LAPEL PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING

AUGUST 11, 2022

In attendance: Andrea Baldwin, Dan Paddock, Jeff Keith, Matt Wood, Angie Callaway, Corrie Myer and town Attorney Evan McMullen.

6:30pm meeting called to order.

President Keith paused the meeting to open the floor for public comment.  Tim Munro 304 Central Ave and member of the Lapel BZA addressed the Planning Commission regarding a variance for his daughter that lives in Brookside.  Lots zoned as R1 and for every type of addition in those neighborhoods a variance should be required.  Permits have been issued that have not obtained a variance so we need to follow the rules of everyone that gets a permit also gets their variance required with it.  We need to be consistent.  My daughter followed all the rules paid the fees but other people were issued a permit and were not required to get a variance.  President Keith agreed and said that Innovative Planning is working to ease the needs of variances in those neighborhoods.  Discussion ended and President Keith reopened the regular meeting.

Motion to approve the June 9 2022 minutes made by Wood, 2^nd by Paddock and all were in favor.

Motion to approve permits 2673-2685 made by Callaway, 2^nd by Baldwin and all were in favor.

COLE PUD-Andy Cole presented a revision to his design which allows better flow in the development.  The proposed development is being built on the 25 acres next the Lapel High School and the Lapel Optimist Club not currently including the Hersberger real estate. The proposed development is a mixed use community, grocery, retail, single family homes with 97 homes total.  Each home will be part of an HOA with shared maintenance.  PUD is written to adopt all codes except lot size which is the same as our zoning codes.

Corrie Myer gave her overview of the project to the Planning Commission: What they’re requesting is to rezone the property for a planned unit development. We have a base criteria already written and they’re using that base as a foundation and make any changes the base they are using is C1 commercial for residential the base is R2.  Sidewalks will be a minimum of 8 feet which is greater than our restrictions interior sidewalks will be 5 feet.  They do note that they will dedicate the streets it’s a 40 foot half right away along real estate on St Rd 32 and a 30 foot half right away when the interact with 900 W and when it interacts with 200 S a 30 foot half right away.  They’re committing to do street trees. 

If you decide to adopt this tonight I would suggest that you adopt this presentation as an exhibit to the PUD that way those home president pictures are part of the package that way when they apply for permits the building inspector can look at those pictures and agree that this is the president we’re trying to achieve.  A couple of things they are varying from is the detention pond code requires 20 foot strip of landscaping of natural plantings and they are suggesting that does not apply.  Parking on side streets may be allowed within a utility easement.  This was sent over to utilities and no concerns were raised with the language.  On the entrance driveways into the neighborhood we have a standard that says if you’re coming up to an intersection that’s an arterial intersection which is what 32 is you can’t be within 100 feet of that intersection basically creating safe distances and they do not want that to apply on this ordinance and they’re also asking for a waiver for interior plantings for individual lots our code has residential interior planting minimums and they’re asking for a waiver on that. Fire had some concerns about truck access in cottage area but that’s coordination as the plan goes thru.  From my standpoint I think this is a well written PUD this gives you a different type of housing product you don’t have in Lapel it is smaller than anything else but that is the trend.  Mr. Cole would be the person responsible of maintaining the standard of the neighborhood. 

Wood asked if the parking lot to the east could be expanded farther east cutting out the bungalows and the 2 story houses you would allow a nice lot for parking for the bungalows as well as the park and visitors.  Cole said he’s relying on some of the Optimist Club parking as well as park parking. At this time the Planning Commission meeting was put on hold so the Lapel Town Council could hold a Special Meeting.   Meeting was resumed after the Lapel Town Council had concluded their Special Meeting.

President Keith paused the Planning meeting and opened a Public Hearing for the Cole PUD.  Gary Shuck 227 E 9^th Street had a question for the commission, “So you’re looking at adopting the specific PUD for that particular acreage.  Has there been engineering and drainage?”  Cole stated this was the primary plat.  Shuck wanted it made clear that the commission was only adopting the zoning specific to this PUD.

President Keith asked if there was any other public comment regarding the Cole PUD a brief discussion was held on entrances to the development for retail.  There will be three entrances total. 

