HomeMy WebLinkAboutP&Z MINUTES JULY 07, 2005
ORM F EQUEST R RAVEL T
P&Z
LANNING ONING
M
INUTES
19 E. Main (PO Box 280) Phone: 208-359-3020 x326
Rexburg, Idaho 83440 Fax: 208-359-3024
www.rexburg.org comdev@rexburg.org
July 7, 2005
Commissioners Attending: City Staff:
Winston Dyer– Chairman Shawn Larsen – Mayor
Rex Erickson – Council Member Steven Zollinger – Attorney
David Stein Ted Hill Kurt Hibbert – P&Z Director
Thaine Robinson
Mike Ricks Bethany Caufield – Secretary
Joe Laird Mary Ann Mounts
Chairman Dyer
opened the meeting at 7:00pm.
1. Minutes:
June 16, 2005
Mike RicksTed HillMary Ann
moved to approve the minutes for June 16, 2005. Seconded the motion.
MountsThaine RobinsonMotion carried
and abstained. None opposed. .
2. Public Hearings:
A. Rezone – Terry Bagley
Chairman Dyer
noted that this particular issue was once before the commission on an earlier occasion.
Because the code was just being adopted and needed some additional information, that particular application
was tabled until the requirements of the particular zone had been developed and put forth in the ordinance.
Terry Bagley requested to rezone two of his parcels from Light Industrial to Technology and Office Zone. The
properties have not been platted yet, and don’t plan to be until they have an interested party so they can develop
some lots that will be suitable for that particular use.
Kurt Hibbert
explained that it includes most professional office type uses, such as computer software, mail
order, computer photography and publishers. He also reported that it is immediately adjacent to what is now
developing as a very nice business park. It will wrap around the existing Highway Business District Zone
where there are several professional offices. It is very much in harmony with the surrounding uses.
Chairman Dyer
opened the public input portion.
In Favor:
None
Neutral:
None
Against:
None
Chairman Dyer
declared the public input portion closed. No testimony or written input was given regarding
the proposal.
Mary Ann Mounts
felt it was a very harmonious use of the property.
1
Chairman Dyer
felt to match a university setting, technology type development is a very promising economic
opportunity for employing university students and others.
David Stein
moved to recommend to City Council that the Terry Bagley property North of Trejo street be
Mary Ann Mounts
rezoned to Technology and Office Zone from Light Industrial. seconded the motion. None
Motion carried.
opposed.
B. Madison Hospital – CUP
Richard Smith reported that the hospital board made the decision during the past two and a half years to expand
the hospital and made economic sense to do it on site. The property north was the property needed to expand
the hospital. They worked with and presented to the neighborhood a number of proposals and a request for
them to amend their protective covenants to allow the ten homes along the border of the hospital to be
purchased and used for the hospital. The covenants were amended and approved by over half of the owners of
the subdivision. There was a requirement that there be a landscaped area along the homes that are going to be
taken out. It was also agreed that during the construction phase, if they were to be used for insularity purposes,
that they only be accessed from the rear. They were successful in getting all of the homes, but one, which is
still in negotiation. They have been trying to work with the neighbors and will continue to work with them so
that their concerns are taken care of.
John Ergman – architect for Madison Memorial Hospital. He explained that they are doing a two-story building
which will be aligned with the two lowest levels of the hospital. They had an additional tear of parking on the
East side of the hospital, but removed it because there was already enough parking well beyond what the codes
required. There will be two four foot fences to shield the lights from the cars in the existing parking. There will
be a six foot berm placed next to some of the parking to prevent the lights from shining into the neighborhood
next to the hospital. There are no patient windows facing the neighborhood east of the property. They plan to
make the East Main entrance a true intersection. The new addition of the building houses almost all of the in
patient functions for the hospital. The only other patient functions in the existing hospital, is the family
maternity center. The existing hospital, a lot of it, will house what was in the old hospital – 1951 building –
which will be torn down. Trucks will still come in at the same route they do currently. There is no intention of
bringing truck traffic onto the back side towards the residents. They also plan to put up a Madison Memorial
Sign, non-lit, on Main Street.
Chairman Dyer
asked what the Northwest side of the parking in front of the building was for. John Ergman
replied that it is for in-patient parking, same day surgery parking, and emergency parking. Staff will still be
parking in the back.
David Stein
asked how long this expansion will last before additional expansion is needed. Steve Cats, acting
as the project manager, replied that the demographic projections that were done still hold up – twenty (20)
years.
th
Joseph Laird
was concerned that the road they would like to provide an intersection at (N 4 E), next to the
hospital, is too narrow. Steve Cats replied that they have met with staff to talk about that very thing. Staff is
very excited to have a much safer intersection. Steve Cats and his staff did not see any need to do any widening
to the street because it kind of morphs into the eastern parking lot, or the old hospital. The pavement section
there is such that they can continue to re-work and put in new curb and gutter.
Thaine Robinson
asked if on the berm between the hospital and the neighborhood included sidewalk. John
Ergman replied that there will be a sidewalk, but not in the thirty-seven (37) foot buffer.
2
Chairman Dyer
asked for more detail and clarity on the thirty-seven (37) foot buffer. John Ergman explained
that in the thirty-seven (37) foot area they plan to go from zero (0) elevation to a plus six (6) foot and back
down is about a one (1) to three (3) slope up and then back down to shield the neighbors.
Chairman Dyer
requested they discuss any noise abatement or location of noise producers in their plan. John
Ergman explained that they have a generator inside an out building. The mechanical room itself is located in
the center of the property. For sound, they are using a central system that will not be heard outside of the
building. The generator could be heard, when running, about forty (40) to fifty (50) feet away.
Steve Cat commented that they recognize that in order to be a good neighbor; there should be policies so that
they are not working too early or too late in the day.
