Loading...
Minutes - 2009 - Planning & Zoning - 08/03/2009 - Regular THE CITY OF EAGLE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION August 3, 2009 Minutes 1. CALL TO ORDER: Meeting called to order at 6:00 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL: Present: TANNER, ROEHLING, AIZPITARTE, SMITH, VILLEGAS. A quorum is present. 3. CONSENT AGENDA: . Consent Agenda items are considered to be routine and are acted on with one motion. There will be no separate discussion on these items unless the Chairman, a Commissioner, member of City Staff, or a citizen requests an item to be removed from the Consent Agenda for discussion. Items removed from the Consent Agenda will be placed on the Regular Agenda in a sequence determined by the Rules of Order. . Any item on the Consent Agenda that contains written recommendations from the City of Eagle shall be adopted as part of the Planning & Zoning Commission's Consent Agenda approval motion unless specifically stated otherwise. A. Minutes of Julv 20, 2009. B. Findinl?:s of Fact and Conclusions of Law for A-06-09/RZ-07-09 Annexation and Rezone from RUT (Rural - Urban Transition - Ada County desil?:nation) to R-E-DA (Residential-Estates with a Development Al?:reement) Clarence and Carolvn Stockstill: Clarence and Carolyn Stockstill represented by Karla Williams with MarKar Custom Homes, LLC, are requesting approval of an annexation and rezone from RUT (Rural-Urban Transition-Ada County Designation) to R-E-DA (Residential-Estates up to one unit per two (2) acres with a development agreement). The 5.00-acre site is generally located on the north side of W. Floating Feather Road approximately 220 feet east of N. Ballantyne Lane at 1980 and 1984 W. Floating Feather Road. Tanner moves to approve the consent agenda as presented. Seconded by Roehling. ALL AYE.. .SMITH ABSTAINS.. ..MOTION CARRIES. 4. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: None 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. RZ-05-09 - Rezone from R-4 (Residential - up to four dwellinl?: units per acre) to CBD-DA (Central Business District with a Development Al?:reement) - M and H Development: M and H Development, represented by Greg Hall, is requesting approval of a rezone from R-4 (Residential - up to four units per acre) to CBD-DA (Central Business District with development agreement). The 0.47-acre site is located on the east side of North Eagle Road approximately 175-feet north of Idaho Street at 220 North Eagle Road. The application also includes the properties located at 16 and 144 East Idaho Street, a .31-acre parcel and a . 14-acre property respectively, located on the northeast corner the intersection of North Eagle Road and East Idaho Street, as a part of the development agreement. This item was continuedfrom the July 6, 2009 meeting. (JL) Chairman Tanner introduces the item. Greg Hall representing M&H Development, 101 Eagle Glen Eagle, Idaho. Mr. Hall states he did not receive the staff report. Staff confirms that it was mailed last Wednesday. Mr. Hall is provided with a copy of the report and staff is directed to make their presentation on the application in an effort to give Mr. Hall a chance to review the documents provided tonight. City Planner, Jeff Lowe reviews the staff report and site specific conditions of approval. Lowe comments on access points to the properties and the compliance with the comprehensive plan in regard to access. Further discussion between Lowe and Commission regarding site access and interconnectivity Page 1 of 5 K:IP&ZIMINUTES\Temporary Minutes Work AreaIPZ-08-03-09min.doc between the properties. Greg Hall reviews his application and the vision for the development. The vision was to create a pedestrian friendly concept that provides a sense of community and place in the downtown. They wanted a park type setting where you could go to a restaurant and watch your kids play similar to Hyde Park. An attempt was made to retain a number of the existing trees. They would like a service entrance that would be used a couple times a day. The alley is an issue for the developers and they do not want to incorporate it into this site. They would like a right in - right out and also maintain a northern access point for service deliveries. Dave Buich 3100 Glen Stewart Lane Eagle, Idaho. Mr. Buich based this concept on one he had originally