Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutP&Z MINUTES SEPTEMBER 13, 2000~~~ DATE: (091300) PLANNING & ZONING September 13, 2000 7:00 p.m. Present: Chairman: Members: P.F.C. Council .Member City Attorney: Others: Excused: Davawn Beattie Ted Whyte LaDawn Bratsman Raymond Hill John Watson Bobbette Carlson Riley Bowman Gary Steiner Doug Smith Roger Muir John Millar Donna Benfield Stephen Zollinger Marsha Bjornn Nyle Fullmer Janet Williamson (minutes) Marilyn Hansen, City Clerk Mike Thueson Ted made a motionto approve the minutes of August 23, 2000. Riley seconded the motion. All voted aye; none opposed. RE: PUBLIC HEARING FOR PARKING ORDINANCE TOPIC: (500,274,,,PUBLIC HEARINGS,PARKING ORDINANCE,PARKING SPACES, PARI~TG,RICKS COLLEGE,STUDENT HOUSING,APARTMENTS,PARKING LOTS) Stephen read the Notice of Public Hearing. John read the changes which are as follows: Residential Use Single Family Dwellings Multi-Family DweIlings Student Housing Multi-family dwellings for elderly Nursing Homes Parking Spaces 2 spaces per unit 2.5 spaces per unit 1.2 spaces per student 0.7 spaces per unit plus maximum staff .25 per bed plus maximum staff 1 p) ~.~ Motels and Hotels 1.00 per sleeping room, 10% accommodation for 40' vehicles Davawn opened the meeting to public comment. Paul Lafollette - 106 Birch He-needed aclan-ftcation-of the- changes - If a single family-only needs 2 why 2.5 each for-a multi family. (Family renting the basement). It was explained that it was to allow for snow removal and visitors. All existing multi-family units would be grand fathered and only required to have 2 per family. Duplex, triplex, etc. fall under the multi-family requirement. Keith Nellesen -Provo He questioned the position of adding the .5 per family for visitors on multi family and not on single family. The visitors cannot be the reason unless you are saying that single families don't get visitors. This seems like an undue burden placed on multi-family dwellings. Also, you need to look at a site plan and see how much land is associated with parking and green space and how much with the building. If you raise it by 1/z space then you have to tack on the green space. requirement for the project and now to go build a project you are adding 20 - 30 percent more land. Stephen said that statistically your chances are twice as great that a 2 family unit is going to have 3 cars in one of those houses as opposed to 2. With every unit your chances of having more then 2 cars is greater. Keith Romney -Salt Lake City, Utah He has been working with a contractor in Provo and their ordinance is 1 per student and they have done a survey and those close to the school have vacant spots...many are walking to school. He suggested that there might be some lee~ray with projec±s closer to school where students wouldn't need cars, that the parking requirement might be less. There might be some way to modify the ordinance, that within 5 blocks of campus there would be a different ratio. At 1.2 you are almost doubling the parking and he feels this might be over kill. Keith Nellesen wanted to address the issue of 1.2. The college has adopted a new policy that if you are not currently on the Ricks College Housing List, that to get on the list you have to up grade your parking to the new standard. He feels that the problem is not created by those with a .7 parking requirement but those with .4 or less and the school is surrounded by all of these older complexes that are inadequate for todays parking rules. George Benson -Rexburg Contractor He has built several complexes and has never seen one filled and wonders why the increase. Davawn explained that we have talked to other cities and they are above ours now. We da have a problem with parking. Our winters with no parking on the streets and our snow removal create big problems. 2 ~~~P Brent Esplin - (Lives in Salem; works at 90 S. l~ W) His concern is that as they drive around the campus where there are apartments all of the on street parking is taken and that is all the parking that they have for customers. Arguing a little on the other side, they are definitely concerned about students taking all that parking. Paul Lafollette - He feels that the grand fathering is a great idea but would like to suggest that it doesn't help with places that are very low and he thinks it would be a good idea to say that they need to upgrade. George Benson asked if you could ratio it further out from campus. Stephen said that legally you could not do this. Keith Neilsen said that the greatest changer is the market. The market could force people to fix it. If we get to the point where students begin to demand more parking that could be the point where things change. People will have to start allowing fewer students. They have a complex that will house 210 students. There are not 2i0 in it because the market said they will no longer live 6 to a room with 1 bathroom so they have changed their demographics. Stephen said the students are speaking out. As a prosecutor he gets calls all winter long from students that are mad at the city because we are ticketing them for parking on the street. We refer them back to their landlord and their landlord refers them back to us. Bavid Bigelow -Rigby He asked if the laws are being enforced. He feels 1.2 is over kill He thinks there are a lot of students walking. Keith Nellesen said a lot of locals are driving here and parking on the street because the college doesn't provide parking. Ric Page said there are places up by the Taylor Building and the Kimball Building. David Bigelow asked if landlords could have it in the contracts that they could not have cars and if Ricks could enforce it. This was tried and it didn't work. JohnWatson said that we don't seem to have a big problem with most commercial places and places like