Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4 April 18, 2002Meddian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 18, 2002 Page 6 Centers: Well, we are just simply lining out Item 5, aren't we? page? On Page 5, the last Borup: Right. Right. Shreeve: I think, as I recall, there was nothing else, other than that, and then the 25 foot the landscape buffer. Borup: Which would be in the next one. Shreeve: Right. Mr. Chairman, I move that we approve AZ 02-003, request for annexation and zoning of 3.84 acres from R-1 to R-8 zones for proposed Amberstone Subdivision by Jim Jewett, with all staff comments on the memorandum dated March 11,2002, excluding Item Number 5 on Page 5. Centers: I would second that. Borup: Motion and second. Any discussion? All in favor?. Any opposed? MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Borup: Thank you. Item Number 8. Shreeve: Mr. Chairman, I propose that we approve PP 02-002, request for Preliminary Plat approval of 19 building lots, and 2 other lots on 3.84 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for proposed Amberstone Subdivision by Jim Jewett. With all staff comments and specifically indicating that, a 25-foot landscape buffer would be allowed on the front. Centers: I would second that. Borup: Motion and second. Any other discussion? All in favor?. Any opposed? MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Item 4: Continued Public Hearing from March 7, 2002: AZ 01-015 Request for annexation and zoning of 34.60 acres from RUT to I-L zones for proposed Utility Subdivision by Falcon Creek, LLC - 3365 North Ten Mile Road: Item 5: Continued Public Hearing from March 7, 2002: PP 01-017 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 12 building lots on 34.60 acres in a proposed I-L zone for proposed Utility Subdivision by Falcon Creek, LLC - 3365 North Ten Mile Road: Borup: Thank you. Items Number 4 and 5 are both Continued Public Hearings from our March 7th meeting. AZ 01-015 is a request for annexation and zoning of 34.6 acres for the propoSed Utility Subdivision by Falcon Creek. Item Number 5 is a Continued Public Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 18, 2002 Page 7 Hearing PP 01-017, request for Preliminary Plat approval of 7 building lots and 1 other lot on the same 34.6 acres. I'd like to start on these two hearings with the staff report and comments. Siddoway: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You can see the site photo on the screen. The site view. This is at the intersection of Ustick and Ten Mile. I'm sure you're very familiar with it by now. It is the site just south of the Sewer Treatment Plant, which you can see at the top portion of the photo in here. It does include the land that's crosshatched in this vicinity map. We have some existing site photos. Looking south on the northeast property line into the project first and then looking southeast into the residential subdivision across the street you can see the general character of the adjacent properties and nearby residential subdivisions across the street. This is the Preliminary Plat and you can see the three areas of the plat in the different crosshatched patterns. They are proposing one lot up here in this corner as a park. They are proposing this area with the dot pattern as an area where Conditional Use Permits would not be required and then the area below it where they will be required. You should have a revised staff report for this, dated April 12th. I'm not going to belabor it too much, because the applicant's presentation I believe will request being continued and submitting a revised plat. I would just point out that the plat that's before us tonight did increase the number of available lots from seven to 12. It did remove the bus facility use, and it reduced the landscape buffers from 35 feet to 25 feet. Since the last hearing on February 19th, the City Council approved a text amendment to the current Comprehensive Plan that states limited light industrial development may be considered immediately adjacent to the City's Waste Treatment Plant. The map was not amended. They have a list of proposed permitted and prohibited uses. That's on Page 2. They do have a cul-de-sac that's in excess of 450 feet. On Page 7, there is a series of things called additional considerations. The first one does mention the text amendment that was just stated. It stated that therefore, staff recommends that only those lots immediately adjacent to the Wastewater Treatment Plant, which are lots one, two, and 12, have a possibility of being zoned light industrial. We would support less intense zoning, such as L-O or C-N for the other lots, three through 11, in addition to the requiring of Conditional Use Permit for future development. City Council did discuss this area last night in relation to the Comprehensive Plan. The direction that discussion is headed currently is that they would like to create a new mixed-use category. It will be specific to the area directly surrounding the Wastewater Treatment Plant and specify uses that would be allowed there. They did not like the idea of allowing retail. They did like the idea of allowing professional office, warehousing, what we sometimes call flex space, which is office, warehouse, things that are not intensively trafficked or not a lot of people, a lot of storage and office and those types of uses. That's still in the process of being worked out, but that is the current direction of that discussion. Therefore, I would probably amend our statement in here that C-N would probably not be appropriate and perhaps L-O would be with Development Agreement to specify uses that Council have been discussing. The recommendation for the annexation and zoning just below that at the bottom of Page 7 would be that the Commission and Council should determine what uses they find appropriate for the subject property and then zone it accordingly. That if more than one zoning Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 18, 2002 Page 8 designation is appropriate we will need new legal descriptions. For the plat, I would take you to Page 9 under the additional considerations there. Lot 12, Block 1, is a parcel of land that's designated for a park. I believe Tom Kuntz is here and he will probably want to talk about this a little bit. It's at the far northwest corner of the property and it has currently no vehicular access or a pathway access proposed, so will not be easy to maintain. It's kind of hidden from public view. We have some concerns about that. The cul-de-sac -- we would not support a Variance for the cul-de-sac as shown. It either should be shortened or extended through as a through street and connect down to Ustick Road. Lot 8, Block 1 -- it's difficult to see in this diagram, but it's a u-shaped one that wraps around another lot. We recommended