November 18, 2004 P&Z Minutes
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 18, 2004
Page 44 of 64
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Zaremba: Mr. Chairman, I move we forward to the City Council recommending
approval of CUP 04-047, to include all staff comments of their memo for the hearing
date of November 18, received by the city clerk November 15th, 2004, again, with a
couple of changes. On page 14, site-specific conditions, number four, the first bullet,
minimum lot frontage should be changed to 76, instead of 79 feet. On page 15 -- we
are now actually under the fire department conditions. On page paragraph three, the
names Napoli and Giovanni, apparently, are changing and those will be corrected. And
the reference to 29 feet will be changed to 33 feet, so that it's 33 feet all the way around
the cul-de-sacs. On the same page 15, paragraph four of the fire department conditions
can be deleted.
Siddoway: Mr. Chairman? As a minor point, the name Giovanni won't change, but I'll
get the name correct. The street names.
Zaremba: Okay. All right. Then, we will remove that remark. The comment about 33
feet in paragraph three on page 15 remains. End of motion.
Moe: Second.
Borup: Motion and second. All in favor? Anyopposed? Thankyou.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 13:
Public Hearing: CUP 04-045 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a
beauty salon in the O-T zone for Rodney Shaul by Rodney Shaul - 116
East Pine Avenue:
Borup: Next item is Public Hearing CUP 04-045. This is a request for a Conditional
Use Permit for a beauty salon in the Old Town zone by Rodney Shaul at 116 East Pine
Avenue. We'd like to open this hearing and start with the staff report.
Siddoway: Mr. Chairman, I'm looking for the file. Just a second.
Borup: Okay.
Siddoway: Oh, here it is. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, I
will be filling in for Craig Hood tonight on this application. You should have his staff
report dated November 15th, received November 15th for tonight's hearing date. This
application is by Rodney Shaul. It's to do a beauty salon at 116 East Pine, which is the
property highlighted right -- just one lot east of Main Street. The lot to their west is
along Main, is the one that has -- used to be Pizano's, now it's --
Newton-Huckabay: EI Tenampa.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 18. 2004
Page 45 of 64
Siddoway: -- EI Tenampa. Thank you. Not far from us here tonight. It's a -- just a 964
square foot home, so just under 1,000 square feet. The current zoning is Old Town. It
is proposed for the salon as the only use. There would be no 24-hour occupants. It's
difficult to see the aerial photo, but with the light -- the lights. Showing the property
there. This is the site plan that was submitted with the application and based on the
square footage of the building, which is just under 1,000 and 200 square feet per space
required per ordinance, five stalls would be required for this site. On this site plan there
are ten stalls currently shown, but those stalls are substandard and we would need to
get some modifications to them, which I will go over in just a second. They are
proposing to retain the existing driveway. It's a gravel driveway from Pine. ACHD is
requiring that this access be abandoned and that they take their access from the alley in
the rear. The applicant is appealing that decision of ACHD staff and has a hearing with
the ACHD commission on December 1st. So, that appeal hearing has not yet
happened. Staff does agree with the ACHD requirement to close off the access to try
and restrict the number of curb cuts along that road when there is an alley that the
parking can be accessed from. I'm on page -- I think it's page two. Where is the page
number? Apparently, the staff report has no page numbers. Does your copies? Okay.
The -- I'm on the second page and I was just going over the first and second bullet or
parking. The third bullet on the page talks about the requirement to pave the parking
area. The area that you can see that's hatched in on either end is proposed to be a
product called gravel pave, which would allow water seepage down through and it's not
something that we have used in the past, but staff is supportive of its use in this area.
It's a tight site to try and do some aboveground storm water detention and it -- the
construction of it would be a dustless surface that we feel would meet our requirement
to have it paved with a dustless material. So, I just want to point out that we are
supportive of that. On the following page, the top bullet, talks about the requirement of
the landscape ordinance for five-foot minimum landscape strip adjacent to -- adjacent to
the parking areas. This proposed layout would have a one-foot strip adjacent to it and
we are proposing that the minimum of five feet should be added to each side. The next
comment in the second bullet on that page deals with the design of the parking stalls.