Thaine Robinson
asked what type of lighting they will have in the parking lots closest to the neighborhoods.
Richard Smith confirmed that they would be full cut-off lights.
Mr. Steiner commented that they would allow the public to meet with them to discuss any questions they may
have.
Chairman Dyer
opened the public hearing portion.
In Favor:
None
Neutral:
Dave Walker commented that he is not against it, but he and his family will be directly affected. He wanted
more definitions and answers of what exactly the hospital is going to do instead of just intentions.
Carolee Lovell – 473 Morgan Dr. Highlighted points from a letter written by Ron and Jill Anderson –
Commissioners had the same letter. They felt the architects should provide an option or two (2) on landscaping
that the neighbors could choose between. Mrs. Anderson suggested continuing the landscaping on Mill Hollow
behind the hospital as well. They were concerned about whether or not the expansion would be large enough
and how long it will take before they had a buffer zone.
Howard Randall – 500 Edith Circle. He would like to see some detailed specifications on the buffer and have a
couple options for landscaping. He suggested to require the trees to be twenty (20) or thirty (30) feet tall
instead of five (5) or six (6) feet tall. He was concerned with the location of the emergency room because they
have to go through the parking lot where people may be crossing to get to their car.
Claudia Walker - 431 Reed St. She didn’t vote for the change in the covenants. She knows it’s going to
happen, but she feels like the neighborhood has been treated like nuisances. She has never had any clear
answers to any of the questions she had regarding the hospital. She is concerned with how the children will be
protected during the construction phase.
Gary Lovell – 473 Morgan Dr. He is concerned with the traffic on all of the surrounding areas. He is also
concerned with the noise associated with the generators.
Against:
None
Mary Ann Mounts
stepped out temporarily.
3
Written Input:
Letter by Ron and Jill Anderson – 419 Morgan Dr. - that was reviewed by Mrs. Lovell as to the highlights.
Chairman Dyer
declared the public input portion closed on this particular issue.
David Stein
commented that it is important to keep in mind the issues that need to be mitigated as part of the
Conditional Use Permit. He referred to the “Standards Applicable to Conditional Use Permits” in Section 6.13
B, suggesting that these are conditions that should be addressed. He would like to add a condition that the
hospital provides a finalized landscape plan that is agreeable to the community.
Chairman DyerDavid Stein
suggested proposing that they would complete construction of that buffer first.
agreed and suggested that some type of temporary buffer be in place also to keep the construction on the other
side of the fence.
Mary Ann Mounts
came back and declared a perceived conflict of interest. She had previously served on the
hospital board. Commissioners had no input. She remained on the Commission.
Mary Ann Mounts
suggested that they hire a landscape architect to find the best option for a buffer. She felt
that there should be a construction schedule that the neighbors can look at so they have a timeframe of what is
going to happen when. She suggested that there should be no access through Morgan Dr. during construction.
Thaine Robinson
felt there were a lot of neighbors with unanswered questions from the hospital board. It
would be nice if the hospital board would meet with the neighbors and answer some of the questions they might
have.
Mary Ann Mounts
motioned to grant the Conditional Use Permit based upon pursuant to the conditions
discussed:
-
That they have a construction schedule;
-
That Morgan Dr. will not be accessed;
-
That they are required to hire a landscape architect to determine the best landscape for the thirty-
seven (37) feet to protect the neighbors privacy;
-
That they have landscaping completed first with mature trees – with staff approval;
-
That there be a temporary construction buffer;
-
That the hospital meet with the public on all issues and questions;
-
That there be completion of the acquisition;
-
That there be a plan for the use and access of the inter properties – accessing through the rear;
-
That there be a transportation study for the City on traffic patterns; and
-
That the standard conditions of 6.13 B in the Development Code be applied.
Thaine Robinson
seconded the motion.
Kurt Hibbert
also thought it would be important to have metes and bounds on the limits of the buffer being
talked about based on the input received from the one letter; where the buffer is.
Mary Ann Mounts
amended her motion to include that the landscaping will include the buffer zone on
Morgan, Mill Hollow and Reed. If and when the property is vacated on Reed St., the buffer will also include
Thaine Robinson
that property. seconded the amended motion.
Motion carried
None opposed. .
Mary Ann MountsMike Ricks
had to leave due to a previous engagement. temporarily left.
4
C. Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment
Chairman Dyer
explained that there were four (4)areas proposed for discussion: 1) Up by the North
th
Interchange; 2) A combination of “a” and “b” on 7 North in the vicinity of the recent Stonebridge Subdivision;
nd
3) On 2 East just south of the Courthouse on the East side of the street, and also the portion across Main Street
stndnd
on the South side; and 4) The next block South between 1 and 2 South on 2 East Street on the East side.
Chairman Dyer
proposed that they discuss them each individually because of the different aspects of each
proposal.
Area number one (1): South East of the North Rexburg Interchange
Kurt Hibbert
reported that the triangular parcel that was a part of the request was currently in the impact area
and is precluded; therefore, not on the table for discussion. Currently, the parcels (four (4) parcels) on the
Comprehensive Plan Map are zoned Agricultural, Commercial and Light Industrial. The applicant requested
the parcels to be rezoned to Regional Business Center. Subsequent to his application, he came in and withdrew
his petition for annexation, but still wanted to proceed with the Comprehensive Plan Map change.
Chairman Dyer
commented that the Commission would like to go ahead and discuss the annexation issue
Kurt Hibbert
rather than withdraw it. He asked Kurt Hibbertif the property was currently annexable. replied
no, because it is not contiguous. In order to be annexed the parcels in between the City limits and the proposed
property would need to be annexed as well.
Chairman Dyer
opened the public input portion.
In favor:
None
Neutral:
None
Against:
None
Written Input:
There was a letter from Sugar City requesting to deny the proposal.
