HomeMy WebLinkAbout06.01.17 P&Z Minutes
1
Commissioners Attending; City Staff and Others:
Heidi Christensen– Chairman Brad Wolfe- City Council Liaison
Melanie Davenport Stephen Zollinger – City Attorney
Steve Oakey Val Christensen – Community Development Director
John Bowen Colton Murdock – Community Development Intern
Greg Blacker Marianna Gonzalez – Deputy City Clerk
Kristi Anderson
Chairman Heidi Christensen opened the meeting at 6: pm.
Welcome New P&Z Commissioner
1. Kristi Anderson
Kristi Anderson introduced herself. She said she has seven children. She grew up in Sugar City and
moved away for 15 years. She and her family moved back to this area about six years ago. Kristi
mentioned she is excited and thankful for the opportunity to service. She has a master degree in
public administration.
Roll Call of Planning and Zoning Commissioners:
Attending: Melanie Davenport, Steve Oakey, John Bowen, Greg Blacker, and Kristi Anderson.
Darrik Farmer, Mark Rudd, Bruce Sutherland, Rory Kunz, and Gil Shirley were excused.
Minutes:
1. From Planning and Zoning meeting May 18, 2017.
Steve Oakey motioned to approve the Planning & Zoning minutes of May 18, 2017. Chairman
Christensen seconded the motion.
John Bowen, Melanie Davenport, and Kristi Anderson abstained due to not being present.
Those in Favor Those Opposed:
Heidi Christensen
Steve Oakey
Greg Blacker
Motion Carried.
John, Melanie, Kristi abstain.
Chairman Christensen explained the procedure for a public hearing.
The applicant or a representative will come forward to explain the proposal to the Commission. The
Commissioners will be given the opportunity to ask clarifying questions. The public will also be
given the opportunity to ask clarifying questions in order to better understand the proposal. If one
35 North 1st East
Rexburg, ID 83440
Phone: 208.359.3020
Fax: 208.359.3022
www.rexburg.org
Planning & Zoning Minutes
June 1, 2017
2
wishes to give public testimony to the Commission in favor, neutral to, or against the proposal,
please come forward and state your name and address for the record, and your affiliation, such as
neighbor, interested citizen, etc. The Commission will not interact with anyone during the public
testimony. As a courtesy to the Commission, please do not repeat any like testimony, but rather say
you agree with what has been stated. The applicant will have the opportunity of rebuttal if opposing
testimony has been given.
Public Hearings:
1. 6:35 pm –Rezone – 703 West 7th South – Low Density Residential 2 (LDR2) High Density
Residential 2 – Bron Leatham (Cook property)
Bron Leatham, applicant at 1272 North Yellowstone Highway presented the proposal to Rezone
703 West 7th South from Low Density Residential 2 (LDR2) to High Density Residential 2. The size
of the property is approximately 2.1 acres, located on the corner of 7th South and Yellowstone
Highway. The Comprehensive Plan Map change has already been approved. This request is for a
rezone and part of an adjacent property project. The proposal to rezone to High Density Residential
2 is, so that it matches with the zoning surrounding the property. The Cook Family owns the
property and will be working with him in partnership on the project.
Melanie Davenport asked about the status of traffic study for the project. Mr. Leatham replied the
traffic study was completed and turned into the City’s Public Works Department to determine the
exact solution they want to use. He said currently the proposal is to build a roundabout at the
intersection of 7th South and Pioneer to try to relieve some of the traffic. The traffic study looked at
75 acres at full development with most of development being high density. He explained by the time
the area is fully developed there would be significant traffic issues. Another issue is the proximity to
the railroad tracks. A roundabout would be Horrocks Engineering’s recommendation to keep traffic
from stacking with a lighted intersection.
Bron Leatham mentioned their tentative plan is to develop phase one which is about 150 units
adjacent to the LDS Stake Center. Phase two would incorporate part of the Cook’s property so they
will develop the rest of the frontage. He said even though the traffic at this point won’t warrant a
roundabout, he would like it built because of all the heavy construction that will be taking place. The
roundabout will be part of a development agreement that will be negotiated with the city.