seen in California. He is adamantly opposed to the alley that is mentioned in the staff report. The alley is the wrong concept, and there are other access options that work better for this site. He also has issue with the requirement of being hooked up to City services (water and sewer). As the neighboring Art Gallery was low impact and not required to hook into City services, that the same consideration be given to his project. Discussion. Tanner opens the public hearing. Lynne Sedlacek 1200 Hereford Dr. Eagle, Idaho. Ms. Sedlacek is here on behalf of the Carpenters' who are long time family friends. The challenge is that approval ofthis proposal would bring a commercial use that would abut a residential property. The Carpenters' live at 240 and 262 N. Eagle Road and one of the main concerns is to preserve access to their property should they want to develop their property in the future. If the alley proposed along the back side of the Carpenter property will ensure access (and thus prevent the Carpenter property from being landlocked) then it would be supported, but only if it does not apply to the Carpenter property until they are ready to develop. If the Carpenters were required to do it now, it would take out an existing garage and some mature trees with sentimental value. They do not want full access at the proposed service delivery entrance. Sedlacek suggests the Commissioners pay particular attention to Eagle City Code to 8-3-3 D. Additional concerns include site lighting, noise mitigation, and buffering. Discussion if this is the appropriate time address these items or if it would be sometime during the Design Review process. Discussion regarding access, noise mitigation and buffering. City Planner, Mike Williams notes that in the development agreement before the Commission tonight that lighting, buffering and noise restrictions may be addressed. Williams also notes that in regard to access on Eagle Road, the City is unable to guarantee future access upon redevelopment ofthese sites. Jan Shurte 1522 W. 15th Street Meridian, Idaho is also speaking on behalf of her mother and brother who live at 240 and 262 N. Eagle Road. Her family homesteaded in this town. They are concerned with both safety and privacy. The possibility of delivery vehicles and the noise associated them are of concern. They would like a barrier of some type that would mitigate noise, address light pollution concerns and deter people from trespassing onto her family's property as well as preserve their privacy. They are in favor of the right in and right out, but would I ike no access on the north side. Her Mom and brother do not want the proposed alley, even with the understanding of access issues to the property. Greg Hall rebuts testimony. Mr. Hall mentions perhaps meeting with the Carpenters' prior to Design Review process to review the proposed barrier options. Discussion. In general the Developers want the northern access; they would like the alley eliminated; they are hesitant to commit to a large masonry wall to mitigate sound as they are not even certain what the buildings will look like at this time;, and are opposed to the requirement of hooking up to City services. Tanner closes the public hearing. Smith likes the idea of the proposed development, but the north driveway is of concern unless there is some type of barrier that could reduce the noise impact substantially. Smith likes right in right out access. Noise mitigation is of concern. Aizpitarte agrees with the applicant that the alley proposed needs to be removed. Perhaps an 8' concrete post and panel between the service area and the Carpenter Page 2 of 5 K:\P&Z\MINUTESITemporary Minutes Work Area\PZ-08-03-09min.doc property would mitigate noise effectively. The Commission questions whether or not ACHD will allow a delivery access at the northern access point designated. Planner Lowe states that pursuant to the ACHD staff report, the northern access does not meet policy, but they alleviated that part of the policy because it would be a service area; only staff parking would not be allowed. Discussion. Villegas likes the project but is concerned with its impact on current residents. He would like some type of barrier, although he wouldn't want to make it cost prohibitive to the developer. Roehling is not in favor of the alley. He would like some