Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutP&Z MINUTES FEBRUARY 05, 2004~~~ CITY OF REXBURG PLANNING AND ZONING MINUTES Thursday February O5, 2004 7:00 p.m. Chairman: Winston Dyer Members: Robert Schwartz Mike Ricks Mary Haley Steve McGary -Excused Jerry Hastings David Stein Joseph Laird Portions of the meeting were recorded Winston Dyer welcomed the Government students to the meeting. Consent Agenda: The consent agenda includes items which require formal Planning ,\ ~ Commission action, however they are typically routine or not of great controversy. Individual Commission members may ask that any specific item be removed from the consent agenda for discussion in greater detail. Explanatory information is included in the Planning Commission's agenda packet regarding these items. a) Minutes from the January 22na 2004, meeting Winston Dyer welcamed Heather Westenzweig from the Madison County Planning Department. She came to introduce herself to the Planning Commission as the new County Planning Coordinator. Winston Dyer welcomed the Scouts to the meeting. David Stein asked to clarify his comments on page 10 of the prior minutes. He was referring to the small housing development Ordinance being developed by the City of Driggs. The City worked with a developer to create an Ordinance to allow a small housing development in the City of Driggs. Jerry Hastings moved to approve the minutes with the requested changes for January 22, 2004; Mike Ricks seconded the motion; all vote aye, none opposed. The motion carried. r Noncontroversial Items Added to the Agenda: None Winston Dyer asked to add discussion on a section in the Planning and Zoning Ordinance. Mike Ricks requested a discussion of the International Building Code concerning a double wall or air space to cut down on noise between units. Zoning Compliance: Kurt Hibbert indicated that there is an apartment compliance issue still pending. Winston Dyer indicated that the record will show that we have Laws- for Zoning Compliance and those that are not willing to abide by the law will answer to the law. Public Hearings: None New Business: None Unfinished/Old Business: Site Plan Review for an office extension of 12' at 76 Professional Plaza -Kent Archibald Winston Dyer explained the history for this proposal. Kent came before the Planning and Zoning Commission and asked for guidance on the potential expansion of his building on May 22, 2002. Near the end of the meeting the minutes inaicate that Kent was asking for an exploratory discussion on how to proceed with the potential expansion of the office building. There was some pretty good input given on the project. The Commission quickly identified some concerns on that particular site plan. The minutes indicate that the effort on that evening was strictly advisory. It was not brought as a formal site plan before the Planning Commission. Therefore, there was not an official voting action by the Planning Commission. There was guidance given and there was instruction to work with the City Staff on some of the issues that were identified at the time. The Staff did work with the applicant through the approval of the site plan for the development. The applicant obtained a building permit after City Staff approval of the site plan. Those site plans associated with a Professional Overlay in a Residential Zone are mandated to come before the Planning Commission. We will try to resolve the concerns of the public with an official Planning Commission review of the site plan tonight. Winston Dyer proceeded to get public input on the site plan that was approved by the City Staff. Kurt Hibbert reviewed the site on the overhead screen. He reviewed the location of the addition to the building that is being built on the structure. 2 Dr. Kent Archibald -1325 South 2nd East with an office at 76 Professional Plaza -offered a time line of the events that culminated in the site plan approval process with the City Staff. On May 17, 2002, Kent met with Val Christensen to discuss the proposed building expansion. They talked about expanding the office to the east, north, south, and west. Val's comment was that the building would be difficult to extend to the south because of the location of the buildings on 1St South. On May 22, 2002, Kent came to the Planning and Zoning meeting and asked for the Commission's opinion for expansion to the south. Kent indicated that the Commission indicated the same answer in that a south expansion would not be feasible because of the other buildings location on that street. The Planning Commission did recommend that an expansion to the east could be done by using an average of the setbacks in that direction. The initial request was to expand the building 12 feet to the east. After measuring the other building location from the right-of--way to the east, Kent shrunk his expansion on the front of the building. His desire was to match and comply with what the Planning and Zoning Commission would approve. Kent proceeded to prepare a site plan as recommended by the City Staff and seek John Millar's approval before finishing the building plan and ob±aining a building permi±. On January 10, 2003 Kent met with John Millar to review the site plan. John indicated that there was a problem with the foot print of the building allowing only a 5 foot set back from Dr. Smith's property. John indicated that the side set back would have to be 6 foot. To correct the problem with the set back, Kent acquired some property from Dr. Smith. John indicated that the front set back was OK per City Staff approval. Kent had the building plan drawn at that point for approval by the Building Department. On April 10, 2003, Kent picked up the forms for a building permit and • reviewed them with Val Christensen. Val provided a list of requirements (four pages) that the Architect would need for the building design. Val indicated that Kurt Hibbert would need to approve the proposal for the expansion of the building. Later that day Kent met with Kurt to verifiy the set backs on the site plan. Kurt had the file fro~Yn the previous meeting to review. Kurt verified the measurements for the set backs. Kurt indicated that there were a couple of other Staff members that would need to review the plan. Kurt thought that the plan would be approved. On Apri125th, Kent went to City Hall to obtain the building permit. Blair Kay indicated