Chairman Dyer
closed the public input portion.
Chairman Dyer
explained that at the time the Commissioners prepared the Comprehensive Plan Map, they
discussed at length the area around the interchange, recognizing that the best use of that would be commercial,
knowing that some day it will be developed that way; however, for the near term, the vision for Rexburg would
be to reduce the tendency for sprawl and keep that area designated as a land use for agricultural. He also
reminded the Commissioners that they are under no mandate to have to change the planning that has been
affected, even if a request or application is presented.
Mike Ricks
came back in.
Chairman Dyer
felt that they would be in a position to deny the annexation. He noted that the area is in
question in terms of the influence of the area of impact. Petitions have been made to Madison County by the
City of Rexburg and also the City of Sugar City about the control of that particular area. Those issues have not
been resolved yet, which would suggest either tabling the motion or denying it because the timing is not right
and the circumstances are not conducive to considering a change until those issues are worked out.
5
David Stein
requested denying it for now because they need a more concrete proposal before changing the
Comprehensive Plan Map, particularly talking about City services and what is going to be there. Growth of
commercial is not even approaching that area yet and he did not see any need to change the Comprehensive
Mike Ricks
Plan Map. supported the idea of denying it at this time until there is a consensus between the three
entities – Madison County, City of Rexburg and City of Sugar City.
David Stein
moved to recommend to City Council denying the request for a Comprehensive Plan Map change
Mike Ricks
for segment Number One (1). seconded the motion.
Motion carried
None opposed. .
Chairman Dyer
directed the discussion to the request for the annexation/rezone. He explained that there are
the options of denying or tabling it based on the discussion.
David Stein
moved to recommend to City Council denying the annexation/rezone request for the particular
Mike Ricks
parcel. seconded the motion.
Motion carried.
None opposed.
Area Number Two (2): Areas “a” and “b”
Kurt Hibbert
reported that currently both parcels are zoned Medium Density Residential. The applicant is
proposing to change parcel “2a” from a Multi-Family land use to a Single-Family land use, which is the parcel
north of the Stonebridge Subdivision. The applicant is proposing to change parcel “2b” from a Residential
designation to a Commercial designation, which is the parcel west of the Stonebridge Subdivision. With the
change in “2a”, the zones allowed for this could be any commercial zones in the ordinance. Under the old
ordinance, it could have been Highway Business District. In the new ordinance, the applicant requested to be
rezoned to Community Business Center. With the change in “2b”, only single-family zones would be allowed.
David Stein Kurt Hibbert
asked what was prompting the change in “2b”. reported that they are anticipating a
large scale commercial development, a single tenant that would purchase the property and many of the
nd
properties on 2 East.
Chairman Dyer
opened the public input portion.
In favor:
None
Neutral:
None
Opposed:
Jerry Hastings – testified on behalf of the owners of the Stonebridge Subdivision. He highlighted some of the
concerns from the BC Stonebridge letter written by Brett Hastings. They felt it was an open ended proposal.
The road map on the Comprehensive Plan Map was to step development back into residential. They don’t want
to say that they are against it. They just want to know how they can protect the existing home owners (e.g.
placing a buffer around the property). To open it up broadly to commercial without having some provisions
made is probably the biggest concern they had.
Written Input:
There was a letter that Jerry Hastings summarized, from BC Stonebridge expressing some of the concerns they
had regarding the proposal.
6
Chairman Dyer
closed the public input portion of the meeting.
Chairman Dyer
declared a direct conflict of interest in that he is presently retained by BC Stonebridge to assist
David
in their development. He felt it would not be appropriate for him to remain in deliberation and asked
Stein
to act as Chairman.
Chairman Stein
opened it up to comments from commissioners.
Thaine Robinson
asked if they could state a buffer between the residential in that area on this zone change, or
Kurt Hibbert
if that had to be done during the limited use permit. replied that there are existing buffers that
define each of the zones. In addition to that, there is a very specific provision dealing with his concern in the
Ordinance we just adopted. Under Commercial Design Standards 4.13 #3, labeled “Back and Sides”, it goes
through the requirements of a buffer where the façade faces adjacent residential uses. If the Commission feels
there needs to be additional requirements, the Standards allow them to do that.
Chairman Stein
asked what the checks and balances are of a Comprehensive Plan Map change. He was
Kurt Hibbert
concerned about protecting the subdivision. explained that if the Comprehensive Plan Map was
amended, they would have to come in and change the zoning, which requires an additional public hearing. At
that point, the Commission may grant or deny according to how that fits in. The control on the buffering is in
the Design Standards themselves, not just on the zoning criteria, for both buildings over 25,000 sq. ft. and
buildings under 25,000 sq. ft. The Commissioners have additional latitude to put additional requirements on the
use depending on each situation.
Thaine Robinson
commented that if they have the latitude to do that, he would feel comfortable granting this
change, as long as it is done project by project.
ThaineRobinson
moved to recommend to City Council changing “2a” from Multi-Family to Single-Family
Ted Hill
and “2b” from Multi-Family to Commercial. seconded the motion.
Motion Carried.
None opposed.
Winston Dyer
regained the chair.
nd
Area Number Three (3): On 2 East just south of the Courthouse on the East side of the street, and also
the portion across Main Street on the South side
Kurt Hibbert
presented a map of who had proposed the change out of all that is being proposed to change.
Petitioned parcels are cross hatched. Staff added the rest of the parcels because any action would affect them as
well.
David Stein
asked what zones were permitted within the mixed use planning designation, and if there had been
Kurt Hibbert
any indication from the applicant as to what they plan to apply for and do. explained that there
are three zones allowed – Professional Office (PO), Neighborhood Business District (NBD), and Project
Redevelopment Option (PRO). As far as the applicants, that varies. There are several that have talked about a
PRO zone. PO zone had also been discussed.
