Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMay 6, 2004 P&Z MinutesMeddian Planning 8 Zoning Commission May 6, 2004 Page 27 of 52 report dated for the hearing date of May 6th, 2004, and transmittal date of April 30th, 2004. Zaremba: Second. Borup: Motion and second. All in favor? Any opposed? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 12. Public Hearing: MI 04-002 Request for removal from the City of Meridian's area of impact for Fred Schuerman by Fred Schuerman - west of North Cloverdale Road and north of East Fairview Avenue: Borup: Thank you. Next item is Public Hearing MI 04-002, request for removal from City of Meridian's area of impact for Fred Schuerman by Fred Schuerman. I don't know if I pronounced that right. West of Cloverdale Road and north of East Fairview Avenue. I'd like to open this hearing and start with the staff report. Hood: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. This is my application, so I'm somewhat familiar with it, but the applicant has submitted a request, a miscellaneous application to remove this property from the City of Meridian's area of impact and will subsequently ask to be annexed into Boise city's area of impact and, then, into the city limits. The property is located on the north side of Fairview Avenue, approximately a half mile east of Eagle Road and about the same distance west of Cloverdale Road. To the south is Terrace Lawns Memorial Gardens. To the north is a residential sub, Venture Subdivision. Both of those properties are zoned RUT. To the west of the site is also RUT zoned property and this was before this board in 2002, I believe it was -- yeah, November of 2002, the site directly to the west of this site was denied annexation by the City Council due to traffic reasons and some other concerns that neighbors in the area had with annexing the property, as well as there was some questions about serviceability with sewer, and so that kind of puts this property in a little bit of a bind. Their path to annexation has been taken away from them, basically. There are other possibilities for annexation. Terrace Lawns I do not believe that they will annex anytime soon. They will be little benefit. Same with the residential subdivision to the north. Those are approximately one-acre lots and annexation for those lots I don't see in the foreseeable future anyways. Further, some background information. The applicant owns approximately 16 acres, which is in Boise city, currently annexed into-the city of Boise directly east and does have a development plan for that site, as you can see here. So, the 1.6 acres is off to the left there, kind of the L - -thank you -- portion of the site plan in front you, with the remainder portion being in Boise city. This application -- I guess Idaho Code requires that the Planning and Zoning Commission hear changes to area of impact and make recommendations to City Council, much like development applications, and that's what we are going through here. Currently, there is not a mechanism or we don't have an area of impact application, that's why you're seeing a miscellaneous application. Included in the staff report is -- I was hoping to get some discussion from the board and eventually City Council on amending our fee schedule to set up strict guidelines for area of impact, adjustments, so I don't know what thoughts the Commissioners may have on that. Just Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission May 6, 2004 Page 28 of 52 to further that, I guess, it does take quit a bit of staff time. This staff report you see before you today did not take staff a lot of time to prepare, but this is the first step in a long process and that miscellaneous application is fairly inexpensive and will not cover the. cost of staff time and going to meetings and preparing other correspondence between the county and being in those negotiation meetings that have to occur between the city of Meridian and the city of Boise and Ada County to move that line. So, we just -- again, for discussion purposes, if you wanted to put a special recommendation in or something like that with this application, that would be great. I have not heard anything back from the applicant. I got them the staff report a little late in the game, I think Monday sometime, so do not have any response. The staff report did not make a recommendation. I'm going to leave that up to this board to make a recommendation to the City Council. There aren't a lot of planning issues when someone requests an area of impact boundary adjustments. Relied on Public Works to come up with some findings or some facts, I guess, about serviceability. That's one of the main reasons that the applicant is requesting to go to the city of Boise. He has services stubbed to this property from the east and he's ready to go and would like to protect some of those existing buildings on that property. So, as far as the planning issues go, there really aren't a lot and I guess I will leave it at that and any questions you may have I will answer them. Borup: Questions from any of the Commissioners? Zaremba: Yes. I have one comment and, then, a question. I thoroughly agree with staff that there probably should be a fee associated with such an application and I would like to discuss it. I probably would ask that that become an Item 15 on our agenda for tonight for a thorough discussion. My own instinct would be not to apply that to this application anyhow. This applicant filed the application not having any idea that there might be such a fee, although I agree there should be. I still wouldn't apply it to this application. So, my question would be can we make that an Item 15 on our agenda and discuss it separately? Because I think we should discuss it and have a fee. Borup: I think -- well, yes, I think we can discuss something. I don't know if I personally agree with that assumption. If we already had a boundary adjustment schedule and a fee established, then, yes. In