that Val had been out of the office for a week. Kent left the building permit packet with the City at that point. Kent was told to bring in the energy calculations and a full set of the building plans. On May 02, 2003, Kent delivered the plans. and energy calculations to Blair Kay. Almost a week later on May 08, 2003, Kent called Val to get the status of the building permit application. Val did not have the information together at that point, so Kent came to City Hall on the 09th of May, 2003. Val was leaving and referred Kent to Blair Kay. Blair was not in so Kent talked to John Millar. John was unable to find the file and he indicated that he would personally follow through on Monday. On May 12th Val indicated by a phone call that there was a letter in the mail to Kent with a copy of the letter available at City Hall. By June 03rd, Kent had completed three or four other requested changes to the City Staff. Winston Dyer asked Kent if these issues related to the building plan or the site plan. Kent indicated that they were building plan issues. 3 i` `- On June OS`~ the building permit was issued for Kent's office expansion. Kent indicated that his contractor had already moved onto other projects, so his building expansion project did not get started until the first part of December, 2003. Kent commended the City Staff for their work on the request. He indicated that there are a lot of hoops to jump through now compared to when he first built 25 years ago, The -Staff was very helpful to Kent to get through those hoops. The Staff are not the ones that made those hoops either. They did a good and job and Kent was appreciative for all of their help. Kent indicated that is was a frustrating process. Mary Haley asked Kent if it was suggested that he should bring this proposal before the Planning Commission for approval. Kent was under the impression from that first meeting with the Planning and Zoning Commission that he was to work with the City Staff and follow through with the request and if he did that, the Staff would make sure that it was done correctly. Randall Porter asked about the alignment with other buildings on the street on the south side of the building. Kent indicated that the expansion proposal to the south would not line up with the other houses on that st*eet. They are ir_ alianmPrt now, as requested by the Planning Commission. Winston Dyer indicated that the Zoning Code does allow the Commission to turn site plan reviews over,to the Staff, except in Professional Overlay Zones. Most site plan reviews are allowed to go directly to Staff and bypass the Commission altogether. Although it has been the desire of the Commissioners to have a better understanding of the developments going on in Rexburg, the recent growth of the City has caused an overload for the Planning Commission. Due to this overload, it was determined that the Staff could review this site plans. Mary Haley did ,indicate that the Staff should have known t hat this site plan needed Planning and Zoning Commission approval. This has been a very controversial area. Winston Dyer thanked Kent Archibald for coming into the meeting. Randall Porter asked about the Professional Overlay Zoning. Mary indicated that Professional Overlay can be an LDR/LDRl Zone. Kurt indicated that it was in an LDRl Zone. Andrew Sparhawk - 37 South 3rd East -represents his parents, Don and Marsha Sparhawk, Andrew spoke and read a letter from Don and Marsha. Andrew read a letter into the record which indicated that the building did not conform to the set backs in the Zoning Ordinance for Rexburg. The letter was dated February O5, 2004: Andrew read the letter that was addressed to the Planning and Zoning Commission. The letter mentioned that Don and Marsha apologized for not being present to the meeting because they were out of town on business. Even though the construction project for Dr. Archibald is largely under way, they thanked the Commission for holding a site plan review of the project to ensure that the project complies with the regulations that are outlined in the Rexburg Planning and Zoning Ordinance. They are very concerned with the set backs and parking for this building. They reviewed the LDRl set back requirement of 25 4 feet. Section 4.9 of the Zoning Ordinance allows an exception to this set back requirement as follows: 4.9 Rxception to Setback Requirement.. When fifty percent (SQ%) or more of the lots on the same side of the street have been built, all buildings erected, established, or rebuilt shall be in conformity with the averaged setback of such buildings. In all Residential Zones all buildings erected, established, or rebuilt shall be required to place sidewalks a minimum of seven (7) feet behind the curb and gutter, where conditions permit. In new residential subdivisions the front yard setback may be changed to twenty feet (20). In all zones the-area between the curb and gutter and the sidewalk is to be landscaped. Andrew Sparhawk continued to read from the letter: The Sparhawks letter indicated that they did not know where the actual property lines were located. They recently measured the setbacks for the buildings on the west side of Harvard Avenue in the area know as Professional Plaza starting at Dr. Heiner's building on the north to Dr. Archibald's building on the south. The measurements were from the side walk to the building wall. They found the following: Dr. Archibald's existing building 17' S" to the sidewalk Dr. Smith's building 27' 4" to the sidewalk Dr. Merrill's building 8' 8" to the sidewalk Targhee Medical building (midsection) 15' 8" to the sidewalk Dr. Heiner's building 82' The average set back for these buildings is 30 feet. The average with Dr. Heiners's building at 25 feet is 18.8 feet. Dr. p~rc?