Chairman Dyer
asked if the PRO zone could be requested under the current land use designation without
Kurt Hibbert
changing the Comprehensive Plan Map. replied yes it can. It can be applied to any zone in the
City of Rexburg, as long as it fits.
Chairman Dyer
opened the public input portion.
7
In favor:
Dr. Lovell – one of the owners of the properties in question. He explained that some of the reasons they have
requested this is because they have a very congested plaza. They are trying to plan long-term. The existing
parking lot is full. Currently, they have no plan; they have not designed anything yet, until they see that there is
an allowance by the community. Another issue is that the back parking lot to the Professional Plaza is
frequently a playground for children, which becomes a safety hazard. Dr. Lovell suggested making changes for
those lots and hiring someone that will make the plans suitable.
Robert Collette – owns one of the properties on Main Street on the second block – what was previously the
Grover home. He asked that the Commission return to the historic designation of this area. It doesn’t look over
run in terms of Commercial development. It looks like there has been some reasonable, thoughtful, work done
in the past. He would like to move an existing business to the home that they own there. He owns Rexburg
Home, Health and Hospice to that home. It would be an ideal location to be adjacent to the Hospital, where
most of their business is conducted. Changing this does not mean that this will happen immediately. He would
have to come before the Commission once again, but he encouraged this first step to happen.
Neutral:
None
Against:
Don Sparhawk – President of the East Main Neighborhood Association. The properties requesting the change
are located in the boundaries of the Neighborhood Association. He read through a letter drafted by himself –
given to the Commissioners at this time. He wants to keep the neighborhood residential. He would like to have
the City wait five to ten years, and then look at the needs of the area. He would like to preserve the historic
homes as Low Density Residential.
nd
Pat Hinton lives at 55 S 2 E – owned by Mary Burns. She plans on living on the property as long as she is
able. She would like to see it remain as residential, and preserve the neighborhood. She knows eventually,
there needs to be changes, but would like the City of Rexburg wait and see what happens in that area with
Walgreen’s and the Hospital expansion. She did not see a need of having more doctors’ offices if the hospital is
expanding. She wondered if there was a way that Dr. Lovell’s property could be expanded to provide the extra
parking space, and yet preserve enough of the backyards of the homes.
rd
Deanne Lindsey – 70 S. 3 E. Read a letter from her husband (Ronald Lindsey) who was out of town on
business. He commented that they do not want to move. Some residents are older or physically disabled. They
don’t want to risk their homes and futures. He requested that the properties remain residential.
nd
Ann Marie Harris – 152 S 2 E. She submitted a letter via e-mail that was given to the Commissioners prior to
the beginning of the meeting. She would like the area to remain Single-Family. She felt that the area provides
a beautiful tree line avenue. She felt the lots are too small to put parking on. She noticed that there are cars
everywhere on Professional Plaza and children are running around, acknowledging that it is a problem, but it
nd
will be a larger problem if allowed to extend to 2 E. She is concerned that it will become very accident prone.
Raymond Hill – 328 E Main. Very much opposed to any encroachment on the neighborhood. He wants to
leave Main Street like it is. He feels there are plenty of places the doctors can build.
rd
Jerry Glanville – 17 S 3 E. The neighborhoods they are in are one of the classic homes in the City. Their
house is 70 years old, and he has spent a lot of effort in keeping it looking like the neighborhood does. He felt it
would not be appropriate to have these beautiful homes anything else but residential.
8
Written Input:
Doralie Gambles was opposed to changing it to mixed use. She is hoping they get new homes and landscaping
that helps improve the neighborhood.
Gary and Bonnie Anderson – Live next to the portion on #4. They are opposed to rezoning and the effect it will
have on the homes. They do not want neighborhood districts, or restaurants and they believe there is already an
abundance of mixed use.
Robert and Kathleen Nelson was opposed to the change in character it would bring. They see that doctors have
attempted to make their offices attractive, but they are concerned with the traffic it will bring. They support the
position of the Neighborhood Association.
Ann Marie Harris highlighted the provisions of her letter.
nd
Margie Waldron was strongly in favor of leaving 2 E as is for 5-10 years.
Rebuttal:
Dr. Lovell explained that there are no other offices planned at the hospital. They do have the existing space, but
they had to turn doctors down because they do not have the adequate parking.
Chairman Dyer
closed the public input portion.
Thaine Robinson
declared a perceived conflict of interest. He had previously served as an ecclesiastical leader
Thaine Robinson
for the majority of the people in that area. Commissioners had no comments. remained on
the Commission.
nd
Thaine Robinson
commented thinking about future usage of 2 E, once the temple does come in, there will
thndnd
only be two major arteries: 7 S and 2 E. 2 E is also a major artery to the college right now, and with the
nd
growth of that, it may be stronger too. That might have a need to discuss what may change with 2 E when
th
there is all of that traffic that stretches clear to 7 S. He didn’t know if that can remain a residential area if that
happens.
David Stein
commented that in the past three years he had served on the Commission, they have spent many
hours discussing this area. He felt that it is a very nice neighborhood, but it is also an office area that has been
there for a very long time. He explained that they have a tool they crafted last year, a Project Redevelopment
Option, that allows customized zoning where there are different needs/desires, but a collective desire to
preserve the architectural area, and suggested that be encouraged instead of changing the Comprehensive Plan
Map. He felt Mixed Use was too general a solution.
Mike Ricks
commented that in area number three (3) there are fifteen (15) for the change and nine (9) against;
Chairman Dyer
2/3 for and 1/3 against. commented that it shows an area in transition.
David Stein
moved that they recommend to City Council denying the change to the Comprehensive Plan Map
for area three (3) from residential to mixed use, but strongly encourage the Neighborhood Association and
Thaine
property owners requesting development to get together and use the Project Redevelopment Option.
