HomeMy WebLinkAbout9-7-1995 P&Z MINUTES � MINUTES OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
Meeting of September 7, 1995
Present: Chairman: Rick Wells, Madeline Buckendorf, Dorothy Davidson, Sonia Huyck, Terry
McConnell, Mike Nachtigall, Bettie Pilote
Absent: None
Staff: Nancy Huff, Ed Christopher, Liz Yeary
The regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairman, Rick
Wells, at ?:15 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers.
The first item of business was approval of the minutes for the meeting of August 10, 1995.
Commissioner Buckendorf requested a minor amendment to page 3, paragraph 7, changing the word
"stated" to "asked". The amended Minutes were approved unanimously.
Staff asked the Commission for a formal extension of the Planned Unit Development for Parkview
Subdivision at Morrison and Parker. Staff explained that the Preliminary Plat was extended May 4,
1995, but no formal action was taken on the Planned Unit Development.
Commissioner Pilote offered a Motion to extend the Planned Unit Development. Commissioner
McConnell seconded the Motion. The Motion passed unanimously.
The public hearing portion of the agenda then followed. Chairman Wells explained the procedure for I I
public hearings. I
The first case was an item continued from the previous agenda of August 10 concerning a request for
a Special Use Permit to construct a residential Planned Unit Development on property located on the
east side of S. Indiana Avenue south of Cherry Street. There is also a Preliminary Plat for this
development to subdivide the property into 27 residentiallots and one common area lot. The
applicant was Jim McCoy.
Staff explained that the item had originally been scheduled for the July 20 Planning and Zoning
Commission meeting but due to engineering and design questions, the item had been tabled. A public
hearing on the matter was held August 10 but the Commission had again tabled the item for the
applicant to provide more information. At this time, Staff had some unanswered questions
concerning irrigation provision, drainage pond, sidewalk standards, parking spaces, irrigation ditches,
amenity provision, side setbacks, and site perimeter setbacks, and density. The City Engineer, while
expressing a willingness to allow the 47' wide street, stated emphatically that this would not be a
precedent.
The applicant, Jim McCoy, presented a packet of information to the Commission. NIr. McCoy
responded to Staffs concerns, stating that he had been assured by the Water Superintendent, Mr. ,
Shoemaker, that municipal water was sufficient for irrigation purposes. Staff explained that under '�
State Law an irrigation plan must be provided or agreement signed by the irrigation district that this is
acceptable. Mr. McCoy said that he would construct 4' sidewalks as requested. He would be
MINUTES P8Z 9-7-95
Page 1
' requesting a variance on the density which with the new design is 9.5 dwelling units per net acre,
instead of the required 6-9. Two parking spaces for each unit will be identified on the final plat.
Irrigation will not be interrupted in any way to adjacent properties and ditches will be shown on the
final plat.
The applicant stated that as an amenity there will be two common area lots. One will provide RV and
other accessory vehicle storage area and the other will be used for barbecue pits, picnic tables and
benches, horseshoe pits etc. The large trees will where possible be retained as an amenity and make it
attractive. He asked for preliminary approval with everything to be worked out before final plat
approval. In response to a question from Commissioner Wells, Mr. McCoy said that the property has
been for sale for five years. Several people have expressed interest in development but were
discouraged because of the restrictions put on the lot. In response to a question from Commissioner
Huyck, Mr. McCoy stated that he could comply with the setback requirements.
Bob Allen, property owner to the south, expressed concern about the density of the project and the �
impact of e�ctra traffic. He said that since Beech Street was paved it had become very busy. He did
not fee147' street was suf�cient and that such a pernussion would set a precedent. In answer to a
question from Commissioner Davidson, Mr. Allen said that single family development would be
appropriate and that Alder Street should be extended.
Pete McArthur of Ace Realty explained, as realtor for the property, that the original intent had been
to make this a gated subdivision with private streets. The density was necessary to pay for the project
because the cost of cleaning up the site, particula.rly the existing septic tanks, was very high. Thus,
less expensive homes could be provided for senior citizens.
In response to Mr. Allen's concerns, Mr. McCoy stated that he understood his concerns but that he
also had been contacted by neighbors supportive of the project who were womed about the fire
hazard and weeds.
` The public testimony portion of the hearing was then closed.
The Chairman said that he felt the Commission needed more time to review the information provided
by the applicant.