Standard 90 degree parking stalls should be nine by 19. As currently drawn these stalls
are 17 feet wide on the west side and the east side they are 16 feet long and seven and
a half feet wide. We would like to see a minimum of five parking spaces that meet the
minimum ordinance requirements designed on the site and as currently written would be
required to revise the site plan prior to the next Public Hearing. Now, I'm going to throw
out one option and I know the applicant has another one that I will also have available
when he does his presentation. But if we were to get a five foot buffer with standard 19
foot deep stalls, you can fit three plus the handicapped stall for the fourth one, we are
still one short, which could be located in the area of the -- the current driveway, if it were
no longer a driveway, but was a parking stall. And, then, you could get a full 25-foot
wide aisle and some more landscaping on the other side. That would be one possible
solution and we thinking it's certainly feasible to get five full size parking stalls on here.
We are not too concerned about that. But we do need to work on that layout. Down at
the bottom of this same page, under landscaping, the main point there is that there are
some significant existing trees along Pine and have -- and those trees should be
retained and there is a condition to say that they need to be retained as part of the
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 18. 2004
Page 46 of 64
project. I'm going to skip a couple of pages over to analysis item H and point out that
ACHD is supportive of access to the alley, but they -- ACHD has a requirement of the
alley being paved. They are -- the paving is also part of their appeal to ACHD and the
only point that Craig makes here is that regardless of what happens with the paving of
the alley, which I guess we don't have strong feelings about, because there was a
waiver granted for adjacent property, the access to Pine should still be cut off. The only
special consideration on this project deals with signage. We didn't have a specific
maximum size to go from and since, as you know, Old Town doesn't have a specific
table in the sign ordinance, we like to nail those down as part of the conditional use
process. We are proposing that they comply with Table C in the ordinance, which is the
L-O standards for wall signs and freestanding signs, but with the additional restriction
that the maximum height on that freestanding sign be six feet. And the applicant does
have some sample photographs of the type of sign that they intend to do and can enter
that into the record tonight. Craig's comment at the end of that special consideration -- I
believe the intent of what he's saying there is to say that we should review these -- the
signage sizes tonight and if you're comfortable with the proposed restrictions that are in
this ordinance, then, they can stand or we can have -- set up a situation where Council
has to approve those. But I think we can probably reach some agreement on the next
maximum sign size. So, I believe that's the only special consideration. It seems like the
only issues to really work out is the layout design of this parking and how it relates the
current access that they have off of Pine. So, I will get the applicant's pictures ready
and stand for any questions.
Borup: Questions from the Commission?
Zaremba: I do have a couple. Is it ever otherwise? Just noticing that Central District
Health asked the question if it's not on city sewer they are recommending denial and I
guess the question is for Bruce. I assume it is on city sewer. And, then, my second
question I think I have asked before and I never remember the answer. Beauty salons
tend to have some kind of chemical waste that would be different than the normal
residential use. Is there any kind of a chemical waste plan or does that just go down the
drain with everything else?
Freckleton: Mr. Chair, Commissioner Zaremba, the answer to the first question is, yes,
this home is connected to city facilities currently. The second question is typically in a
beauty salon the products that they use do go down the drain. It's something that our
pretreatment department out at wastewater will evaluate and that's part of the permit
process that they will go through and make an evaluation and address at that time.
Zaremba: All right. Thank you. And, then, to Steve -- and probably to the applicant
also, but just to comment on the parking situation. If we are looking for a standard
parking stall of nine feet wide and the actual requirement for this building would be only
five, the lot is 60 feet across, nine parking stalls would take 45 of that. You could have
a five foot landscape buffer and a five foot landscape buffer and you'd still only be at 55
out of the 60, so one of the stalls could have an additional five feet to be a handicapped
-- one of the five stalls and that would satisfy the requirement and probably take up --
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 18, 2004
Page 47 of 64
that's a lot of paving. If you put the stalls here and oriented them north and south, is
that an acceptable solution to the city? I realize they are trying to get more spaces on
there, but --
Siddoway: Yeah. It sounds like something that could certainly be looked into. The
handicapped space would need to be a van accessible space; at least eight plus eight,
which would be a total of 16. There was nine and five, we are up to 14. We are close.