Robinson
seconded the motion.
Mike Ricks
commented that on the portion where the majority wants to change the Comprehensive Plan Map,
then that is what should happen.
9
David Stein
felt that it doesn’t have to be either or. The PRO zone talks about creating a well-planned
architecturally design development that meets the needs of the community. He is concerned that if it is changed
to mixed use, they won’t get the development they want; they won’t have a say as a community and Planning
Chairman Dyer
and Zoning Commission on how it develops. agreed and felt that it is an area that is definitely
in transition.
Ted Hill
would like to see it turn to mixed use. He felt there would be a lot more control if they redesign the
whole area instead of coming in individually.
David SteinThaine RobinsonJoseph Lairdin favorChairman DyerTed Hill
, , and were of the motion. ,
Mike Ricksnot in favorMotion did not carry
and were of the motion. .
Mike Ricks
moved to recommend to City Council that they do have the Mixed Use Zone change on the
Ted Hill
Comprehensive Plan Map on that particular area. seconded the motion.
Mike Ricks
explained that he made the motion because 2/3 is for it and 1/3 is against it.
David Stein
didn’t feel it was a popularity process. The Comprehensive Plan Map and the long term vision of
that is some type of residential or as it states now. Where it is now, it is changing. He felt they should not
Chairman Dyer
ignore the change, but work to improve it. clarified that for as long as there has been a
Comprehensive Plan there, that area has been designated for office type use. When they went through the
Comprehensive Plan and did the public involvement, they came out with a map that showed that. It was
changed then by the City Council back to strictly residential, and was then adopted.
Chairman DyerTed HillMike Ricksin favorDavid SteinThaine Robinson
, and were of the motion. , , and
Joseph Lairdnot in favor
were of the motion. Motion did not carry.
Thaine RobinsonJoseph Laird
moved to recommend to City Council tabling it for further discussion.
seconded the motion.
Motion carried
None opposed. .
Five minute break.
stndnd
Area Number Four (4): The block between 1 and 2 South on 2 East Street on the East side.
Chairman Dyer
commented that they should try to capitalize on things that were previously discussed that
would be applicable to Number four (4) in order to shorten the discussion as much as they can.
Kurt Hibbert
commented that in Section Four (4), the parcel on the northwest corner had withdrawn the
application.
Chairman Dyer
opened the public input portion.
In Favor:
Bonnie Anderson explained that she recently moved to Kanab, Utah. On the master plan, it is zoned R1 as well
nd
as on the Comprehensive Plan Map. She felt that S 2 E is so busy now. Not one offer was given for a single-
family residence. She commented that no one wants to build a new house in an old neighborhood; it is not the
best use of the land. She felt it needed to be changed because R1 is not even feasible for the property. She
10
would like to see small professional offices in that area. Mrs. Anderson felt more and more doctors are needed
in that area because there are not enough people to cover it. There are a lot of commercial buildings that look
more like houses that have pleasing aesthetics. She felt she was unable to do anything with the property unless
the master plan is changed.
Ralph Kern – 158 Harvard. He is a property owner of the same area in question. He is looking for a
cooperative compromise. He sent a letter to the Commissioners as well as handed out another page during the
meeting with signatures on both. He said that 75% of the land owners agreed to the points he was about to
discuss: They support the development of the long vacant property. They were concerned that the Mixed Use
Zoning was really broad and provides things that need to be prevented. They don’t want Medium to High
Density Student housing, Neighborhood Business District, restaurants, and most were opposed to having
medical professional offices. He supported the idea of a Project Redevelopment Option. He liked the idea of
having an attractive patio home type of block that is consistent with what it was to begin with.
nd
Steve Hurley – 141 S 2 E. He commented that the property has been blight for many of years, for those who
have been trying to make their property nice, it is terrible. He agreed with what Mr. Kern said. He would ask
that if anything is done, that the Anderson’s be required to keep their property well kept.
Sid Muir lives on the corner of Harvard. He had been the one keeping the weeds down, with the exception of
this year. He agreed with the proposal for a Mixed Use just because he is tired of keeping the weeds down. He
felt no one will build a new house there. He commented that if they put offices that could possibly leave the
nd
houses down 2 E there so the doctors wouldn’t have to expand that way.
Neutral:
none
Opposed:
Don Sparhawk commented that he agreed with much of what Mr. Kern had proposed. With the addition of the
temple, this older residential area will become an even more desirable place to live. He recognized an increase
nd
in traffic on 2 E and knew some homeowners would like other options for their property; therefore, it is their
recommendation to have this neighborhood kept residential in nature. He does not want any retail there. He
would like to see strict controls on this area, including architectural controls. He felt the PRO zone, which is
already allowed, could be a toll in helping the Anderson family, and protect the Neighborhood and the entire
City.
nd
Linda Walker – 120 S 2 E. – right across from the Anderson property. She felt that it is a beautiful tree-line
street. The vision of the City, when they put in all of those beautiful maple and birch trees was more like a
neighborhood than an office building; more of a historical area.
Anne Marie Harris felt that the vacant lot is such an eye sore. She suggested that it be cleaned up and maybe
have patio homes with small lots.
Jennifer Rock – 174 Rosewood Dr. She had concerns because the area seems like a gateway to her own
community. She would hate to see commercial creep up to the elementary and Smith Park. She was also
concerned about the traffic and felt that residential is more appropriate for the area.
Written input:
Doralie Gambles was opposed to changing the Residential Zone to Mixed Use. (She was originally an
applicant, but withdrew).
There was a letter from Mr. Kerns that he highlighted during the public input portion.
11
Robert and Kathleen Nelson did not want to see that type of development in that area.
Ann Marie Harris provided a letter and testimony of not wanting to see those potential types of uses.
Margie Waldron was in favor of leaving it how it is for 5-10 years.