John Bowen asked about the location of the entrances and exits to the development. Mr. Leatham
reviewed the map of the location on the overhead screen and indicated where the entrances and
exits will be located.
Community Development Director Val Christensen had no clarifications of the proposal at this
time.
Chairman Christensen opened the public input portion of the hearing.
In Favor: None
Neutral: None
Opposed: None
Written Input: None
3
Chairman Christensen closed the public input portion of the hearing.
Community Development Director Christensen gave the staff report and reviewed the location
of the road that will be built to give access to the Cook property. There will be three points of
connectivity within the development. The Cook property wasn’t included in the first proposal. He
read the Community Development staff recommendation a. The lot shall be incorporated into the new
subdivision that is currently being created to the west and south of the property.
Community Development Director Christensen reviewed the Public Works staff
recommendations.
Public Works Staff Review Comments
Rezone Application
File #17 00219– Bron Leatham (Cook property)
Property Location: 703 West 7th South - Requesting to change the zoning from LDR2 and HDR2
Sewer: The City has adequate capacity to handle the increased density for the rezone of this
property.
Water: The City has adequate capacity to handle the increased density for the rezone of this
property.
Streets: Because of the increased density to the area a roundabout will need to be installed at the
intersection of Pioneer and 7th South. Once the roundabout is installed, access to the property will
only be allowed off of Cornelison Ave.
Community Development Director Christensen said during the final plan process the city will
require that they provide access to the Cook property through their property.
Steve Oakey motioned to recommend approval to the City Council of a rezone from Low Density
Residential 2 (LDR2) to High Density Residential 2 (HDR2), for the property located at 703 West
7th South as requested, to include the Community Development staff recommendation a. The lot shall
be incorporated into the new subdivision that is currently being created to the west and south of the property. John
Bowen seconded the motion.
Those in Favor Those Opposed:
Heidi Christensen
Melanie Davenport
Steve Oakey
John Bowen
Greg Blacker
Kristi Anderson
Motion Carried.
4
2. 6:45 pm Conditional Use Permit – 486 South 3rd West – to allow reduced parking. The
applicant is requesting a parking reduction to 65% through the use of the Pedestrian
Emphasis District (PED), per the Rexburg Development Code. The zoning for the property
is High Density Residential One (HDR1) – Jonathan McMullin
Jonathan McMullin, applicant at 260 W. 1st N. presented the proposal to reduce parking from the
prescriptive 75% to 65%. He reviewed the property on the overhead screen. They have currently
built two12-plex buildings. They will be building another 10 units on the corner. The development
will have 111 parking stalls and 163 students this calculates to 68% parking; however, they are
requesting 65% just in case there are any changes.
Steve Oakey said one of the issues with reduced parking is the possibility that the tenants will be
pushed onto the street and start parking on the street. This is barring the fact; the city has the right
to close off the street, or greatly reduce and strict parking on the street. He asked Mr. McMullin if
he has an adequate management plan in place so as not to allow the tenants to be parking in long-
terms out on the street. Mr. McMullin replied during the tenant contract process, they will inform
the tenant of the limited number of parking permits available.
Mr. McMullin indicated overflow parking is an issue; however, it is something the city and
university are trying to address. The city has a Pedestrian Emphases District with close proximity to
the campus. He believes encouragement from the city, university and apartment complex managers
is needed to not allow the extra cars.
Melanie Davenport asked the reason why reduced parking was not requested at the beginning of
the project. Mr. McMullin replied reduced parking was not needed at the beginning of phase one;
however, they are adding an additional 45 beds. The construction on the third building has not
started; it is pending the approval of this Conditional Use Permit.
Greg Blacker asked about the building that looks like it is being worked on. Mr. McMullin said the
building is a four-plex that is being moved.
Community Development Director Val Christensen did not have additional comments about
the Conditional Use Permit.
