HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity/County Planning Board Minutes 04.30.2009WORKSHOP
Laurel Planning Board
April 30, 2009 6:00 pm
Council Chamber
Members Present: Dan Koch, City Rep.
Dick Fritzler, County Rep.
Hazel Klein, City Rep.
John VanAken, County Rep.
Kathy Siegrist, County Rep.
Greg Nelson, Member-at-Large
Others present: James Caniglia
Cheryll Lund
Kurt Markegard
The meeting started at 6:05 pm.
Signs
James talked about signs being placed in Residential Professional zones. There are no
codes that address signage specifically for Residential Professional zones. James feels
that this needs to be addressed.
James asked the board what they wanted to do regarding electronic signage. He feels that
electronic signs can make areas uncontrolled, as well as confusing to people trying to find
a business. He asked the board members for their input regarding either controlling the
information on the signs more strictly or just banning electronic signs completely.
The board discussed options such as limiting message time and only allowing letters and
numbers on the signs. Several board members expressed wanting to have electronic
message displays banned completely.
Building Materials
James stated that when the entry way zoning district was established in 2002 there were
building design standards regarding building materials that he feels are not being
enforced by the building department. He gave an example of the CVS building on SE
Fourth Street.
James read the ordinance (003-31 - B (1) "All buildings shall be completed on all sides
with one of the following finishing material: brick, fluted block, colored textured block,
glass, stucco, architectural concealed fastener metal panels, exterior insulation and
finishing systems (i.e., Dryvit, etc.), stone or wood. Exposed seam metal buildings shall
be prohibited unless covered with an acceptable finishing material".
James would like to see city codes require a certain percentage of natural building
materials on all commercial buildings, not just in the entryway zoning district.
The board discussed what percentage of natural building materials should be considered
and how it would be addressed. The discussion also included whether or not to require
all sides of the building to be considered in the percentage of coverage or only the sides
of the building within public view.
The board discussed how to make commercial buildings more appealing to window
shoppers and the possibility of changing setback requirements so that new construction
within the commercial district would be set closer to the sidewalks.
The new West Laurel Interchange was discussed and the board decided to look at how
they would like to see this commercial/residential area developed more in-depth. The
intent is to make the entry into Laurel appealing enough to entice travelers to spend extra
time in Laurel.
James suggested the possibility of creating a new zoning definition for that area to create
a momentum for business types the city would like to see go into that specific area.
James would like to hold a workshop in the next few months to have a workshop
specifically to work on the area around the proposed new interchange.
Parking Lot Requirements
Kurt Markegard, Public Works Director spoke to the board members.
Kurt pointed out that at this time the City of Laurel does not have building codes that
require curbs in parking lots to be installed prior to an occupancy permit being issued.
Site plans are submitted and reviewed prior to the permit being issues, but there is not a
code that specifies curbing and ingress/egress into a businesses parking lot be done. This
has resulted in several businesses having part of their parking lot paved and part not
paved. This puts unwanted gravel into the city streets from customers coming in and out
of these parking lots and creates problems in having to sweep the streets and also gravel
running into the storm drains that eventually makes its way to the River.
Kurt went on to say that to correct this problem curbing or driving barriers should be
required inside these parking lots to keep customers from driving onto mud areas. He
feels that the existing businesses with this problem need to be notified that they need to
correct these problems and be given a time frame to accomplish the task.
It would be a lot easier if this issue was addressed prior to the building being built and
occupied.
2
Kurt stated that if this problem is not addressed there will come a time where the turbity
from the storm water will affect our sewer discharge. They will tie one in the same
together and the City will have to start monitoring and cleaning it. The EPA will get
involved.
James said that there is a possibility that there may be a section of our zoning regulations
that can be taken out and placed into the building code section. He will look into this
further and see what can be done to change this.
The Board feels this issue needs to be explored and addressed.
Density Bonus in Residential Zones
James is exploring enticing developers with density bonuses when they choose to develop
in Laurel. The idea is to reward them with more building density if they choose to build
their houses with amenities that the City would like to see such as front porches, 2 story
buildings or a walking or biking trail.
James stated that there would have to be a specific list of amenities with a point system
attached to each amenity. The developer would be rewarded with a number of points if
he chose to include some of the amenities in his building.
The board thought this was an idea that needed to be explored. James will work on
putting some information together for future review by the board.
Maximum Setbacks in Central Business Districts
James would like to encourage new businesses in the CBD zoning to set buildings closer
to the sidewalks by creatubg setback maximums. This would encourage more window
shopping in the downtown area. There are several businesses in downtown that have
their parking lots in front of their buildings.
He would also like to add requirements that buildings in the CBD zoning are at least 2
stories high to help add density within the downtown area.
Questions and Answers
James stated that Figgins Subdivision has run into some difficulty while being reviewed
by the Yellowstone County Commissioners. There was a problem as to how the board
recommended denial of the subdivision. There was nothing in the motion that stated a
legal reason for denial. In the future it is important to remember that the board has to
have a good legal reason to recommend denial.
There are other issues that the County Commissioners questioned on Figgins Subdivision
such as road access, water access and the septic drain field system.
3
The County Commissioners conditionally approved the Figgins Subdivision subject to
several conditions being met.
The meeting was adjourned at 8:50 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Cheryll Lund, Secretary
4