Chairman Dyer
declared the public input portion closed.
Thaine Robinson
declared a perceived conflict of interest for the same reason as in Area Three (3).
Thaine Robinson
Commissioners had no comments. remained on the Commission.
Chairman Dyer
commented that this area may be an area in transition, but it is still undetermined. Talk about
common themes of the cottage type development and smaller homes that would fit perfectly under the PRO
Zone. He felt the time may not be right for considering any change. He would rather see it go straight to a PRO
Joseph Laird
zone in this particular case since it is deeper in to Residential Neighborhood. agreed with what
Chairman Dyer indicated.
Mike Ricks
felt the best way to solve this problem would be to put something on it. He felt that there should be
a different type of housing in that area and would be in favor of them going to the PRO zone on that particular
block.
David SteinThaine Robinson
and agreed.
David Stein
moved that they recommend to City Council denying the application for the Comprehensive Plan
Thaine Robinson
Map change for Area Four (4). seconded the motion.
David SteinThaine Robinson
amended his motion to encourage having a PRO zone. seconded the amended
motion.
Motion carried
None opposed. .
3. Unfinished/Old Business:
A. Valley View Estates – preliminary plat
Bart Stevens reported that they included in the Preliminary Plat the water and sewer line sizing, as was the
request of the Commission in their previous meeting. They met with Mr. Millar. There was a concern on the
North side as sunrise continues to the west as to the width of that street, and if there had been a decision on the
width. Mr. Millar indicated that that would be one hundred (100) foot right of way, which would include a fifty
(50) foot right of way as their half of it. Contouring was put in place. Other things that were missing were lot
dimensions, which are now included.
Joseph Laird
commented that where they are coming down with the right of way, he felt that it will need to be
curved so that it does not cut into existing homes. Bart Stevens discussed that with John Millar. The only
problem is it will have to come off of the church or Crest Haven. There was also a grade issue, coming off of
the back of the church property. There are several little issues right there that have to be resolved, including
placement of fire hydrants.
12
Chairman Dyer
addressed a comment from Public Works that said that not only will there have to be 68 ft. of
right of way there, but this development will have to construct the entire Morningside Street. Bart Stevens
commented that John Millar did address that to him and they agreed to do that.
Mike Ricks
asked if the City is still going to use part of Morningside Dr. at the bottom of that hill, so it can go
south. Bart Stevens said yes and explained that the homes on Morningside Dr. to the south can now exit this
way instead of having to go through Poleline Rd.
Chairman Dyer
addressed another comment regarding subdivisions over one hundred (100) lots being required
to offer ten (10) percent of the land area to the City for park space. Bart Stevens said that they are willing to
work with that. They have added an additional detention on the bottom of the property on Morning Side and
they had one on the South side to help handle that storm drainage.
Chairman Dyer
asked how he might propose to offer at least ten (10) percent to the City for park space. Bart
Stevens explained that they would have an interest to create a buffer between the college property and the
residential neighborhood, to the bottom of the entire property on the west side. That would be the most logical
place.
Chairman Dyer
commented that Mr. Millar indicated that he didn’t want these cul-de-sacs for snow removal.
Commissioners discussed last time that they were fairly flat and kind of run with the contours. He asked if he
had any discussion with him. Bart Stevens explained that he hadn’t discussed it with Mr. Millar. The reasons
those are still there are because there were comments made that there were other subdivisions recently approved
with cul-de-sacs.
Kurt Hibbert
explained that he had talked with Mr. Millar. There is a high demand for cul-de-sac lots. The
result was that he did not have preclusion against cul-de-sacs as long as they have adequate storm drainage.
David Stein
asked what the process for the City talking about having a park so that it can be worked into the
Kurt Hibbert
plans at the best location for the citizens of the area as well as the development. explained that
on the last Comprehensive Plan Map, there was actually a purple dot where there was a planning designation to
the east of this that there should be a park somewhere in that area. He didn’t think it was carried over to the
new Map, but probably the best mechanism is that our Council representative takes that back to City Council
and let them find out what opportunities the City has, financially.
Chairman Dyer
commented that in the past developers were asked to donate that property.
Ted Hill
commented that he liked the looks of it and would like to see the cul-de-sacs left in there.
Joseph Laird
approved the Preliminary Plat based upon the approval of the various City Departments and with
the North right of way line of Sunrise Dr. curbing south it connects into the existing North right of way line of
Sunrise Dr. through the Crest Haven Subdivision.
Mike Ricks
seconded the motion.
Chairman Dyer
suggested adding the recommendation regarding the park situation is worked out with Staff or
David Stein
City Council. agreed. He felt a resolution needs to be done on the park or at least a mechanism to
talk about the acreage and placement of a park so that some of the impact fees paid on the development get
funneled to developing the park as opposed to just designating it.
13
Joseph Laird
amended his motion to indicate that there needs to be some discussion between the Planned
Developer, City Staff and City Council as to the location of a park within this subdivision if they deem such is
Mike Ricks
needed. seconded the amended motion.
Motion carried
None opposed. .
4. New Business:
A. Petition for Approval from Commissioners for a hot dog stand in a residential neighborhood.
st
Mr. Morin
presented his proposal. He brought pictures of the proposed location. It will be on the corner of 1
W 3rd S across from the Hart building on campus. It will be in the parking lot area of the Normandy
Apartments. There are trees that surround it. It is a blank space and is not being used as parking. He talked to
Virginia Pratt, the owner of the property and she said she would be willing to lease it out to have a hot dog
stand, with approval of the Commission. It would have hot dogs as well as Sno Cones. He spoke with a lot of
the local residents and they had no problem with it. One tenant was concerned with trash. The employees will
be responsible for taking care of the trash. Another concern was the increase in traffic. There is already high
traffic on that road and those are the people they want to sell the concessions to. The third issue was noise from
the customers. Where it would be placed is a reclusive location and it wouldn’t be open late at night, only
during the day time where people will be out. Another possible concern might be an eye sore for the area. It
will be a brand new building and well kept.
