Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutP&Z MINUTES JULY 31, 1996~~' f C_ DATE: (073196) Planning & Zoning 07/31/96 7:00 P. M. Those present: Chairman: John Millar Members: Mike Thueson Davawn Beattie Jim Long Ted Whyte Mary Ann Mounts Roger Muir John Watson Doug Smith City Clerk: Rose Bagley Attorney: Stephen Zollinger Councilmember: Bruce Sutherland Engineer: Joe Laird A motion was made by Mike and seconded by Davawn to approve the minutes of 6/26/96. All Aye A motion was made by Davawn and seconded by Jim Long to approve the minutes of 7/10/96. A11 Aye . On the late arrival of John Millar, Mary Ann started the meeting. RE: COURTYARD ADDITION FINAL. PLAT REVIEWED (5TH WEST & MAIN STREET) TOPIC: (400,108,,,COURTYARD ADDITION,FINAL PLATS,HOMESTEAD,5TH WEST, MAIN STREET) Final plat review of the Courtyard Addition on 5th West and Main. Joe showed the plat and explained it. We previously had approved a site plan but they had not submitted a final plat. The only exception they have noted on the plat is the lot width. Joe felt everything else seems to meet the regulations. They will come in for a variance on the percent of concrete at the next meeting. (John Millar arrived) A motion was made by Jim Long that we approve the plat based upon Joe's recommendation that it meets all regulations. Seconded by John Watson (Ted Whyte abstained) All others voting aye. RE: BOWEN & THOMASON PLAT APPROVED TOPIC: (400,108,,,BOWEN & THOMASON,PLATS,RIGHT OF WAY,6TH SOUTH, 3RD WEST,2ND WEST) Bowen & Thomason Plat- Rose took this plat around to all the members and seven approved it, one did not sign and two voted against it. John asked Joe if all the property owners signed the plat. Joe explained they had tried to get everyone within the ground that Bowen and Thomason originally owned to be signatures for the plat so we could get • the right-a-way for 6th South, 3rd West and 2nd West. Bowen and Thomason have already sold off property to nursing home, to Bill Henderson and Bob Lee so in the end what we were able to get is a ~~ r right-a-way for 6th South, 3rd West and part of 2nd West. In sometime in the future we will still have to get a portion shown in pink on the plat for the East, roughly 1/3 of the right-a-way for 2nd West and a little strip on either side if we get our full 90 or 99 foot right-a-way. We do have a 80 foot right-a-way. He further explained the plat. Bob Lee did not sign it because he wanted the city to do the improvements on the street or pay him for it. If Bob Lee wants to develope his land he will have to pay for the improvements. John reminded the group they had already approved the plat when Rose carried it around to the group. A motion was made by Ted Whyte and seconded by Jim Long to approve the Bowen & Thomason Plat. Those voting nay: Doug Smith and Mike Thueson, all others voting aye. Motion passes. RE: ASSISTED LIVING CENTER PLOT PLAN ACCEPTED TOPIC: (400,109,,,ASSISTED LIVING CENTER,PLOT PLANS,FIRE LANES, PARKING,DRAINAGE) Assisted Living Center Plot Plan- Joe explained the plan and showed the site plan, showing the development portion of the lot. The building will be the interior portion with a courtyard. Showing the main entrance on 3rd West. They will have 24 parking spaces which is within the requirements of the ordinance. It is a flat lot on a hill side location so they are cutting down with the slop with 6 to 8 feet on the east and there will be a fill of around 6 feet from the back of sidewalk at another location up to the base of the building. Their ! • driveway coming in is around 3 to 4~ grade. Showing the crushed gravel fire lane that the fire department requested with a 6~ grade. A discussion on the parking and comparing it with the Nursing Home parking. John Millar suggested that we need to review our ordinance, but as far as this unit is concerned it is in compliance with our ordinance. The ordinance requires parking for Multi Family Dwelling for the elderly to be .7 spaces per unit, which would mean 27 parking places. (Suggestion that at a work meeting, we need to review and possibly adjust the parking for a nursing home.) Discussion on gravel fire lane vs a paved road. Discussion on how this unit could be classified. Their staff parking on the biggest shift was 12. John Millar stated he thought the most parking places we can require is 27. A motion was made by Jim Long to accept this plan and require the number of parking places required for Multi Family for the Elderly which would be 27 parking places. (discussion) That they design an additional drainage plan in addition to what they have already shown and that it be so indicated on their site plan. Seconded by Mary Ann. All Aye (discussion on the roads in that area) We need to draft a Drainage Ordinance. Mike Thueson and Ted Whyte left at 8:00 P.M. • // ~ • RE: MILLHOLLOW SUBDIVISION DISCUSSED TOPIC: (400,110,,,MILLHOLLOW SUBDIVISION,IMPACT ZONE,PLATS, ANNEXATIONS,WATER HOOK UP,SEWER HOOK UP) Millhollow Subdivision- Mr Sepherd was at the meeting to discuss the plat. He first discussed their future plans on the rest of their property on the East Side. They own about 30 acres of land. They had bought about 44 acres. The future development will probably be a long time away. This parcel is off the hill of Millhollow and goes into the Gene Palmer property. He wanted to talk about the road situation and future development on the East side. (discussion on the roads and location) Talking about a road through Smith property for access and the Gene Palmer property which would have to be developed first. Mr Sepherd stated that they would not object to an L.I.D. by the three houses indicated which would widen the road. Bruce Sutherland commented on the Millhollow street. About three years ago we suggested an L.I.D. for that street and no one wanted it so the City Council decided that because it the narrowest road in the city and probably the most dangerous, we would not require it at the present time but when the street needs to be repaired then it will be widened. Mr Sepherd indicated the portion that is not in the city but it is in the Impact Zone. If