Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutP&Z MINUTES APRIL 06, 2006 Planning & Zoning Minutes April 6, 2006 12 North Center Phone: 208.359.3020 www.rexburg.org Rexburg, ID 83440 Fax: 208.359.3022 Commissioners Attending: City Staff and Others: Rex Erickson – Council Member Kurt Hibbert – P&Z Administrator Winston Dyer– Chairman Stephen Zollinger – City Attorney Mike Ricks Thaine Robinson Emily Abe – Secretary Joe Laird Mary Haley Randall Porter Ted Hill Dan Hanna Chairman Dyer opened the meeting at 7:02 pm. Roll Call of Planning and Zoning Commissioners Thaine Robinson, Winston Dyer, Randall Porter, Mike Ricks, Dan Hanna, Ted Hill, Mary Haley David Stein, Mary Ann Mounts, and Charles Andersen were excused from the meeting. Minutes: A. Planning and Zoning meeting – March 16, 2006 Corrections: -P. 3 – Dan Hanna’s abstention moved to where motion carried. -P. 4 – Dan Hanna’s abstention moved to where motion carried. Mike Ricks motioned to approve the minutes for February 16, 2006 as amended. Randall Porter seconded the motion. Ted Hill abstained for having not been present. None opposed. Motion carried. Joe Laird arrived at 7:05 pm. Public Hearings: None New Business: A.Final Plat – Parkside Plat “D” John Dester – Developer of Parkside. He said this is Phase 4, the last phase, with 17 homes. The previous phases are almost all sold out. The clubhouse facilities they promised in Phase 2 are built and operational. 1 Thaine Robinson asked Kurt to explain about the re-numbering of the addresses as requested in the staff review. Kurt Hibbert said this issue doesn’t need to hold up the plat, but staff had decided this needs to be addressed before it was signed and recorded. Houses on both sides of Parkside have the exact same numbers, which causes confusion, especially for UPS drivers. John Dester said the homeowners would surely be willing to change addressing. Dan Hanna asked about the problem of the boundary descriptions not closing. Kurt Hibbert said Craig from the GIS department felt this problem needs to be resolved before the plat went before City Council. The Planning & Zoning Commission could go ahead with the plat. Randall Porter asked if the developer was able to meet the requirements for green areas on the project. Kurt Hibbert said they built the club house and pocket park facilities that were part of the preliminary plat. John Dester said the open space is all around the units in a central park. He said this area will be finished with phase 4. They prepared it last fall and they will do all the landscaping with this phase. Mary Haley motioned to approve the Final Plat for Parkside Plat “D,” with the stipulation that the developers meet the requirements designated on the staff review presented to the Commission. Ted Hill seconded the motion. Randall Porter clarified it is the April 6, 2006 staff review referred to in the motion. Mary Haley clarified her motion that the stipulations refer to the April 6, 2006 staff review presented to the Planning & Zoning Commission. Ted Hill seconded. None opposed. Motion carried. Chairman Dyer encouraged the developer to see that all the issues on the April 6, 2006 staff review were addressed before the plat was presented for signatures. B.Preliminary Plat – Henderson Addition #3 nd Kurt Rolland – 310 N. 2 E (Schiess & Associates). He presented the preliminary plat to the Commissioners. The plat covers 19.48 acres, and they will put approximately sixty (60) homes in the subdivision. Chairman Dyer asked if there has been contact with the canal company and if there is proper reservation for maintenance. Kurt Rolland said there has been contact, and a bridge is planned over the canal. It will be constructed this fall. There is no need to show an easement on the canal. Joe Laird asked how long the cul-de-sacs are. Kurt Rolland said they are approximately 450 to 500 feet. Chairman Dyer asked what the status is on the development agreement. Kurt Hibbert said it is being worked on, and it will be finished before City Council approves the plat. Chairman Dyer noted some of these issues could be addressed on the final plat. Mike Ricks commented the streets could be confusing where Mariah Avenue ends. Joe Laird asked how they will take care of the storm drainage. Kurt Rolland said it will go into the City system. They will take it from the LDS church all the way through the project. Randall Porter asked what the zoning is on the property. Kurt Roland said it is Low Density Residential 2. Mary Haley commented this allows a basement apartment. Chairman Dyer reminded the Commissioners there was 2 considerable consideration on the zoning in the area at the original planning of the entire subdivision. It was felt that single family should extend to the canal. Joe Laird commented that usually storm drainage, fire hydrants, and sanitary sewage are shown on a preliminary plat. This plat is somewhat deficient in these areas. Chairman Dyer asked if there was a twelve (12) inch storm drain down the middle of Polo Drive. Kurt Rolland said there is. Joe Laird asked if the developers had discussed the storm drain with John Millar to see if it was big enough. Kurt Rolland said they discussed it when he did Division #1 as part of a master plan for the whole subdivision. Mary