Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-28-1995 DRC DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES - MARCH 28, 1995 Members Present: Chuck Winn, Acting Chairperson Rick Hixson John Paysek Fred Shields Kurt Albrecht Craig Brawner Staff Present: Therese Berger Lanette Windemaker Debbie Arkell Dale Beland Visitors Present: Dave Grigsby Joe Sabol Ursula Neese Myan McGeachy Dennis Downing Doug Price Lowell Springer Gene Mickolio Rex Fas+or. Final Week Review 1 . Vander Jagt Z-9529 Planner Windemaker reviewed the proposal and staff memo dated March 28 , 1995 . She recognized several letters in opposition to the project which note traffic as a major concern and indicated that the site would probably generate 10-15 trips per day. Planner Windemaker noted the two requested deviations and read conditions from the Staff Report . John Paysek reviewed written comments from the Engineering Department and noted the importance of conditions #2 and #3 . He added that the grading plan provided with the improvement drawings will be used to establish the building foundation grades . Roger Sicz remarked that it would be necessary to tie the existing sidewalk into the proposed curb and gutter and to extend the pavement from the edge of the gutter beyond the edge of the centerline of the street to maintain the integrity of the crown. Kurt Albrecht remarked that, since the south wall of the structure is shown 8 ' from the property line, it will require a one hour wall and 3/4 hour windows . John Paysek remarked that the applicant will need to work with the Engineering Department on the engineering of the street widening to avoid any birdbaths . Joe Sabol commented that he understands that the entire northeast neighborhood is subject to a proposed drainage plan. Craig Brawner clarified that the distinction between storm sewer drainage for the entire northeast neighborhood and the subject on- site drainage. Roger Sicz voiced concern that the infrastructure placement might be unreasonable due to the street elevation and the applicant might possibly have to postpone the installation until the entire street can be reconstructed. He remarked that if the project is to proceed and curb & gutter is not required, he would want to see "no parking" signs along Avocado and Plum Streets to protect the integrity of the asphalt surface edges . He questioned the maneuverability in the alley and said that it would need to be paved up to the edge of the property at Avocado. Dave Grigsby commented that the alley is 24 , wide. Roger Sicz remarked that the applicant would need to sign waivers for SID for improvements to Plum, Avocado and Peach. He noted that drainage currently goes into the Simkins property. Phill Forbes noted that he has conditioned the project to require that access to and use of the loading berth must be entirely on-site as backing movements out in Avocado are not acceptable. He remarked that templates for the largest service vehicle must be included on the final site plan. Fred Shields reviewed written comments from the Water/Sewer Departments . Planner Windemaker added that if the applicant opts to extend the water service from the existing building, the project would no longer be reviewed as a minor site plan. Craig Brawner confirmed with Chuck Winn that fire protection is adequate. Chuck Winn indicated that he has made several trips to the sight and the hydrant placement looks sufficient. He added that if the use changes from what is proposed, the situation would need to be reconsidered. Phill Forbes moved, seconded by Roger Sicz, to approve the proposal with conditions outlined by the DRC and Planning Staff . The motion carried with a unanimous voice vote of the members present . Planner Windemaker noted the appeal deadline. Second Week Review 1. Spring Meadows Z-9535 Planner Arkell reviewed the project and noted a phone call from Gene Graf, who farms property east and west of the site, who expressed concern regarding the swampy nature of the area. She indicated that a site inspection will be in order to determine whether a 404 permit will be required. Planner Arkell briefed the history of the PUD and discussed adjacent zoning. She voiced concern regarding the wetlands nature of the site and the lack of adequate turnaround for fire trucks . Planner Arkell noted the location of sewer and water lines and indicated that no sizes are listed. Fred Shields added that the plan shows the water as a service line, but it would need to be an extension of the main. He noted an 8" stub at the northeast corner of the site that was installed specifically for the subject site. Craig Brawner suggested that the stub line may be under- seized for the use. Chuck Winn commented that a sprinkler system would need to be installed and access to within 150 feet of the furthest point of the building would need to be provided. Rick Hixson noted that the manhole to which sewer is shown to be connected to is only 5 .4 feet deep per the as-built drawings and voiced concern that the system might be too shallow. He indicated that 10 clean-outs would be required on the sewer line due to the length. He added that paving of Graf Street to the property line would probably be required. Planner Arkell confirmed with Phill Forbes that the applicant would need an easement from Mr. Graf to improve the culdesac as it extends beyond the subject property line. Craig Brawner remarked that, based on the existing soil conditions and the magnitude of the project, some consideration should be given to requiring geo- technical work on the site both for the street section design and for the future building. Kurt Albrecht agreed. Lowell Springer indicated that he has talked to the Corps of Engineers , the ASC office and the Schaffer & Associates regarding the pond areas . He noted an illegal dam on the creek which raised the water table and indicated that he feels the pond on the east side of the site could be a real amenity. He added that he would like to develop a linear park walkway through that area as many ducks