Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMay 5, 2005 P&Z Minutes Meridian Planning & Zoning May 5, 2005 Page 25 of 32 MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 14: Public Hearing: CUP 05-018 Request to amend the existing Conditional Use Permit / Planned Development to allow for a maximum building height of 58-feet in a C-C zone for Lots 1 & 2 and the southern portion of Lot 9, Block 5 for Marriott Courtyard at EI Dorado by BRS Architects - NWC of East Tarpon Drive and South Eagle Road: Zaremba: Okay. Moving ahead. I'd like to open the Public Hearing for Item 14 and this is CUP 05-018, request to amend the existing Conditional Use Permit slash planned development to allow for a maximum building height of 58 feet in a C-C zone for Lots 1 and 2 and the southern portion of Lot 9, Block 5, for Marriott Courtyard at EI Dorado by BRS Architects, northwest corner of East Tarpin Drive and South Eagle Road, and we will begin with staff comments. Guenther: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is -- I'll start by showing this in EI Dorado. The two lots are immediately west of Eagle and north of Tarpin in this location as shown. The applicant's request is to increase the height requirement or height limitation and this is from ground to the highest point of the building. I detailed that in the staff report, so there is no confusion that -- if we are talking about building height versus any type of architectural features on the top. This is from ground to the highest point of the building. This is -- the use as a hotel on this site has already been approved under an existing Conditional Use Permit. The request is right now to make the allowance for the height of 58 feet. This is not going to impact any of the height restrictions of the existing EI Dorado Conditional Use Permit, which was -- I'll go back one slide -- in what they call the Ridenbaugh section, which is these lots in here. Just a point of clarification, that it has no impact on that. They will be providing a cross-access agreement to the north, which is the -- there is a convenience store, as well as, I believe, a Jack-in-the-Box restaurant in that location and their other access will be to Tarpin to the south and the already pre-approved designated location for the access. Their only major requirement was to upgrade the classification for fire from an R-3 -- it's in the Meridian fire department comments and that was the only change that would need to be done to the building through construction in order make allowances for the height increase. And I will stand for questions. Zaremba: Commissioners, any questions? Borup: None. Moe: None. Zaremba: Thank you. Would the applicant care to come forward? Strite: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. Billy Ray Strite, 1010 Allante in Boise. I'm here on behalf of the hotel partners and, obviously, we are pleased with the staff report. I do have one question, if I might, and it pertains to page five, Meridian Planning & Zoning May 5, 2005 Page 26 of 32 items number seven and items number eight. Maybe Bruce can help me with this. Those two lots -- the parcel is made up of two lots, as the previous slide would show you there, and each one has its individual sewer and water tap to the lot specifically. So, we, in effect, have two services provided to this site. However, if I'm reading item number seven, item number 8, second sentence, it says we Will be responsible to construct sewer mains to and through this proposed development. I guess I need a point of clarification. Freckleton: Certainly. Zaremba: Mr. Freckleton. Freckleton: Benito Subdivision, when it was constructed, eight inch mains were stubbed into each lot. We didn't know how services or how the lots were going to develop, so they were actually main lines. It's our intention to, whenever possible, to be able to loop water mains through and tie them back in, just for hydraulic balance and better fire flows. So, if -- it's a little bit of a boilerplate comment. If we have the opportunity to run it through and tie it back into another main on the other side or something we would desire to do that. Does that answer the question at all or -- Strite: Mr. Chair. Bruce would -- does that also include the sewer extension? I mean the sewer is-- Freckleton: Well, it's considered a main, because it's an eight-inch -- it's eight inch diameter. Strite: But we, basically, have two sewer services, each of which is eight inch. Freckleton: Right. Strite: To that site. Let me ask you this: Having spoken to Joe Silva probably a year ago when we started this process, we talked about the potential for extending the water main anyway, because we had to provide additional fire hydrants, which you will note in the fire department comments. So, is that construed to mean that once we get to the north end of this property, are we going to be responsible to try to get Farmers and Merchants to allow us to go through their property in order to get back to that other eight inch main? I guess -- all I need is a point of clarification and -- I have no problem with the concept, but it doesn't make a lot of sense in this case. Freckleton: Right. Point of clarification would be that services or the mains that are necessary for this project are existing and you would just need to extend them to whatever point you would need to to access the building at the point you need. Now, the only qualification I'll add to that would be if there is deficiency in the pressure flow, we may be looking for another main to tie into to balance out hydraulic -- hydraulically or increase the fire flow. So, it's something that we would have to go through and add to our water model to analyze that once we get a little further into the process. Meridian Planning & Zoning May 5. 