Haley motioned to approve the preliminary plat for Henderson Addition #3, with the understanding that the April 6, 2006 staff review issues be addressed before the Commission sees a final plat. Thaine Robinson seconded the motion. None opposed. Motion carried. C.Preliminary Plat – Riverwoods Townhomes, Div. 2 Brandon Jenks – 3680 West Mountain View Drive. He presented the preliminary plat to the Commissioners. They own the development on the south side of Trejo Street. They want to extend the subdivision across the street and do the exact same thing there. Thaine Robinson referred to the staff review sidewalk issue. He asked if there was anything on the East side. Brandon Jenks said that area is owned by someone else, it is not part of the development. Thaine Robinson asked how long the area had been developed. Brandon Jenks said it was landscaped last year. Chairman Dyer asked if there would be any development in the future on that property. Kurt Hibbert said there would not. Chairman Dyer asked if there is a mechanism to ensure the sidewalk is completed. Kurt Hibbert said there is. Thaine Robinson asked Kurt to explain the parking on the front yard setback. Kurt Hibbert said since the development is on a peninsula-type lot, there are three (3) front yard setbacks. The visitor parking in the back is actually in the front yard setback. Other than that, the setbacks look fine. This is usually not allowed, but in this case with a peninsula-type lot, there are no real concerns. The concern in the past has been single frontage onto a street. Chairman Dyer asked if there had been a development agreement that addresses this issue. He asked if there was a trade in not accessing Trejo Street to be able to park in the front yard setback. Kurt Hibbert said he believed the developer gave this concession. Mary Haley commented they don’t want that area to become a storage area for toy trailers or anything like that. Brandon Jenks said this issue is specifically addressed in their protective covenants, because they have the same concern. He said the empty space on the plat would all be landscaped. Kurt Hibbert said the parking stalls designed on the plat are partially on the property and partially not. The applicant has opportunities and options to move the parking onto the lot. He could pave the entire West property line and put parallel parking along the side, or develop parking on an adjacent parcel. The Commission should be concerned with whether this is tastefully done and in the best interest of the public. They should suggest to the developer what could be done if they feel it could become problematic. He brought it to the attention of the Commission because it does not strictly comply with the code. 3 Chairman Dyer said the code says they are not allowed to occupy that area. In six years, this has been allowed once with very specific requirements and negotiation with the city on a number of items. This ended up being a win/win situation. The matter has come up dozen times, and has only been allowed that once. The developers need the opportunity to come back with a final plat and match closer to what the Commissioners require. There will inevitably be visitors to these residences, and they need to make sure there is a place for them to park. They are just running out of space on the property. Brandon Jenks pointed out it is difficult to come into compliance on a peninsula lot like the one in question. They will do whatever needs to be done, but he would rather do this than pave the whole west side of the property for parking. Thaine Robinson asked how the area would be landscaped from the street. Brandon Jenks said it would be flat landscape with grass and shrubbery in between. Dan Hanna asked if there is a standard for the ratio of parking per unit. Chairman Dyer said there is a standard amount of parking per square foot of the proposed development. He asked the applicant if there was extra parking under the car ports. Brandon Jenks said there will actually be garages with two (2) stalls at the back doors. The code calls for two (2) to three (3) more for visitors. Randall Porter asked if the garages were single-car garages or double-car garages. Brandon Jenks said they are full- size double-car garages; you could park two (2) full-size trucks in them. Mary Haley asked if the west end of the property abutted the church property. Brandon said there is another lot between them. Kurt Hibbert said they appreciated the developers putting the parking in the rear, so it is not visible from the street. He also pointed out it will look attractive, since they are going to mirror image the development across the street. Randall Porter asked if Tasmun Drive is wide enough for parking on the street. Brandon Jenks said there is enough room, but he wonders how much they want there once the commercial development is completed in the area. Chairman Dyer commented that people who needed to stay over night would have no place to go. Chairman Dyer asked how many guest parking spaces are required. Brandon Jenks said it is written in the ordinance book that three (3) are required for the twelve (12) units. Randall Porter asked if the green space requirements are met on this plat. Kurt Hibbert said they are. This development