HomeMy WebLinkAboutArbor Court DR Minutes 4.13.21 w applicantOffice of Community Services
& Economic Development
PO Box 5604 – 5160 Yellowstone Avenue, Chubbuck, ID 83202
208.237.2430 – Fax 208.237.2409
www.CityofChubbuck.us
Design Review Minutes (w applicant)
Project Name:
Arbor Court Apartments
Applicant Name:
Daren Crockett
Applicant Address:
244 E. Chubbuck Rd.
Project Address:
295 E. Chubbuck Rd.
Email:
dcrockett@vandykmortgage.com
Date:
April 13, 2021
Applicant, Darren Crockett: Doing what’s been done, mirrors what Jonathan Vincent has done by Tastee Treat. Measurements are all identical with maybe a little more space between buildings.
Plan has already has been approved and done elsewhere.
Regarding the vision for downtown, the biggest issue is there is nothing in ordinance yet for that area. As much as you plan or want it done, it’s not done. The person selling the
land owns a car dealership next to him, is a friend, and was already making plans to put car lot there. What staff is wanting/visioning, isn't going to happen. It’s been for sale for
years. People aren’t beating down doors to put in what staff wants. It’ll be apartments or a car lot. The City has a larger need for housing than car lot.
Referencing parking, He has created ample parking for his development, others businesses should do the same. It should not be on the burden of the person who owns the land to create
parking for other businesses.
In regards to the suggestion that the doors face Burley Dr., not a single apartment complex in town that has front doors facing back doors, it’s very awkward. Referencing zero setbacks,
picture a tenant opening door to hit skateboarder on the side walk. That is very awkward and won’t rent well. It’s not desirable and not city’s place to make those decisions.
Different roof lines and different colors – plan is to dress up outside. Back view, not planning for flat, will plan for pop outs with alternate colors. The City is on a slippery slope
if telling him what roof lines he can have, colors, and where doors need to face.
The City preferred 2 entrances which doesn’t work because he would lose a whole lot and the land is very expensive. The single entrance is a full 80 feet wide, plenty of room for access
in and out. Driveway is over 40 feet plenty to get stuff in and out of and is bigger than Jonathan’s project. Both are also dead ends inside.
Hillam wanted to clear up misconceptions – doors don’t open directly onto sidewalks, there is a 10-foot landscaping buffer requirement on street ROW. Angled parking is a street improvement
in the ROW that would serve this development and others. Crockett stated he has his own parking internally and shouldn’t be asked to create parking for someone else’s business.
Hillam clarified aesthetics are outside of Design Review Committee but were passing along thoughts and comment the LUDC would likely recommend. LUDC will make that determination and
will use staff recommendations to aid their decision.
Burch, on behalf of City leadership, it is not Staff’s view of downtown, the entire city organization is focused on the downtown vision commitment. CDA, has an active role in developing
that along with the Council, Mayor, and others. Burch acknowledged it is a new vision but one they are committed to, it’s not just staff’s ideas and thoughts. Crockett stated he understood
but to go in and ask business owner to make changes based on something that hasn’t happened yet, regardless of vision – unless the City is developing – it isn’t the City’s role. It’s
up to private investors and what they are willing to do. If he doesn’t do it – it will be a car lot.
Mayor England asked Crockett to work with everyone involved to make it happen. The City has tried for a number of years to create this concept of downtown and have received community
input and created a vision they would love to see happen. Mayor conveyed he would hate to give up on a vision with the very first development that goes in. Mayor again asked Crockett
to work as closely as he can with others to make it look as close to the vision as possible. A lot of the vision has come through community input and surveys of what the community has
said they want the area to look like.
Crockett stated he agreed but downtown businesses would like to have a housing option to walk around downtown. Part of having downtown has to have housing.
Mayor England and Attorney Holmes suggested an in person design review. Hillam suggested running through a few technical aspects for Crockett to incorporate prior to the in person meeting.
The group then discussed item #1:
Traffic Safety and Traffic Congestion: (ingress, egress, off-street parking, unloading)
Code requires 80 foot of ROW, 40 foot from center line. Crockett stated It’s 25 feet right now if he goes to 40 will lose 15 feet and then project is done. Burch stated that is a standard
that would apply to any development in the City for a higher classification roadway. 15 foot additional ROW would be expected for any use on the parcel. Holmes added that future roadway
planning is part of the comprehensive plan and city code (sited by Hillam) to make sure development sustains future needs.
Burch clarified that technical aspects are not unique to this project or downtown, they would apply anywhere in the city.
Access shown is on property not owned by applicant. Interior space would not accommodate sanitation or emergency service vehicles. Second access or a reconfiguration of internal traffic
patterns needed. Crockett stated it is wider than Jonathan’s development (The Falls). Jonathan has designated fire turn around areas – hammer head requirements, etc.
Crockett asked again about the 40 foot ROW, Holmes stated that it is a functional classification for future planning and the City will adhere to that. Road classification system looks
20 years plus into the future and as parcels redevelop they have to plan for traffic flows. Crockett asked if the ordinances recorded and in place. Holmes and Hillam again confirmed
that requirement is in City Code and in the comprehensive plan. It’s 25 feet today but it’s not in the future plan. A car lot would also require 40 feet.
Crockett stated 40 feet does not leave room for project and if the City wants to hold to that which doesn’t exist, he is done. The City vision will have car lot.