Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-11-1995 DRC DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES - APRIL 11, 1995 Members Present: Dave Skelton Chuck Winn Kurt Albrecht Rick Hixson John Paysek Staff Present: Therese Berger Dale Beland Debbie Arkell Lanette Windemaker Visitors Present: Mike Teslow Patrick Pierzina Sher Rosenberg Ben Lloyd Dab Dabney Everet Egburt Final Week Review 1 . Bridger Arms Z-9533 Planner Beland reviewed the proposal, written comments from Fred Shields (Water/Sewer Department) , written comments from Rick Hixson (Engineering Department) , and the staff memo. He indicated that, since the Committee ' s last review, the applicant has submitted additional information which addresses Kurt Albrecht ' s concerns . Planner Beland reiterated Fred Shields ' comments to Mike Teslow who arrived late to the meeting. He noted that the applicant would be required to widen the driveway off Babcock from 20 ' to 241 . Mike Teslow indicated that found a buyer for existing house on the site. Planner Beland explained the appeal process and deadline. Chuck Winn moved, seconded by Kurt Albrecht, to recommend approval of the proposal per conditions outlined by staff and the DRC. The motion carried with a unanimous voice vote of the members present. 2 . Auto Body Experience Z-9537 Planner Arkell reviewed the project and noted that she received a letter from a property owner who lives in Butte who feels the area should be reserved for residential housing. She explained that the entire area is designated for light industrial uses per the Master Plan. She noted that she also received an anonymous phone call from an individual who believes the proposed name is repulsive. Planner Arkell reviewed staff conditions and recommendations . Patrick Pierzina commented that Rex Easton has contacted him regarding the coordination of landscaping. He confirmed with Planner Arkell that a hedge that is a minimum height of 18" can be installed as long as it grows to 61 . Chuck Winn reviewed written comments from the Fire Department. Kurt Albrecht reviewed written comments from the Building Division. Patrick Pierzina explained that one door will be closed off . Rick Hixson reviewed written comments from Engineering Department. Patrick Pierzina verified that the floor drains are plugged. Patrick Pierzina confirmed that an engineering firm would be able to assist in designing the storm drainage. He remarked that Matzinger Electric and Crescent Electric have expressed interest in paving the property. Dave Skelton remarked that the proposal is consistent with zoning and the Master Plan in terms of the commercial growth in the area. Dave Skelton moved, seconded by Chuck Winn, to approve with conditions outlined by staff and members of the DRC. The motion carried with a unanimous voice vote of the members present . Dave Skelton noted the appeal process and deadline. 3 . Amalgamated, Inc. Z-9534 Planner Windemaker reviewed the project, the proposed deviations, adjacent developments, and staff conditions . She reviewed written comments from both Fred Shields (Water/Sewer Department) and Roger Sicz (Streets/Sanitation Department) . John Paysek reviewed written comments from the Engineering Department. Ben Lloyd confirmed that curbing will need to be provided on the existing driveway. Kurt Albrecht remarked that, since the applicant is converting a residence into an office building, he/she will need to provide engineering calculations that verify that the structure will meet loading requirements . Chuck Winn indicated he has no comments . Dave Skelton noted that the setback issue will be resolved by requiring the applicant to locate at least one corner pin. He reiterated to the applicants that the DRC recommendation will be exclusive of the deviations requested. John Paysek moved, seconded by Kurt Albrecht, to recommend conditional approval of the application exclusive of the deviations . Second Week Review 1. Spring Meadows Z-9535 Planner Arkell noted that final comments on the subject project are due next week, based on the plan received April 5th. She reviewed the proposed water and sewer extensions and noted that Fred Shields ' comments which she received are based upon the old site plan. Chuck Winn remarked that the plan does not show the fire service line or fire truck turnaround. He said he would assume the building would need a 4" fire service line depending upon the sprinkler system and indicated that the existing fire hydrant should serve the proposed building adequately. Rick Hixson commented that the water service line is shown under the building and would not be acceptable. Planner Arkell said that the developer will most likely need a 404 permit because access to the proposed parking on the west side crosses wetlands . Dave Skelton remarked that he would prefer to have dimensions noted before making a final decision. Rick Hixson noted the lack of proposed detention areas . Planner Arkell remarked that information shown on the original submittal is lacking on the revised site plan. She indicated that the applicant provided revised drainage calculations; however, did not show where the drainage is going. She confirmed with Rick Hixson that the applicant would need to submit such information prior to approval . Kurt Albrecht remarked that he would like to see a foundation investigation to obtain the bearing capacity of the soil . Planner Arkell indicated that the proposal will be conditioned to that effect. Rick Hixson indicated that the site plan will need to show the 100 year flood plain line for Matthew Bird Creek. Planner Arkell confirmed with Rick Hixson that a 3" service line would work for the structure, but would need to be relocated. The two briefly discussed some alternative locations . Review of the project was continued until the applicant submits the following: 1) Water service line annot be located under a building. 2) Location of fire service line. 3) Adequate fire truck turn around. 4) A dimensioned site plan, including access, parking widths . 5) Drainage retention/detention areas . 6) 100 Year Flood Plain boundary on site plan. 7) Distinguish between existing and proposed trees . One Week Review 1 . Comstock Apartments Z-94104 Planner Windemaker reviewed the proposed changes and indicated that she is not asking for any formal decision, but for issues that may jump out as concerns. She explained that the original proposal became cost prohibitive so the applicant has eliminated the northernmost building. Chuck Winn indicated that he has been working with the applicants and the proposal meets fire safety concerns . Planner Windemaker noted that, with the revisions, the site is opened up and allows additional parking. Rick Hixson remarked that the site layout seems to be an improvement from the original proposal . Planner Windemaker noted Fred Shields ' comment that enough information is lacking on the site plan. She remarked that she would assume that his standard comments would apply to the proposal . Dave Skelton remarked that the Committee can forward a message onto City Commission that, as long as the original conditions of approval stand, the Committee has no problems with the revisions . Discussion Item 1 . Willows Pre-Application Planner Windemaker asked for comments on the subject proposal . Chuck Winn remarked that the developer will need to make provisions for a turnaround. John Paysek recommended a temporary cul -de-sac at the end of Willow Way. Chuck Winn asked if a road connection would be made through the site. Planner Windemaker responded that eventually a connection should be made. John Paysek remarked that barricades could be installed for the time being at the end of Mendenhall . He added that if the applicant decides to include a common park, the City might consider allowing the amenities in the detention/retention area in the park area.