has an advantage of having no driveways in the front. This allows more green space on the front of the property. Randall Porter asked if the property to the west could be purchased to provide more space for parking. Brandon Jenks said they have approached the owner and offered to purchase the land, but they have not received word back. Randall Porter then asked if the whole project could be shifted to the east onto the empty space. Brandon Jenks said they could move a few feet, but they have to keep enough of a side yard setback required for their building height. Mike Ricks said the twenty-two (22) foot driveways are too narrow. He suggested they make those a couple feet wider. He also said they should keep the shrubs low enough for people sitting in cars to see over. The commissioners continued to discuss the parking issue. Randall Porter moved to table the plat and asked the developer to bring the Commission another plat for them to look at in a couple weeks. Mike Ricks seconded the motion. 4 None opposed. Motion carried. Chairman Dyer encouraged Mr. Jenks to work with the plat and find some other ideas for parking. He complimented him on the quality of the plans presented. Unfinished/Old Business A.Comprehensive Plan – Eric Smith to present Preferred Land Use map options Chairman Dyer introduced Eric Smith from the City GIS department. Eric Smith presented the Preferred Land Use map. He presented some possible changes to the map, including removing city right of ways, changing the colors scheme, and adding the city boundary line. Street center lines would replace right of way designations. This would help the map look less cluttered and would more accurately portray the location of streets in the city. Mike Ricks asked if there was a way to distinguish the heavily traveled roads from the lighter traveled roads. Eric Smith said there are a number of ways to do this. Joe Laird said he is concerned with the major arterials not being shown on the map. Eric Smith said they don’t have any intention taking the proposed roads off the map. Chairman Dyer reminded the commissioners that the purpose of the map is to provide the general public with an understanding and clear vision of the expected and anticipated land uses in the city. The streets are important to help people orient themselves on the map. Randall Porter suggested the railroad be designated on the map with a unique symbol. The commissioners generally discussed right of way issues. Eric Smith pointed out the Zoning map and the Preferred Land Use map look similar. He proposed a new color scheme on the Preferred Land Use map to distinguish it from the Zoning map. He proposed the streets also be added to the map, along with the city limit boundary line. Randall Porter asked if the flood plane was on the map. Eric Smith said it is on the most recent Preferred Land Use map. Chairman Dyer said he liked the idea of having different colors on the Preferred Land Use map and the Zoning map. This would help the public understand the difference between preferred land use and an actual designated zone. Kurt Hibbert agreed. Thaine Robinson stated his concern that this could affect the city/county efforts to make the three municipalities’ maps uniform. Chairman Dyer said they would need to have this same discussion with the county, to make sure this would work. Eric Smith said they are planning to talk with them. B.Next steps on Comprehensive Plan – Kurt Hibbert Kurt Hibbert said he had committed to City Council to give the first three (3) chapters of the Comprehensive Plan and the associated policy development to the Commission and Council this month. He will have it sent out to them 5 the next week. He asked them to critically look at it and evaluate whether or not it is meeting the intent of the SWOT analysis. Chairman Dyer said we had made a huge effort to rewrite the development code, and we have done extremely well considering the volume in it. Now as the individual proposals are coming forward and we are scrutinizing it more closely, we find things that need to be adjusted. If we could all spend some time with it up front we wouldn’t have to be going back to adjust the Comprehensive Plan. Kurt Hibbert asked them to get engaged and look at it really critically. He really needs their input. They want to make sure the document accurately reflects the thoughts of the Commission and the Community. Kurt Hibbert also asked the Commission to continue to think about issues and bring their thoughts to him so he can distribute them to everyone for discussion. He asked them not to hesitate to add to the SWOT analysis. Chairman Dyer reminded the Commissioners of the SWOT analysis given to them a few meetings before. He asked them for some input on that analysis. He said the Comprehensive Plan is the foundation for everything we do. It is important that the philosophies and concepts in the Comprehensive Plan stage are correct, so the rest of it will follow in the logical sequence. It is worthy of our time and attention. Compliance: Non controversial Items Added to the Agenda: A. Discussion on City/County Administration of the Impact Area Chairman Dyer said since we have so much action in the impact area, we need to have a clear understanding of how the process