John Bowen asked how the request to reduce parking to 65% compares with neighboring
developments. Community Development Director Christensen reviewed the neighboring
developments that have reduced parking. The South Gate and North Gate Apartments have
reduced parking; however, they are closer to the 75% parking. The Ivy Apartments has reduced
parking and is further away from the center of campus. The 65% has been the normal request for
reduced parking.
Mr. McMullin said Windows Manor Apartments is at about 52% in reduced parking. There has
been discussion regarding the overflow of cars needing parking between him and Connections
Property Management. The Connections Property Management group manages the Tower
Apartments and other apartment complexes in the city. The Tower Apartments have a higher than
75% parking ration with vacant parking stalls. They discussed the possibility of allowing the
overflow of cars to park in those vacant parking stalls and the owners of those apartment complexes
with the vacant stalls collect the fees from the parking permit.
5
Steve Oakey mentioned Mr. McMullin in cooperation with other apartment complex owners has
been managing his development’s parking issues voluntarily and quite well. He said this is a good
example of private cooperation for mutual benefit.
Chairman Christensen opened the public input portion of the hearing.
In Favor: None
Neutral: None
Opposed: None
Written Input: None
Chairman Christensen closed the public input portion of the hearing and asked for the staff
evaluation.
Community Development Director Christensen indicated the Conditional Use Permit for
reduced parking is in depth for the Pedestrian Emphasis District. He reviewed the staff
recommendations.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff can support this request if the requirements identified in Chapter 9 are properly
addressed. They are as follows:
a. The parking ratio per student within “Area 1” as identified on the attached exhibit map shall be
reflective of a market demand as determined by the applicant or land owner, but may in some
cases be reduced to zero parking spaces. However, other parking (vehicle and bicycle) is required
for guests and management as specified below in Sections 9, 10, and 11. N/A
b. The parking ratio within the area identified as “Area 2” on the exhibit map shall be a minimum of
0.5 spaces per student. Other parking (vehicle and bicycle) is required for guests and management
as specified below in Sections 9, 10, and 11. Staff feels that 65% (including 6%
visitor) is sufficient. The application does not identify how many students
are being included (see Final Recommendation).
c. Parking areas (parking spaces and maneuvering areas) shall not be located within the required
front yard. This requirement is met.
d. Existing parking areas that are located within the required front yard shall be eliminated and
restored to landscaping that includes the use of trees and shrubs. N/A
e. In order to be eligible for the reduced parking ratios as permitted herein, the resulting structure must
have ten (10) dwelling units or more. However, structures with fewer than te n (10) dwelling units
may apply for a conditional use permit in order to qualify for reduced parking. This ordinance is not
intended nor shall apply to any structure originally constructed as a single -family or duplex
residential structure. Furthermore, all underlying zoning standards shall apply (e.g. dwelling
density, permitted land uses, etc.). This project does not meet this requirement (see
Final Recommendation).
f. Landscaped areas shall, through the use of trees and shrubs, deter the use of the re quired front yard
6
as parking during the winter months when vehicles are not allowed to be parked overnight on City
streets. This project meets this requirement.
g. Landscaped front yards and other required buffer yards shall be delineated from parking areas by
high-back curbing that will further discourage parking in the front yard. This project will be
required to meet this requirement.
h. Each property that utilizes this parking reduction shall clearly specify on all rental contracts or
agreements whether or not a vehicle parking space is provided for that individual tenant. Rental
contracts will be required to be reviewed by the City Attorney.
i. Bicycle parking, shall be provided on a ratio of One (1) space per every ten (10) resident beds, as
follows:
i. Spaces may be in an open-air environment, but shall be placed on a hard surface such as
concrete, asphalt, pavers, or other.
ii. A hard surface, such as concrete, asphalt, pavers, or other, shall connect bicycle storage
area to either the internal parking lot, or a public right-of-way. Surface shall be a
minimum of 5-feet in width or 6-feet in width if vehicle overhang will occur.
iii. Spaces shall have lighting that is motion activated. Lighting shall in no way shine on to
adjacent rights-of-way or adjacent property, but shall be directed downward on to bicycle
storage only. The City’s lighting ordinance shall govern any other aspects not anticipated
by this section.
iv. Parking areas shall not be located within the required front yard setback.
v. Signs shall be placed conspicuously that state that moped parking is allowed in areas of
bicycle parking. Signs shall clarify that mopeds include either pedals, or have engines
under 50cc.