~.ibald's new addition is set back 7' S" from the side•~:~alk. This is less than any other building on the west side of the street. They indicated in the letter that it is essential that Dr. Heiner's office be included in this average. His office is located on the north end of the same block and exemplifies the building that complies with the proper set back of 25 feet as required in the Zoning Ordinance. While the Sparhawks researched the issue, they came across City Ordinance 824 that was approved in 1999. This Ordinance deeded back property from the street to the property owners on the west side of the street. They made the assumption that this property adjustment was included in the City's set back measurements. The Sparhawk letter addressed the parking concerns they have with the Archibald building and in the Professional Plaza in general. They asked the City to address these concerns before additional construction is allowed in the Professional Plaza. They reiterated a past conversation with an employee of Dr. Archibald, who indicated that parking was limited for the needs of the office. They wish to protect their residential neighborhood from further encroachment from commercial development. They asked the Planning Commission to follow the Planning and Zoning Ordinance and enforce the laws as they currently stand for the Archibald development. ~'`~ Winston Dyer thanked the Andrew and asked if any one in the room was from the East Main Neighborhood Association or the general public who would like to provide additional input on this matter. Winston indicated that there have been ongoing discussions on this issue for four to six weeks with letters on this issue. Winston mentioned a letter on the 23rd of January and the Commissioners indicated that the letter they have is on the 04'~ of February, 2004. There was a letter in response to the issues from Val Christensen in the Building Department. In addition to the concerns raised tonight with set backs and parking, the letter raised the third issue of the green space requirement. Winston indicated that the Commissioners could review the site plan that has been given to them. Randall- Porter reviewed article 4.9 of Chapter 4 as noted above in the Zoning Ordinance 725. He mentioned Ordinance 824 which deals with a partial vacation of some of the street in the Professional Plaza. They reviewed Val Christensen's letter to the Sparhawks. Randall asked to review page 34 of the Zoning Ordinance. Winston Dyer read section 4.9 concerning the 50% allowance far buildings on the same side of the street on page 34 of the Zoning Ordinance. David Stein reviewed the original set back of 17 feet for the building and the new set back of 8 feet for the Archibald addition which is under construction. Jerry Hastings asked if Harvard Avenue turned into Professional Plaza. John Millar indicated that the Professional Plaza access is publicly owned. John has struggled with the definition of the location for a long time. If he had to classify it, he would classify it as a City parking lot. Winston Dyer indicated that it is germane to what the Commission is discussing. John Millar indicated that the Professional Plaza area is not considered a City Street on the City's maps. He called it a parking lot. John indicated that the side yard setback would be applicable in the Zoning Ordinance. Mary Haley asked why Doctor Lovell's building was not in compliance with the Zoning Ordinance. John indicated that it was built before he became an employee of the City. Mary indicated that the City is in the same position with the Archibald building being under construction with a site plan that is out of compliance. Winston Dyer asked Kurt to explain the City's position on set backs. Kurt used the overhead screen to discuss the Archibald application for building expansion. s ~ ;' • Winston Dyer asked far a discussion on the right of way that was vacated by the City on the Profession Plaza in 1999 under Ordinance 824. John reviewed the sidewalk and the set back for both sides of the Professional Plaza on the overhead screen. Kurt Hibbert reviewed the history of the site plan and the Staff reviews with the associated measurements for the set backs. The Engineering review of the set backs came up with an 8.04 foot set back allowance. He indicated that the Archibald building addition has met the minimum side yard set back of 6 feet. Winston mentioned that the measurements need to be done from the property line instead of the back of the sidewalk. Winston asked Kurt if they were in compliance with the set backs in his review. Kurt indicated that they were in compliance. Kurt discussed the classification of the street as a parking lot or a street. He indicated that the parking could have been calculated on the aggregate parking for the entire public parking lot. Mary Haley asked about Dr. Lovell's office not being in compliance when it was constructed. Therefore, the City abandoned the right-of--way to bring the structure into compliance. Stephen Zollinger clarified the discussion indicating that the building was built in compliance with the set backs because that parking area is a parking lot. The building could have been built out to the right-of--way like the buildings across the street. When the addition came along, the Association responsible for this property dedicated property specifically for a public thoroughfare. He reviewed history of the area indicating that the addition to the building brought the matter to light. The decision was based on treating the land not as aright-of--way; therefore, it was a type of set back. They were not summarily overruled, but tentatively overruled and they were told to treat it as aright-of--way. The best they could do to evaluate the building was to use the exception clause under 4.9 which is to average the building's set backs on the street for thie set back requiremerit. That is tree process that ied to the E-rigineeririg calculation of 8.04 feet for a minimum setback for the Archibald addition. Mary Haley asked where the averaging comes from in the set back discussion. Stephen Zollinger indicated that the west side sidewalk does not remotely track the property lines. The Engineering technicians used the parcel maps to identify the property lines, plus Forsgren Associates recently placed monuments on the City's intersections allowing a definitive location to help identify the property lines. The Targhee Medical building was treated as a porch instead of an atrium. The measurement was taken on that building from the property line back to the primary portion of the building. There was an exception made early on before the property line adjustment was made for the Professional Plaza. They attempted to treat the atrium for Targhee Medical other than a structure. They tried to call it a porch. That did not fly very well and that is what led to the property adjustment. Discussion of the porch addition to Targhee Medical in relation to the property line. The