Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutP&Z MINUTES OCTOBER 19, 2006 Planning & Zoning Minutes October 19, 2006 12 North Center Phone: 208.359.3020 Rexburg, ID 83440 Fax: 208.359.3022 www.rexburg.org Commissioners Attending: City Staff and Others: Winston Dyer – Chairman Stephen Zollinger – City Attorney Joe Laird Thaine Robinson John Millar – Public Works Director Ted Hill Dan Hanna Val Christensen – Building Official David Stein Mike Ricks Natalie Powell – Compliance Officer Emily Abe – Secretary Chairman Dyer opened the meeting at 7:11 pm. Roll Call of Planning and Zoning Commissioners Thaine Robinson, Winston Dyer, Joe Laird, Mike Ricks, Ted Hill, David Stein Mary Haley, Charles Andersen, Randall Porter, and Mary Ann Mounts were excused. Minutes: A. Planning and Zoning meeting – October 5, 2006 Thaine Robinson motioned to approve the minutes for October 5, 2006. Joe Laird seconded the motion. David Stein abstained. None opposed. Motion carried. Public Hearings: None Unfinished/Old Business: A. Discussion on letter from Buena Vista Apartments Stephen Zollinger pointed out the findings of facts in the Commissioners’ packets. The owner of the apartments was contacted concerning his neighbor’s complaints about his garbage container. The Compliance Officer was unaware that the parking had been approved previously. The letter was the applicant’s attempt to get a written response out of the city, so the issue wouldn’t be readdressed. The findings of facts form represents an exhaustive research of the property. Buena Vista legally exists. The City Council has made the decision that the time has come to formalize the ordinance that will require apartment owners to contractually obligate each of their parking stalls. A bill will be introduced to City Council that will require all apartment owners to have parking specifically assigned 1 pursuant to a contract to the tenant. There will be no tenants coming to their apartments without knowing that they either have a parking spot, or don’t have a parking spot. Thaine Robinson asked what the bill will do to the development code. Stephen Zollinger said it will only apply to apartments that exist and existed before 1985. Chairman Dyer asked what will happen if we get a proposal for a new 12 unit apartment and the developer wants to provide six (6) parking stalls and rent to six (6) tenants with cars and six (6) tenants without cars. Stephen Zollinger said the ordinance will be very specific to apartment units that are in existence. This won’t change the requirements for new construction. New Business: A.Preliminary Plat – Valley View Townhomes Chairman Dyer declared a direct conflict of interest and excused himself from the table. Thaine Robinson was selected to act as chair for this issue. nd Winston Dyer, with the Dyer Group at 310 North 2 East, Suite 153. He is an authorized representative for DSC Investments, the applicant on the Valley View Townhomes subdivision. There is a zone change pending for this property. The applicant desires to try and move forward the plat process on a roughly parallel track to the zoning process, so it all merges together at the end. Any of the recommendations that come out of the discussions are subject to the zone change falling into place. He pointed the property out on the map. This plat includes the entire piece of property. It is a 4.4 acre tract. It is currently proposed to be developed into 12 lots consistent with the LDR2 zoning that is being sought. The lot sizes are 16,000 square feet. It would go with the town home concept so it could be split down the middle of the twin home, to be divided into 2 lots after construction. Each lot would then be 8,000 square feet or better. With only the 12 units there, the impacts of this subdivision will be fairly minor. There will be about 18 pupils in the school system. It would be on city utilities. There would be about 18 cars seeking ingress or egress from the subdivision at the peek hour. The proposal is consistent with the comprehensive plan for the area. Winston Dyer said they would like to initially develop the front 5 lots. They have tried to protect existing utilities nd and the access for vehicles onto 2 East. The access to the lots would be onto the private roadway system. The nd sewer line would be along the east side of 2 East. Water service would be provided. He showed the proposed plan for the utilities. For storm drainage, there is a detention basin next to the proposal. There will be sidewalk and nd gutter along 2 East. At the moment, they have sketched in another possible storm water storage basin. nd Winston Dyer said as far as the staff review comments, 2 East was dedicated when it was built 20 years ago. The state helped the City acquire the right of way. This information will be provided to the City. The Common areas nd are intended to be private for the use of the homeowners association. The developer wants to assign a common 2 East address to the development and then sub address each unit. He said the question was raised about lot frontage on a public street. There could be a cul de sac constructed on Tower Road and a slight reorientation of the lots to allow three (3) of the four (4) lots to have the required 22 foot lot frontage. The other option would be to do a nd Planned Residential Development. There will be curb and gutter according to the City standard on 2 East. The nd point was made that the driveway needs to meet 2 East at a right angle. This is very well taken, and they will make nd the adjustment. The 2 East frontage will belong to the homeowner’s association, and they will be responsible for maintaining and landscaping the roadside area. Dan Hanna arrived at 7:39 pm. 2 Joe Laird asked if any of the adjacent subdivision’s streets tie into streets on this subdivision. Winston Dyer said they don’t. There have been negotiating with different property owners to work on this. Joe Laird asked if the private road was 22 feet. Winston Dyer said