restrictions on noise and lighting, and would like to preserve access on a northern boundary. Smith agrees with not allowing access on the northern boundary. General discussion. Discussion regarding the concepts generated from the public during the Downtown Planning process. City Planner Baird Spencer draws the Commissions attention to the fact that this proposal is contrary to the results produced during the Downtown Planning Process. Commissioner Aizpitarte disagrees with Planner Baird Spencer regarding the applicability of the concepts from the Downtown Planning Process. Discussion. Mr. Buich reiterates his opposition to the alley. Discussion amongst the Commission. The following are the questions the Commission would like staff to clarify or address regarding this item. · What is the purpose of the alley as it relates to the planning of this area. · Recommendations on site specific conditions restricting noise and lighting. · What are appropriate barriers in the TDA. · Clarification on the potential uses for the entrance at the northern boundary - limiting to service entrance only what are other options. · Provide the Commission with a better idea of what the macroscopic view of this area is, so this parcel can be viewed in that context. · Refresher on the downtown planning process and what that vision was. · Compare and contrast this application to the J Bar application in particular to the aesthetics area. · What are the logistics of an alley. . What are the cross accesses. · Better visual aids for the Commission. Roehling moves to continue RZ-05-09 - Rezone from R-4 (Residential - up to four dwelling units per acre) to CBD-DA (Central Business District with a Development Agreement) - M and H Development to September 14,2009. Seconded by Aizpitarte. ALL AYE...MOTION CARRIES. B. A-07-09/RZ-09-09 & PP/FP-OI-09 - Annexation And Rezone From Rut To A-R-DA and Combined Preliminary and Final Plat For Sulik Subdivision:Paul and Susan Sulik are requesting annexation and rezone with development agreement from RUT (Rural Urban Transition) to A-R-DA (Agricultural-Residential - up to one (1) unit per five (5) acres with a development agreement) and combined preliminary plat and final plat approval for Sulik Subdivision, a two (2) lot residential subdivision. The 10.01 - acre site is generally located on the north side of W. Beacon Light Road approximately 1,280 feet east of Hartley Road at 6344 W. Beacon Light Road. (MJW) Chairman Tanner introduces the item. Paul Sulik 6344 Beacon light Road Eagle, Idaho. Mr. Sulik reviews the application. Mr. Sulik would like to keep the barn as opposed to moving it or demolishing it. The barn is currently used for agricultural purposes. The long term goal is to keep this a residential use and later redevelop the property. City Planner Mike Williams reviews the staff report. Williams comments on Eagle City Code pertaining to building setbacks, buffering, easements and width requirements. Page 3 of 5 K:IP&Z\MINUTES\Temporary Minutes Work AreaIPZ-08-03-09mindoc Tanner opens the public hearing. Sulik rebuts testimony regarding irrigation allowance from the property. Tanner closes the public hearing. Discussion amongst the Commissioners. There IS a consensus that the barn should be allowed. Discussion regarding easements for irrigation. Smith moves to approve the annexation and rezone request, item A-07-09/RZ-09-09 & PP/FP-OI-09 - Annexation And Rezone From RUT To A-R-DA and Combined Preliminary and Final Plat For Sulik Subdivision with the standard conditions of approval and adding 2 conditions: The first one being using the appropriate language that in future no structures be built over the water delivery network system that is already there. And that the language pertaining to the easement description be included for the future, that Planner Williams described. City Attorney asks for clarity of the record that two separate motions are required. Smith moves to approve A-07-09 RZ-09-09 annexation and rezone request for this property. Seconded by Aizparte. Tanner moves to amend the motion and amends site specific condition of approval 3.4 to eliminate the 30' setback requirement for the existing barn and allow for it to remain until such time as the property is further developed and/or the adjoining property is developed. Second concurs. ALL AYE...MOTION CARRIES Smith