the hospital, jail, etc. because the ordinance requires a significant amount of parking before they can build a building. They automatically build in a significant amount of parking. Multi-family and student complexes are thinking "economy" and want as many units on as many floors with the least amount of parking. He feels that even complexes with .7 spaces is not adequate. He is definitely in favor of the 1.2. John Millar offered to have the engineering staff review some of the lots in the evening counting how many spaces there are, how many vacant, etc. Ted Whyte said he has already done this. On August 29~' (first day of school) at 9:OOp.m: • ~~7 Royal Crest Full Brookside Colonial Not Full Nauvoo House Heritage Manor Full Birch Plaza Carousel Court Full Sommerset Riviera Full Centennial Princeton Court Full Harmony House Snowview Full Sunrise Village Pineview 8 spaces Bunkhouse Birch Gold Full (had to back out) Davenport Full (had to back out) 10 spots Nat Full Overfull Overfull plus street Full 5 spaces Full (couldn't get out) Full (couldn't get out) Snow removal is one of our biggest problems. John had mentioned that the green space could be used for snow removal but the design a lot of times doesn't facilitate that. Ric Page from college housing said that they require that the apartment owners meet the city ordinance right now or if they are an existing structure they meet the .7 to get on the list. Doug Smith made a motion to accept the ordinance with the suggested changes. Bobbette seconded the motion. All voted aye. None opposed.. RE: PUBLIC HEARING FOR KEITH NELLESEN ZONE CHANGE AT 75 SO. 1ST WEST TOPIC: (500,277,,,PUBLIC HEARINGS,NELLESEN~`KEITH,ZONE CHANGES, lsT WEST, H.D.R.,A.D.A.,APARTMENTS) Stephen read the Notice of Public Hearing. John made a clarification on the legal description saying it is a portion of lot 3 and a portion of lot 4. He explained where this change is located and said it is contiguous with the existing HDR. Keith Nellesen said they are building a beautiful complex. They added the additional 1/2 acre in the back. It makes the project better. It makes parking and access better. They could still do the project as it stands but adding the 1/2 acre enhances the complex. Davawn entered in to the minutes a letter from Steve Hart. (Copy was given to all the board members) Brent Esplin -works at 90 S. 1St W. Along with what Steve says in his letter they want to make sure that their customers are not forced out of their parking spaces. If parking does become a problem he hopes they could change it so they could have reserved spots off street. Public hearing closed. They are in excess of the .7 requirement and they over comply with the ADA requirements. 4 They fall under the old parking ordinance. Ted Whyte recommended they send this to the city council to be approved. John Watson seconded the motion. All voted aye. None opposed. RE: PUBLIC HEARING FOR ANNEXATION OF LDS CHURCH AT 1545 W. 1000 SOUTH TOPIC: (500,278,PUBLIC HEARINGS,ANNEXATIONS,LDS CHURCH,1000 SOUTH) Stephen read the Notice of Public Hearing. It was explained that this annexation was only for the LDS church property and none of the residential surrounding area. Rus VanAllen - 932 S. 1952 W. He is okay with the Stake Center being annexed but many of them already spent thousands of dollars putting in their own water and sewer and he is concerned that this is some type of creeping annexation. Bill Tietjen - 161.2 W. 930 S. District 7 Health Department requested that he be to this meeting. They have 10 of those homes on 1 well there and 10 homes qualify as a small community and they put a lot of pressure on the health department to do all kinds of tests and updates, The Health Department would really like to see these homes get on city water so it is out of their hands. Thzse people need to knpuv what it would cost them to be annexed in terms of do they have to come up to standard as far as curb and gutters; if they do go with water and sewer what is an estimated cost for each home, etc. Public hearing was closed. Doug Smith moved that they recommend to the City Council that the LDS church be annexed. Roger Muir seconded the motion. All voted aye. None opposed. RE: GENE PALMER HIDDEN VALLEY SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL TOPIC: (500,278,,,PALMER*GENE,HIDDEN VALLEY,PRELIMINARY PLATS, SUBDIVISION PLATS) John Millar said this has been reviewed with the department heads and the additional information required has been submitted. All questions have been addressed. (Discussion) Raymond Hill moved that they approve the preliminary plat. Roger Muir seconded the motion. All voted aye. None opposed. RE: DAVID BIGELOW SITE PLAN APPROVAL TOPIC: (500,278,,,BIGELOW*DAVID,3RD WEST,STH SOUTH,SITE PLANS, APARTMENTS,PRELIlvIINARY SITE PLAN) John explained the location of this project at 5t'' South and 3`d West and said that the City 5 ~~~ Departments have reviewed it. David said he has townhouse apartments designed so he could go either way -student housing or married student housing. The first one is a 4 plex, the second . one will have 23 units (82-96 students) John Watson was uncomfortable with the design plans and felt there was not enough information. (Discussion -Reviewed requirements on page 49 & 50 in the Zoning Ordinance). There was some confusion as to what the board was supposed to do. John said Mr. Bigelow went through our ordinance and met the requirements. The Ordinance does not require that the site plan be drawn by an engineer or surveyor. He is here for a site plan review. Ted Whyte moved that they approve the preliminary site plans. Gary Steiner seconded the motion. Voting aye: Ted Whyte LaDawn Bratsman Raymond Hill Bobbette Carlson Riley Bowman Doug Smith Roger Muir Gary Steiner Opposed: John Watson. Meeting was adjourned. 6