2005 Page 27 of 32 Strite: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, that's certainly acceptable to us. And reasonable. Zaremba: Thank you. Strite: That's the only question I have. If you have any questions, I would be happy to answer them. If you want to take a moment, I can show you some photographs of the one we just finished in Boise, if there is any desire to do so. Other than that, if you're ready to go home, I'd like to go home as well. Zaremba: Run through them quickly and we will be glad to see them. Strite: Well, I have them in a packet here. Zaremba: Oh, I thought they were up on the screen. Strite: No. I have them here and you're welcome to take a look. Again, I'm not sure that -- some of you, I know, have already seen these, but I brought them just to -- just in case. I, actually, expected to see some people from Thousand Springs and I went and checked out the -- I kind of expected to see some people from Thousand Springs, so I did a little bit of homework. I checked the grade basin -- finish floor elevation of the ridge line at Thousand Springs and the finish floor of the hotel and we are 18 feet below finish floor of the houses on the bench there, so, in essence, our highest point of 58 feet is, really, 30 feet from that particular elevation, which, in fact, is below what's allowed by ordinance. So, I just thought I would throw that out. I find that there are no opposing neighbors, so -- Zaremba: If they had been here, they probably would have raised that issue, but -- Strite: I would have thought so. That's very -- other than that, I have nothing else. But ask for your permission and we will move forward. Zaremba: Commissioners, any other questions? Borup: Mr. Chairman, the only question I have to ask Mr. Strite is are you glad you didn't, being last on the schedule, anticipate a 9:30 hearing and wait until then to show up? Zaremba: We can always talk until 2:00 o'clock in the morning if you want us to. Borup: And we wouldn't have waited for you. Strite: Thank you very much. Meridian Planning & Zoning May 5.2005 Page 28 of 32 Zaremba: Thank you. And we have opportunity for everybody else in the audience to speak, but there is nobody else in the audience, so that opportunity has been granted and nobody was here take it, so Commissioners? Guenther: I was going to say, if he really wants to be here that late, he can either be on 19th or the 2nd. Zaremba: We could continue it until, then. Moe: Mr. Chairman, I move that we close the Public Hearing on CUP 05-018. Newton-Huckabay: Second. Zaremba: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? That motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Moe: Mr. Chairman? Zaremba: Commissioner Moe. Moe: I move we forward on to City Council recommending approval of CUP 05-018, to include all staff comments of the hearing date May 5th, 2005, received by the city clerk April 29th, 2005. Newton-Huckabay: Second. Borup: Second. Zaremba: We have a motion and a second. All in favor say aye. Any opposed? That motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Moe: Mr. Chairman, I move we adjoum. Hawkins-Clark: Mr. Chairman? Zaremba: We have -- staff has a comment. Hawkins-Clark: I'm sorry. I know you're really anxious to get out, but if I could just -- two quick things. One is there is an open house that we are hosting -- we being the City of Meridian and planning staff, for the north Meridian area. It's going to be the 16th - Monday night the 16th, May 16th, at Sawtooth Middle School, and there will be notices going out and put in your boxes, but I just wanted to give you a heads up. It's going to Meridian Planning & Zoning May 5, 2005 Page 29 of 32 be open house format. The focus of the meeting is going to be a -- solicit input from property owners and the public on the north Meridian area. Zaremba: Say again where that meeting is? Where is that meeting? Hawkins-Clark: At Sawtooth Middle School. Zaremba: And what time? Hawkins-Clark: 6:00 to 8:00. Zaremba: 6:00 to 8:00? Borup: That's Sawtooth on Linder? Hawkins-Clark: Sawtooth on Linder. Right. Zaremba: All right. Thank you. Newton-Huckabay: You don't want to walk or ride your bike, because there is no sidewalk. Hawkins-Clark: It could be a test case. You could walk there. And the second thing, I just, for the fun of it, was just estimating -- which I usually don't do, but estimating the time frames for the 19th and the 2nd and I thought I was being conservative and I couldn't come up with less than a seven hour meeting on either one. To be honest with you, I mean there was a withdrawal of the Reserve Subdivision from the May 19th and I factored that withdrawal into -- into that, but I know that you probably don't have a way to solve this tonight, because you have already -- you know, you have already set these agendas, but I just thought maybe one idea might be if you're willing, that, you know, you could have sort of a pre -- is this right, Mr. Attorney, that -- as long as we announce that they are going to have a quorum, it's not a hearing, it's a workshop where staff could give an overview of some of the details that we anticipate being presented at that hearing. It is -- I mean you have had many meetings