overhead map does not have the new property line as changed in Ordinance 824. Stephen indicated that the measurements that the Sparhawks took on the buildings are i• ~``~ completely understandable. In most places in the City the property line runs equal distance from the back of the sidewalk. If this would have been a City Street, that probably would have been the case per Stephen. This entire division was once a single piece of property. As the property developed, it was determined that selling parcels off with little or no respect for subdivision rules. Mary Haley mentioned that it was allowed at that time because the City's Zoning laws were in effect. Stephen Zollinger's recollection was that the property line was moved just enough to move the Targhee Medical building off of the City property. Stephen related where he thought the line. was on the overhead screen. Mary Haley was concerned with the definition that was applied to this property. She indicated to Winston that the City needs to clarify the definition of this property so that this issue will be settled for future discussions. "Either we are going to call i± one thing or we are going to call_ it another! We can't vary depending on who is coming before this board." Stephen Zollinger indicated that the legal opinion of the City for the last five years is that it is a parking lot. If the City is forced to take a position, that would have to be the City's position. There are no set backs on the east side of the street. The City created the property line on the west side of the street which created a zero lot line set back. That set back would not have been allowed if the City treated this property as a street. It had nothing to do with the parties we are dealing with on the property. It was the City's effort to recover from a 30 year old dinosaur which the City has been feeding for the last 30 years. Mary Haley commented that the City does not want to give birth to any more dinosaurs. Stephen Zollinger did not think that the City could go back and change the way the property has been treaded. Presently, the City has been treating it as a parking lot. Winston Dyer asked Legal Council about the disposition of this issue for future proposals on how that right-of--way will be treated. Stephen Zollinger indicated that the City Staff will obediently and respectfully do what ever the Council and the Mayor tell them to do. Unless the Staff is directed otherwise, they will continue to treat this particular thoroughfare as a parking lot. Andrew Sparhawk indicated that you should tell what the location is by actual law not by opinions. Stephen Zollinger agreed that opinions do change; however, this opinion is based on some evaluation of existing documentation. Stephen indicated that a new document would have to be 8 \''~ created to change this status. The land's current status is a "parcel of land owned by the City", "It is not a public right-of-way". "That is what the legal documents say". During Mayor Porter's term, the property was transferred to the City of Rexburg as a parcel transfer not as a public right-of--way dedication. The goal was to have the City plow the snow in the Professional Plaza. Winston Dyer mentioned that the point is very valid. There will be further expansion and future development in this area. He indicated that past expansion has caused nothing but controversy. He asked Legal Council for a recommendation for the Planning and Zoning Commission concerning the disposition of this issue for future requests that will be brought before the Commission. Stephen Zollinger indicated that he does not make professional recommendations. Engineers make recommendations; "I render opinions". Mary Haley asked Stephen to render a professional opinion. Stephen indicated that presently it is a parking Iot right up until the day someone tells him to change it. Winston Dyer asked Stephen if the City Council needed to pass a resolution to clarify the situation for future requests. Stephen indicated that it is a parking lot like several other parking lots the City owns through out the City. Winston reviewed Stephen's comments that it is a parcel of land owned by the City. Stephen indicated that it is a parcel much the same as the parcel behind Porter's Book and Variety store, which the City allows people to drive on every day. It is much the same as the parcel just north of Gringos restaurant. It is a parcel of land that the City allows public access too. Winston asked if the City takes a parcel of land and paves it and adds curb and gutter, then can it be called a parking lot. Stephen mentioned that it is the quickest way to identify this parcel. Stephen Zollinger indicated that the fact that this allows traffic to go through creates confusion. He did not think that through traffic changes its status. No one has shown Stephen any document to the contrary. David Stein reviewed the sidewalk set backs on the east side of the street. He asked if this proposal meets the set back. Winston Dyer asked for help to resolve the issue if there is an issue to be resolved. Mike Ricks review the possible expansion that would be possible if any future expansion were possible. The east side would not allow future expansion except one home. Winston did indicate that there was one space between offices on the east side. Mary Haley reviewed the issue of defining the area as a parking lot instead of a street. „• 9 Stephen Zollinger indicated that the set back was in compliance even if it is called a street or a parking, lot. It makes no difference. If it is classified as a street with aright-of--way, eight feet is the right number by 4.9 Exceptions in the Planning and Zoning Ordinance. Stephen mentioned that the City was bluffing when it attempted to create aright-of--way where none existed. Winston Dyer indicated that this is an advisory board. He asked for input on a recommendation to City Council to bring this issue to closure. Mary Haley asked why this site plan did not come to the Planning and Zoning Commission for approval. Kurt Hibbert referred to the minutes of the meeting on May 22, 2002, which indicated that the Planning and Zoning Commission delegated that review to the Staff. Winston Dyer mentioned that the discussion occurred between 12:00 a.m. and 12:30 a.m. It was not deferred to Staff with the knowledge that it was required to