Commissioner Buckendorf questioned the amenities provided. Commissioner Huyck stated that she
did not feel those described would qualify as an amenity. Ms. Huff said thax such items as common
walks, pools, trailways, or multi-layering could be considered amenities. Commissioner Wells
commented that the common area already has a purpose, that is as a storm water retention area and
he did not think using it for storage or barbecues would be appropriate. Commissioner Huyck
commented that if Alder is e�ctended which is apparently planned at some time in the future, the
amenity of the RV storage area would be taken away.
Commissioner Pilote expressed frustration with the Planned Unit Development concept and asked for
a better definition of a Planned Unit Development. She did not feel the proposal conformed with a
Planned Unit Development concept. Ms. Huff quoted from state documentation on the concept of
Planned Unit Developments. Commissioner McConnell agreed with Commissioner Pilote and said he
MINUTES P8Z 9-7-95
Pa�e 2
� felt a decision was warranted based on what had been presented so the applicant could decide what
action to take. He agreed that there was no amenity provided, such as a meeting hall.
A.fter some further discussion along the same lines, Commissioner McConnell oi�ered a Motion to
deny the Special Use Pernut and Preliminary Plat based on finding that the project did not fit the
Planned Unit Development concept, and the density was greater than pernutted and therefore did not
conform to the Comprehensive Plan. Madeline Buckendorf seconded the Motion.
ROLL CALL VOTE. Those voting yes: McConnell, Buckendorf, Pilote, Nachtigall, Davidson,
Huyck. Those voting no: None. Absent and not voting: None.
MOTION CARRIED
The Chairman explained the appeal process for the applicant.
The second public hearing was a request for annexation, Comprehensive Plan designation and zoning
classification for property located on the northeast corner of Ustick Road and l Oth Avenue, south of
Caldwell Transportation Company property and west of Brian Avenue. Commissioner Huyck
declared a conflict of interest and indicated that she would not be participating in the discussion. This
application is made by the City of Caldwell.
Staff explained that this request was initiated by City Council when the Rosewood Subdivision
annexation was discussed. The property is contiguous to city limits on three sides and is divided into
lots of less than 5 acres. City water service is available to the property. City sewer will be provided
within a few years.
Mr. Everett Jensen, one of the property owners, did not directly oppose annexation but asked what
requirements would be to connect to city services. Staff said that people are not required to connect
to City water, even when it becomes available, unless they request it. The sewer, when it is e�ended
will be required to be connected within a year of its availability, unless proof can be produced that
newer septic systems have been installed. In response to a question from Mr. Jensen, Staff said that
the City has a Code Enforcement Officer who will enforce City ordinances concerning weeds and
unsightly yards.
In response to a question from Commissioner Wells, Mr. Jensen said that he wanted the zoning to
remain R-1 (Single Family Residential). The public testimony portion of the hearing was then closed.
Commissioner Buckendorf offered a Motion to recommend approval of the Comprehensive Plan
designation of low density residential and a zoning classification of R-1 (Single Family Residential) '
for the area under consideration based on finding that the property is contiguous to City limits and �
can be served by City utilities. Commissioner McConnell seconded the Motion.
MINUTES P8Z 9-7-95
Page 3
� ROLL CALL VOTE. Those voting yes: Buckendorf, Pilote, Nachtigall, Davidson, McConnell.
Those voting no: None. Abstain: Huyck. Absent and not voting: None.
MOTION CARRIED
The next public hearing was a request for a Special Use Pernut to expand an existing professional
office building at 1913 S. Kimball and to pernut a Variance as part of that expansion to reduce the
rear yard setback from 20' to 15'/z'. The applicant was Dr. John Holton, represented by David
Davies, Medical Design Group.
Staff explained that they had had some discussions with �ir. Davies and had deternuned that in view
of the size of the expansion and the associated request for a Variance, a Special Use Permit would be
required. As part of this expansioq the City will obtain needed right-of-way on Kimball Avenue for
future widening and/or improvement.
Mr. Davies was concerned about the time limit of 18 months. It was explained that if that time limit
was too short, an extension could be granted at the time. He also asked if Dr. Holton would be
required to put in the sidewalk improvements. Ms. Huff suggested he discuss that with the City
Engineer. Amendments were suggested to the proposed conditions requiring all improvements to be
with the review and approval of the City Engineer, to avoid unnecessary improvements being
constructed and then have to be removed.
