Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutP&Z MINUTES FEBRUARY 26, 1997~~~~ DATE: (022697} Planning & Zoning 2/26/97 7:00 P. M. Present were: Presiding: Mary Ann Mounts Members: Jim Long John Watson Doug Smith Ted Whyte Mike Thueson Davawn Beattie Roger Muir Excused: John Millar City Clerk: Rose Bagley Attorney: Stephen Zollinger Engineer: Joe Laird Councilwoman: Marsha Bjornn A motion to approve the minutes of January 22 was made by Jim Long and seconded by Mike Thueson. All Aye RE: JARED SOMMER PARKING PLAN TOPIC: (-":^vv,167,,,~vl~"~1ER*JARED,C.TJ.P.,PanuT.^IG) Jared Sommer parking plan. Jared stated (1) there had been a letter written by an adjacent property owner who is concerned about the Conditional Use Permit. He didn't want to proceed with feelings in the neighborhood until they are entirely resolved, or until he knows exactly what is going on. (2} With the parking being the way he will have to create it, they will have to do an adjustment on the layout of the house. They have a conditional purchase on the property, they want at the present time to have a formal denial on the parking plans, until they can present something to the board they can approve. A motion was made by Mike Thueson that we reject this until further modifications are made to the plan because there has not been acceptable proposal made at this time so the Conditional Use Permit can not go to Public Hearing until that proposal is made. Seconded by Jim Long. All Aye RE: REPORT ON P & Z MEETING IN POCATELLO - POLICIES & PROCEDURES TOPIC: (400,167,,,PLANNING & ZONING,PUBLIC HEARINGS,SUBDIVISIONS, FINDING OF FACT) Mary Ann made a report on the Planning & Zoning meeting that she, Stephen, Joe and Rose went to in Pocatello. (hand out to all members of material from that meeting) Somethings that were talked about: (1) You should not talk to anyone when they call you or ask you about something that is going to be discussed or that we are going to have a Public Hearing about at Planning Board. (2) Posting notices of Hearings especially changing Zoning Ordinance or Comprehensive Plan. We need to reach people that do not take the newspaper. (3} The Finding of Fact and Conclusions need to be written up and handed out to the members of the board to make sure everyone agrees with them. Stephen has been ti' doing them, but Rose is going to help with them by comparing them with the minutes so we can get them out faster. (4) A lot of time was spent on Public Hearing procedures. When possible we need to inform the people before they come to the hearing. Besides sending the notices we need to send them an application packet explaining the project. Limit length of testimony and let people know in advance. Jim suggested that when the notice goes out they need to be informed that they are not to contact the Planning Board prior to the meeting. Rose said she could type a form to that affect to mail out. One problem we have had in our hearings is after they have had a turn and people have a question, if their turn has already passed for a question, we can tell them when the applicant gets up he can address that question when he does his rebuttal. We need to stick with the basis format. We need to not rush the hearings through but give them time to get all the information in. Mary Ann suggested that they told us at the meeting we should not hurry to make a decision but take the time we need. We should never feel the pressure that we feel so often. They said we should not have written in our ordinance that we should act on anything by a certain amount of time, only a reasonable amount of time and bring it back on the agenda after a certain amount of time. If we go view a site with a quorum, we can't unless we take a tape recorder or someone to take minutes. We can view it one at a time. If we receive letters in enough time they can be mailed out or make a summary at the meeting. Jim suggested that we get that information to contractors. We need to give people an idea at tlicir CaiaiiCe f^vr ~uCC2SS .before }hey Pay their mo;;ey. .Tnc c~wgnyoctVar~ that at the meeting they felt we should hold public hearings on Subdivisions. (Stephen discussed the pro & con of this. Ted Whyte discussed what had happened in Sugar City.) (Additional paragraph on this topic on page 169) RE: GREASE MONKEY SIGN VARIANCE APPROVED TOPIC: (400,168,,,GREASE MONKEY,SIGNS,VARIANCES,YOUNG SZGN COMPANY) Public Hearing 7:30 P. M. regarding proposed issuance of a variance to the owners of the property at 582 North 2nd East, the property commonly known as the Grease Monkey. The variance would allow for the placement of a sign nearer the lot line than is provided for in the zoning ordinance. Jerry Steadman representing Young Sign Company was at the meeting to discuss the placement of the sign. They placed the sign at the Grease Monkey. Joe had informed them there should be a 28' side setback from the property line. They measured from the curb rather than the property line. The concern they had is if they had. gone the extra 10' they were suppose to go there was a concern about R.V.'s when they came around to be serviced in the winter time clipping the edge of the sign that was that close to the landscaped area. There is still 40' from the curb to the other curb where Kentucky Fried Chicken is. He has been in the sign business for 25 years and had never had to deal with aside setback for a sign like that. On a frontage on the highway or over hanging city property, they are still 18' into the property with the sign. There was an error on their part but they feel it serves the property owner the best as well as the community. i a • Mary Ann stated that part of the problem is with the placement of the power pole. Mr Steadman stated that there is a power pole close there that they are trying to avoid blocking the vision of the sign. The closer you get to the power pole the more .visual barrier the power pole is. The board discussed the reason for allowing a variance: (1) The request was for 28' setback from neighboring property. There is currently a 28' setback from curb on the South to sign structure. (2) The over head power lines and telephone poles have limited where placement of the sign can go. Utah Power already required the sign to be lower than designed. (That is a hardship he did not create.) (Putting the sign lower would make it so an R.V. could clip it.) (3) ----- (4) The setback of sign and current location, do not conflict with Walmart and there is no neighbor on the North. Mike because he had to lower the sign it would be a reason for the site of the sign. Stephen stated had they been allowed to build this and configure the lot like they had originally wanted, this sign would have automatically been put beyond the 28'. They wanted the driveway up against Walmart. The driveway was changed because the board requested it. This request created a physical constriction of their property that pushed them back toward the south. He stated that they did meet the requirements of a hardship. A motion was made by Davawn Beattie to g-rant the variance because of bards hip. SeC.^.nd~d by iT~hn T7atcCn~ Dl l Aye. RE: CHANGES TO ZONING ORDINANCE 725 APPROVED TOPIC: (400,169,,,ZONING ORDINANCE,PUBLIC HEARINGS) 7:45 P. M. Public Hearing pertaining to the proposed changes to the Planning & Zoning Ordinance known as Ordinance 725. These changes are housekeeping changes on changes made by this board within the last year. (discussion) Stephen told them it is just a codification of what has already been voted on. A motion was made by Davawn Beattie to recommend the changes that have been recorded. All Aye Mary Ann continued to discuss the meeting on Planning and Zoning she had attended. They suggested that the chairman go around the table and ask each member for their comments before each member gave their comment they would be given a time limit as decided upon by the board. Even though we limit the amount of time people speak at the hearings, we are never to limit the. amount of time we take for deliberation. They talked about putting in mitigation provisions in our subdivision ordinance for impact fees. RE: C.U.P. FOR CALVIN WENDELBOE FOR APARTMENT IN HOME APPROVED TOPIC: (400,169,,,C.U.P.,WENDELBOE*CALVIN,APARTMENTS,SHOSHONE, PUBLIC HEARINGS) 8:00 P. M. Public Hearing for Calvin Wendelboe to be issued a Conditional Use Permit for the property 220 South Shoshone to allow an apartment in the home he was planning on building. Mr Wendelboe showed the plans for the house and the plot plan. They are planning to have this for a mother-in-law apartment but prior to that it will be rented . out for a single family apartment. Mr Wendelboe explained that the existing covenants provide for the request for an apartment. (reading from the covenants) It does require for a rear entrance and parking. Prior to the hearing he had individually spoke to the neighbors and had no negative feed back. He did go back with a petition and got 27 households to sign and agree to the apartment. Mary Ann asked if the Indian Hi11 Architecture Committee had made any comment? Wendell said he had talked to John Bowen, who stated, they had reviewed the plan and liked it but the committee felt that the residents would object to it so they did not feel we should put an apartment in. Mary Ann told him that was the reason we don't go around and get a petition signed anymore. This is addressed in the law. They are all notified and can come to this hearing and testify and no one is at this hearing to testify against it. A copy of a letter to Mr Wendelboe was mailed to the board but it was not addressed to the board. (discussion on the use of the apartment, definition of a family and parking) There was no further discussion from anyone at the meeting or from the board. A motion was made by Jim Long to grant the conditional use permit for the apartment and that he will have to comply with the restrictive covenants of the Subdivision. Seconded by Ted Whyte. All Aye RE: PLAT FOR RICKS PALMER SUBDIVISION PHASE 4 APPROVED TOPIC: (400,170,,,PLATS,RICKS PALMER SUBDIVISION) Dave Waldren, Forsgren Associated, presented a Plat for Ricks Palmer Subdivision Phase 4. The preliminary plat had previously been approved but this is a revision of the plat. After showing the plan and discussing it with Joe he had made the suggested changes. (1) Joe would like to see the water line and the sanitary sewer line ran to Hillside Drive and stubbed in .with a valve and cap. When they first started out with this project, it was their belief that Mr Palmer owned the property out to the east bank of the canal. In doing final research they found the lots adjoining that extend out into the farm ground that Gene had been farming, does not belong to Gene but to the adjoining property owners. (2) The placement of two fire hydrants. Regulations require that a fire hydrant be 500' adjacent to the nearest fire hydrant. So they will shift the fire hydrants to meet code. (3) To switch the side of the road the water and sewer lines are on Susan Drive. (4) A concern was the exact location of the existing water lines that we will be tieing into. When previously done these water lines were actually under the sidewalks, but they will jog them out to the asphalt. (5) Joe would like to see a 20' radius placed in Lot 8 of Block 6, that way when Barney Dairy road gets fully developed and Hillside Drive is fully developed there will be room to for curb, gutter and sidewalk. This property is abutting the property in the county., (Discussion on right-a-ways, ownership of abutting property, storm drainage.) A motion was made by Davawn Beattie to approve the plat with the five recommendations for changes made by Joe which were addressed in this meeting. Seconded by Mike Thueson. All Aye y ~ ~ I ~ ' ,~ Mary Ann told the board to all go out and look at the different planting strips around the city. A motion was made by Jim Long and seconded by Davawn Beattie to adjourn. All Aye. • • FINDINGS OF FACT FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR CALVIN WENDELBOE 1. In January 1997, Mr Calvin Wendelboe came to the City Hall to talk to the city clerk about putting an apartment in a house he was going to construct on South Shoshone Avenue. The city clerk told him that was zoned L.D.R. l and he would have to get a Conditional Use Permit prior to building an apartment in the house in that zone. Mr Wendelboe was given an application to fill out for the Conditional Use Permit. When he returned the application to the city clerk, she mailed it to all the Planning & Zoning members. 2. On 1/22/97 Mr & Mrs Wendelboe came to the Planning & Zoning meeting to request a Conditional Use Permit to allow him to build an apartment in a new home, he was going to build on Shoshone. They would like to have the apartment for an elderly parent but would like to rent it to a couple during the interim period before they needed it for the elderly parent. The Planning Board told him they would schedule it for a Public Hearing. 3. On February 26, 1997 at 8:00 P. M., a Public Hearing was held regarding the proposed issuance of a Conditional Use Permit to provide for Mr Wendelboe to construct a home with a single family apartment in the basement. The property is currently in a L.D.R.l Zone. The property is locaed at approximately 220 South Shoshone Avenue. Mr Wendelboe showed plans for the home and for the parking. He would be required to have two parking places for his family and two parking places for the apartment, making a total of four parking places. (1) Mr Wendelboe had talked to John Bowen from Indian Hills, who liked the plan but was afraid residents would object to it. Mr Wendelboe checked with most of the neighbors who gave , positive comments and he got a petition signed by neighbors who were not against the apartment. T herE was a copy of a leer to 1Vfir Wendelboe but not addressed to the board against u'~e apartment. Mr Wendelboe read from the Protective Covenants of that subdivision which would allow the apartment with a rear entrance and off street parking. No one was at the meeting to object to the Conditional Use Permit. (2) A motion was passed to grant the Conditional Use Permit for the apartment and that he will have to comply with the restrictive covenants of the subdivision. ~~~ ' ~ FINDING OF FACT FOR VARIANCE ISSUED TO THE GREASE MONKEY (1) On 2/14/96 Larry Hudson, Mountain River Engineering, presented site plans for the Grease Monkey to be built north of Walmart. On 2/28/96 a Public Hearing for annexation was held and final plans for the Grease Monkey were reviewed. In the review of the plans the Planning Board required that they put the road on the North side of the building instead of the South side. After changing the road they would need to shift the building. (2) On September 6, 1996, Young Sign Company applied for a Sign Permit to construct a sign for the Grease Monkey located at 582 North 2nd East. Joe Laird, City Engineer/Building Inspector, approved the application for a sign and they were given permission to start the construction of the sign. When our Building Officials went to that location to check on the construction, they found the cement had been poured and the sign was not in compliance with our Sign Ordinance. It was too close to the property line. Mr Laird notified Young Sign Company that they were in violation of the Ordinance. (3) Jerry Steadman representing Young Sign Company came into the City Hall and talked to the city clerk, who gave him an application to apply for a Variance for the sign because the sign could not be closer to the property line than 28'. The city clerk mailed to all the Planning & Zoning Board a copy of the application. (4) On November 23, 1996, Mr Jerry Steadman representing Young Sign Company, was at the (5) On 2/26/97 a Public Hearing was held by the Planning Board regarding the issuance of a variance to provide that the owners of the property at 582 North 2nd East, the property commonly known as the Grease Monkey be granted a variance to allow for the placement of a sign nearer the lot line than is provided for irl the ordinance. The reasons the board. found for granting a variance due to a hardship he did not create are: (1) The over head power lines and telephone poles have limited where placement of where the sign could go. Utah Power already required the sign to be lower than designed. (2) Putting the sign lower would make it so an R.V. could clip the sign. (3) If they had been allowed to build the building and configure the lot Iike they had originally wanted, this sign would have automatically been put beyond the 28'. They wanted the driveway up against Walmart. The drieway was changed because this board requested it. This request created a physical constriction of their property that pushed them back toward the south. Stephen stated that they did meet the meet the requirements of a hardship. A motion was passed that they be granted a Variance. f' Planning & Zoning meeting to request the variance. He told the board they had made a mistake and measured from the curb instead of the property line so the sign is 28' from the Walmart curb instead of the property 1111e. 111 the application grid at the meeting Mr Steadman stated that because of the layout of the property and the placement of power lines and telephone poles, space was limited where the sign could be located. He also pointed out that if they went the extra 8 feet there is a question when trucks and R.V.'s come through the driveway if they would clip the sign if it met the setback requirement. It was voted at that meeting to go to public hearing for a variance.