moves to approve the PP/FP-OI-09 Combined Preliminary and Final Plat with the conditions described earlier with the irrigation easements discussed earlier. Seconded by Tanner. Smith amends the motion to add the irrigation conditions discussed earlier. Staff is directed to build those conditions recognizing the irrigation easements, where they are located and to be recognized by an instrument. Second concurs with the amendment. ALL AYE...MOTION CARRIES. C. RZ-19-06 MOD - Development Al?:reement Modification - M3 Companies, LLC.: M3 Companies, LLC, represented by Gerry Robbins, is requesting a modification to the pre-annexation/rezone/development agreement for the M3 Eagle Development to include site specific hillside and grading standards as required within the original development agreement. The 6,005 acre site is generally located north of the Farmers Union Canal and Homer Road, east of State Highway 16 and west of Willow Creek Road. (NBS) Chairman Tanner introduces the item. Aizpitarte asks for clarification as to which document will be discussed, as he was provide with three different versions with different dates on them. Planner Baird Spencer directs Commission Aizpitarte's attention to the "Staff and Applicant changes dated 6/25/09" draft that shows strike through and underline format as recommended by the City Attorney. Planner Nichoel Baird Spencer reviews the history ofthe M3 application. Gerry Robbins 533 E. Riverside Dr. Ste. 110 Eagle, Idaho representing M3 Companies LLC. Mr. Robbins reviews the application. This was a requirement of the development agreement that was originally approved in 2007. Mr. Robbins briefly touches on numerous conditions contained in the document including the following: the variations of topography of the M3 properties, existing soils and vegetation, view sheds, the grading typologies and conceptual grading plan, landscape and erosion control, mass grading permits. Tanner opens the public hearing. Robbins compliments City Staff and specifically Baird Spencer and Vaughan for all of their efforts in this process it has been a good experience. Tanner closes the public hearing. Page 4 of 5 K:\P&ZIMINUTESITemporary Minutes Work Area\PZ-08-03-09min.doc Tanner moves to approve the application as presented. Seconded by Smith. Discussion. ALL AYE...MOTION CARRIES. 6. NEW BUSINESS: None 7. REPORTS: A. Commission: B. City Attorney C. Staff 8. ADJOURNMENT: Tanner Hearing no further business, the Commission meeting adjourned at 9:45 p.m. RESPECTFULL Y SUBMITTED: ,........ ", .... ,......, Of E A G, .... ..' "'" ....... <w~ ". ~.. ~ ... ... \ ~ ~/. ~ORA l' ... ~ .. ~ ~..... ...... : : v ._ : : . . . till' .: CITY CLERK/TREASURE\ ir \. Sf.. f\ ~~l 0 j ~ .. ,,~ . ...\1.. .:z:;" .. .r. ..(OkPO~~'\.. 't" ~ ..~. u.,. .,....... :Q ,,'" .... --i 1'E Of \ "" APPROVED: """"..11"'" ~- ~~2 GARY TANNER J CHAIRMAN A TRANSCRIBABLE RECORD OF THIS MEETING IS AVAILABLE AT CITY HALL. Page 5 of 5 K:IP&ZIMINUTESITemporary Minutes Work AreaIPZ-08-03-09min.doc EAGLE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING SIGN-UP SHEET August 3, 2009 - 6:00 p.m. SUBJECT: RZ-05-09 - Rezone from R-4 (Residential - un to four dwelling units per acre) to CBD - DA (Central Business District with a Development Agreement) - M and H Development: NAME F)A. r1/06bye/6/14=76 ADDRESS/ TELEPHONE/E-MAI sates/ /yJ, � Z /$7 / S oxo id L/6L 1 i /i( J, 46LL TESTIFY YES/NO? PRO/CON NQ EAGLE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING SIGN-UP SHEET August 3, 2009 - 6:00 p.m. SUBJECT: RZ-19-06 MOD — Development Agreement Modification - M3 Companies, LLC.: ADDRESS/ TESTIFY NAME TELEPHONE/E-MAIL YES/NO? PRO/CON EAGLE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING SIGN-UP SHEET August 3, 2009 - 6:00 p.m. SUBJECT: A-07-09/RZ-09-09 & PP/FP-01-09 - Annexation And Rezone From Rut To A -R -DA and Combined Preliminary and Final Plat For Sulik Subdivision: ADDRESS/ TESTIFY NAME TELEPHONE/E-MAIL YES/NO? PRO/CON EAGLE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING SIGN-UP SHEET September 14, 2009 SUBJECT: A-09-09/RZ-10-09 - Annexation and Rezone from RP and RR (Rural Preservation and Rural Residential - Ada County Designations to PS (Public/Semipublic) - City of Eagle: NAME min u // rM 110 i. ADDRESS/ TESTIFY TELEPHONE/E-MAIL YES/NO? PRO/CON e, K b l f i� 7/t'' N-ff--TAey- 4 Of Na Vo [Jo re) pro