it is annexed into the city then they can require an L.I.D. John Millar stated that with the three lots that are built on now it would be difficult to put in a 100 feet of curb and gutter • south and 200 feet of curb and gutter north and leave those three pieces floating. Mr Sepherd discussed the drainage on Millhollow. John Millar stated that those three lots are not in the city but on city water. The city has a policy now that says that if you want to connect on the city services you will have to be annexed. Mr Sepherd explained that Millhollow was costly because they had to blast a great deal of the way and the city required them to put in a 6" water line and a 12" sewer line. The sale of those lots did not more than cover putting in those lines. They understood at that time that by putting it in under city code they could connect to it. .Roger asked if the county now has a moratorium on sub divisions and the reason for the moratorium is to get the plans through the county and with their requirements they will require the road in the county can we put this on hold? John Millar told him because this is in the Impact Zone it is under our jurisdiction. That was the agreement when we set the Impact Zone. Millhollow Subdivision #2 plat. He explained that two lots were too small so they increased the size of those lots on the north, Lots A & B. A doctor is buying the two lots under contract and is upset with what has transpired. Mr Sepherd told him if he was unhappy about anything they would refund his money. John Millar asked if the four lots that have been built on are in another plat? Mr Sepherd told him they were not. They were sold in leaps and bounds. Joe asked. if they would be signatures to this plat? Mr Sepherd told him they were nat included in this plat. They wrap around these lots. (discussion) Stephen told Mr Sepherd that the state law does not allow plating the • three lots and not including the four. He told him he would have to get those four signatures on this plat, because this was all originally //1 ~• one parcel. When the fifth lot is sold off the original parcel then the entire parcel must be platted. It doesn't mean you get to start platting on the fifth lot. It means if you sell it into more than five pieces you must plat the entire area. Mr Sepherd stated that is why they tried to go around them, they don't own those parcels. Stephen stated you don't have to own them. The way the law reads, they can't object to the plat as long as it does not affect their lot lines. You have to include them in the plat and they have to be signatures on the plat. The statute spells it out quite clearly that they must be included but they cannot raise an objection unless you are tempting to modify their lot lines. The 30 foot piece set back would be objectionable if these four are not willing to go with the 30 foot setback. When you go to the fifth lot you have triggered the requirement that you plat it and that means you plat the entire parcel. It is similar to what they just did with the Ray Walker property. They have platted all but one lot, yet they had to go back and get signatures from all the property owners. If you take the 30 foot right-a-way off and dedicate that which you own and re-draw the plat the lot lines will not be affected. You will dedicate your 30 foot right-a-way which is all you have authority to dedicate. We will have to deal with those property owners when and if the road gets expanded. All that will do is to preclude them from having an abjection. You will still have to get them to sign it, but if they refuse to sign it, the statute provides a method for which you can get it approved without their signatures, but you have to attempt to get . their signatures and show an argument why they are going beyond their authority. John Millar stated that if these problems are cleared up he did not see anything wrong with the plat but the question is with the city council. Do they want this annexed where water and sewer is an issue? (discussion on a small lot) John Millar stated it needs to be understood just because we allow it to be a lot, does not mean we will grant a variance on it sometime in the future for the setback. Those lots are the required size, but part of them are on the hill side. John also stated that we need to direct him exactly what he needs to do to get this passed. (1) is to draw this plat to include all lots with an individua_1 signature block for each property owner. (discussion) Stephen stated that the board does not have to approve the plat at all, because the original owner created the problem. You can require that the original owner go back and fix it. The subdivision was created without a right-a-way. At some point if the city opts to widen that road and the plat is accepted as Stephen had drawn on the plat, then the city will probably have to purchase the 30 foot setbacks for any portion they use. The problem was created when the other four lots were developed. (2) If the city wants this annexed before it is served by water and sewer, which would mean to in order to develope any meaningful annexation you would have to annex a portion of the undeveloped ,, • property on the East side of the road. That would get you around a possibility of conflict with the moratorium on county subdivisions which is coming. If you will redraw it with those lots it would probably be acceptable. He thought we would be okay-with not putting in ~i ~ curb and gutter now. This would have to go before the council with the • wavers being signed. Joe stated that we would have a development agreement that would be signed by you and the city that would spell out whether there would be curb, gutter and sidewalk. The water and sewer would have to be extended across the frontage of the far south lot. A motion was made by Doug Smith if he replats this with the conditions as previously stated by John Millar and brings it back to this group we will consider accepting it. Seconded by Davawn Beattie. All Aye. John Watson reported on the parking lot at the courthouse and also the project at the hospital. Meeting adjourned. •