Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutP&Z MINUTES APRIL 10, 1996~~ DATE: (041096) Flanning & Zoning 4/10/96 7:00 P.M. Those present: Chairman: John Millar Members: Jim Long Mary Ann Mounts John Watson Richard Smith Davawn Beattie Ted Whyte Roger Muir City Clerk: Rose Bagley Attorney: Stephen Zollinger Council Woman: Marsha Bjornn Engineer: Joe Laird A motion was made by Jim Long and seconded by Ted Whyte to approve the minutes of March 27, 1996. All Aye RE: RESIDENTIAL DRIVEWAY PARKING REQUIREMENTS TOPIC: (400,78,,,DRIVEWAYS,PARKING,ZONING ORDINANCE,RICKS*DEAN, RESIDENTIAL PARKING,SETBACKS) Dean Ricks showed a typical subdivision which was Ricks Palmer (" Subdivision. The two areas in the Zoning Ordinance that was questioned was 5.6 Location on Parking and 4.8 B. Mary Ann suggested that was not the intent. Dean stated that if a driveway had to be behind the setback it would eliminate any landscaping on that side of the house. Mary Ann felt the intent of 4.8 B was we didn't want too much of the front yard put into driveway. (discussion) Joe state he interpreted 5.6 location of parking area "required front yard and required parking" it states required parking for single family dwellings shall not be permitted in the front yard. The required front yard is the space from the right-a-way line 25 feet back the width of the front yard, so you can't have your required parking within the front yard. The required two spaces need to be back of the front setback. Discussion on corner lot parking. (discussion on the re-wording of section 5.6. John Millar stated he did not think our intent was to restrict it to double car garages. (discussion) Joe suggested that if the board does change it, they need to be aware of how it will affect apartment buildings parking areas. That is where we have come up with problems. (discussion) A motion was made by Mary Ann to recommend in LDR and LDR1 adding to 5.6 in the ordinance so it would limit single family structures could have one parking place counted in the setback area per dwelling for the parking requirement. Seconded by Davawn. All Aye • 7`I Ted Hill questioned how they have to landscape with a circular driveway and how do they incorporate it into the landscaping? (discussion) Blaine Shaw asked about townhouses? Had the board taken them into consideration? The people in those townhouses don't want a lot of maintenance and yard work. Mary Ann stated that we have talked about a section on P.U.D's but have not done anything about it and townhouses would be covered under P.U.D.'s. Larry Beesley asked about parking for a duplex? It was suggested that we are in the process of hiring Renee to do a comprehensive plan so she can check out the need for these things. (discussion) A motion was made by Richard to amend Subsection B of Section 4.8 of the Zoning Ordinance striking the language incorporated into the landscaping and in it's place inserting unless a site plan is submitted and approved by the Planning & Zoning Commission. Seconded by Jim. All Aye RE: NEW P & Z BOARD MEMBER NEEDED TOPIC: (400,79,,,PLANNING & ZONING BOARD) John Millar told the board he talked to Eric Erickson and he can't attend very many if any of the meetings for a while. He would like to stay on but if we need a representative to attend the meetings, he would ask to be released. He felt it would be important for a rural r"~ resident non Ag to replace him. Marsha Bjornn suggested the name of Doug Smith. Ted Hill stated that the builders group would like to present the name of Bart Stevens. John told him it would have to be someone in the Impact Zone. The board felt we need to replace him because it is hard to make a quorum at the meetings. Roger recommended that the County Commissioners or City Council appoint someone that is in that area in a like situation of Eric to be in on the Board. (Discussion on who selects the member City or County. Stephen said there is an order that they are appointed and he believed it was the City's turn.) RE: P & Z MEETING AGENDA DISCUSSED TOPIC: (400,79,,,P & Z,AGENDAS) Mary Ann recommended we start discussing Public Issues on one Wednesday of the month probably the 4th Wednesday and have a work meeting only on the 2nd Wednesday because all work items get brushed to the end and we never get any accomplished. Marsha suggested that sometimes we have to have hearings that have to be rushed through. Mary Ann stated if there was an emergency type of situation we could always deal with it at a work meeting, but we still would not have as much on the agenda. A motion was made by Jim Long that we designate the 4th Wednesday meeting for Public Issues and the 2nd Wednesday be a work session unless something urgent comes up. All Aye Sometimes of the year we need to have Public Issues at both meetings. Ted suggested that it might be ` • hard if there is an issue that needs to be done more than once a month. ,;~ • RE: FOOD CENTER AND PARK PLACE PARKING TOPIC: (400,80,,,REXBURG FOOD CENTER,PARK PLACE APARTMENTS,PARKING) Discussion on the parking on the sidewalk at the Food Center and also the landscaping at Park Place. The board felt something needed to be done with both issues. RE: REPORT ON THE SIGN ISSUE BY RAILROAD TRACKS TOPIC: (400,80,,,SIGNS,RAILROADS) Rose gave a report on the sign issue that was brought up at the last meeting. The traffic committee felt the sign should be 150 feet from an intersection and suggested that it not be adjacent to another sign. He will build it to the regulation size and only one sign. Joe had checked for any other signs on the Railroad Right-a-way and only found a couple that were on buildings. Stephen pointed out that they are different than billboard signs. Meeting adjourned. •