Bicycle parking meeting the above requirements is not shown on plans.
j. One vehicle parking space shall be provided for on-site management and must be the City’s full-
size parking space standard. This requirement will be required prior to a building
permit being granted.
k. Parking shall be provided for guest parking at six percent of occupanc y. Guest parking shall be
marked with signage that is clearly visible during all seasons of the year. These spaces shall not be
included in the parking contract required to be entered into (see section #8 above). Guest parking
spaces shall be the City’s full-size parking space standard. This requirement will be
required prior to a building permit being granted.
l. All sidewalks located along property shall be eight-foot minimum, installed and maintained per City
standards. This requirement is not met on the south side of project (see Final
Recommendation).
m. By utilizing this parking reduction provision, the property owner, and future property owners
agree to participate in a joint sidewalk maintenance agreement with other property located in the
PEZ overlay that may be established in the future. Sidewalk maintenance shall include repairs as
needed, and snow removal and deicing, as needed. The P&Z Commission may want to
comment on this requirement.
7
n. Sidewalks shall be maintained for safe passage during a ll seasons of the year. In the case of snow
removal and de-icing, this safe passage must be insured by 6:00 A.M. every morning and continue
until 10:30 P.M. This requirement should be part of the CUP agreement (see
Final Recommendation).
o. Property owners are encouraged to work with adjacent property owners to allow pedestrian access
easements over property if a more direct route for pedestrians to BYU-I campus can be achieved.
N/A
p. Lighting fixtures on the property shall not exceed 15-feet in height. This would include wall
mounted lights as well as parking lot lights and walkway lights. Any lighting that exists at the
time a property wishes to implement this PEO parking standard shall be brought in to compliance
with this standard and any other lighting standards per the City’s lighting ordinance. This
requirement will be required prior to a building permit being granted.
q. Every dwelling unit shall have a minimum of 150 square feet of gross floor area for every person
living in dwelling unit. This requirement will be required prior to a building
permit being granted.
r. No applications for expansion of the PEO boundaries shall be accepted for five (5) years from the
passage of this ordinance in the hopes that infill will be maximized within the bounda ries. The
current boundaries coincide with a quarter mile (1/4) radius, a distance with the strong likelihood
of pedestrian activity. When the boundaries are revisited, if it is determined that this ordinance
has been effective but needs more time to maximize infill then the boundary should not be
expanded. N/A
s. Qualifying developments cannot reduce their existing parking space ratio except to proportionally
allow for additional on-site buildings, or for the restoration of required yard. N/A
t. Qualifying developments shall be subject to future proportional share of pedestrian and vehicle
enhancements implemented to facilitate movement to and from campus or businesses. This
ordinance shall take effect and be in force from and after its passage and publica tion as required by
law. This requirement should be part of the CUP agreement (see Final
Recommendation).
FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS:
a. This project needs to be combined with the existing Roost development in order for it to
meet the 10-unit requirement as well as the requirement for full size parking spaces.
b. Staff recommends that the Commission recommend to Council the approval of this CUP
with all of the Staff Recommendations listed from a. to t.
Discussion, deliberation
Melanie – It fills the city’s and the college’s requirements for parking.
Steve Oakey motioned to recommend approval to City Council of a Conditional Use
Permit for the property at 486 South 3rd West (The Roost), to allow a lowered number of
parking spaces, to 65% through use of the Pedestrian Emphasis District (PED), and
including the Conditions listed below.