works. We need to know who has jurisdiction. He read a letter he received from Penny Stanford, the County Attorney, concerning this issue. Ted Hill asked if the Rexburg Planning & Zoning Commission would send their recommendation to the City Council, or directly to the County. City Attorney Zollinger said the Rexburg Planning & Zoning Commission would send their recommendation directly to the County on issues in the impact area. The Rexburg Planning & Zoning Commission functions as a County Planning & Zoning Commission on issues within the impact area. On issues within the City limits, the Rexburg Planning & Zoning Commission functions as a City Planning & Zoning Commission. Chairman Dyer clarified that when the Rexburg Planning & Zoning Commission acts as a County Planning & Zoning Commission, there is already an agreement that has been established that the County has adopted the City codes and standards in the impact area. The Rexburg Planning & Zoning Commission would look at it as thought their standards apply. City Attorney Zollinger said this is correct. He said the Rexburg Planning & Zoning Commission was specifically created with the three (3) man impact area representation for this reason. These three (3) commissioners have power to stonewall recommendations within the impact area, because they have a weighted vote. They can prevent any change, but they can’t force a change. These three (3) commissioners are equal to the other seven (7) on these issues. It is a 50/50 split on impact area issues. Joe Laird asked if the County has to approve City annexations. City Attorney Zollinger said annexation is more of an instantaneous switch. The moment a piece of land is annexed, the City controls it, not the County. Chairman Dyer asked if they would have to have the County ratify amendments to the development code. City Attorney Zollinger said they don’t have to approve Ordinance 926, but they do have to approve the ordinance to be applied to the impact area. If they don’t approve this, Ordinance 725 applies to the impact area. The County actually suggested that the City expand their zoning into the impact area. 6 Joe Laird asked if the County would have to adopt the Comprehensive Plan. Attorney Zollinger said they would, but this is an entirely different issue. Both entities have to agree on a Comprehensive Plan map. The County adopts our Comprehensive Plan as theirs. The City has the authority internally to pass their Comprehensive Plan map. The County then adopts this plan for the area. Ted Hill asked if the Commissioners could have a letter of clarification on the issue for their files. Attorney Zollinger said the simplest explanation is this: when acting on matters within the impact area, the Rexburg Planning & Zoning Commission is acting as the Planning & Zoning board for the County. When acting on areas within the City limits, they are acting as the Planning & Zoning board for the City of Rexburg. Kurt Hibbert said they will need to review this from time to time with the Commission for a reminder. Chairman Dyer asked for both the letter and the reminder. Kurt Hibbert suggested the Impact Area Agreement be inserted in the Comprehensive Plan document as an appendix. B. Report on Joint Planning & Zoning Committee Meeting Chairman Dyer said this committee has been meeting twice a month to review Comprehensive Plan land use designations, coordination of mapping schemes, and matching of map boundaries. Thaine Robinson reported on the meeting. Seven (7) people attended. The committee concluded the comprehensive plans do match up pretty close where they intersect. Simpler definitions are needed for some of the preferred land use designations. The County was concerned with clustering industrial areas in the County. To put any industrial in the area would affect one or both cities, no matter where it is put. The County is also looking at adding a University Preferred Land Use. The committee concluded Rexburg and Sugar City match up pretty well, but they need one large map to see how the rest of the County matches up. The committee will wait until the County comes up with on large map to continue discussion. Thaine Robinson also reported on the Planning & Zoning Training in Pocatello. He said they received a DVD at the meeting in Pocatello about how to run planning and zoning meetings. He said anyone could borrow it if they would like. There are some good ideas in the DVD. Kurt Hibbert also handed out information from a land use conference he attended in Boise. Report on Projects: Tabled requests: st A. Rezone request from MDR1 and CBC to LI at 330 West 1 South – (Interwest Cabinet) th B.Rezone request from RR to LDR2 at 1139 East 9 North – (Titan Development) Building Permit Application Report: None 7 Heads Up: A. Comprehensive Plan Changes Public Hearing – April 20, 2006 Chairman Dyer encouraged the Commissioners to be careful and not have conversations on the issue. Kurt Hibbert asked the Commissioners disclose everything they hear from the public on the issue at the public hearing. st B. Rezone request from MDR1 and CBC to LI at 330 West 1 South – (Interwest Cabinet) th C. Rezone request from RR1 to CBC at Highway 33 and 12 West – (My Storage and Neighbors) Chairman Dyer adjourned the meeting 9:53 pm. 8