be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission. It was an oversight when it was deferred to the Staff. Winston indicated that there were 21 agenda items that night. Mike Ricks discussed properties that develop between streets. He recommended that they be identified in the beginning as a City Street. Jerry Hastings mentioned that the property meets the statutes where the averages are i concerned. It does meet the set back requirements. We have to understand what happened. In a new development it will be totally different. Robert and Mary concurred with Jerry. Winston Dyer asked Kurt to review the parking issue. Kurt Hibbert reviewed the parking on the overhead screen. An aggregate parking lot review was probably the process for this site plan. The Building Department review indicated that there was sufficient parking for all the offices as they have been historically used. Winston asked if that included the private parking on the rear of the building. Kurt was not sure of all the details of the parking lot review by the Building Department. Mary Haley indicated that Harvard Street was very narrow. She was concerned with the additional parking that could be allowed on Harvard. She said that it was extremely dangerous on that 1st South and Harvard intersection. She was concerned with Dr. Archibald's project increasing the parking needs for that area. Kent's staff will park in the rear of the building after the construction phase is complete. 10 ( Kurt Hibbert indicated that the parking was approved by the City Building Department. t Landscaping was checked and it did meet the Ordinance. He purchased additional property to the north to be included in the green space requirement to 35%. Mary Haley indicated that the discussion has resolved the issues. Winston Dyer thanked Kurt for his effort. He asked the Commissioners to state for the record their opinion concerning the site plan discussion including the thoroughness or lack of thoroughness of the issues. Mike Ricks indicated that the review of technical information (physical measurements by the Staff) and the discussion tonight has shown that the proposal is within the City Ordinances concerning the set backs and the green space requirements on this particular project. Robert Schwartz expressed he is satisfied on all counts concerning the discussion. Jerry Hastings said his earlier comments still stand. Winston Dyer mentioned that the public has had appropriate and adequate opportunity to have input on the issue. Mary Haley spoke to the misunderstanding that came from giving Staff the responsibility that `, ~ was not in the Ordinance. The. Commission has been absolutely swamped and the Commission is still swamped. Mary did understand the Sparhawk's concerns too. ~JYinston Dyer reviewed the process and thanked Dr. Archibald :;r returning to the City to review this matter, The record should be clear the Kent sought for and obtained input from City representatives throughout the process. He has done what he thought he was directed to do to get the project approved. Certainly, there was no mal-intent to circumvent the process. David Stein added that given the number of requests for office expansion, as well as requests to change zoning to allow for office and "Professional Overlays"; the Commission needs to make sure that these type requests are being planned for in the Community. The City has a major hospital in town which happens to be in a residential area. Randall Porter is in agreement with all that has been said He empathized with the Sparhawk's and their concerns. The Professional Plaza has been a difficult thing over many years. He commended Dr. Archibald and other Doctors for taking care of their property in the neighborhood. He has a better understanding of the definition of a parking lot after Legal Council's review. ~~ ~ ~ I1 Robert Schwartz appreciated the public input that has come in a non contentious way; • compared to some of the letters the Commissioners have received that have been false, and blatantly untrue. Mary Haley moved to approve the site plan for Dr. Archibald's office expansion at 76 Professional Plaza for Dr. Kent Archibald; Jerry Hastings seconded the motion; Discussion: all voted aye, none opposed. The motion carried. Work on the Comprehensive Plan Draft: Kurt Hibbert discussed the Community Design Standards Chapter as a proposed chapter to the Comprehensive Plan. He had a handout that showed some designs from a historical perspective. The discussion went back to the original town site and where and how the design originated. Winston Dyer indicated that the Commission is on target for the goals and objectives reiterated on page 79. PIe asked Kurt to softer the language in the Community Design Standards Chapter to make it a universal document that would not isolate anyone in the Community. Jerry Hastings asked if the Commission wanted to emphasize the University in the Comprehensive Plan. David Stein asked for the Comprehensive Plan to show integration between the City and the University. He mentioned shopping and street lighting as items needed in the Comprehensive Plan to show a cooperative plan. ~~'inston Dyer meritloned that the Comprehensive Plan should indicate that a cooperative efl:;rt is desired between the City and the University. Reference was made to page 80, which emphasize the coordination or integration of University and high school development in the Comprehensive Plan. Randall Porter would like to discourage building a new high school outside the City. The Comprehensive Plan should have the High School inside the City. Robert Schwartz mentioned that the Community has not been included in the University activities as much now that the University excluded competitive sports from their program. Jerry Hastings called for realism in the Comprehensive Plan. He reviewed the economic and realities to develop a new high school within the City. The City would have to make room for a High School in the City with economic and logistic support. He indicated that the County has the availability of less expensive land for a new High School. 