. He thought that would acceptable. Then, as far as the Variance applicant, it was my intent to submit for a Variance application on the landscaping buffer. I thought that the garages that are there, instead of having to tear them down, to eventually develop the property in the back that they -- they compliment the neighborhood and that they fit in well with the surrounding. landscaping and architecture. I felt that they should be left, so I was to going to apply for a Variance on that. Borup: Did you discuss the alternative compliance option also with staff at all? T. Palmer: Which is -- what was the alternatives? Borup: Well, they may have some correction, but I believe on an alternative compliance you could do some more intense landscaping. T. Palmer: Okay. Borup: And with a smaller buffer and still comply. Is there something you'd like to add to that? Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting September 4, 2003 Page 75 of 96 T: Palmer: I think Brad and me might have discussed that in our preliminary meeting and I told him that if we needed to do that, I would be agreeable to do that. Borup: Okay. T. Palmer: I feel we should -- if we can leave the garages as they would -- that would be the best-case scenario. I would be willing to do what we need to do to have that happen. Borup: Any other questions from the Commissioners? Centers: Yes. I had a question, Mr. Chairman. Your intent was two basement apartments? T. Palmer: Yes. Centers: And then, one apartment above? T. Palmer: Upstairs. Yes. Centers: Your access -- I take it you're going to dig down and put doors in or -- I'm unable to tell by the pictures. T. Palmer: Yes. There is, actually, already a full basement in the basement. It has a separate entrance already. Centers: One separate entrance. T. Palmer: On the property on the right side of the house, yes. Centers: So, you're going to put a hallway to -- T. Palmer: There is a stairway going down and, then, there is going to be a common shared hallway with one unit on the left and one unit on the right. Centers: I had thought maybe Chairman Borup knows or the planners' maybe you know this. The Fire Department didn't address it. Don't you have to have window sizes for emergency exists? T. Palmer: Egress windows. Yes. That's -- Centers: Two by three? T. Palmer: Yes. Centers: Is that the size? Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Sep[em6er 4, 2003 Page 76 of 96 Borup: No. It's larger than that. Centers: Is it? Borup: Twenty by twenty-four access. Centers: So, that will be addressed when the building permit is issued, correct? T. Palmer: Yes. Ironically enough -- oh. Sorry. Ironically enough, I have already done that work. I was told when I called the City of Meridian that all I needed to do was just come in and get a permit to change the building, it was already zoned that direction, but I guess the first of the year they changed the ordinance to where we had to come before you guys. I had already gutted the basement, I had already replaced windows with the proper windows to meet code and, then, I came to a stand still at that time when I went to go get my permit to start doing my electrical and framing. Centers: And you found out that you needed to come -- T. Palmer: Through the city. Yes. Yes. When I originally called the city they said all I needed to do -- I was already in the correct zoning for what I needed to do and that all I needed to do was come in and get a permit to change it and that's -- Centers: Someone over the phone told you that? T. Palmer: No. I had somebody -- one of my guys that works for me go down and talk to them down there. Borup: That was in Old Town right? T. Palmer: Yes, because it was in Old Town and it was zoned that already and -- Borup: Do you actually own the property in fee simple? T. Palmer: I do. Centers: You didn't buy it subject to converting it to a tri-plex? T. Palmer: No. I actually own it. Yes. I have owned it for like two years now, a year and a half. Centers: Okay and you probably checked that out? T. Palmer: Yes. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting September 4, 2003 Page 77 of 96 Centers: That's interesting. You were told just get a permit, now you have to go through this process? T. Palmer: Yes. Centers: Okay. I was just concerned about the windows, the emergency access, and you're aware of that. That's good. T. Palmer: Now for sure we are going to make sure everything complies with code. Centers: Good. That's all I had. Borup: Any other questions? T. Palmer: Yes. The gentleman that told me that we -- the gentleman that told my guy that we just needed to come down and pay for a permit is no longer working here, so --I he was a younger kid. He went on to somewhere else, but -- Centers: He's no longer with the city? Maybe that's why. T. Palmer: Could be. Powell: Probably working for an engineer somewhere. Borup: Go ahead. Zaremba: I'm just needing some help orienting to the drawing here T. Palmer: Okay. Zaremba: I see the existing garage, which we can see in the picture here, appears to be the one that on the drawing says garage, two parking spaces. Then, there is one to the east of that. Am I interpreting correctly that there is, then, going to be a driveway along the north --what's the access to second garage there? And is that