8
The Roost Conditional Use Permit
Proposed Conditions 17 00236
a. The parking ratio per student within “Area 1” as identified on the attached exhibit map shall be reflective of
a market demand as determined by the applicant or land owner, but may in some cases be reduced to zero parking
spaces. However, other parking (vehicle and bicycle) is required for guests and management as specified below in
Sections 9, 10, and 11. N/A
b. The parking ratio within the area identified as “Area 2” on the exhibit map shall be a minimum of 0.5
spaces per student. Other parking (vehicle and bicycle) is required for guests and management as specified below in
Sections 9, 10, and 11. Staff feels that 65% (including 6% visitor) is sufficient. The application does not identify
how many students are being included (see Final Recommendation).
c. Parking areas (parking spaces and maneuvering areas) shall not be located within the required front yard.
This requirement is met.
d. Existing parking areas that are located within the required front yard shall be eliminated and restored to
landscaping that includes the use of trees and shrubs. N/A
e. In order to be eligible for the reduced parking ratios as permitted herein, the resulting structure must have ten
(10) dwelling units or more. However, structures with fewer than ten (10) dwelling units may apply for a conditional
use permit in order to qualify for reduced parking. This ordinance is not intended nor shall apply to any structure
originally constructed as a single-family or duplex residential structure. Furthermore, all underlying zoning standards
shall apply (e.g. dwelling density, permitted land uses, etc.). This project does not meet this requirement (see Final
Recommendation).
f. Landscaped areas shall, through the use of trees and shrubs, deter the use of the required front yard as
parking during the winter months when vehicles are not allowed to be parked overnight on City streets. This project
meets this requirement.
g. Landscaped front yards and other required buffer yards shall be delineated from parking areas by high-back
curbing that will further discourage parking in the front yard. This project will be required to meet this requirement.
h. Each property that utilizes this parking reduction shall clearly specify on all rental contracts or agreements
whether or not a vehicle parking space is provided for that individual tenant. Rental contracts will be required to be
reviewed by the City Attorney.
i. Bicycle parking, shall be provided on a ratio of One (1) space per every ten (10) resident beds, as follows:
i. Spaces may be in an open-air environment, but shall be placed on a hard surface such as concrete, asphalt,
pavers, or other.
ii. A hard surface, such as concrete, asphalt, pavers, or other, shall connect bicycle storage area to either the
internal parking lot, or a public right-of-way. Surface shall be a minimum of 5-feet in width or 6-feet in width if
vehicle overhang will occur.
9
iii. Spaces shall have lighting that is motion activated. Lighting shall in no way shine on to adjacent rights-of-way
or adjacent property, but shall be directed downward on to bicycle storage only. The City’s lighting ordinance sha ll
govern any other aspects not anticipated by this section.
iv. Parking areas shall not be located within the required front yard setback.
v. Signs shall be placed conspicuously that state that moped parking is allowed in areas of bicycle parking.
Signs shall clarify that mopeds include either pedals, or have engines under 50cc.
Bicycle parking meeting the above requirements is not shown on plans.
j. One vehicle parking space shall be provided for on-site management and must be the City’s full-size parking
space standard. This requirement will be required prior to a building permit being granted.
k. Parking shall be provided for guest parking at six percent of occupancy. Guest parking shall be marked with
signage that is clearly visible during all seasons of the year. These spaces shall not be included in the parking contract
required to be entered into (see section #8 above). Guest parking spaces shall be the City’s full-size parking space
standard. This requirement will be required prior to a building permit being granted.
l. All sidewalks located along property shall be eight-foot minimum, installed and maintained per City
standards. This requirement is not met on the south side of project (see Final Recommendation).
m. By utilizing this parking reduction provision, the property owner, and future property owners agree to
participate in a joint sidewalk maintenance agreement with other property located in the PEZ overlay that may be
established in the future. Sidewalk maintenance shall include repairs as needed, and snow removal and deicing, as
needed. The P&Z Commission may want to comment on this requirement.