12 • • Winston Dyer would like to keep the Comprehensive Plan as a vision plan for the Community. Mary Haley gave an example of a one high school town where the Juniors and Seniors stayed at the Central High School and the Freshmen and Sophomores went to other locations in the Town. This allowed the Community to remain centralized under one high school. Kurt Hibbert indicated that the Comprehensive Plan is a guide for development; it is not a law and it can be changed or amended at the City Council's discretion. Jerry Hastings asked if it was mandated by law to have a Comprehensive Plan. Stephen Zollinger indicated that the Comprehensive Plan represents a broad stroke Plan and the Planning and Zoning Ordinance is administered by the Planning and Zoning Commission in narrower strokes. The State Statutory Comprehensive Plan is the first plan. It is regulatory in the sense that you can not deviate from it. He reviewed the historical development of the Salt Lake Valley. The Comprehensive Plan is for your protection. The verbiage is secondary or ancillary to the Comprehensive Plan "Map". Discussion on what the Comprehensive Plan should be used for in the planning process. Stephen Zollinger indicated that it was for long term planning using broad strokes. It is the vision or projection for the Community in 20 to 30 years. Do the best prognosticating that you can for the future. ~~ Jerry Hastings indicated that the Plan could suggest a closed high school campus in a certain geographic locatlon if it was the vision ofthe Comprehensive Dian. Stephen Zollinger mentioned that the Plan may say it; however, it depends on how you stroke the Comprehensive Plan map that will suggest your beliefs for the development of the Community. Winston Dyer asked how we are progressing with the development of the Comprehensive Plan. Kurt Hibbert indicated that it was about five weeks out before it would be ready for a public hearing process. Jerry Hastings asked when the Comprehensive Plan map could be ready for review. Kurt will have it available for the next meeting. He asked Kurt to get the Comprehensive Plan out to the public hearing process. We need to get the input from the public and get the City Council's input. Mary Haley reiterated the need to see the Comprehensive Plan map. ~. ~ 13 Kurt Hibbert indicated that five weeks is a reasonable time frame to have the Plan review ready • for the Comprehensive Plan draft. He will work to get the Comprehensive Plan map to the next meeting. Winston Dyer mentioned that the RR2 re-zone request to LDR was approved by the City Council for Millhollow Road; however, the Council did not approve the requested Professional Overlay for the re-zone request. Discussion on the City's Council Public Hearing and the support for the proposal and the support against the proposal. Discussion on three annexation requests that went before the City Council. Discussion on the neighborhood meeting process before the annexation requests can come before the Planning and Zoning Commission for a Public Hearing. Mike Ricks asked for a March 18~' hearing date on the annexation requests. Kurt Hibbert has to make contact with neighbors before a date can be set. The Tom O'Toole re-zone request was discussed by the Commission. The City Council granted a change from a Traffic Study requirement to a Developmental Agreement requirement that will be approved by the City Council. The Zoning change is pursuant to a Development Agreement. The risks are that the City would have to bond that way. Maybe the City does not need to look at zone changes cor_ditioned on a development agreemen±. The Cell Tower Public Hearing before the City Council was also discussed. The Planning Commission reviewed the findings of fact used for the Public Hearing. Randall Porter asked for a designated area for Cell Towers in the Community. Winston Dyer indicated that the Mayor has asked for increased continuity between City Committees and City Staff. He asked that an agenda item should be added to the Planning and Zoning Agenda: (City Council actions on actions) Then we can do a better job with communications between City Council and Planning and Zoning. Winston Dyer discussed pages 55 and 56 in the Planning and Zoning Code. Article 6.14, which covers amendments to the Planning Ordinance and applications for rezoning. He referred to item E as being the item where the Commission has its teeth to transmit a recommendation to the City Council concerning compliance to the Comprehensive Plan. He mentioned the next 4 items that deal with capacity of services, potential for nuisances and the recent changes in land use for the adjoining properties to a re-zone request. 14 • • That is where the findings of fact need to be focused. Winston indicated that the Commission needs to look for additional tools. Legal Council will help the Commissioners with the list of review items before making recommendations to City Council. Examples: 1) Consider the character of the existing neighborhoods and the potential changes that this request would bring to the neighborhood. 2) Is there enough public input or "public acceptance" of the request for a recommendation to City Council? This might be a criteria for the Planning and Zoning Commission to use. 3) Quality of life in a neighborhood. Stephen Zollinger reviewed the actions of the Police Department when they act upon a hunch and there is a need to call for "rapid processing of detail" before an action is taken. The Commission will have to come up with a check list to help process detail in the same "rapid processing manner". Stephen mentioned that everything listed is #3 is applicable for your consideration. Potential change is a great rapid processing thought process. The Commission needs more tools and more concepts to help make decisions. Randall Porter referred to page 16 for an overlay discussion. (Article 3.9) Jerry Hastings asked Legal Council to help the Commission identify legal concerns and issues %\ ~ that the Commission maybe overlooking. Stephen Zollinger mentioned that it was a fine line between making recommendations to the Planning and ZE?1»ng r`~~nrrZicgiQn and prnyiding Legal C`n»n~il t~ tie ~nrnmiccinn. The Commission discussed having the following items on the March 18'~ agenda: 1) IBC Noise Ordinance amend city ordinance. 