Commissioner Pilote offered a Motion to approve the Special Use Permit and Variance subject to
suggested amended conditions finding that the expansion was in conformance with the
Comprehensive Plan, the additional right-of-way for Kimball Avenue would assist in the projected
expansion, and the use would not likely result in any undue nuisance, damage or detriment to
surrounding properties. Mike Nachtigall seconded the Motion.
ROLL CALL VOTE. Those voting yes: Pilote, Nachtigall, Davidson, Huyck, McConnell,
Buckendorf. Those voting no: None. Absent and not voting: None.
MOTION CARRIED
The next public hearing was a request for Preliminary Plat approval for Mountain Gem Estates
Subdivision, located within the Area of City Impact on the west side of old Hwy.30 south of Hwy.44.
The proposal involves a subdivision of 17.75 acres into 33 residential lots. The applicants are Gary
Vezzoso and Ed and Pat Hoffer. Their Engineer is John Brennan of Blakley Buturla Eng.
Commissioner Pilote expressed a conflict of interest and indicated that she would not be participating
in the discussion.
Staff explained the location of the property and described the request. She identified the waivers
requested and explained Staffs recommendation on each one.
Mr. Vezzoso testified that the property is poor quality soil that is zoned R-1 (Single Family
Residential) in the County. Fire protection will be provided by a water tank located at the northeast
corner of the property which will ultimately also provide protection for other properties. The power
MINUTES PSZ 9-7-95
Page 4
- line easement on the eastern side will be a greenbelt extension which will be bermed and improved
with a pathway, which due to the topography would appear to be the best use of it. An irrigation plan
will be provided before final plat. Streetlights will be installed. Mr. Vezzoso distributed
Homeowners Association Bylaws in draft form. Irrigation supply, greenbelt area and maintenance of
common areas will be organized by the Homeowners' Association.
Mr. Vezzoso stated that he had been told by Canyon Highway District that they would not maintain
curbs and gutters. A pathway has been proposed for the subdivision. When the property is
eventually annexed into the City, the Local Improvement District process can be used to upgrade the
improvements to a City standard. Utilities will be underground.
The applicant said that the purpose of the proposal is to develop a quality rural manufactured housing
subdivision. The units will meet October 1994 standards for manufactured homes and will have
garages and driveways.
In response to a question from Commissioner McConnell, Mr. Vezzoso stated that the Highway
District will maintain the street. He was concerned that if they installed curb, gutter and sidewalks
would the homeowners have to pay to replace them once the area comes into the City.
Ms. Huff said that she had discussed this with Gordon Law who is supportive of curb and gutter
improvements which helps the drainage situation.
Commissioner Buckendorf asked the applicant who ultimately pays for the improvements. Mr.
Vezzoso responded that when the Area of Impact was negotiated these issues were supposed to have
been taken into account. The development deserves special consideration because of that. There
may never be services available. Pedestrian ways are proposed and for safety there will be a swale
between the pathway and the road which will provide a barrier.
John Brennan then testified as the Engineer on the project. He explained that a paved section for a
County road is 27'. The City require a paved section of 33'. If a county road is put in and improved
with curb and gutter when the City annexes the property the street will have to be widened to 33' and
the curb and gutter would have to be removed.
Concerning drainage, berms and swales are very effective and work very adequately to get all the
storm water to the drainage retention point.
In response to a question from Commission McConnell, Mr. Brennan said that although curbs and
gutters are a nice addition, they do not work with a 27' paved street. The County will maintain a
wider street section.
Delbert Berg owns the property directly to the south and was concerned about runoff onto his
property. Currently there is a natural pond area which takes all the runoff from the present vacant
property. However, he felt the development was a positive addition. Staff explained the location of
the retention pond which is designed to take all the drainage off the subject property.
MINUTES P8Z 9-7-95
Page 5
� In rebuttal, i�1r. Vezzoso asked whose standards will be followed. He was confident that the Council
would understand the need for waivers. The public hearing was then closed.
There was considerable discussion on how County and City standards differ and whose should have
preference within the Area of Impact. The Chairman said that the waivers are recommended to City
Council. He was impressed with the design. During the discussions over the Area of City Impact,
growth areas were reviewed and it was generally found that growth is mostly in the south and
southwest and the subject area is on the outer northern edge of the Area of Impact. In his opinion the
Subdivision Ordinance does not apply to this type of area and there needs to be consideration of a
separate ordinance for the Area of Impact.
He had no problem with waiving the requirement for sewer or dry lines in view of its distance from
services. He did not think a sidewalk should be provided on Hwy. 30 and that the easement pathway
is a good alternative. The whole development would appear to fit well with the sunounding area.