eliminating the lots or combining them so that you don't have funny, unbuildable u-shaped lots that surround another lot. I believe the applicant is prepared to address that as well. In summary, if you go to Page 12 for the final recommendation. I'm going to let Tom address the park and pathways. There is a pathway in the Comprehensive Plan shown that's not being addressed currently by the project and Lot 8, which I just mentioned, the cul-de-sac, and the zoning. With that, I'll turn it over to Tom. Kuntz: Thank you, Commission Members. You should have in your packets our comments. There should be an attachment there from the parks strategic plan, action plan. I can certainly summarize those or just stand for questions. Borup: Any questions from any Commissioners of Mr. Kuntz? Kuntz: I will add one item at the bottom page on the action plan, the criteria for a mini park, which this would be considered a mini park, is 400 feet of minimum frontage on a road. Centers: Is that five acres? Kuntz: The size -- the minimum size that we would accept is five, but at the bottom of that, the design standards, you will notice that for a mini park, which the city does not want to own or maintain, our recommendation is for minimum of 100 feet of street frontage for any mini park. Thank you. Borup: Any other questions from the Commission? One I have on the park. I thought in some earlier design we were talking about a pathway to this area. Any comments on that? Kuntz: Item Number B on my comments. Borup: Okay. Kuntz: Staff comments from the original plat regarding the need for pathways along the two drain ditches still pertain to the revised plat. To summarize those comments, the developer should be responsible to provide a 10-foot wide hard surface pathway with a 30-foot easement along Five Mile and Nine Mile Drain. The pathway should be built to Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 18, 2002 Page 9 Parks Department standards. The developer should be responsible to provide surety in the form of a letter of credit or some other form for one half of the construction cost of the future pedestrian bridge over Nine Mile Drain. Borup: Okay. Thank you. Anything -- any other comments from staff? Okay. Does the applicant have some comments they'd like to make? Forrey: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Members of the Commission. My name is Wayne Forrey with Hubble Engineering, 701 South Allen Street in Meridian. I'm here tonight working and representing Falcon Creek, LLC, the developer of the proposed Utility Business Park Subdivision. Let me introduce briefly Ed McNelis right here, who is a partner in Falcon Creek, and then Steve Sedlacek, the owner of Sanitary Services Company, who is here tonight, and also their architect Lynn Brown. They are available for question and answer. Let me start by saying thank you for giving us the flexibility to have the hearing in mid April tonight, on the 18th of April, because we knew that the City Council was going through some planning discussions and future land use. We were able to attend the meeting last night with the Meridian City Council and they specifically discussed this area. We have felt -- the developer, my client, has felt definitely, and I have, too, there has been kind of a bouncing ball, like a super ball, that just keeps bouncing and bouncing about the policy on this area and what is appropriate or not appropriate for the area surrounding the Meridian Waste Treatment Plant. Last night, boy, the Council grabbed that ball, it stopped bouncing, and they gave the property owners and us in that area some public policy direction. Because of that we now want to make some changes to this approach to reflect two things, what the Council directives were last night and also the neighborhood input that we have received. I want to present those changes to the Planning and Zoning Commission and I've got a handout for you. I'd like to hand that out. It summarizes all of that. Okay. You will notice on the cover it says developer requested changes to the Utility Business Park property as a result of last night's City Council Work Session on the comprehensive land use changes. Now if you go to the first page inside, let's go through these notes. This is what the Council discussed as a body last night. Number 1, Meridian City Council recognizes that this property needs a special land use destination due to proximity to the Meridian Waste Treatment Plant. That was confirmed. Then they went on to note Number 2. Meridian City Council directed city staff to prepare a new land use classification of Mixed Use Waste Treatment Plant. They are going to call that MUWTP, for the Utility Business Park property. Now that planning designation would certainly apply to other properties around the Treatment Plant, but it would definitely apply as they directed to this specific property. The Council then in note Number 3 as a body discussed the types of uses that they felt would be appropriate in that new mixed-use classification. They said no new residential uses, but they understood that there were some existing homes in the area and they would remain if they chose to. They talked about professional offices and warehousing uses, flex space uses, office warehouse type uses. They mentioned casually or informally like business park type uses, which needs some further definition, and mini storage. Those were the uses that the Council said last night is what they envisioned for this property. Then in note Number 4, unless otherwise permitted by city adopted incentives, all Meddian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 18, 2002 Page 10 developments proposed in this new mixed-use area would require approval through Planned Development or through the Conditional Use Permit process. They were very directive on that, that they wanted this area to have Conditional Use Permit processing. Then note Number 5. There was discussion about buffering. The City Council indicated that limited office zoning was an appropriate transition buffer between industrial zoning and residential subdivisions. Okay. Now that we have that set of notes, we have made and we are proposing to make some changes to this property. If you will look at the map on the next page, I have got a larger map that I can set up on the counter right here that the audience can see -- what about on the overhead projecto~ Okay. Thank you. The area in pink we are proposing that it would be zoned light industrial. The area in green would be zoned L-O, Limited Office. That top pink part, about 13 acres, is about 21 acres on the balance or about 60 percent of the site would be limited office. The entire development would be subject to Conditional Use Permit requirement, but this, as you can see, is a change here, because now we have some direction in terms of public