lately, but it's just one thought, that if you want to -- because our fear, of course, is that, you know, you won't get to the last four items on both of these meetings, I really don't think. So, you may get to their -- you know, you get through -- and through it and, then, if you don't finish those meetings, then, we have this ripple effect, you know, through -- through the people that are already now anticipating to go onto our July meetings and I'm just trying to think of a way to help these two meetings ease up a little bit. Nary: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, it may be problematic in trying to do a workshop, which, essentially, is really trying to give the staff an .extra opportunity to -- to give the staff report or the troublesome areas and, then, there is not an opportunity for a response or public participation. One thing you might consider -- I mean certainly I know there are times when I agree with Hawkins-Clark that, you know, we have Meridian Pianning & Zoning May 5,2005 Page 30 of 32 announced on a number of occasions that we won't take anymore hearings after a set time and we will stop -- we will stop at a certain point and determine how many more hearings we will continue on and, then, setting those. You probably would be better off if you wanted to, setting a special meeting in the future that can be noticed and that way it can be determined -- just to give you an example, if you decide at 10:00 o'clock on the 19th that you're going to gauge where you're at and there is three projects left and you're going to set those two to your second meeting in June or you're going to set it to a special meeting in June, just to make sure you have that spill over capability, that would probably be better from a public records standpoint, as well as the record going forward to the Council and, you know, always there is the potential of district court. The other option is that it is a national day of prayer and you could certainly use that as a method to determine maybe on May 19th things will work themselves out. Zaremba: We can pray that I ask fewer questions. Moe: I do it all the time. Nary: I just would be hesitant to recommend a workshop. It would be better just a special meeting setting those items on a meeting agenda and just hearing them in that fashion, than, trying to get a hearing early and, then, hear it again and have it appear to at least an applicant that maybe there is an opportunity -- they didn't get a fair opportunity to really rebut that or there is a lag in time between those. I think it just makes it a little more problematic. Hawkins-Clark: And Joe pointed out to me that we may shuffle the agenda for those that are anticipated to be no opposition, to help -- try to determine -- you know, from the standpoint of public relations, if you will, to get them done first, but -- Zaremba: Well, we discussed at one point having a -- the no brainers might be on a Consent Agenda and move them off. If somebody objects -- can we do that? There was a few -- I mean there were two or three tonight that probably could have been -- Borup: If the applicant has no objection to any of the staff comments, if they are in a hundred percent agreement with all staff comments, that those could go on. Didn't we get that in -- Nary: Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission, there is a -- there is a Public Hearing ordinance that's been worked on to death and it's kind of in the pending stage, but you could certainly, as the chair's prerogative, certainly request that any of the items that have no objections to the staff, that they are in agreement, you could have the application state that on the record, that they are in complete agreement with the staff comments and they are ready to move forward, you can group those together and approve those all in one motion and that's certainly not going to violate any -- Rohm: How can it be done without taking public testimony? If there is someone from the public just because -- Meridian Planning & Zoning May. 5, 2005 Page 31 of 32 Nary: If there was someone from the public that's here to provide any testimony, then, you could take it off the Consent Agenda. Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, I mean Commissioner Rohm is right, I mean as long as a member of the public has an opportunity to speak, if there is no opposition by the applicant or there is no opposition from the public, you can certainly group all of those projects together and you kind of approve them in one motion recommending to staff the findings for approval based on the staff's recommendation. Borup: I'd recommend we do that. We have been wanting to try that anyway. Zaremba: Yes. This would be a good meeting to experiment with that. Moe: That's what Boise does. I have been there a few times in the last month and a half going through that process. Zaremba: Okay. We have a motion on the floor that I don't believe has been seconded and has not been voted on. Rohm: To adjourn? Zaremba: Yes. Rohm: Second. Borup: Did Mr. -- did we get through all -- Zaremba: I'm sorry. We are done. Hawkins-Clark: I'm done. I just wanted to give you that forewarning, Borup: What was the estimate on tonight's meeting? Hawkins-Clark: No estimate. Borup: Okay. Zaremba: There wasn't time to make an estimate. Rohm: Second. Zaremba: Okay. We have a motion and a second. All in favor say aye. Any opposed? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Zaremba: Thank you. We are adjourned at 8:24.