and geese visit. Planner Arkell noted that a portion of the lot is within he 100 year flood plan. Fred Shields remarked that the main would need to be extended from the southeast portion of the site. Lowell Springer asked if services could be taken one each from the northeast and southeast corner of the site. Fred Shields commented that he would like the service length limited to 1501 . Phill Forbes asked if the site is affected by the Post Plan Trail System. Planner Arkell responded that the Matthew Bird Plan has no connections through the site. Initial week Review 1. - Bridger Arms Z-9533 Planner Beland reviewed the project and noted adjacent developments . He briefly discussed the two proposed deviations and asked the Committee to consider the issue of access . Roger Sicz remarked that parking in the area is limited and voiced concern about exacerbating the problem. Fred Shields noted that existing and proposed water and sewer lines are not shown on the site plan. Kurt Albrecht commented that the top of the proposed foundation looks to be lower that the contour lines on the plans . He noted that the building would need to meet UBC requirements in regards to the foundation height. 2 . Amalgamated, Inc. Z-9534 Planner Windemaker reviewed the proposal and adjacent developments . She noted the three parking spaces which back into the alley and the proposed handicapped ramp into the building on the 5th Avenue side. In response to Craig Brawner' s query, Planner Windemaker noted that the house, garage, driveway, and trees currently exist. Kurt Albrecht confirmed with Planner Windemaker that the site is currently used as a residence. Kurt Albrecht remarked that the Class B occupancy might possibly change the building loading requirements . Phill Forbes asked if the applicant needs a deviation for backing into the alley. Planner Windemaker remarked that when an existing structure is re-used, there is generally a list of clean- up deviations . Craig Brawner confirmed with Planner Windemaker that parking, as proposed, is adequate. John Paysek and Planner Windemaker briefly discussed the proposed snow removal and storm water detention areas . 3 . Auto Body Experience Z-9537 Planner Arkell reviewed the project and distributed photos of the existing structure. She remarked that only interior changes will be made to the structure and asked the Committee to review the existing gravel drive and parking area. Chuck Winn remarked that the project is in the Story Mill Fire District. Planner Arkell commented that the site is on a septic and well system; however, any rest room facilities would need to have the consideration of the County Environmental Health Department. She indicated that no floor drains are shown on the plans . Kurt Albrecht commented that the use will probably put the structure into an H-4 occupancy and noted that the building type may be difficult to convert to meet fire requirements if necessary. Craig Brawner asked if the Uniform Plumbing Code would require floor drains . Kurt Albrecht indicated that he would look into the issue and remarked that, if floor drains exist, they would need to have grit and separators . Roger Sicz voiced concern that any signage be considered now to mark "no parking" , loading and handicapped zones . He also expressed frustration at parking in the city in general and noted incidences where businesses, established through the business license application process only, offer no off-street parking. He questioned whether the direction of the city is to accommodate businesses with residential parking. Phill Forbes confirmed with Planner Arkell that parking seems to be adequate. First of Two Week Review 1. Danhof Concept Plan Z-9536 Planner Windemaker reviewed the proposal and noted adjacencies . She indicated that parking may not be adequate, but the PUD process warrants a consideration of reduced standards . Roger Sicz confirmed that the alley would be used as an access and remarked that it would need to be paved. John Paysek voiced concern that the stairs off of North 8th meet ADA requirements . Craig Brawner noted a pronounced drop-off to the back of the curb and suggested the Committee require proper grading and landscaping. Fred Shields remarked that sidewalk exists on the subject block. Craig Brawner remarked that he doesn' t think they can terrace the sidewalk into the right-of-way. 2 . Speedy Lube Z-9531 Planner Arkell reviewed the proposal and explained that code allows for modifications to existing approved site plans by the Planning Director. She remarked that Planning Director Epple has asked that DRC review the proposed modification to address any concerns . Planner Arkell added that the 3rd bay was to be only used for storage per the original approval . Chuck Winn remarked that he believes the bay is being used by the owner for personal purposes . He added that he would be visiting the site soon due to the recent problem with flammable liquids on-site. Phill Forbes noted that nothing scaled accurately on the original project drawings . Planner Arkell remarked that she believes the required landscaping and improvements were completed and noted that the site plan and footprint of the building is not changing. Roger Sicz asked Planner Arkell to check if the alley has been paved. One Week Review 1. ZMA for Bridger Creek Lots 41 & 42 Planner Arkell reviewed the proposal and asked the Committee for any concerns . In response to Roger Sicz ' question, Planner Arkell explained that Story Mill Road will be widened as part of the Bridger Creek Subdivision. John Paysek confirmed with Planner Arkell that the streets are public. Phill Forbes remarked that the preapplication for the amended plat of lots 41 and 42 of the Bridger Creek Subdivision did not get a real good response from DRC. Planner Arkell said that a new pre- application has been submitted. Rex Easton commented that he has purchased a portion of the M- 1 property to the south which will be a shop for the golf course and will be a buffer between the commercial and residential uses .