policy. This definitely fits with what the Council discussed last night. Now if you turn the page and if you can put up the next page there, Bruce. Let's talk about that corner just one moment. We received quite a bit of neighborhood input that where the two creeks come together, Five Mile Creek and Nine Mile Creek, is a very nice natural area. It could be a very unique park site here in the City of Meridian. Our thinking was that the City of Meridian already owns land on the north side of the Five Mile Creek. If you look at this yellow area, on the north side of the drain the city owns that, it has access to that. In fact, we had a meeting there last night and there is a nice parking lot there and a nice meeting room. It's part of the City's Waste Treatment Facility, so there is access to that area. As other properties develop on the west side of the Nine Mile in the future, maybe there is a way, then, that that developer could provide some land to the city. If Falcon Creek provides one acre here and that's the blue portion here, we can start a land banking process for some future option for the Parks and Recreation Department. That yellow and green combination you see is five and a half acres. That's the minimum size that the Parks Department wants for a neighborhood park. With some footbridges in the future and land banking or at least leaving that option open, there is a nice area here for a future park. Falcon Creek is willing to provide that one-acre as a land bank to start the process. It's definitely thinking about the future not a mini park concept, but holding some land in reserve, thinking about future options, thinking about using the waste treatment plant site for access and parking and footbridges to access that area. That's the thinking behind that one-acre. Now let's go to the next page. We have proposed a Development Agreement to the city and we are proposing an Exhibit B, an amended Exhibit B. There are three important elements. Element 1 is it would state in writing that all of the land use on Lots 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11 -- and that's in the green area on the map -- all of that would require Conditional Use. Element Number 2 says all of that area would be zoned L-O and Element Number 3 says that the City of Meridian shall establish a future land use designation to further define the types of land uses that can be developed in this property. That reflects last night's discussion with the City Council. Now if you will turn the page, there is some background information that I want to share with the Commission and the public about Sanitary Services and the type operation that they have. They are a company that by contract, regulated by the Meddian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Apdl 18, 2002 Page 11 city, are to pick up household waste, but they are not in control of the land fill, they have to take that to Seaman's Gulch. Ada County is currently evaluating options that may include closing Seaman's Gulch Landfill. They may expand it, they may close it, and they are looking at alternate landfill sites in Ada County and some even outside of Ada County for future options. Sanitary Services is in a position that as long as Seaman's Gulch Landfill remains open and accessible to Meridian. They are within an easy driving distance of taking their trucks and driving up to the current landfill. That's the plan they have right now. If Ada County was to close Seaman's Gulch or develop a new landfill and require Meridian to go to that new landfill, it conceivably could be many miles and miles and miles away from Meridian. In order to efficiently transfer they would need a transfer station. If you look at the bottom of this example here in quotes, what we are proposing is a modified Conditional Use Permit approach for Lot 2 of Block 1, which is this 10-acre Sanitary Services site. Here is what we would recommend that the city include in this project. Lot 2 of Block 1 in Utility Business Park Subdivision shall be owned and occupied by Sanitary Services, Inc. If Sanitary Services, Inc., determines that a solid waste transfer station is needed to provide efficient public services, then a Conditional Use Permit for this facility will be required only if the Seaman's Gulch Landfill is open and available to Meridian residents. The trigger here -- in the current system in this community if Seaman's Gulch is open, Sanitary Services has no problem with a Conditional Use Permit for a waste transfer facility. Here is the other opposite side of that trigger. If Seaman's Gulch Landfill is closed or not available to Meridian residents, then Sanitary Services will not be required to apply for a Conditional Use Permit for a solid waste transfer station facility. The reason for that is it would become a critical, essential element. They would have to have a Waste Treatment, because they are a public -- semi-public agency. They have -- by contract they have to pick up the trash. If they were told that they had to go to EImore County -- and there is a regional waste facility in Elmore County. If Ada County said to Meridian your trash has to go to Elmore County, you would have to have a waste transfer facility. DEQ would require that. It's not something that Sanitary Services could optionally do or not do they would have to have one. Their position is if we have to have one and DEQ mandates that, then we shouldn't have to go through a Conditional Use Permit process. As long as Seaman's Gulch is open and viable, they may not ever need a waste transfer station and then they are totally agreeable to the Conditional Use Permit process. That's what I would call a modified approach for that specific lot for that specific user. Now if you turn the page, we would propose, then, Exhibit C amended and it would have five elements. Element 1, that the Lots 1 and 2 and 12 are subject to Conditional Use Permit requirements and that's the pink area. Element Number 2 is the zoning on Lots 1, 2, and 12 would be light industrial. Element Number 3, that Lot 12 of Block 1 would be provided to the city for public use as a pathway and park space and that this area would be credited towards open space and/or impact fee requirements as negotiated with the City of Meridian. You require developers to provide open space and you have ordinances that provide land in lieu of impact fees, so we'd like that same opportunity here. Element Number 4 Falcon Creek would develop Lot 1, Block 1, for Western Recycling Company as a Conditional Use in the I-L zone. Element Number 5 says that Lot 2, Block 1, would be for Sanitary Services as a modified Conditional Use in the industrial zone, subject to the following language. Then I repeated again Meddian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 18, 2002 Page 12 right there the language that we hope