Thaine Robinson
asked what the dimensions of the building are. Mr. Morin replied that it will probably be
about six (6) feet by twelve (12) feet.
Thaine Robinson
asked how they plan to get electricity and water there. Mr. Morin answered that it will be
going off of gas; there is a gas grill for the hot dogs. They are proposing to sell Sno Cones. They will need
power for that and they were going to work that out with Virginia Pratt later. As for now, they are just going to
sell hot dogs.
Thaine Robinson
asked if it will be open all year round. Mr. Morin replied that they were thinking of selling
hot chocolate in the winter, but if they decide not to use it, it will be taken down.
Chairman Dyer
asked if he had checked into the zoning issues, if it is a permissible use in this zone. Mr.
Morin said that he talked to Kurt Hibbert about it and it was said that it needed to be presented to the
Commissioners.
Chairman Dyer
explained that although it is a small business and kind of a neighborhood thing, the current
code in the City does not allow for such a thing in that particular zone. The code does allow for a variance
under certain circumstances. (Chairman Dyer read through the variance section in the code).
David Stein
didn’t think there was really anything the Commissioners could do. It didn’t seem like they could
grant a variance. He felt it was a great idea, but according to the zone, if it were to go to a public hearing, the
Commissioners would not be able to approve it.
Chairman Dyer
agreed. He suggested that Mr. Morin find a place that it will apply.
No motion was necessary.
5. Enforcement:
14
A.Valley Wide Co-op
Kurt Hibbert
summarized Bill’s report on that. There was discussion had on the location of outside storage.
There was nothing in the motion of the approval of the site plan that specifically delineated or precluded any
outside sales and display out in the parking area. However, in the review of the overall site plan on the parking
requirements for the structure, it is in violation currently because of the magnitude of the outdoor storage. He
has obscured enough parking that he is truly below the minimum standard for parking.
Chairman Dyer
clearly our intent was not to create a bone yard. He had received additional complaints about
the situation. They’ve added lights out there for security reasons, but they are over shining their bounds into
neighbors’ houses. There is overnight parking going on, contrary to what was discussed. The City insisted on a
buffer of trees there along the canal to buffer that from the adjacent residential area across the canal. One of the
new developments that had gone in there has torn out the trees and disrupted the irrigation line that feeds the
other trees.
Steven Zollinger
commented that they will have to come into compliance. He will sit down with Bill and come
to a conclusion.
B.Enforcement report: for Commissioner’s review.
Adjourned at 12:10am
15
1-o
CIO
w
0
Z
Q
O
2
w
2
7
E
LL
C
0
0
N
@
w
w
@
a
a
Y)_
47
0
K
W
L
.3
O)
c
0
0
D @
Lo c
N c
@ a)
N a)
a.0 w
O N 'O 3
Nw
O N
N
(D L a)
C
a) 0
C o c
OU 3
a
Q (0
O (V E a)
N C
_ 0) � @
C O
O) N N >; Y U)
C? Y75 @
N a)
E
N
N
r0
@03c0_a) a)E
O w
@ @ O a —
'O
m m
O C Cco
O C@C
�.c 3
@�-o 3w
-0 0
O "O C
E O vOi U 0
N@
C
U 0@
N C_
�@ E
m�
U O
N aL�:_.
0�
U)
E
0
O
N N
m O C (0 U O_
ac^N
a) a)
m x
a)
w E
Ll NL-'
O` O -Lp 4'� N
N
00
�
ate) 0 -c
M U
L1J cn U @
3 a
=_Ow @
C 7 Cts
0=
4 2 m a
o 0o N N o w
W c
3 m00 o o
c
c
0
°)mN@aa))0)
_0
@o
z
�-0 O
E a) o -N E
E a
E E
" '-
c c c
L -O
O~
m
U N w @
C E .�=
L N a
`- > E
p@ O 2 N
E E a)
N U N
c
c @-o
c a) E
O N E
C N'
N
3 c!E
ao.- 7 - c
w UO 0
Q
O> L
L)
E j
@ E
N OU
a@
'O N N
N 3 '6 @
3
a C.L..
O -C
-p
Q)
@
Q)
d
O) N C@
@
O N
-c O C
m
>
C @ a) a) @
U —
3 0
a
m o
c
c
o
EE�nc@
mmEa)aN
� �.NajE
Q
U) @= oa
.co3�
0 l
0LL 7
L@"@ @
O--
F' n.� N N
O
F• a) - U "OL
LL �Ow
.N.
Y o
C O_
C
@
cLi3�
a) O
y0 > a)
O ` c
0 O (1)
X O L
N @
@° E
C) � ro
V
N r @
C O m
O
U C O_
w U O
c a
L w
@ 0
a)
a a3
ca)o
U L Y
U)
m aci o
N = O
o�o0
O
m� rn
0@�
0)
c N O
C U a
a)ca
LLw @
wma)
� L
0 3
W moa
N c U m
O N
CL a) ° o
N C O
N X
w O i O
c c
a) .D U O
E Nw�
a) 3 >.