n. Sidewalks shall be maintained for safe passage during all seasons of the year. In the case of snow removal
and de-icing, this safe passage must be insured by 6:00 A.M. every morning and continue until 10:30 P.M. This
requirement should be part of the CUP agreement (see Final Recommendation).
o. Property owners are encouraged to work with adjacent property owners to allow pedestrian access easements
over property if a more direct route for pedestrians to BYU-I campus can be achieved. N/A
p. Lighting fixtures on the property shall not exceed 15-feet in height. This would include wall mounted lights
as well as parking lot lights and walkway lights. Any lighting that exists at the time a property wishes to implement
this PEO parking standard shall be brought in to compliance with this standard and any other lighting standards per
the City’s lighting ordinance. This requirement will be required prior to a building permit being granted.
q. Every dwelling unit shall have a minimum of 150 square feet of gross floor area for every person living in
dwelling unit. This requirement will be required prior to a building permit being granted.
r. No applications for expansion of the PEO boundaries shall be accepted for five (5) years from the passage of
this ordinance in the hopes that infill will be maximized within the boundaries. The current boundaries coincide with
a quarter mile (1/4) radius, a distance with the strong likelihood of pedestrian activity. When the boundaries are
revisited, if it is determined that this ordinance has been effective but needs more time to maximize infill then the
boundary should not be expanded. N/A
10
s. Qualifying developments cannot reduce their existing parking space ratio except to proportionally allow for
additional on-site buildings, or for the restoration of required yard. N/A
t. Qualifying developments shall be subject to future proportional share of pedestrian and vehicle enhancements
implemented to facilitate movement to and from campus or businesses. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force
from and after its passage and publication as required by law. This requirement should be part of the CUP
agreement (see Final Recommendation).
FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS:
a. This project needs to be combined with the existing Roost development in order for it meet the 10-unit
requirement as well as the requirement for full size parking spaces.
b. Staff recommends that the Commission recommend to Council the approval of this CUP with all of the Staff
Recommendations listed from a. to t.
Melanie Davenport seconded the motion.
Those in Favor Those Opposed:
Heidi Christensen
Melanie Davenport
Steve Oakey
John Bowen
Greg Blacker
Kristi Anderson
Motion Carried.
The “Standards Applicable to Conditional Use Permits,” Section 6.12B of the Rexburg
Development Code No. 1115, apply to all Conditional Use Permits.
3. 7:00 pm - Annexation & Rezone – Approximately 20 South 12th West – Rural Residential 1
(RR1) to Community Business Center (CBC) for the east 250' as described in the legal
description; the rest of the parcel remains Rural Residential 1 (RR1) – Ringel
Rod Jones 1014 Erickson Drive, representing the Ringels, presented the proposal. He reviewed a
map of the location.
Steve Oakey asked if only the front portion of the property will be rezoned. Mr. Jones replied the
front 250 feet along 12th West will be rezoned as commercial and the remaining will be Rural
Residential 1 with the annexation.
Steve Oakey questioned if the annexation and rezone can be requested at the same hearing.
Community Development Director Christensen replied yes both requests can be made at the same
hearing.
Chairman Christensen opened the public input portion of the hearing.
In Favor:
11
Shauna Ringle residing at 157 East Jordan Ridge Blvd. #301 Saratoga Springs, Utah spoke in favor
of the annexation and rezone. The property was owned by her mother and father in-law; it has been
in the family for many years. She would like to see the property be put to good use. There are
commercial businesses already surrounding the property.
Neutral:
Lynn Tietjen 2262 West Highway 33 asked what the plans for the remaining property that is zoned
Rural Residential 1. Chairman Christensen said they do not discuss the plans for the property, they
determine the best use for the land.
Opposed: None
Written Input: None
Chairman Christensen closed the public input portion of the hearing and asked for the staff
evaluation.