that you could put on this project and that, again, is tied to the landfill situation, which is not controlled and out of the control of the City of Meridian and Sanitary Services. Then if you will turn to the next page, here is a summary of what we are asking your Commission to do tonight. Number 1, we are asking you to accept public testimony on our application, our own testimony, and the public's. Then Item Number 2 we are asking that you would continue our application to your next available meeting date. We want to submit plat revisions to the city staff. We want to submit zoning descriptions to city staff. We want to submit legal descriptions and some amended Development Agreement language and actually start putting that Development Agreement together. That's because we learned quite a bit last night from the Meridian City Council and so in response to that we'd like the opportunity to amend this and continue it to another date. Then the third thing is really important. We are hoping you would direct city staff to accept that material and prepare a revised staff report, now that we have some direction from the City Council and from Falcon Creek. Then that I think will help further define this project and start to nail down some of these loose ends, so we can stop this ball from bouncing. Now I hope that that has helped -- helped you understand that we have made changes to the project. We have listened to the neighbors, we have listened to City Council, we have listened to staff, we are willing to make these changes and continue to work on this. We hope you will give us a chance to do that. I'd be happy to answer any questions. Then, of course, Steve Sedlacek is here for questions about Sanitary Services and his architect Lynn Brown is here. The last few pages are some of the preliminary layouts of Sanitary Services and, you know, the site -- the siting and those types of things that you might have questions on. Borup: Questions from the Commission of Mr. Forrey? Centers: Oh, yes. Mr. Forrey. Forrey: Yes. Centers: How are you tonight? You heard Mr. Siddoway read the City Code defining light industrial zoning district. Basically, it says establishments, which are clean, quiet, and free of hazardous or objectable elements, such as noise, dirt, dust, smoke, glare, etc. Forrey: Yes. Centers: Then you, yourself, read the items that the City Council discussed last night. No residential and etc. Forrey: Right. Centers: How do you feel that SSI or the recycling fits into those recommended uses as Council discussed last night? Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 18, 2002 Page 13 Forrey: Well, they didn't discuss the -- Centers: Do those uses fit in with what they discussed? Forrey: Well, I feel they do with this new mixed-use designation that they have asked staff to prepare. Centers: How can you say that? The Meridian City Council discussed the following types of uses -- Forrey: Yes. Centers: -- that would be appropriate. This is your writing. A new mixed-use classification that they want to set up just for that parcel, which I think was a great idea, then you read the uses that they discussed and SSI or recycling doesn't fit. I can't see that it fits. Do you really think it does? Forrey: Well, let me -- Centers: Sure. Go ahead. Forrey: -- clarify for you. What I understand the Council is talking about was the area between the industrial zone that we are proposing and the subdivisions to the south and east. They said that they wanted office to buffer the industrial to the subdivision, so they talked about having industrial and a Comprehensive Plan Amendment that they authorized that they felt there could be industrial use next to the Waste Treatment Plant, but between that use and the subdivisions that had to be limited office. Centers: Okay. Then I understand maybe that rationale, but you know I will flip back to the definition of light industrial zoning. I can't see that SSI or recycling fits in that. Forrey: What zone do you think they should fit in? Centers: Well, maybe heavy industrial. Forrey: There is no heavy industrial in Meridian. Centers: There wasn't a MUWTP before last night either. Forrey: That's true but today there exists no heavy industrial zones. Centers: But the way the light industrial zoning district read, I mean you just got to admit it doesn't fit. The way I read it. You know, we could argue that all night, I guess. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 18, 2002 Page 14 Forrey: Well, Mr. Chairman and Commissioner Centers, we are not proposing Sanitary Services within this area of the office area. They recognize that there would be a tier of industrial -- that there should be tier of offices -- Centers: And the top tier would be light industrial. Forrey: That is correct. Centers: And the definition of light industrial, in my mind, doesn't fit SSI or the recycling. In my mind. Forrey: Okay. Centers: What you -- I had a little confusion following you. You're agreeable to a CUP for all the lots except 1,2 and 127 Forrey: No. Just Lot No. 2 and it's tied to Seaman's Gulch. Centers: No. I said for all lots, except 1,2 and 12. Forrey: One and 12 Conditional Use Permit and even Lot 2 subject to Conditional Use Permit. That is a -- that is a prior -- we have changed -- I'm submitting to you now, based on last night's information, new amended Development Agreement sections. Centers: So what you're saying is that you're fine with industrial -- light industrial zone for the top half and L-O for the bottom and a CUP on everything except -- Forrey: A waste transfer facility if the landfill closes. Centers: Which is on Lot 2. That's SSI. Forrey: Correct. Centers: I thought they were on a bigger one? Forrey: No. Lot Number2. Centers: Yes that is the bigger one. Forrey: Ten-acre parcel. Centers: So, in effect, what you're saying is you want a -- just common sense. You're wanting a CUP on that in combination with the approval of the zoning. Forrey: Yes. Correct. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 18, 2002 Page 15 Centers: One other question. I was just by there about a month ago. think the house sits somewhere in this area, an existing home. There is a -- I Forrey: Right there on Ten Mile, just -- Centers: Okay. Forrey: Down from the -- Centers: Okay. I noticed numerous SSI trash containers sitting and scattered all over. I wondered does SSI the person live there now or -- Forrey: You'd have to ask Steve Sedlacek. I don't know. Centers: I mean they were scattered all over the land. Forrey: I'm sorry I don't -- Centers: I would like that addressed, because if that's the way they keep their property, then how will they keep their property in the future if they are going to be the user there? I think that could be addressed. Forrey: One other point I should make, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, let me tell you why this has been difficult, because your Zoning Ordinance has one symbol and it just says I. In the text description it has an L and I and it says all these things you're talking about, Commissioner Centers. About should be this type of development or that type of development. Okay. In the Zoning Ordinance in the control of land use table we have an I and you go down that list and it says things like waste transfer station permitted. In other words, some very definitive exact things that are bankable. In other words, if you have that zoning, you can go to the bank and you can borrow money, because it's a permitted use and you can finance those types of land use decisions. It's very difficult for any business person to take the kind of risk when you have zoning and it's permitted. They are saying to you. but I will submit myself to a Conditional Use Permit. The Council asked for that and I'm saying tonight we are agreeable to that, as long we can understand to modify it if the landfill closes, because that's outside the control of Sanitary Services or the City of Meridian. That's that County Commissioner Landfill Commission issue and if they decide that they have to manage that landfill and say everyone west of this particular street -- west of Eagle Road has to go to this other landfill, that's out of our control. That may dictate a waste trensfer facility. That's a public urgent need that we would have in this community. If that doesn't happen, then it's totally a Conditional Use Permit scenario, even though it's a permitted use in an industrial zone. You know, Meridian, you don't have any other zone where this could go, but yet we all need this service. Centers: Well, you know, sometimes cities that grow fast like the City of Meridian has, has to, you know, take some baby steps and get some experience and you heard us Meddian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Apdl 18, 2002 Page 16 pass the Zoning Ordinance change tonight prior to your application and specifically for zero lot lines. Never had it. You know, Meridian has grown by leaps and bounds. They are gaining knowledge and I think they are gaining a lot of ground, but the zone of that land presently is RUT correct? Forrey: That is correct. Centers: So, you know, you're not coming to a for use on an exiting zone, you're coming to us for a zone change and want us to feel that your use fits our light industrial. Forrey: That is true. Centers: And in my opinion it doesn't fit -- Forrey: Okay. Centers: -- the way it's defined in the City Code. Forrey: Frankly, we have no other place to go. Kuntz: Excuse me, Mr. Chairman. I apologize, but I have an 8:00 o'clock meeting that I have to move on to. Just a couple of quick comments. One, we certainly support the developer in wanting to provide a one acre open space park, but the city would not be interested acquiring that. We would support the developer developing it and maintaining it. As far as combining with additional land on the other side of the drain ditches, I know for a fact that the VVastewater Treatment Plant would not support us putting public on the grounds of the Wastewater Treatment Plant. We are certainly not interested in exchanging impact fees for a one-acre parcel. Then three, again, we just - - if the developer is asking us to go back and revise our comments and he's going to revise the plat, we'd like to see those revisions contain our comments that are included in tonight's hearing as far as the two pathways and the surety for the half of the bridge. Thank you. Borup: Thank you. Do you know why the -- did the Wastewater Treatment elaborate on why they wouldn't be interested in any park ground on their property? Kuntz: Mr. Chairman, they don't want the public on the grounds of the Wastewater Treatment Plant for liability reasons. A small child wanders off and ends up in a place they shouldn't be. Borup: Okay. Kuntz: Thank you. Borup: Did you have some other questions, Commissioner Centers? Meddian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 18, 2002 Page 17 Centers: No. I'm fine. Siddoway: Mr. Chairman, two comments one about the public policy discussions of the City Council last night. What Mr. Forrey is explaining is the direction in terms of the uses that they were discussing, but I think it's important for the public here to know that it's not set public policy yet, because it was just a hearing, it was workshop where it was discussed. Those proposed policy -- proposed policies are up for Public Hearing on May 1st to be discussed with City Council. While it's not written in stone, that's certainly the direction they are headed at this point, would be a fair statement. Those discussions were generalized to the area around the Wastewater Treatment Plant on all sides and not just focused on this one property. I don't think there was any discussion, unfortunately, or acknowledgement of the -- of separating this proposed industrial section from those requirements. I don't know that they would be opposed to it, but it was not discussed separately, so -- Borup: Did they talk about how that discussion would tie in to their previous changes, the recommendation on the text change to the Comprehensive Plan? Siddoway: It was not. It was just -- the discussion came up to talk about, well, maybe we should do a charrette with local landowners and figure this out in the future. Just make it rural residential today and they didn't like that, they said we need to make a decision. We need to give some direction, we need to move forward and, you know, make a decision on what we want and go. They discussed this new mixed-use area and Iow impact, light industrial, office, office warehouse type uses that they would envision. Staff is to prepare a list and have that ready for them at the next hearing. Borup: Were they back-pedaling on their previous statement that immediately adjacent would be the light industrial? Siddoway: It did not receive specific discussion last night. That's all we are saying. Borup: Okay. Well, when I read it -- I guess I kind of assumed the same thing Mr. Forrey said, that they were still -- that was still their policy but then they were talking about all the other property that wasn't immediately adjacent. Siddoway: That may be. I'm just saying that it wasn't discussed. Borup: Okay. Were you finished, Commissioner Centers? Centers: Yes. Borup: Anyone else have any -- Shreeve: I have got a question. Just -- of course, this is a proposed light industrial section that we are showing. Of course, we have read the definition that Commissioner Centers has brought up, but in the -- of course, in the zoning regulations Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 18, 2002 Page 18 subdivision development manual, you know, you show under the industrial what would be allowable