> aC m
O Q) . a
�Y N N
@ c m
O = OU"Q)
L C ._ N
a IL- @ E
'O = O @
oN' 3 0 M o o E o
`a)a)a
H Q) w c
o @ E
a) a) 0
ELLa)
a)ooc3
@ a)
L w w
Cc
@ C a) 0
O N O a)
Q) E
3 rna) o 0
=3O O
O O @ a) O`
z > 2w
K
r
Y O )
o a
0 c
U O
C @ C
@ m,0
a)
a) O �
E 3�
-0
im
@ N O)
a N _O
Y O @
CL T
7 N C
0 L
uj N
o E @
O d
@ O a
3 @ a)
0- 3
o@
C N
E my c
EC
c
> @ o
m U 72
O @
a) L L
L
C6
N
@
N wa)
7
N
N'V
00_
N
m 3
G C
@ E
o
W N
O
c .E
O N
NN
U =3
'- U
C
aE) Q
cw
C a)
a E
E m
as
y 3
c O.
a) m
E �
>
O 0
— o
:i
orte-. C E N ,L.. N m a a) E C ,�
(6 O E N C L
a) O 3 a)
D C O N C U C a) a E '> a) 3 N "p N E
a) : _O .� C E E L O OL . 5< o a) E N p N , .N
E 'O U -O .o m U N o m o F a -p a) L U(D E N `0 "O O m 'p
E Co m° o y m N c m e a) r.� m 0 Q c m o `o
L _
C: a) a) = Lim >mam 3.3oN> V) pOa)mmL 3 0 �N
O C E 'O L .� m C C '� 7 m "O a a) t p 7 a y a) N O N (p 'O m
a) 0 0 a) O .0 a L O �C 7 O C Cy. m Q y0 3 'oo O L N� '> m 7
e o o-aUO)
).cL Z m O N X m °r E o. o c v o c w w c > o N
a= a) N E S ayw a °) m V) ° N c E c p L ar m a) E L m.� L
$� 0c�� m`)oo)9 Ynaci�c >.Emoa-00 CU(D >FEa) o� YL'm
O (a — c m U C aa))
0 0 C C a) .Q O a)7 m m -O m L 3 m a) a) ;z' -C 0 a) E
p m N 3 m Fm a) �' E m O C >' m e C a) N m L w L
v- a) m N w .0 a) L a) 3 U' C O -C 7 'o E � ()
- n m >'� E E 0— 0— c.0 m> a) y p m m a) e c o a) a a) s
M L a) w m a) c o ll a o o m m o m a) p c o w -0p a) ° m •N .� °) r o 3 0
°oomm igE3c� y`'cm.3° tT 3om 0)m000� mr asm
m m e c N O o 7 m o m m a � m L o E
a) E 0 c N O N �= m m y U m@ c r Na 0 a) N m c E Q. mL y E E
X c a) �1 in C OL a m m •p) "O p '-' w a) a) 043 O�~ f0 C 7 o 0 w L O C a) m
m m a N L m 7 t/) -O .- O L a a) Y= N Cn C N— 'N � C C m ) a J U m
0E Ey3mm 3m•E n> m.>_flccm N' mw-_>a� m.n3w°Onm a� mm�
L .D E a) a) m L m c -0 1.0 m m L C M 7 ,�., O C 3 w L m L ❑ -� p O C a) a) 3 U
m 7 X N m ++ C Co a) L "O 'D a) O O p w- O N O a) i) � m = 7 3 E a) N L O �-% O
7 N 0 N 1-0 fO C C 0 -r a) U 7 7 L.. ::. N 'O "O m N > a) — L w o i E °1 C C Q
tY o a)'v o c o mca) omE—o 0 oom E> a)0
x.S1 o)y EN -0a) .cUw33° E=aaai Lmcac. 3c ��F Eo a)o E� a
Q) m 7 E .:+ OL m m m @ L >i N N >. O "O N °) a) 7 o m L a) m m a .,'C.. U a) >
'Fn
A N 3 N m o 0 L_ m a m C t F, 3 C m C C m _r m .. 'O C S Q) C .r- �O .O m m -0 m m O-
O O Zn 5m O O a) o 0)-a a >, O F- O L N row m 0 C C O m J L a) 'L O N N a) O m
C O y a) 0) L 0 0 3 N '� m m Y L_ i 'O '90 7 LO N m N "" L a ,� @ .m �O N C C a)
•m N O N .N O O O O p_'C m, a �O N 'o O 7 C N C C -O N a) '3 ._ Q) O
C O L L 'O '��Qa ,�-, U, E N C N O 'O 3 a) r p m j C m m C m e •O N E— C E a
N a U CL O m U 0 'C L Y a) a) a O = Y� T U � .N w N N� � � E -O (+ m m O N N a)
N O a) Y O C m yaw C T,L O U 7 7 N f6 a) m L O m N L "' C E w
O �'-' N N N O C 'C 3 O N C O p L L p >. 'O ..� O O O m
U C N °) 0)= 'O C >." C N 3 '> a) -O a) 3 L a) N '�- a) C a) m � = :_�
�7oa Y� Nv rno °3aoitmv°)a) �.vm��� r���a3io t��m�a3i� c� 75 >,t'
: U o m N 0 0 V) m t w o�� 0 a) �� a) m aLv >i 'w m ami Y 3 m�° C 7 a a)
C= E o U v a o m u w-0 N 3 m� m� m m° c'N o o 3 E c=� ami o a c°v8 o ax
N O y L a) N m -Op U O a) m m U C N O a) Zn —U C d a, N C
d m a) O L .0 a) C Y C C 'O m m L a) .o i C 3 7 N 'O O 0).o)
m
o o� m L a) - e o o m m.m.4 mY aa) ° m Q L�� a C m'= 7 n >L E
m aim -Coo a) cL oJ--03 v- 3mP?=a)m O. mem
a)aN�3
0) -F .4o�0m 4E:? aa)0)0 O -o maco.° mm rN-
a > Y m Y a) L_ L_ •^ Ill L� t_ a W U U O C> '-' a) m U m L N- m E O N 3
N m O C N 0 3 C c m 0 '" m o >, O L o C a) O L O ..m. C N O> a) O o f C U N
iI Qw S o m o o ro U �CK U9 U po cu o LL _ m mcn 0a>i a m c=
Cl)