it was 24 feet. Tower road will be constructed to city standards. John Millar said in the areas where lots are developing on our collector roads, without direct access onto the collector road, there is an area left out in some circumstances. We are not getting any agreements for maintenance. We end up getting a wall or something there, and the area becomes a weed patch. This one will surely be landscaped. This is something that needs to addressed at some point; some way to require maintenance along the road side. Winston Dyer said there will be CCRs associated with this, and this will be addressed in a homeowner’s agreement. The commission discussed maintenance of landscaping in the city right of way. Mike Ricks asked how snow removal vehicles will turn around on the 24 foot street. He also asked if there would nd be parallel parking on 2 East in front of the units. John Millar said the road is wide enough to allow for this. John Millar said the staff concerns have been adequately addressed. Chairman Robinson said it is a good use of the land. Joe Laird motioned to recommend to approve the preliminary plat for Valley View Townhomes with the stipulation that the various staff review comments and the Commission’s concerns be addressed. David Stein seconded the motion. None opposed. Motion carried. Winston Dyer was restored as chair. Compliance: Non controversial Items Added to the Agenda: The Commission discussed Design Standards in the impact area. Stephen Zollinger said the last thing the County adopted in the impact area was the first draft of Ordinance 926, which didn’t include the Design Standards. Once Ordinance 926 is revised, we need to take it to the County and have them adopt it. The County also suggested that during our design review process, we ask the parties to sign a formal agreement saying they will construct what has been reviewed and agreed upon. Chairman Dyer pointed out the information on the new Planning & Zoning Administrator. He invited the Commissioners to read his resume and get to know him a little before he arrives. He said the City felt this individual would be a very good fit for the community. 3 A.Discussion on pages 1 through 75 of suggested Development Code Revisions Val Christensen presented his suggested revisions to the Development Code. He pointed out the non-technical items that would need discussion. The Commissioners discussed the following sections: (Attachment includes the Commission’s suggested adjustments.) DEVELOPMENT CODE - ORDINANCE 926 - SUGGESTED REVISIONS SECTION PAGE TEXT IN QUESTION SUGGESTED MODIFICATION Define size and density of shade trees and density A. Parking of "low shrubs". Also the type of shrubs and shade Areas….."landscaped strip to trees need to be defined. Planning and Zoning 3.4.150 19 be planted with shade trees" asked that the Beautification Committee be involved. Does Commercial Lighting Create residential lighting standard. Assigned to 3.4.160 20 belong in single family zone? John Millar. Define size and density of shade trees and density A. Parking of "low shrubs". Also the type of shrubs and shade Areas….."landscaped strip to trees need to be defined. Planning and Zoning 3.5.150 23 be planted with shade trees" asked that the Beautification Committee be involved. Define size and density of shade trees and density A. Parking of "low shrubs". Also the type of shrubs and shade Areas….."landscaped strip to trees need to be defined. Planning and Zoning 3.6.150 27 be planted with shade trees" asked that the Beautification Committee be involved. 4500 sq. ft. with 1500 sq. ft. for each additional dwelling Add this language to the end of the section: The will work in the 16 units per above requirements are for the first 5 units, acre density for the first five thereafter the entire project must meet the units. Thereafter it violates requirements of a maximum density of 16 units per 3.7.030 30 the 16 units per acre rule. acre. Approved by the P&Z Committee Define size and density of shade trees and density A. Parking of "low shrubs". Also the type of shrubs and shade Areas….."landscaped strip to trees need to be defined. Planning and Zoning 3.8.150 35 be planted with shade trees" asked that the Beautification Committee be involved. Define size and density of shade trees and density A. Buffers "The buffer shall of "low shrubs". Also the type of shrubs and shade include trees and under story trees need to be defined. Planning and Zoning 3.10.150 43 of shrubs". asked that the Beautification Committee be involved. Delete this part of the sentence. (Keep the word 3.11.030 45 "or more up to five (5) acres" acre as per P&Z Committee - see Emily) A. "No lot or parcel of land in the NBD zone shall have a building or structure which exceeds a height of two (2) stories with a maximum of 3.13.100 55 thirty-five (35) feet." Change two (2) stories to three (3) stories. B. "Three Story Buildings. A three story building or structure, not to exceed forty- five (45) feet in height, may be 3.13.100 55 allowed …." Change "three story building" to "four story building" 4 "In mixed Normal residential is not identified in the permitted residential/commercial use and conditional use sections of the GBD zone. The structures, the amount of only residential listed is for the elderly, or for persons commercial area shall not with a disability. Also, there is not a section under exceed thirty (30) percent of zone GBD that describes allowable residential the total lot area unless there density. Either remove this section or change the is a corresponding reduction permitted and/or conditional uses. Planning and of residential square Zoning has asked that this be given to Mr. Leikness 3.14.035 61 footage…" for review. B. Sideyard "at least 10 feet when located adjacent to a Change to read "shall match the setbacks of the 3.14.080 61 residential zone" adjacent residential zone". For residential (even mixed use), some green space should be required. See also notes for section 3.14.035 above. Sections on mixed use (commercial/residential) density, landscaping, etc. are needed. I recommend a 20% of lot be left in "green space" with at least one half identified for "Permissible lot coverage for yard (playground, picnic etc.) space. This mixed residential/commercial requirement should be turned over to Mr. Leikness 3.14.120 62 uses" for further review. Add: Where CBD Zone is adjacent to the residential zone, match residential side and rear yard 3.15.80 65 Yard Requirements requirements. Add: "On mixed use (commercial/residential) projects, a minimum of 20% of lot area must be put into landscaping. One half of the required space to be identified as yard (playground, picnic etc.)