Being no further public comment the Public Hearing was closed and the regular meeting reopened.

Myer suggests motion be that the Commission accepts the PUD as written with additional presentation attached as president images within the PUD document.  What you’re approving is the general concept they can’t make lots smaller from here.  Cole states they’re going to follow this land plan but is happy to adjust the east parking lot.

Motion to approve Woodward Place PUD with the exhibit as part of the PUD for the presentation to the Council made by Callaway, 2^nd by Paddock and all were in favor.

Bryant Keesling came before the Planning Commission to discuss a re-plat of a 5 acre plot on 900. Along 300.  Currently zoned AG.  They want to subdivide the property to sell 3 acres to their son.  Myer suggests Commission favorably recommend to Council and that Keesling’s follow the formal re-plat process file a petition with legal description and hold a Public Hearing at the September 8 Planning Commission meeting. President Keith said he saw no issues with what the Keesling’s were proposing to do. 

The building inspector asks that the Commission consider having a permit for sewer repairs then we would know when a sewer has been worked on because they require inspections. This would be an addendum to the current zoning codes and fee schedule. 

Gary Shuck was asked to discuss Shelby Materials and their “temporary” plant.  Shuck gave a background on how the plant came to be.  The Commission does not believe they meet the codes of how things should be.  Joe Shetterly brought the project to the Commission on the Giving Hope Foundation in 2013.  The foundation was to care for autistic children and their families.  One of the individuals included in the foundation at the time was Richard Hale of Shelby Materials.  Shetterly stated there would be lots of concrete needed for the project and they would fix roads build deceleration lanes but they needed 10 acres to set up for a TEMPORARY ready mix plant they said they would use it to build their buildings and roads and it would be temporary and they would need the ready mix facility first.  The Commission was under the understanding that Giving Hope was going to take care of the buffering and the road work.  The plans came in, they have a website and a sign up on the location but no work is being done out there.  Shuck and Wainscott met with Hale in 2017 about fixing the buffering and roads and were told by Hale that the plant was never going to be a temporary plant.  Shuck stated that Shetterly said it would be temporary to which Hale replied that Shetterly did not speak for him.  Hale said he could not fix the road and was not going to fix the road.  Retherford and Shuck were supposed to meet with Hale after she came on the Council but Hale has yet to show up for a set meeting. President Keith asked what would be our legal path to cite them for not following our zoning codes. Myer stated we have language to support the zoning violations in our code and we would cite them for not following code as well as attach a fee if not brought to code. McMullen to review and report back to Planning Commission.  President Keith asked that we table this discussion until next meeting.

319 W 9^th person living in a garage that is not a legal apartment discussion asked to be tabled due to lack of Code Enforcement.  Paddock suggested forming a subcommittee within the Planning Commission to handle some of the Code Enforcement issues until a new Code Enforcement officer can be hired. President Keith asked to table these items until next meeting.  McMullen to investigate if a subcommittee can be formed within the Planning Commission. 

Old Business: Mr. Turner neighbor south of Tuscany Development raised concerns about access to his driveway since that time the developer has met with Mr. Turner and has suggested changes to leave off curb on their side of road build a sidewalk on north side but not on the south side wedge the asphalt and make grade change for Mr. Turner to get up into his property.  Also a couple at 434 Central that had parking issues but these changes will allow the couple to continue parking in front of their home.  Myer reviewed all these changes, no vote is necessary and Mr. Turner and 434 Central are now happy with the developer’s plans. 

President Keith was asked to provide addresses for Tuscany he would like to ask them to split the one street name into two to make everything consistent with numbering on the houses. 

Gary Shuck addressed the Commission regarding the Lapel One plat which was done as an administrative subdivision and they were not to be split again at all.  But since there was a mistake made on the Franklin’s we said we would split it one more time.  Corrie says you’re lowering the minimum to 5 acres which is great for when someone else comes in and wants so split a 25 acre lot.

Myer then gave a presentation to the Commission on the continuation of the zoning code changes. 

Once Myer gave her presentation to the Commission motion to adjourn was made by Wood, 2^nd by Paddock and all were in favor

Back