Zaremba: Yeah.
Siddoway: We are within two feet. But it sound like something that could be --
Zaremba: That could even encroach upon the landscape buffer, maybe.
Siddoway: Yeah. And we could have the applicant's engineer look into -- I believe
there may be even provisions through ADA, as long as they are trying to meet the -- you
know, those dimensions as close as possible, they may be able to do a six. I don't want
to speak for ADA, but we will leave that to them, but they may be able to work that out.
Yeah.
Zaremba: And my next question. When the applicant is done with their presentation,
will be are they really serious about needing ten or could they get by with the five that's
required, so -- I'm done.
Borup: Okay. Anyone else?
Rohm: No. I'm anxious to hear the --
Borup: Would the applicant like to make their presentation?
Shaul: My name is Rod Shaul, 775 North Ten Mile in Meridian. We bought this house
for my sister and she is handicapped, so we understand the handicap issues. We are
going to make it handicapped accessible with a ramp -- ADA ramp to the front. Our
concern with the parking area is that she's going to have five employees, so if we fill the
spots with employee, we have an issue with customers. So, we need as many spots as
we can. So, that was the reason for the ten spots. Do you have a little pointer? The
first I heard of the five foot buffer was last night at 8:00 o'clock, so it was a little bit of a
surprise to come up with that. What we are looking at is the parking lot would actually
be right here where the shed is and on the back. On this side is a house and a shed
with a six foot fence. On this side is a six-foot fence that we will retain to this house -- to
the edge of our house. There is no windows in this building and no windows that look at
the property on this side. So, our five foot buffer is -- you know, again, a surprise to me
as of 8:00 o'clock last night, but when I bought this property what I did is actually took a
site map and cut this off on our computer of the city parking lot and laid it onto our spot.
So, before I purchased the property I actually looked at it to see, you know, what the
parking was going to be like and --
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 18. 2004
Page 48 of 64
Rohm: It's looked pretty logical, doesn't it?
Shaul: We said it would work, so -- I mean that was the research. Again, on the
driveway, after talking to ACHD, we are allowed to have a right-in going in. Instead of
just a driveway we are trying to get in and out. So, during the appeals process that's
what I'm requesting is to do a right-in here to the parking area and exit through the alley.
And that -- Ada County requirement is 85 feet from the intersection to the first parking --
or drive-thru, which is probably about this area. You're 57 feet closer on this entrance
than this one is. So, a right-in seems like it would function and that was part of the idea
when we purchased the property is make it work. Obviously, with five employees and
we are filling the handicapped, we don't want all these people trying to park over here
and walk across the street to get to this and have a safety issue and that is mentioned
in the staff report, that there is safety problems there. I'm a firefighter, I understand, and
I don't want to go on my sister or anybody else getting run over here, so -- I mean that's
probably the big issues. We are retaining the trees. There is another tree right here
you can't see very well on the plot and, you know, all we are looking for is to retain as
much parking as possible and to make this thing work. The alley -- I go in all the time to
clean this up and there is trash cans laying in the alley, there is now three cars parked
on a daily basis right here with the tail end sticking out into the alley and I can get
through with my pickup, but I don't know what an older person can do getting through
this alley. So, I worry about the access coming in here. There is trash trucks, there is
trash cans laying in it, so to guarantee that the spots will be used if we have to use the
alley is a little bit of an issue. Other than by employees. So, I guess I will answer any
questions if you have any.
Borup: Okay. Any other questions from any of the Commissioners?
Shaul: We will comply with the sign. Debbie Anderson is working on that with Idaho
Electric Signs and she's submitted plans, but we haven't really got down to the
essentials of it, so she will comply with it.
Borup: The property to the east, is that a residential property, or do you know?
Shaul: The property to the east is Kids Corner, I believe it's a kids clothing outlet.
Borup: Okay.
Shaul: We are the last residence on the block. Let's see. This is a candle shop and
this is another business here.