this case, they were doing an application that did not have any fees connected with it at all. Zaremba: Right. Borup: So -- and I'm assuming they didn't -- they weren't assuming there would be no fees at all, so they had to assume there would be something. If it's not -- if it's not on the schedule, then, that needs to be determined, other than it did come in as a miscellaneous, but -- Zaremba: Okay. Well, in that case it makes sense to discuss the subject now, rather than put it off. Borup: Well -- Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission May.6, 2004 Page 29 of 52 Zaremba: I, actually, had asuggestion -- Borup: And I think there maybe needs to be some other discussion. The question I would have from staff is I don't think we can establish a fee. There needs to be a recommendation from staff as far as assessment of time and what would be a fair -- Hood: Yeah. And we talked with the applicant early on in the process about that and there being some ambiguity in what the city had done in the past with these applications and the miscellaneous app. Borup: But I think there has been very few boundary adjustments. We really don't like to -- we don't like to give up any of our area of impact and in the past there has been some that I think this Commission has approved and City Council denied, so -- Hood: That's why staff was a little hesitant to give a recommendation on this application. Borup: You don't want City Council mad at you. Hood: But just as far as a fee schedule goes, it could be interpreted that this is a Comprehensive Plan amendment. In that case, that application is 12 or 15 hundred dollars. That didn't seem to be appropriate either, so something in the middle may be appropriate for that discussion, but for this applicant the miscellaneous app was consistent with the previous three, I think, is what the city has seen in the past three or four years. And so that's what the director decided would be appropriate for this application as well. But, you're right, we don't see them very often, but it would be nice to add that to the fee schedule, so there is a process that those go through and there isn't questions about how much fees are and whatever and this discussion of size, too. I mean this is a fairly small adjustment that's being requested. I don't anticipate huge requests for area of impact adjustments, but maybe, you know, that's the criteria, if you're underneath it's this much, if you're over --although staff time would be -- Borup: That's what I was going to ask, whether it's small or large, the time with the county and stuff is going to be pretty much the same, isn't it? Hood: It would be the same. And I guess just thinking out loud, for those discussion purposes, I, myself, have not sat in on those meetings, but the director has and is well aware that it does take a lot of staff time and effort to follow this through to the end, so -- Borup: So, did staff come up with a recommendation on a fee? Hood: I don't have a dollar amount, I guess, in mind. Something, I guess, in between the 250 dollars for this application and the 1,200 dollars that a Comprehensive Plan amendment is, would probably be appropriate, something in there, but -- Zaremba: Mr. Chairman and Craig, the suggestion I was going to make is that there be some calculation of the time involved in not only the application process, but carrying it through Planning and Zoning Commission, City Council, Boise would, then, have to deal Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission May 6, 2004 Page 30 of 52 with it, Ada County, then, makes the final decision, if both Meridian and Boise agree. That there be a fee calculated on that much work, with a knowledge that if it got to Meridian City Council and they denied it, there might be a refund of a portion of it. Borup: That's -- Zaremba: Because there is a different level of work if it proceeds and if it doesn't and my suggestion would be to come up with a full price and, then, establish what a refund might be if it's denied. Borup: That makes sense to me. Zaremba: Just a suggestion. Borup: I think that's a good one Zaremba: I would collect it all up front, as opposed to saying if it goes on there is an additional charge, but I'd make it one fee and collect it all up front, but have a possibility of a refund proportionally. That being said, to discuss the merits of this issue, if we may, I agree, the initial instinct is not to give up any property. However, this is along a borderline where there is discussion and, eventually, the question is for Bruce, about whether we can service it or not by gravity sewer and other things. The applicant has stated that eventually this could be connected at a cost of about 100,000 dollars and I'm sure that's a fair assessment, but I throw into the mix in a situation like this where an applicant is trying to put together two pieces of property, the great bulk of which is already in Boise, it's kind of the reverse of what we did with Winston Moore's property on Ustick and Eagle where Boise gave up some impact area to us in order to join his property into one jurisdiction and I can't see asking Boise to give up 16 acres to us in this case, it makes more sense for us to give up the -- what was it, 1.6 acres. Anyhow, whatever it is. The small piece. My inclination, although my instinct is to be against approving any of these, that this is probably one that's valid, which brings me to my question for Bruce, does it make more sense for them to hook up to Boise? Freckleton: Mr. Chair, Commissioner Zaremba, the city, as you guys are well aware, have paid considerable sum of money to have a facility plan generated for the entire urban service planning boundary. The purpose of that study was to determine the serviceability of the lands. According to that facility plan, it does indicate that this parcel can be served. The sewer currently stops right about there at that little out parcel that you see. That's about where water stops now, too. We didn't make a specific recommendation because of the issues historically. Zaremba: Well, let me ask a bigger question, because at sometime -- probably a property south of this -- we had some discussion about making a realignment and even along the Ridenbaugh Canal, you know, so that we didn't have ten feet on the other side of the Ridenbaugh Canal that we had to do something about. Has that sit down with the county and Boise happened? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission May 6, 2004 Page 31 of 52 Freckleton: There have been meetings between their city engineer and our city engineer. We have identified several parcels. This particular one wasn't one of them. With the cemetery here, we know that they more than likely will not ever need service. The county subdivision up here potentially could be serviced through the Kliner property when it develops. To get back to your original question, does it make sense, it may not make real good sense to try and keep it in the city. It's not going to be cheap to try and bring services to this parcel. From the applicant's application, they have services that are available on their east side. Readily available. I guess I'd lay the cards out like that. Zaremba: Thank you. Rohm: I think my question on that, Bruce, would be if, in fact, you were to service it off of the Meridian system, would there be a loop in and through this property to service other property? And from what it looks like, the answer to that is probably no? It would dead end -- it would -- to that parcel, if, in fact, you did take service to it? Freckleton: Commissioner Rohm, the service -- basically our service area stops right there. So, as far as looping goes, no, this would be basically dead end for sewer. Now, water, you know, eventually, we will probably want to bring water up -- up this road, so that it can tie in, you know, to this Kliner property someday in the future. You know, I would envision that some day this subdivision probably would be on city services. Rohm: Well, I guess my point was -- is if, in fact, the City of Meridian would ultimately have to go through the expense to sewer that, even though it wouldn't be serving it, then, I would be inclined to speak against removing it from our area of impact. But if, in fact, that's not the case, then, there would be really no compelling reason to keep it within our area of impact, from my perspective. Thank you. Borup: I think one other factor that the buildings on this side are already existing, at least what they show on the application. I believe they are all existing and I don't know if they are anticipating any new structures or not, but it's not adding anything new at this point that I can see. Okay. Would the applicant like to add anything? Schuerman: My name is Fred Schuerman. My address is 6134 Emerald in Boise. This application comes about by the unique problems that are caused by our property being bisected by the boundary for two different entities and their area of impact. Could I have the commercial -- the development plan, please? This is the boundary line now between Boise and Meridian. This building is constructed and ih the city of Boise and there is sewer right there within a few feet of our property line. There is also water, both in the front and back of this building. The property to the west of us -- an application has been made to be annexed to the city of Boise and it was -- or the City of Meridian and it was denied. It may be years, I don't know, but there is no way to tell how long it would be. It just makes common sense, with utilities within a few feet, to be served that way, rather than wait for I don't know how long or if ever and I had an engineer and a utility contractor give me the estimate of 100,000 dollars -- there would have to be a boring under Fairview and it's -- I think it's just -- you know, it's just -- because we are bisected by this line and we are doing this as one project, it just makes sense that it should be under one area of impact. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission May 6, 2004 Page 32 of 52 Borup: I understand. Are you trying to get water over here for sprinkler systems for the building? Schuerman: One of my main concerns -- this is an historic old barn. It's presently being occupied by a produce company and I really would like to get that fire sprinklered, as I said in -- or in my application there was an historic old barn recently lost on Ustick and I would hate to have a similar fate happen to this. The rest of the buildings probably would not fire sprinkler. There is no -- this is an old house with a red the roof, a neat old house, but -- and there are a lot of other reasons that I feel are compelling reasons, besides the utilities. It just makes it -- I mean addressing is a problem. We are 4380 East Meridian here and this is 12570 West Fairview, Boise, and if the -- life safety problems if there is some kind of an incident, it's real confusing to have two different entities there in two different areas of impact. Borup: Any questions from any of the Commissioners? All right. Thank you Schuerman: Thank you. Borup: Do we have anyone else to testify on this application? Seeing none. Zaremba: Mr. Chairman -- Borup: Oh, wait a minute. I did have a question for Mr. Schuerman. I'm sorry. Zaremba: Okay. Borup: I wrote a note here and then -- and that's the discussion of the fee. Have you talked with staff on that and -- you realize the dilemma a little bit here as far as fee schedule on this type of application? Schuerman: Early on when we made the application there was a discussion. Borup: Do you have any input on that that might help this Commission maybe -- Schuerman: Not really. Borup: So, you don't care which way it goes? Schuerman: I'm not sure what -- Borup: Staffs recommendation was -- as we mentioned, this was maybe a Comp Plan issue, kind of, which was 1,200 dollars. The miscellaneous application, usually for little minor things, which was the 250. Staff's recommendation may be somewhere in the middle there. Schuerman: That's fine with me. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission May 6, 2004 Page 33 of 52 Borup: Okay. Thank you. Okay. Mr. Zaremba, you were starting to say something? Zaremba: Mr. Chairman, I was going to move that we close the Public Hearing and I will do so. Moe: Second. Borup: Motion and second to close the Public Hearing. All in favor? Any opposed? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Zaremba: Mr. Chairman, I would like to make atwo-part motion. The first part is that I move we forward to the City Council recommending approval -- Borup: Okay. Are we going to discuss the fee part of this application? Or I guess your motion will determine that. Zaremba: The second part of my motion was going to involve the fee, but not a dollar amount, just following up on the suggestion I made earlier that the fee be established based on carrying it through the whole process, with a possibility of a refund and let staff determine an actual dollar amount before it gets to the City Council. Borup: Okay. Zaremba: Is that -- staff is having some discussion. Freckleton: Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission, I don't believe that -- if you're thinking -- Borup: No, we are not talking about establishing fees on the books, I don't believe, but we are talking about attaching a fee to this project, isn't that -- wasn't that the request from staff? No? That's what it says. It says staff is requesting the city assess fees for this application. Zaremba: Mr. Chairman, my instinct would be to create a fee structure, but not apply it to this applicant. Which is sort of why I wanted to make it a separate motion. Borup:. Okay. Well, the staff application -- or the staff report says this application. Rohm: I kind of like your first idea, Dave, of adding a 15th item on our agenda and we will talk about that separate and aside from this application.. Especially if there is not going to be a fee structure applied to this application. I don't see why it would even be part of any motion. Borup: Yeah. So, maybe that's the first thing to establish. Freckleton: Mr. Chair? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission May 6, 2004 Page 34 of 52 Borup: Yes, Mr. Freckleton. Freckleton: Perhaps some input from legal counsel, but to establish afee -- to set a fee, it's going to take a lot more discussion and it's going to have to be established by the City Council. This Commission can't establish afee -- Borup: Well, I know we can't, but we can make a recommendation to the City Council, but you're saying they can't either? Freckleton: It's going to take public hearings to establish stab fees and -- Borup: Even a -- okay. Well, then, that really answers that. Zaremba: Okay. So, it can't be part of this application. In that case -- Freckleton: I don't believe so. Jill, do you have any input? Hollinka: I did talk about this a little bit with Bill Nichols this afternoon and he had suggested I think what had been suggested earlier on, was treat it as a Comprehensive Plan amendment, but we never really came to any kind of final decision or conclusion on whether or not that should be applicable to this particular application. But maybe go forward with trying to work through some revision to the fee schedule to add a fee for this particular instance, which would be a separate issue for this particular application. Borup: Okay. That's another -- that's adifferent -- Zaremba: In that case, I would like to go back to my suggestion that we have an Item 15 on our agenda tonight for further discussion. Borup: But that still doesn't address this application. Let me ask you a question. Can -- is there any provision for a reduced fee? I mean can you reduce a fee that's in the schedule? Hood: The City Council, I believe, can reduce fees. I don't know if the Planning and Zoning Commission has that -- Borup: Well, I understand that. We don't have any authority to do anything. Hood: And they waive fees for non-profits and the like, so they have the ability to do a lot of things. I don't know that it's written in the ordinance that way. Borup: My thought was, per Mr. Nichol's recommendation, is it could go through as a Comp Plan fee with areduced -- Rohm: Mr. Chairman, no, that's not the application, though Zaremba: This applicant already paid 250 dollars; right? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission May 6.2004 Page 35 of 52 Rohm: Right. That's where we got to leave it. Zaremba: For this applicant we are done. Hood: And just to set it for future applications, we will bite the bullet on this one, but let's establish something for future applications. Zaremba: That's where I would like to go with it. Borup: Okay. Let's proceed with your motion. Zaremba: Okay. Then Ihave aone-part motion. Mr. Chairman, I move that we forward to the City Council recommending approval of MI 04-002, request for removal from the City of Meridian's area of impact for Fred Schuerman by Fred Schuerman, west of North Cloverdale Road and north of East Fairview Avenue, to include all staff comments of their memo for the hearing date of May 6, 2004, received by the city clerk May 3rd, 2004, with one change. On page two I would delete the paragraph entitled Miscellaneous. Rohm: Second. Zaremba: Which refers to the fee structure. Rohm: Second. Borup: Motion and second. All in favor? Any opposed? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Borup: Okay. Thank you. Moe: Mr. Chairman? Borup: Commissioner Moe. Moe: Just a small recess. Borup: I was just going to suggest that. I told Anna yesterday that we were going to be out of here by 9:00 o'clock and I see we are not going to make that. Zaremba: Almost. Rohm: I was thinking 8:30, I don't know what's going on. Zaremba: I'm trying to stretch it to 11:00. Borup: So, we will have a short break. We will be back by 9:00 o'clock to continue.