Community Development Director Christensen explained an annexation request can be
submitted as they are currently zoned in the county or as they are designated for land use in the
Comprehensive Plan or have them partially zoned; however, they cannot submit the request as
industrial because the property is not on the Comprehensive Plan as industrial. This applicant is
requesting an annexation zoned as it is in the county with a commercial piece on the front of the
property as allowed in the Comprehensive Plan or they can ask for the entire property to be zoned
commercial. He said in the future this applicant can ask for zone changes with new public hearings.
At this time the applicant is doing all that is allowed within the Comprehensive Plan and current
county zone designation.
Steve Oakey asked Community Development Director Christensen to explain what the
Comprehensive Plan is and what legal force it has with these proceedings.
Community Development Director Christensen said the Comprehensive Plan is a state
requirement that cities put together to use as a planning tool. The whole city and the impact area
have been designated on the Comprehensive Plan to show different land uses. The Comprehensive
Plan allows cities to plan for future growth and to designate the best land uses.
Community Development Director Christensen explained anyone that wants to change how
their property is zoned will have to meet the Comprehensive Plan designation. The Comprehensive
Plan is a living document that can change. In order for someone to change the Comprehensive Plan,
they will need to apply and go through the public hearing process.
Discussion regarding the process of this annexation request.
Steve Oakey motioned to recommend approval to City Council of an Annexation and Rezone for
property at approximately 20 South 12th West as specified, with the Zone change from Rural
Residential 1 (RR1) to Community Business Center (CBC) for the east 250' as described in the legal
description; the rest of the parcel remains Rural Residential 1. Kristi Anderson seconded the
motion.
12
Those in Favor Those Opposed:
Melanie Davenport
Steve Oakey
John Bowen
Greg Blacker
Kristi Anderson
Motion Carried.
Unfinished/Old Business: None
New Business:
1. Final Plat – Kenneth Square– Approximately 814 North Yellowstone Highway – Bryce
Dorion and Eagle Rock Engineering
Community Development Director Christensen presented the Final Plat application for
Kenneth Square. He said staff had someone required changes for them to do. They showed this as
only an easement to begin with, staff required them to bring it back in as a dedicated right-of-way.
Staff will follow through prior to finishing up the final plat process. The dumpsters on the south
parking lot need to be moved to the south aisle.
Melanie Davenport asked if there is a perceived problem with the left turn onto Highway 33.
Community Development Director Christensen said there is not a perceived problem with the left
turn; however, permission is required from the Idaho Transportation Department for access onto
Highway 33.
Steve Oakey asked about the staff recommendation # 2. Because this is a condominium project, Covenants,
Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R’s) and a landscape plan are required for review by City Staff. The reason
why condominiums need CC&R’s are because the area surrounding the buildings have a joint use, so
the city requires the CC&R’s to make sure they do not against any city requirement.
John Bowen motioned to recommend to the City Council approval of the Final Plat for Kenneth
Square located at approximately 814 North Yellowstone Highway. Greg Blacker seconded the
motion.
Those in Favor Those Opposed:
Heidi Christensen
Melanie Davenport
Steve Oakey
John Bowen
Greg Blacker
Kristi Anderson
Motion Carried.
Compliance: None
Non-controversial Items Added to the Agenda: None
Report on Projects: None
13
Tabled Requests: None
Building Permit Application Report: None
Heads Up:
June 15, 2017 P&Z meeting
5:30 pm - Work Meeting - City Council and Planning & Zoning Commission
6:30 pm – P&Z Meeting
1. Rocky Ridge Planned Unit Development (PUD) – Preliminary Master Plan/Preliminary Plat - 398 Pioneer
Road - Sweetwater Investments
2. Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment - 407 West 1st North - to change from Moderate -High Density
Residential and Neighborhood Commercial /Mixed Use to all Neighborhood Commercial/Mix Use for the
specified property - Homestead
John Bowen motioned to adjourn the meeting. Greg Blacker seconded.
Those in Favor Those Opposed:
Heidi Christensen
Melanie Davenport
Steve Oakey
John Bowen
Greg Blacker
Kristi Anderson
Motion Carried.
The meeting was adjourned at 7:33.