Borup: Okay. Any other --
Moe: I don't know that I have question for the applicant. I guess I would ask staff that
based upon his presentation showing the right-in into that property, what does staff feel
about that?
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 18, 2004
Page 49 of 64
Siddoway: Certainly a right-in situation is preferable over two way in and out. We are
interested in access control along Pine and, you know, the right-in only may be -- may
be the compromise. Just a question for Mr. Shaul. Are they -- is it a right-in, right-out or
is it just a right-in that would be proposed to that -- the appeal?
Moe: I'm assuming -- it looks to me it's a right-in and you go out the alley.
Shaul: Correct.
Moe: Because it's basically a one way.
Shaul: Correct. One way in, one way out.
Zaremba: Well, that's the way I would describe it as a one way and you can do either
right or left into it, you just can't come out it.
Shaul: Well, we would prefer to have it a right turn in.
Zaremba: But how would you control that? If somebody were eastbound on Pine and
wanted to turn in there --
Shaul: Well, I would assume that we would prefer to have a left -- or a right-in here, too,
but you can't really control that, either. So, .you know, other than she does have
repetitive customers and once they find out, just like I have, that you can't really turn in
there on a regular basis, then, you come from the other way.
Zaremba: That's easier. Yeah.
Shaul: So, it isn't like a new customer every time, they do have pretty much repetitive
customers.
Siddoway: One benefit to having a one way configuration is that the drive aisle width
between the parking stalls can be reduced. It's no long 25 -- 25 feet aisle between stalls
is the requirement for 90 degree, but if you got a one way with angled parking, that drive
aisle can be reduced, which may help.
Borup: Mr. Siddoway, I have got a question along that line.
Siddoway: I'm sorry.
Borup: Yeah. I have got a question along that park -- line of that parking. Had the --
that ordinance with the discussion of five foot buffer, how new is that? I assume that
was passed after the city parking lot was built?
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 18, 2004
Page 50 of 64
Siddoway: Yes. The ordinance was adopted in -- at the end of year 2000. The parking
lot has been in existence long before that. It was re-striped after that, with the
Generations Plaza construction, but it was not reconstructed.
Borup: Okay. I was just referring to Mr. Shaul. Your comment is -- you saw how the
parking was across there and that's what I was thinking, that it -- the ordinance
changed.
Shaul: Yeah. I didn't know that. Didn't have any -- you know, I just looked at what we
had here.
Borup: Right. That's a logical conclusion.
Zaremba: While you're there, let me ask staff about alternate compliance. Could we
trade maybe planting two extra trees in the front yard where they wouldn't be in
anybody's way or -- I'm --
Borup: I don't know if the front needs any extra trees.
Zaremba: It probably doesn't but, if I understand his discussion, if there is six foot fence
on both sides and no windows looking at it --
Shaul: On that proposal we are putting the access for the handicapped ramp down the
side with a four-foot walkway. We could put some trees -- a couple of trees on that side
to help, because we will have an additional -- like a ten foot area there that has grass.
Zaremba: As alternate compliance, instead of having to do the five foot buffer; is that a
possibility?
Siddoway: Alternative compliance is an option that the Commission always has. The
standard requirement is for five feet adjacent to any vehicular use areas to just prevent
ongoing areas of asphalt and to break them up and get some landscaping. There is no
required buffer between land uses. So, you know, that would be something more
significant along the lines of 25 feet or something if there was a residence and we would
-- in the past what we have done in Old Town, we have regularly granted alternative
compliance on buffers between land uses down to five feet, but I can't think of an
instance where we have done no landscaping, if that makes any sense.
Borup: Okay.
Newton-Huckabay: My personal opinion is that it would be acceptable in this area. I
mean I understand the ordinance was passed after the city parking lot, but it would be in
the same spirit as the city parking lot and -- I mean, in all honesty, you're landscaping
for the sake of landscaping because it's the ordinance. There isn't a lot of benefit that I
see to ten feet of landscaping when you could have utility for the benefit of the business
owner in this situation and it is the -- it's a very narrow piece of property.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 18. 2004
Page 51 of 64
Rohm: Well, especially along the commercial property to the west. This side here. It
almost seems appropriate to have a five foot buffer on the east, because there is some
-- it's almost a -- this property isn't as commercially developed as this. It's a -- what is it,
a day care you say?