existing now? T. Palmer: Yes. That is where the easement -- that's where the road's going to be for the back of the property. Zaremba: Okay. Is that garage already there? T. Palmer: There is already a garage behind that garage. It's more of a shed, more than a garage. It's not for parking of vehicles it's more of a fairly good size storage area that's enclosed. It's finished off, but it's not for parking cars. Zaremba: Okay so, then, the access to the two parking spaces Meddian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting September 4, 2003 Page 78 of 96 T. Palmer: Would be behind that. Zaremba: -- east of that is along the north side of those garages? T. Palmer: Yes. Zaremba: Okay. Centers: Well, you're fortunate that you have an acre to deal with. T. Palmer: Yes. Zaremba: That can't be landscaped, then, right, if it's a driveway? Am I missing something? Okay. Is there additional space beyond the .driveway that can be landscaped? T. Palmer: Yes but it ends about where the garages are is where the adjoining neighbor's property is. Behind that is a bare lot behind him also it's vacant land that I do not own. Zaremba: Okay. Hood: Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission, there are -- there is approximately seven feet between the edge of pavement -- proposed edge of pavement of the driveway and the property line, which you can see the large trees that will be retained. There is that power pole there, that's -- there is seven feet, approximately, in the property line, somewhere in between it, but we are -- the edge of pavement for the new driveway is -- and the property line to the north, there is approximately seven feet that can be landscaped within that seven feet. Zaremba: And that's where you're saying the alternate compliance, rather than having 20 feet or whatever, would be to put more dense shrubbery or landscaping in there? Okay. Centers: Well, Mr. Palmer had mentioned he's going to apply for the Variance through -- T. Palmer: Yes. Centers: -- the City Council. T. Palmer: Yes. Zaremba: That was it for me. Borup: Okay. Thank you. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting September 4, 2003 Page 79 of 96 Powell: Chairman Borup, Members of the Commission, just to perhaps clarify a few things. He would be able to ask for alternative compliance versus a Variance, so that would certainly be the more expeditious way to go on the applicant's part. There may have been some confusion in terminology between Craig and I while he was writing the staff report and I apologize for that to you, as well as the applicant, if that's the case. My understanding of the alternative compliance use that the -- of it as a tool and kind of this Old Town area where there are -- even though it's not Old Town zoning, but in these areas where there are fairly small lots or narrow lots, as the case may be, with existing uses, that it has been -- the primary method of reducing those required buffers between -- between uses and, then, regarding the -- Borup: Would that be worked out with staff, then? It wouldn't need to come back for a -- Powell: No. It's just a director termination. Borup: Okay. Powell: So, if you all approved it, then, we could work with him to come up with something suitable. Given the heavy, dense vegetation, the canopy, I'm not sure -- he is certainly not going to be able to get more trees in there, probably. It looks like it's a -- got quite a canopy as it is, so -- Borup: But maybe some lower-- Powell: Maybe some shrubs. Borup: Lower shrubs or something. Powell: Regarding what the applicant was told as part of the -- of having approval for the use, just for the applicant's benefit and for yours as well, there was some confusion in the zoning ordinance -- I believe it was taken out about a year and a half or two years ago. There was three family dwellings in there and -- but it wasn't consistently used, so there was a conflict between multi-family dwellings and three family dwellings and apartment houses and there were some amendments made to the use schedule that, basically, pulled it down to just apartment houses. So, anything over a duplex becomes an apartment house and that buffer is based on the idea of amulti-family dwelling, you know, probably more than three, adjoining residential uses. This is a fairly benign multi- family use as far as -- you know, it's not 100-unit apartment house, complex, or something like that. Just those clarifications for the Commission. Borup: Before the Old Town designation came in, was that what was needed or was a CUP still required? Powell: Well, I believe this is, actually, zoned R-15, but it's in this area in general, I think, that they have been doing that with those existing uses -- Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting September 4, 2003 Page 80 of 96 Borup: Oh. Okay. It is an R-15, so what -- yes. That should have been -- Zaremba: Which brings up the question -- Borup: Well, then, why is he even here if it's zoned R-15? Borup: Because a Conditional Use Permit is required for apartment complexes in R-15, in a use technically an apartment complex. Borup: Because it's over three -- or because it's over two? Powell: Yes. Borup: Okay. Powell: That would be something we would look at in the rewrite of the zoning ordinance. Zaremba: Shouldn't it also be being rezoned to O-T, though? Borup: An R-15 is also 15 units per acre. Powell: Correct. Apartment houses are Conditional Use in the R-15 and the R-40 zone. They are not principally permitted in these zones. Borup: And R-40? I thought they were allowed in R-40. Powell: Conditionally allowed. Borup: Okay. Then I just had kind of a side question. It's not -- probably doesn't really make any difference, but this size sign is not required on projects of this size, are they? Five acres and above. Powell: Can we answer that question in a little bit? I don't know the answer off the top of my head. Borup: I believe it's five acres. Unless there was something else that was added in there in addition to that. Maybe the type of -- maybe the type of project was also -- any other questions from the Commission? Do we have anyone else that would like to testify on this? Stephens: Good evening. My name is Tom Stephens. I live at 1304 East 2 1/2 Street, adjacent to Mr. Palmer's property. The thing that I was concerned about is with that extra driveway going in, which is adjacent to my property there, I'm concerned about the extra noise and the extra traffic that's going to be brought in onto our street in that area. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting September 4, 2003 Page 81 of 96 It sounds like the Commission and Mr. Palmer has got the Variance or the noise that's going to be created there -- it sounds like something is going to be done. I'm not sure exactly what, but that is my main concern is the extra noise that it's going to create and the extra traffic on that street. Borup: Okay. Anything else? Stephens: That was basically it, just on the noise. Borup: Yes. As far as the traffic, I don't know that there is much we can do that's going to prevent that, you know, there would be a couple more residences there. Stephens: Right. Borup: As far as the buffering, that is something that could be open for discussion, and what I was just wondering now, maybe if a fence would be -- do better for you than some landscaping. Stephens: I -- with the distance that's there, I think maybe a fence would probably do -- would do fine. Borup: Would that be your preference over some shrubs that would be probably something solid that would not let any light and -- Stephens: Yes. I think -- yes. The shrubbery I don't know that that would really make much difference, but I think a fence would probably be adequate, because my property line -- Borup: This is your property all along here? Stephens: Yes. Just inside -- Borup: Other side of those trees. Stephens: North of the trees. Yes. Just about right along the edge of the driveway, to the left of the fire hydrant there. So -- and I think the property line is just one foot or so inside my driveway there. So, that's what I'm concerned about. It's just since he's putting in that driveway there, as far as the extra noise. And it sounds like the problem is being addressed. Borup: Well -- and that's one of the reasons we have a Public Hearing, is the input from the adjoining property owners, so that's -- it looks -- the way it's drawn, there would be two parking spaces back there, so -- right here. So, the traffic back here would be going to these two spots, would be all, so it would just be the two cars that would -- the other --the other parking is right here and, then, the other is over here. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting September 4, 2003 Page 82 of 96 Stephens: Right. The two will be inside the garage and, then, the other two will be in the front of the house there, so that -- Borup: Correct. Stephens: So, that was just -- Borup: So, the ones that will be going down this driveway will these two back here. Stephens: Yes. That is just -- that was just maybe my concern. Borup: It sounds like a fence would be a good solution for you, then. Stephens: I would think that that would probably be the best solution. Borup: Okay. Stephens: Yes. Centers: Mr. Stephens, how long have you lived there? Stephens: Seventeen years. So, I have seen a little change, you know, and that's to be expected. I -- you know. Centers: Yes. Stephens: I didn't think that apartments would be going in, but that's what happens. Borup: Well, it looks like the house was -- the character of the house itself isn't really changing, so -- Stephens: Yes. And that's good. I'm glad to see that, because that house is a really nice place. Borup: Okay. Stephens: So I think that was all I had. Borup: Thank you, Mr. Stephens. Centers: Thank you. Borup: I don't see anyone else, so I think that's got to be a hundred percent of the public. Mr. Palmer, any final comments? Meddian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting September 4, 2003 Page 83 of 96 T: Palmer: Just that Ithink afence -- if that's what we all agree on, would be fine. I wouldn't see a problem with putting up a fence to buffer that noise for him and take care of that problem for him. Borup: Okay. T. Palmer: That should be no problem at all. Borup: The only question I have on the fence --and that probably doesn't -- does that fit in the definition of alternate landscaping or -- Powell: A fence is, actually, listed as something as part of a buffer, so it is in the definition of buffer, so I would think that that's -- Borup: So, that's something that could still be worked out without requiring a Variance application? Powell: Correct. And also, Chairman Borup, you were correct, the applicant only needed to post an 11-by-17 sign. Which he probably doesn't really want to hear at this point. T. Palmer: Yes. I was given the instructions for that size of a sign and that's what I did. Borup: Sorry about that. T. Palmer: That's all right. Borup: I just wanted to make sure there wasn't some change that I wasn't aware of. Okay. It sounds like that's probably -- I mean you're in agreement on the fence and that's what the neighbors would like, so I'm assuming that's the direction that the motion is going to go. T. Palmer: Okay. Borup: And I think that's probably a lot less maintenance for you than landscaping. T. Palmer: Yes. Great. Thank you. Borup: Thank you. Centers: So, for staff, there really wouldn't be a need for a Variance application, is that what we are saying? If we require a fence along the -- is that the north property line? Borup: Well, I think there probably still needs to be some discussion to see if it's agreeable as an alternate compliance. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting September 4, 2003 Page 84 of 96 Centers: Yes. A recent application that we had - in fact, we were talking about it earlier, we required a fence in lieu of the buffer. I don't know if the Council approved it, but -- do you recall that application, Chairman? Borup: Yes. I don't remember which one it -- Centers: The elderly lady that wanted the fence and -- at any rate, in lieu of the landscape buffer and everyone was happy with that. And the cost was about the same, so -- Zaremba: OPM on Fairview. Borup: Oh. That's right. Okay. Zaremba: Used car lot. Centers: Yes. They were doing a car lot out front on Fairview. Borup: Okay. Are we ready to -- Zaremba: I'll move the Public Hearing be closed. Centers: Second. Borup: Motion and second to close the Public Hearing. All in favor? Any opposed? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Borup: Does staff feel we are okay on the trash issue with a 90 gallon -- two 90 gallon - - (believe that's what Mr. Palmer said. Powell: Staff is nodding his head yes. Borup: And then would -- should there be some -- some discussion with time zoning as far as alternate -- alternative compliance, in addition to what this motion may be? Powell: Chairman Borup, Members of the Commission, yes, I would suggest adding a condition that they provide a revised Landscape Plan showing their proposed method of alternative compliance 10 days before the City Council Hearing, so that we can review it and make a recommendation at the time -- at least get it on the record at the time it has the City Council hearing as to whether the alternative compliance has been approved. Borup: Okay Centers: And the fence could part of that. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting September 4, 2003 Page 85 of 96 Powell: Yes, sir. Centers: That's for Mr. Palmer's information. Borup: Okay. Centers: Mr. Chairman, I'll make a stab at it. I would like to make a motion that we approved CUP 03-038, request for a Conditional Use Permit for a tri-plex in an R-15 zone for Troy Palmer Tri-plex by Troy Palmer. 1236 East 2 '/z Street, including all staff comments and adding site-specific Comment Number 4 that applicant to submit his alternative compliance proposal prior to the City Council Meeting to the staff for their review, which would include the fence. End of motion. Rohm: Second. Borup: Motion and second. All in favor? Any opposed. Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Borup: Any questions on -- this recommendation will go forward to City Council and there will be another Public Hearing at City Council. Mr. Stephens, right now our motion was to -- that there would be a fence in. Item 13. Public Hearing AZ 03-020 Request for annexation and zoning of 1.13 acres from R-6 to L-O zones for proposed Office Jet Subdivision by Wardle and Associates - 1975 North Locust Grove Road: Item 14. Public Hearing PFP 03-003 Request for Preliminary /Final Plat approval of 4 building lots on 1.13 acres in a proposed L-O zone for proposed Office Jet Subdivision by Wardle and Associates - 1975 North Locust Grove Road: Borup: Our last project is Item Numbers 13 and 14, Public Hearing AZ 03-020, request for annexation and zoning of 1.13 acres from R-6 to L-O zones for the proposed Office Jet Subdivision by Wardle and Associates. It's at 1975 North Locust Grove. Accompanying that is Public Hearing PFP, which is Preliminary/Final Plat, 03-003, for the same project. I'd like to open both these hearings at this time and start with the staff report. Kirkpatrick: Chairman, Members of the Commission, this application is a request for zoning for 1.13 acres from what's currently zoned R-6 within the City of Meridian to L-O. There is also an application for -- oh, I'm sorry, I want to make a correction. I had the dash here, but there was a city zoning. It's R-6 county zoning. Excuse me to L-O zoning. The applicant also has a preliminary and a Final Plat for four commercial building lots. The subject property is located on the west side of Locust Grove Road about a quarter mile north of Fairview. You can see an aerial. This is, actually, an older