or what would be permitted uses. Of course, solid waste is listed there. There are several other items in there that by virtue of the definition you could probably have a similar argument, whether or not those uses really are -- fit the definition of what's written. I guess my question is if the zoning was approved and -- what gOverns? The definition as we may interpret it or that there is actually specific uses listed for an industrial type -- Siddoway: In the case of specific uses listed in the schedule of use control we would go with that. If there is, a use listed under industrial in the schedule of use control and it's listed as either permitted, conditional, or prohibited, that is what we would regulate by. If there is a conflict between the definition and the schedule, you know, it needs to be cleaned up, but we would go with the schedule of use control, because that should be adopted in conjunction with that definition. Shreeve: And I guess I should, of course, put in that that is under I, industrial, it doesn't designate light or heavy, it's just simply industrial, so we get into a whole other definition by virtue of that, too, but -- okay, thanks, Steve. Centers: Well, to follow up to that, if I might, Steve. Schools are allowed in a residential zone. Siddoway: That's correct. Centers: And this Commission turned one down six, eight months ago for an alternative school at the corner of Pine and 9th. Siddoway: A standard public school is permitted. Centers: Yes. Your comment to Commissioner Shreeve isn't entirely correct, then. Siddoway: Yes, it is. The alternative school that was proposed is not a listed use in the schedule of use control and all unlisted uses are determined to be a Conditional Use Permit. Centers: Okay. Siddoway: Cell towers fall into the same category. They are not listed on there, so if someone proposes a cell tower it's automatically a Conditional Use Permit. Centers: SO what you're saying to Commissioner Shreeve is if it states permitted for a solid waste transfer station in the industrial zone, you would go with that, rather than the Meridian City Code that defines a light industrial zone? Siddoway: It's a conflict but yes. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 18, 2002 Page 19 Centers: Wasn't your question for Mr. Shreeve based on -- Siddoway: We could ask the City Attomey his opinion, but if it's adopted ordinance that says that those uses are permitted in industrial, we would go with that, with property that already had the zoning. If it's in conflict, we would need to change it .but if it's an adopted ordinance that says it's permitted industrial, we would go with it. Borup: That's also, why the city has that protection, because of the discussion, than it is with the -- with the Conditional Use Permit. Centers: Not for the -- Borup: Well, except for that one -- Shreeve: On a conditional basis. Borup: Modified. Forrey: And we are proposing a Development Agreement and that's the Exhibits A, B and C, that put that in writing. Centers: On the contract. Forrey: Right. For their clarification and protection. That's what the Council asked us to do last night and we are doing it. Borup: Any questions from Commissioner Mathes? Mathes: No. Borup: Anything else you want to say, Mr. Forrey? Forrey: Thank you very much. Borup: Probably have you back up probably to answer some questions. Okay. We'd like to proceed with the Public Hearing portion and -- you can come up when you're called upon, sir. Mr. Booth, do you still want to testify? Booth: Yes, I do. David Booth, 3744 West Niemann Drive in Meridian. That's in the Dakota Ridge Subdivision. I kind of want to make my comments in two parts. One as the political action committee chair for the Dakota Subdivision and so as a representative of that subdivision, I have a couple comments. I also want to make comments -- personal comments. First, I think as that subdivision I'd like to commend the city, both the Council and the Planning and Zoning, as well as the developer and his representatives on -- just think of the public and taking our comments and concerns into account. On a personal note, the two drains that run through or near -- adjacent to this Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 18, 2002 Page 20 block of land. I don't know how many of you have been out there and looked at it, but currently the banks are pretty steep. I foresee with a future path along that, that could be a potential hazard to small children that may fall down the slopes and into the water, it may be hard for them to get out. I'm not an expert on that, but I see that as a potential. Therefore, I propose that we increase the landscaping buffer from 25 feet to at least 35 feet and include in that flattening out the banks of those areas to make it a little bit safer. Also I think it improves the visual aspects of that. With regard to the Development Agreement on Exhibit C, I don't think that just because the landfill closes that should relieve SSI of the responsibilities that come with the CUP. I think it's important to have the CUP in place, so that the public has a way of making sure that that facility is built and maintained in an appropriate manner, not that I necessarily approve of it in the first place, but -- and then also with regards to the industrial versus industrial light, that is a major conflict. The text change did say light industrial immediately adjacent. I don't know how the city process works, but I think it might be in everybody's interest if we, as a city, went ahead and created a new zoning called light industrial with a list of permitted uses. I think that's all I want to say. Any questions? Borup: Any questions for Mr. Booth? Booth: Thank you. Borup: Mr. Cody, did you still wish to testify? Cody: Yes. My name is Charles Cody and I live at 3691 West Niemann. Good evening. What brings us here tonight is the concern of the homeowners that have invested time and money into their homes. Now they feel the pressure of an undesirable business trying to move into the neighborhood. I have witnessed what happens to properties of this kind when this kind of operation is put into effect. It doesn't matter what they do to run a clean dump or a recycling plant, without saying that it is devastating to the property owners who have to live here after the gates have closed for the day. We still have to face the residue on our streets and yards, although we all agree that services such as necessary for the health and welfare of our city, we feel that this is not a proper location. I think Falcon Creek is making a bed that they want the homeowners to sleep in. I think there is other places for this kind of operation. Thank you. Borup: Thank you, sir. Karen Lyman? Can't quite -- Angie Hroma? Is that -- I don't think I pronounced that right. Hroma: That's actually -- Angie is