Shaul: No. It's a kids clothing store. It's a retail store.
Rohm: Oh. Oh. Excuse me. And this is a building, these are structures here?
Shaul: Yeah. That's a shed behind the house. This is the house. Actually, the house
right here and the shed is there and, like I said, there is a six foot and weeds long this
side of their place.
Rohm: Uh-huh. Well, maybe your comments that it's not necessary to have a five foot
buffer on either side is appropriate.
Newton-Huckabay: Well -- I mean I don't know. I would --
Zaremba: Part of the purpose of not having wall-to-wall pavement the application is
already offering to solve by -- I forget what it was called, some asphalt treatment that
was semipermeable. I mean the point is you -- where does the drainage go. But, you
know, if you're going to have the margins of the parking lot be the semipermeable
material that you can still drive on that water goes through it, apparently, that to me --
although it's not directed as decorative, solves the purpose of having a landscape
border there,
Moe: Then, I guess I would ask that question, then. If you, then, put some of the
decorative rock in there, does that take care of the landscape buffer? We are using the
decorative rock as part, you know, landscaping in other projects now, so I just ask the
question.
Borup: But they also have bushes and shrubs in there, too.
Moe: Well, darn it.
Siddoway: The ordinance requirement is for the buffer with one tree per 36 lineal feet
and vegetative ground cover along the ground with -- and rock mulch, should the
ordinance be acted on favorably by City Council next week, you know, they could use
rock mulch in and around the plants, but the intent of the ordinance has restricted rock
as the only use.
Borup: The other thing that's different here is there is six foot fences on both sides,
where, normally, if you have got adjoining properties and parking and -- you know, it is
more visible, which is not the case here.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 18, 2004
Page 52 of 64
Newton-Huckabay: What about landscaping similar to the city parking lot at the end?
Rohm: I like that. That's a good thought. We are working with you on this, so -- no.
No. No. Because I'm sure we will have more questions or at least request your
thoughts on--
Shaul: Chad is, actually, the person that's worked on this, on the engineering
standpoint, and he's contacted the people that do the gravel pave and he knows more
about it than I do, so --
Rohm: Well, let's get you engineer up here and see what his thoughts are.
Jones: Chad Jones. I reside at 2250 Grassy Branch, Meridian. I am employed with
B&A Engineers in Boise. I'm working with Mr. Rodney Shaul. I guess to answer your
question in regards to gravel pave, it's not real new technology, but it's new to the area.
Gravel paved is currently being used at the corner of Myrtle and 13th in Boise in that
new temporary parking area. I have worked with it a little bit with the city of Boise and
that's about it. And I think there is only two applications in this whole area that it's been
used at. I, actually, looked at another product called grass paved. Same principle. It's
a porous drainage type of material that allows percolation of drain water to be stored --
storm water to be stored on the surface, perc down through, rather than going to a sub
surface system or discharging to municipal systems. Kind of in the spirit of low impact
development. To answer your question, as far as decorative rocks, you can get several
different colors of aggregate. They are using it -- different colors in other areas, so you
can get browns and blues or whatever you choose. But the spirit of it is it's a coarse
aggregate that ultimately allows drainage to go down through.
Rohm: I was kind of hoping that you might offer up a solution to the location and
number of parking spaces themselves, if you had -- after listening to what's been
spoken so far, if you had some alternate plan that -- that might be presented here.
Jones: Well, I think isn't there two stations in front of the business? That's what we are
allowed. So, there is two there. And I think if we can get -- we need at least five for the
employees, that's seven. So, an additional three, so if --
Rohm: Yeah. I don't think it's the minimum that you're struggling with, I think it's the
maximum that you're trying to attain that --
Jones: I think we can do it with the space. The problem is is the five-foot buffer,
landscape buffer, from the fences is really what we are struggling with.
Rohm: Okay. I think Commissioner Wendy brought up a possible solution with putting
your buffers at the end of the parking area, as opposed to along each side. I'd like to
have you explore that a little bit if you could.