2} Snow storage pushing on to the road. Work on the Rlanned Residential Developments (PRD) Ordinance 854 Kurt Hibbert reviewed the changes to the revised document for a new PRD Ordinance. He asked for comments on the changes to the Ordinance. Curvilinear Street engineering in the Ordinance was deferred to the City Engineering Department to make the calculations with specific engineering data. This is on page 8. Mary Haley asked about the term upscale in a descriptive manner. Kurt mentioned that on a descriptive requirement, the document is using the power of suggestion. Mary asked about ingress and egress definitions. ~. ~ 15 Mike Ricks reviewed the curvilinear design that he has seen in other areas. He was concerned • with the symmetry of the design and right-of--way widths. Winston Dyer -asked about minimum pavement widths. Winston Dyer asked Rex Erickson for comments on the proposed PRD Ordinance. Car ports and car shelters have a different requirement in some locations. The City Council requested a change in the Ordinance from car ports to garages. Kurt Hibbert indicated that one developer was interested in attaching a car port to the structure. Winston mentioned that the City Council specified garages. Jerry Hastings asked about a Planned Unit Development (PUD) in the Subdivision Ordinance. He mentioned an example of a new subdivision with a Home Owners Association that would take care of common areas. Where does that type subdivision fit into the Ordinance? Is it a PUD, PRD or a Residential Association? Winston indicated that a Home Owners Association could be applicable in any of those developments under the Subdivision Ordinance. Jerry asked about common line twin homes. Winston mentioned that the current Ordinance does allow for zero lot line development. The zero lot line allowance in the Subdivision Ordinance was reviewed concerning existing developments that have used that concept. John Millar mentioned that the new proposed Subdivision Ordinance will not allow for a PUD. The new Subdivision Ordinance is in the works. • Mary Haley asked about a proposed development on the Burn Brothers Gravel pit that was discussed in Ci±~,~ Council at the last meeting. What type of development ~,~nll ±hey be able to seek approval? Kurt Hibbert discussed the possibility of providing different options for new developments. The Burns gravel pit development proposal was discussed as an example of a development that is not allowed in the Planning and Zoning Ordinance. They have an option of seeking a Professional Office Overlay, Mixed Use Zone, or two different Zones. It depends on how the development is presented to the City. John concurred that they have several options to pursue. Kurt Hibbert provided a brief explanation of the proposal on the property that was presented at the City Council meeting. Randall Porter discussed page 7 concerning lighting in developments. He commented on the need to preserve the "night tame sky". Mike Ricks indicated that the developments may need more snow storage area.. He indicated that many developments are pushing the snow onto the roads. 16 • Kurt Hibbert will spell the snow storage requirements in the site plan check list. There is a 10% space requirement. Joseph Laird reviewed the width of the streets. Should the street width measurement come from the back of the curb or the edge of the asphalt? Winston Dyer would like to have minimum pavement width requirements. He reviewed the vision of the PRD. It is to allow smaller streets with larger contiguous green space areas and increased density for housing units. Jerry Hastings recommended that sidewalks and curb and gutter should be required even if the PRD was applied in an RR2 Zone. Winston talked about taking care of some ofthese issues in a site plan review. Robert Schwartz indicated that you can not walk the sidewalks in this town when there is snow piled on them. He indicated that if you are going to have sidewalks, then you should be able to use them. David Stein asked about conformity to the City/County Greenway Plan in the PRD Ordinance. Winston Dyer mentioned that it would be incumbent on the developer to tie into the City's Greenway Plan. `' • Randall Porter was concerned with developers leaving part of the development in weeds if funding did not allow for the completion of the project. Kurt Hibbert and the Commission reviewed Page 10 of the new proposed PRD Ordinance. Winston Dyer discussed the passible solution to the question of developing a subdivision in a checkerboard manner. The Ordinance could require the subdivision development to proceed in a sequential manner. Winston asked John if the City was bonding for subdivision development. John Millar indicated that it was an option if the situation required bonding. Normally, the City does not do the bonding for subdivisions. Stephen Zollinger indicated that bonding by phases in a build out plan is on page 10 excluding phasing. Rex Erickson commented on the need to strengthen the access to the green belt on the river. He indicated that the vision for the Teton River is to have a green belt from Rexburg to Teton. Kurt Hibbert reviewed the requirements that Idaho Falls has adopted to have all river frontage development reviewed by the Green Belt Committee for approval. 17 ~,- • The Commissioners discussed creating an Ordinance for the purpose of protecting the area as a • public thoroughfare for public use. There has to be just compensation given to the land owner if his land is being required to participate in the Green Belt. Winston Dyer discussed takings and commitments to the public. There are private property issues involved in this discussion that will need to be explored in the process. Joseph Laird reviewed Page 6 concerning set backs for buildings. Winston mentioned that the setbacks were going to be increased. David Stein indicated that the issue was using the setbacks for open space. Do we have the right set backs? Mary Haley indicated that set backs should not be used to fulfill the open space requirement. Set backs are not green space. Stephen Zollinger mentioned that this was covered on page 10 of the proposed PRD Ordinance. Discussion on green space requirements and 25 foot setbacks for neighbors. Mike Ricks asked about the 20 foot setback for garages. He indicated that vehicles would hang over the sidewalks when they were parked in the driveway with a 20 foot setback. • Joe Laird asked about 6 foot high fences. Are they high enough for a PRD Development? The Commission discussed having an 8 foot fence with sound reflecting material next to an arterial road for a sound barrier. They discussed the fact that concrete block can be stained. The Ordinance does not allow chain link fence. They discussed the curvilinear design requirements for PRD Streets. It was recommended that the Public Work Department requirements be considered in the design of a curvilinear street. Winston Dyer indicated that developer's (can and should) have input on the PRD Ordinance after it gets to City Council for review. Kurt Hibbert has reviewed the changes Developers have requested. Robert Schwartz moved to recommend this Planned Residential Development Ordinance to the City Council for approval as edited with Staff approvals after developers have reviewed the proposed PRD Ordinance; David Stein seconded the motion; Discussion: Question: all voted aye, none opposed. The motion carried. 18 • -. Continued discussion on the Professional Plaza: 1 Katie Sparhawk - 37 South 3rd East -asked why the Professional Plaza is signed as Harvard Avenue on the corner of Main Street and Professional Plaza. She was concerned with putting a street sign on a location that is not a street. Stephen Zollinger indicated that it is the City's attempt to convey to the public that there is access to Harvard Avenue through the Professional Plaza from Main Street. Work on the Commercial Design Standards (draft) Ordinance 907 -Deferred Report on Proiects: None Tabled Requests: None Adjourned ~~ 19 (~ ~~, ,, ;;. FEB-26-1900 23 42 i i To: ~ TL ~~y From: Dr. Kent M. Archibald ar. Bryce B. Thueson P.01 Fa~c Cover Sheet MRS Fax: 3~- 30Zz- Fax: 208-356-45$7 Phone; Total'Sheets: 3 Phone; 208-356-585 Date: z ~ oµ Confid~,ntiality Notice: The documents and information accompanying this fax transmission contain confidential and restricted information t~iet l,elongs to the sender. It is legally privileged and intended only for the use of the lndlvidUal or entity named above. ; If you ai~e not the above named party, you are hareby,notified that any disclosure, distribution, Copying, or other use of this information is strictly prohibited. If, by CfRance, you have received this fax in error, please call 2Q8-356-4585 immediately and notify us of the error. We will reimburse you for any costs in doing so. Thank you. 76 Professional Plaza P, O. Boxy 430 Rexburg, lD 83440 • Eye Examinations • Contact Lensels • Complete Optical • LASIK Evaluation And Care • Cat$ract Evalyatipn And Care • Eye Infections Injuries + Computer Eye train • Dry Eye Treat ent • Poor Reading bility • Vision Therapy . .. .: • • • FEB-26-1900 23 42 P &'.:Z i ~; 5/1 ?!02 5/22102 1l10l0~ P. 82 {: met with Val Christensen at my office to discuss plans for remodel and addition_ We discussed expanding to the South, the East, the North and to the West. Mr. Christensen thought hat P&Z vwould not approve expansion to the South because my building wou d no longer Gne up with the homes on 1~ South. Fle thought that I could get cin the agenda at' the next P&Z meeting to ask. some informational questions. ~}nce I had the approval of P8~Z, them Mr. Christensen would need to review t ~ e building plans before a building permit could be issued_ I then called lair Kay and Winston Dyer, and they graciously agreed to let me come to the next meeting. P&Z Meeting I met with ~'8SZ at the end of a very long meeting for them. I discussed my thoughts regarding 4 expansion. John Millar projected my building and the Professional Plazh on the screen. As predicted by Mr. Christensen, the PBr,Z rejected the idea of expanding to the South, as this would put my building out of alignment with the other buildings along 1~ South. The Committee recommended that the setback from the sidewalk (on the East) could be the average of what the setback was for the other buildings in Professional Plaza. Then, they recommended that I draw up a site plan, take it to Mr. Millar for his approval sand then we could get the building plans done and a building permit would bey issued_ i met with John Millar at City Offices^ I showed him: 1. ,wrchitect's si~etch of officg appearance. 2. Original footprint of building. , 3. Revised footprint of building with addition. He indicated that the only problemi that he could see was that the current setback for the side prop®rty line was six feet' (not the five feet that 1 thought it was). He indicated that the setback on the front was OK as that was previously agreed upon. He also indicated that it was OK tb get things drawn up and then to Mr. Christensen far approval and we're ready tv go. i~ FEB-26-1980 23 43 P.03 . j d u the for the buiidin ~ ermit. ~ 1 went throw h the forms with 4/10103 I p~cke p forms g p 9 Mr. Christensen. He made a lift o things the. architect would need to do befiore approval would be given (fau~ pages}.: Mr. Christensen also told me that I would need approval of Kur# ~Hibbert. !~.ater that day I met with Mr_ Hibbert. He had my file with noted from the previous P&Z meeting that 1 attended. His office had verified t#~e measurements of setbacks of other offices in Professional Plaza that #I had given to , PBSZ, Sorne of their measurements matched mine; others were close. He indicated that he ne®ded a couple of others tv review€ plot plan but his impression was that it would be approved, Si~~ ,~.- `~ 4/25/03; I went again to get the building perrriit. Mr. Kay told rite that Mr. Christensen lead been out for a week. 1 left the building permit information with Mr. Kay. 5!2/03 !gave to Mr. Kay the Energy Envelope Compliance Certificate and copy of the plans. 518/03 ~ I called Mr. Christensen to find out the status of the building Permit. He asked me if I had done the Energy report yet, I told him that the information hid already been delivered to Mr. ~cay. Mr: Christensen indicated that he would have to go up front to find that; 5/9/03 ~ I went to the City Building to find nut about the building permit. 1 met Mr. Christensen as he was leaving, he y told me to see Mr. Kay, as he had not even received the information yet. ~ Mr. Kay wasn't in on that day. I spoke with Mr. Millar- He could not find this fle and promised that he would walk it through himself on Monday. 5%12/03 Phone call from Mr. Christensen. He indicated that he had sent a letter io me indicating what else needed to be dune, See letter. 613103: i~ delivered all of the requested information (by Mr. Christensen). 6/5103 ~ building permit issued- By the time we received the building permit, our contractor had already gone on to other jobs. He was finally able to start by the 1 ~ part of December. ~ ~ ~.. Tf1TAl P _ 1~3