my wife. Borup: Okay. Hroma: I'm Paul Hroma. I live at 3136 North Burley, which is just right across Ustick from this. One thing I wanted to clarify just -- and maybe I just misheard, but now the Sanitary Services, is that in the green area or the purple area? Meridian Planning and Zoning Commissio~ Meeting Apdl 18, 2002 Page 21 Borup: Purple. Hroma: Okay. I misheard that. I just want to -- you know, just state again -- Borup: Actually, they are in the middle lot in the purple area. Just in that area. Hroma: Yes. I guess I misheard something and I just wanted to make sure I got that right, For some reason I was thinking it was the green but I mean in general I mean I agree with Mr. Centers, you know, it's just a huge conflict. It just seems like, you know, we are trying to, you know, justify this. I understand his argument of, you know, it's something that's required, if Seaman's Gulch closes down, and then we have to do something. I just don't think this is the location that we have to do this at. I mean there are -- I see land all over the place that's for sale that doesn't have anything around it and, you know, whether that's in the future or not of what's proposed around it in the future or not, right now there are homes and residents that are right there in the heart of this thing. If this thing passes, you know, -- there was one lady that made a comment a couple of meetings ago about how she did live next to a Waste Treatment Plant or a transfer at one point. She said, if you lived anywhere, you know, anywhere within nine blocks or something within this thing, you smelled it. You know, I don't want to live in a neighborhood where that's going to be a constant thing that we are going to have to worry and have to deal with. I mean just talking about depreciation and everything else and I think those are basically the only comments I would make and just kind of reiterate my stance on that, that I just think there is other alternatives, that even though it is a necessity I think there is other alternatives as far as location goes. Borup: Thank you. Charles Crane. Crane: My name is Charles Crane. I live at 3610 West Ustick Road. I'm the neighbor to the west of the property, the little triangle. One thing I'd like to address, the idea of industrial and light industrial, heavy industrial. Meridian has a character to it and I don't think it's required that we have some things in Meridian. There are nuclear power plants. Does Meridian have to make an allowance for that? Do we have to allow everything in this town? I think a 10-acre garbage dump in the center of Meridian is not going to fit in with Meridian's character. I think you will damage the character of the city immensely. Borup: I would agree with that, but I haven't heard anyone proposing that. Crane: If Seaman's Gulch is gone and they have got to not -- originally they talked about the neighbors that would rake their leaves and put it in the transfer station temporarily. Now we are talking about absolutely every kind of garbage in a big pile that is going to go out in giant semis to some far off county if Seaman's Gulch is closed. We are talking difference in the original proposed little transfer station of some yard rakings, we are talking big, giant 10-acre garbage dump. I think the public has spoken Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 18, 2O02 Page 22 at many of these meetings against this. There has been a petition with over 300 signatures against industrial in this area. There was another petition before that with 100 signatures. We have had -- you guys have seen yourself I think over 100 people at the Planning and Zoning meeting opposed to this. The City Council has seen over 100 people at the meeting opposed to this. If the city represents public policy, I think the public has spoken that this is not the right place for heavy industrial. I think most of the public would classify a large garbage dump, front-end loaders and semis, as heavy industrial. I would hope that any use in this area would require a Conditional Use Permit and not just a Development Agreement that says when Seaman's Gulch closes that there will be dump here, because we know there is a limit to any dump. All dumps get full. Seaman's Gulch will be closed some day and if that's in the agreement, then there will be a dump there it's just a matter of time. One thing I'd like to point out, the original 1993 Comprehensive Plan does have residential designations along Ustick Road. I would like to hand this out to - Borup: We have got a copy. Go ahead and your time is up. Crane: This second page is the meeting minutes from my deVelopment when I split my land into two pieces a couple years ago. The Findings of Fact and the legal decision was that the edge of Ustick Road on the original 1993 plan is residential for a short distance into the property. Since the other three sides are residential, that would be a good match with the neighborhood. That's something I would like to make known, if you consider along the edge of Ustick Road as a possible use. Thank you. Shreeve: Mr. Crane. Just one comment, Mr. Crane. Of course, what they are proposing is that the industrial would not be up against Ustick Road. Basically you would have offices, you would have some kind of transition, theoretically, would be the idea. My question is, is not what about the industrial, but -- with this comment, but what is your opinion of having office spaces? Is that anything that's of a concern to you right there in that area? Crane: Yes. The L-O designation is one that at the neighborhood meetings that we had with the developer. At the meetings we have had with ourselves, that just about everybody agrees would be a usable item for that if it's done with landscaping. Also, one of the concerns is the entrance from Ten Mile. It would be nice to have internal access to those businesses, instead of having five of six entrances on Ten Mile and Ustick, but to have the traffic coming into Utility Subdivision to service the L-O area. Shreeve: So basically your only complaint as I'm hearing it, then, is the Sanitary Services correct? Which would be in the proposed industrial zoning. Crane: I believe so, except for the fact that a Conditional Use Permit should be required on this entire sensitive area. Shreeve: Right and for the whole thing that's what's proposed anyway, that there be a Conditional Use Permit on all the office spaces, the whole thing. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 18, 2002 Page 23 Crane: Right but especially within the area -- Shreeve: Okay. Centers: Mr. Crane, I think your term dump is out of place and, of course, the applicant will address that. When I was out there, a month or so ago I noticed your house for sale. Have you been successful? Crane: No. I even dropped the price 7,000 dollars and I haven't had an offer. Centers: How long have you had it for sale? Crane: With a realtor I have had it for I think 40 days now. Centers: That's all I have. Thanks. Borup: Mr. Crane, just -- do you have a comment? The minutes that you presented to us -- I guess -- and I realize you were rushed a little bit, but my reading of these and recollection of the meeting, the point that Commissioner Nary was making when he talked about compatibility and such and the way the current Comprehensive Plan was reading, that this would necessitate a change in the Comprehensive Plan. Crane: Right. Borup: And that's what did take place with that text change with the City Council. Their statement was the way it was worded at that time he didn't feel it would be compatible and that's why with the text change it would have been necessary to make it. Crene: And the question I have is what does immediately adjacent mean. Are we talking that this whole property is immediately adjacent? The original text change request was a lot broader. It just said adjacent to and the City Council made a big point of it being immediately adjacent. They restricted that so if that restriction is just on the edge up at the top, then that leaves the rest of the property trying to be industrial would be totally against the Comprehensive Plan. Borup: And I think that's the way the -- that interpretation eventually evolved to. In other words, the purple area would be the area immediately adjacent. I'm not sure -- I think there was some confusion exactly on what they meant by that, what's immediate -- what's adjacent and what's immediately adjacent. It's my understanding, then, that any lots or parcels that were adjacent -- I think is what is involved and what they meant, which in this case means the purple area only. Is that your understanding, too? Crane: Or maybe even a smaller purple area. Maybe a little closer to the plant might be immediately adjacent. I think 10 acres might be a little excessive for being immediately adjacent. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 18, 2002 Page 24 Borup: Okay. Thank you. Janet Wilder. Wilder: My name is Janet Wilder and I live at 3340 North Ten Mile Road. Last night the City Council held a special meeting to discuss the new Comp Plan. This was a meeting that the public could attend, but they couldn't speak and there were several in attendance just to listen. When the property on the comer of Ten Mile and Ustick was discussed, one of the Councilmen made the statement you don't buffer industrial with industrial. This was very interesting to me, because I recall hearing the same thing in the '93 Comp Plan and they did designate that property as a park. The idea of locating the trash trucks and recycling next to the Wastewater Treatment Center may make sense to anyone that doesn't live close by, but would it make as much sense if it was being planned in your neighborhood? We already have one objectionable problem or neighbor in the Wastewater Treatment Center and how does it make any sense to add to the existing problem? If you zoned industrial for the trash trucks, you will be giving the go ahead for a waste transfer station, which absolutely has no place in the neighborhood. To summarize, I would encourage you to listen to former and present Council Members and don't buffer industrial with industrial. Another comment I had is I have read in the '93 Comp Plan that there was a certain area that was planned for light industrial, which was Eagle Road, and a certain area that was planned for heavy industrial, which was west of Ten Mile along the railroad tracks: I don't know if that makes a difference to what we have been talking about or not, but I have read that in there. I can't tell you exactly where, but it's there. Thank you. Borup: Ma'am, Ithink-- Shreeve: Yes. Mrs. Wilder, just one comment. Looking at the '93 Comprehensive Plan -- and this was brought up before, but to -- the Ex-Commissioner Nary did make a similar comment. The park that was shown there on even this map I'm looking at now, that is -- they show dots. Wilder: I know. Shreeve: And that doesn't necessarily mean that that's specifically the exact spot -- Wilder: I know. Shreeve: -- the exact spot it's supposed to be, it was just basically a target area is what that represents. Wilder: I know it was but it was -- that's what they thought it might be at that time. Shreeve: And that certainly could be a safe assumption for those who -- absolutely. Nevertheless, that -- it's probably poorly written and I hope we are specific like that. We talked about this before on our -- on the next Comprehensive Plan, but, nevertheless that was some kind of a general idea where parks might be. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 18, 2002 Page 25 Wilder: Well, I think if you go around the valley, you will see parks next to most of the Wastewater Treatment Plants, so -- Centers: Yes. What I was saying was in the '93 Plan -- correct me if I'm wrong, Steve - - those dots -- it wasn't defined that this is a general area. In our new Comprehensive Plan, we are very particular about that to let the public know that these aren't set in concrete, they could float up to two, three miles, or what have you. Wilder: Well, as you have heard so many testify, their realtors have told them there is going to be a park there. Centers: Yes. I can believe that, but I don't think everyone in that neighbor thought there was going to be a park there. I don't think everyone in that neighbor bought their home because they thought there was going to be a park there. Wilder: You would be surprised how many did, though. Centers: There may be some. I don't doubt that. I think everyone in the room now knows about that park, because they went and researched it and I don't blame them. Wilder: Okay. Any other questions? Borup: I just want to mention once the regional park purchased that land, then after that point I don't think there was any anticipation at all. Wilder: I don't know, you know. I haven't -- Borup: Which was five or -- five years ago. Wilder: Some of the people in that Turtle Creek were told that and that's pretty new. Borup: Turtle Creek does have a park across from it. Wilder: Turtle Creek -- that's, what, on Ustick? Borup: No. That's on Linder. Wilder: No. It's the park that's off of Ustick. No. It is Turtle Creek, but -- Siddoway: It would be Tumble Creek. Wilder: And some of the people in there said they were told that it was a park on Ten Mile and Ustick. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 18, 2002 Page 26 Centers: One other comment in defense of the Council -- and you couldn't speak last night? Wilder: Yes. Centers: I believe they had at least four or five Public Hearings and they do have to close those at some point. Wilder: And we were aware of that. Centers: And we've experienced that. