Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutP&Z MINUTES MARCH 08, 2000~~~ DATE: (030800) PLANNING & ZONING March 8, 2000 7:00 p.m.- Present: Chairman: Davawn Beattie Members: Raymond Hill Roger Muir LaDawn Bratsman Ted Whyte Doug Smith Mike Thueson P.F.C.: John Millar Council Member :Donna Benfield City Attorney: Stephen Zollinger Excused: John Watson Marilyn Hansen Minutes: Janet Williamson A motion was made by Raymond Hill to approve the minutes of February 23, 2000 with corrections. The motion was seconded by_ Ted Whyte. All voted aye. RE: ALEX MARTIN TOPIC: (500,238,,,SIGN VARIANCE,SIGNS,MAIN STREET,JC PENNEY) John Millar explained that Rocky Mountain Trophy House, located at 7 West Main, will have the J.C. Penney's Catalog business in with them. They have acquired the J.C. Penney sign from Porters and want to put it out front. When they measured the square footage on the front of the building it is just shy of meeting the loo requirement. It is allowed that the sign could be placed on either side of the building but it would detract from the Dance Festival mural on the east side and they would rather have it in front on the Main Street side with their other sign. For these two reasons they are asking for a variance. (Pictures of the sign were shown ). His Rocky Mountain Trophy House sign and the Penney's sign take up about 15o instead of the required 10°s of the square foot frontage. Stephen said that it is not a variance that he needs. You would be granting an exception to the rule. It would be similar to Broulims where we let them take the whole complex and put the signs all in one place rather then spreading it out. Essentially, even though it is a single building,. you would be giving them that type of treatment in an effort to preserve the mural. You would allow him to put the signs both on Main Street under the accumulative square footage equation that we use for complexes. In an effort to preserve the existing Dance Festival Mural, which does not benefit Mr. Martin, and in the interest of community spirit of keeping the mural up, Mike Thueson moved that we grant him an exception ~~~ allowing the sign to go up on Main Street with his other sign. Ted Whyte seconded the motion. All voted aye. RE: GEORGE BENSON APARTMENTS TOPIC: (500,239,,,PLOT PLANS,2ND WEST,3RD SOUTH,BENSON*GEORGE, APARTMENTS) John Millar explained that Planning & Zoning has already granted approval for the building that is currently up. They have made some changes in the scope. The 3 houses are now being moved out and this plan will bring it up to the full development. John has not had a chance to review this plan and so any approval from the board will have to be contingent upon the department heads review. George pointed out changes made from their previous suggestions and answered questions. He figured the parking on 104 girls. He would need 73 spaces and he has 88. It was brought to his attention that the east side may require some set back because it backed up against a residential use. Ted did not like the garbage containers on the street but George said that was the way the City wanted it. It would be too hard to get their trucks in and out of the complex. John said he would try to coordinate that with Farrell. Doug Smith made a motion that they accept the plot plan with the stipulation it be reviewed and approved by all the City Departments. Roger Muir seconded the motion. All voted aye. RE: GLEN WALKER SUBDIVISION REVIEW TOPIC: (500,239,,,WALKER*GLEN,SUBDIVISIONS,QUAIL HOLLOW ESTATES, BARNEY DAIRY ROAD,IMPACT ZONE) John explained that the property is on the Barney Dairy Road, on the North Side, just East of Del Barney's field. It has been before P & Z a couple of times before. Glen explained the plan he had drawn up. They are looking at a 60' right of way through. The reason they did that is that he understands that anything over an acre still has to follow Madison County Sub Division Ordinance and anything under an acre they are subject to Rexburg City. They are in the Impact Zone. It is rural residential. (Zoning Ordinance pg. 79, #10) The lots will all be one acre in size so they have to comply with the county ordinance. It was asked if they were running city services out to it and Glen said they were not. It would not be cost effective. Ted asked what the health department said and Glen said they said there are no problems. There is only one area back by the canal where. there is a grade. The rest of it is level. At the back side of it there is a canal right of way or easement. They left it for them to get to and do their cleaning, etc. It is out of the flood plain. There will be about 21-22 lots. Discussion about septic tanks - District 7 Health wanted them to have the septic tanks on one side and the wells on the other side. Davawn asked John why the City isn't interested in taking services out to them. John said it was the cost and also the Council ~~~ is leaning very heavily toward the concept that they will not provide sewer and water service to areas outside the City limits. They were asked about drainage conditions and Glen said they intend to have grass go right out to the asphalt and they are going to have asphalt not just chip seal. All utilities will be underground. They will be doing it in 2 phases. The road will go in all at once though. It will be 60'. John said it would require a temporary turn around. Glen said they would probably put the road in in one shot and it would not be stubbed off. The homes that front on to Barney Dairy Road will only be accessed from the new road, not from Barney Dairy Road and they will put that in the covenants. The front will have a nice rock wall with a nylon fence. Discussion on City and County requirements Stephen said they could go larger then an acre and the county still would not step in and exercise control. If you were seeking to create a sub division and wanted to go less then the acreage that is the minimum end of the impact zone that you are going into then you have to comply with the City Sub Division Ordinance which then would kick you into curb, gutter, sidewalk, storm drainage, etc. Board comments: Roger and Mike would like to see easements there if the city sewer and water should ever go out there. (Discussion of county and city road and easement requirements). Ted would like to hear from District 7. Mike had concerns about the visibility of the corner lot. Davawn told Glen they had the boards blessing. RE: AIRPORT ZONING ORDINANCE TOPIC: (500,240,,,AIRPORT BOARD,AIRPORT,ZONING ORDINANCE, FAA) John did not have the ordinance ready so they tabled it until next meeting.Discussion: John said in compliance with FAA part 77, which requires any new construction within a designated area to file a form with FAA, there are 4 new homes under construction south of the airport that filed a form. It came back from FAA that they were not a hazard to airway navigation and nothing would be required of them. Those 4 homes are in compliance with FAA requirements. Davawn said they are required to do that anyway so what does the board need to do. John said they were asking the boards opinion or direction for the building permit department as to whether or not we want to require that as part of the building permit process. Stephen said they added that as part of their check list. The thing that is still pending is the ordinance adoption and the issue of whether or not they try to obtain aviation easement or acknowledgment. John said the feeling of the board last time was that with easements or acknowledgments it was more paper work then it was worth. They felt it could become so broad it could go all over town trying to enforce that paper work. It becomes quite a nightmare and does it really give us anything in the end. Roger said the key is the form; that it is in the packet with their building permits. Ted said the building committee had the leeway of deciding whether that needs to be part of the process or not. A home on the ;~ hill doesn't require it. John said even those near the airport, if it's a home in the middle of a bunch of homes, even if it's within a ~J quarter of a mile of the airport, we are not going to require it.Tabled to next meeting. Meeting adjourned. •