." Mr. 3.15.160 70 G. Landscaping. Reserved Leikness to make suggestions. Add: Buildings or structures that have an occupancy as defined by the City of Rexburg Building Code in excess of 2500 occupants. (or whatever number is 3.27..010 136 F. SIC Code relevant) v. (3) "sidewalks shall be located at least six (6) feet "sidewalks shall be located an average of at least six from the façade of the (6) feet from the façade of the building" Ok'd by the 5 162 building" P&Z Committee The "Standard" directly below this sub-section B. v. Standard: No more than requires that "parking areas shall be located to the 60 percent of the off-street rear of the building or screened". Remove the parking area for the entire sentence "Parking shall be located to the rear of the property shall be located building or screened so that it does not dominate the 5 165 between the front façade…" landscape." B. x. (3) "sidewalks shall be located at least six (6) feet "sidewalks shall be located an average of at least six from the façade of the (6) feet from the façade of the building" Ok'd by the 5 166 building" P&Z Committee This standard was not being applied by Kurt prior to his departure. Recommend that we remove it so we B. x. (4) "within 30' of don't have to go back and make every one put it in. 5 167 customer entrances" P&Z Ok'd to remove. 5 1.2 is more than needed for manufacturing. Change to read: "1 per employee". If the factory also sells and has showrooms or involves the general public in other ways, parking spaces must be added for retail, wholesale trade etc…" See Stephen Zollinger for 5.8 175 Table 3. Manufacturing suggestion on Conditional Use. General Notes: 4 New PUD rules need to be created in the subdivision ordinance. See John Millar The ordinance needs a section that identifies that parking lots require a permit to build or modify. The subdivision ordinance requires a permit for parking lots. Put in section that 5 requires parking lots to be permitted before changes. When a single family home is converted into dormitory style housing (MDR or HDR zone) and there is a parking lot created (usually in the rear), is the parking in the front yard grandfathered? The ordinance states that one space is allowed to be counted in the front yard per unit in LDR1 and LDR2 zones only. P&Z responded that the parking was not 7 grandfathered. Could we create two new divisions of design standards? We now have Commercial over 25,000 sq. ft., Commercial under 25,000 sq. ft. and Multifamily. We need another commercial design standard with less restrictions for areas that are not as visible to our main corridors. Also we need a revised standard for Heavy Industrial and Warehousing. P&Z Committee will 8 take discuss. In meantime turn over to Mr. Leikness. 9 Remove Airport Hangers from consideration for design standards. P&Z Committee agrees. 11 Allow for taller and larger pole signs near the Highway 20 corridor. Signs could be up to 40' tall and twice as large as the current ordinance allows. A conditional permit would be required. All properties located within 1000' of the Highway 20 right-of-way would be eligible. P&Z Committee does not agree. Could we have a conditional permit situation for reduced student parking? As an example within 2 blocks from university boundary .7 spaces per student, 2 to 3 blocks from campus, .8 spaces per student and 3 to 4 blocks from campus .9 spaces per student. The new student housing parking lots are not filled up. Housing complexes requesting the conditional permit would also have to convince the P&Z Board that they have a good plan (vouchers etc.) to control the amount of students and cars. If a complex was found to be violating it's conditional use permit it would be revoked. Also, complexes that are currently built to the 1 space per student ratio and are not filling up their lots could request conditional use permits. Then they could rent out their extra spaces to the complexes that were built before the ordinances raised the requirements. Should be a win-win situation for everyone. P&Z Committee will review 12 and come up with answer. P&Z Committee OK'd that design standards in general should not apply to sides of backs of 13 buildings that are not clearly visible from the street. Subdivision ordinance to be reviewed and combined with Development Code. As per the P&Z 14 Committee. The Commission decided to discuss the rest of the suggested revisions at the next meeting (pages 76 through 240). Stephen Zollinger pointed out a property on the map that is zoned MDR1. It was all purchased by one individual with the purpose of building professional offices. The property was never rezoned to commercial, which was a mistake. There are two (2) pending building permits for commercial buildings on two (2) of the lots. The area will be proposed to be changed when the Comprehensive Plan map is amended in December. He asked if there were 6 any of the Commissioners who did not believe this property should be commercial. He asked them to be tolerant of the mistake, and allow them to process the building permits in anticipation of what they believe is going to happen. The Commission agreed. Report on Projects: Tabled requests: Building Permit Application Report: Heads Up: Chairman Dyer adjourned the meeting at 10:12 pm. 7