Commissioner McConnell was advised that the City would not be held liable to deliver services to the
area. Commissioner Buckendorf expressed frustration with the existing ordinance and its applicability
within the Area of Impact. Commissioner Wells offered an opinion that consideration could be given
to allowing waivers for subdivisions at a considerable distance from the City, but requiring waivers
for closer developments.
Commissioner McConnell agreed but said that he felt since the inner subdivision streets are less likely
to be widened, that they should be provided with curb and gutter.
Commissioner Nachtigall expressed concern about setting a precedent in granting waivers and the
need to amend the Ordinance.
After some further discussion, Commission Huyck offered a Motion to approve the preliminary plat
subject to suggested conditions of approval except that the condition concerning irrigation provision
has been fulfilled, and condition E. concerning curbs, gutters and sidewalks was deleted and dealt
with separately under waivers. Commissioner Nachtigall seconded the Motion.
ROLL CALL VOTE. Those voting yes: Huyck, McConnell, Buckendorf, Nachtigall, Davidson.
Those voting no: None. Abstain: Pilote. Absent and not voting: None.
MOTION CARRIED
For clarification the Commission acted on each waiver request separately.
� Commissioner Davidson offered a Motion to recommend waiver of the requirement for sewer and dry
line installation finding that the development is sufficiently distant from the City. Commissioner
Nachtigall seconded the Motion.
MINUTES P8Z 9-7-95
Page 6
• ROLL CALL VOTE. Those voting yes: Davidson, Huyck, McConnell, Buckendorf, Nachtigall.
Those voting no: None. Abstain: Pilote. Absent and not voting: None.
MOTION CARRIED
Commissioner Buckendorf offered a Motion to recommend waiver of the requirement for City street
standards finding that the Canyon Highway District will not maintain them. Commissioner Davidson
seconded the Motion.
ROLL CALL VOTE. Those voting yes: Buckendorf, Nachtigall, Davidson, Huyck, McConnell.
Those voting no: None. Abstain: Pilote. Absent and not voting: None.
MOTION CARRIED
Commissioner Nachtigall offered a Motion to recommend waiver of the requirement for sidewalks on
interior streets finding that the Subdivision Ordinance permits waivers for lot frontages exceeding
120' and an adequate paved pathway is proposed. Commissioner Davidson seconded the Motion.
ROLL CALL VOTE. Those voting yes: Nachtigall, Davidson, Huyck, McConnell, Buckendorf.
Those voting no: None. Abstain: Pilote. Absent and not voting: None.
MOTION CARRIED
Commissioner McConnell offered a Motion to recommend waiver of the requirement for curb, gutter
and sidewalk for Hwy. 30 finding that as development occurs there is a potential for the highway
being widened or changed. Commissioner Huyck seconded the Motion.
ROLL CALL VOTE. Those voting yes: McConnell, Buckendorf, Nachtigall, Davidson, Huyck.
Those voting no: None. Abstain: Pilote. Absent and not voting: None.
Commissioner Buckendorf offered a Motion to recommend denial of the request for waiver for curb
and gutter along the interior streets finding that the street width is less likely to change.
Commissioner Davidson seconded the Motion.
ROLL CALL VOTE. Those voting yes: Buckendorf, Davidson, Huyck, McConnell. Those voting
no: Nachtigall. Abstain: Pilote. Absent and not voting: None.
MOTION CARRIED
Commissioner McConnell asked that the record show that the Commission needs guidance from the
City Council as to how to apply the Subdivision Ordinance within the Area of Impact.
Commissioner Buckendorf felt that it is a staff priority to hire a consultant to assist staff with getting
a revised subdivision ordinance done as soon as possible, including meeting with the County and the
Highway District to get this solved.
MINUTES P8Z 9-7-95
Page 7
4 Due to the lateness of the hour and due to the fact that there was no-one present to testify,
Commissioner Pilote offered a Motion to table the latter two items, Code Amendments, until the next
meeting. Commissioner Huyck seconded the Motion which passed unanimously.
Ms. Huff commented on items acted on by Council and potential items for forthcoming Planning a,nd
Zoning Commission agendas.
There being no further business the meeting adjourned at 11:15 a.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
L �c�.s2..
Liz e �`� Rick Wells
�Y�
Recording Secretary Chairman
MINUTES P8Z 9-7-95
Page 8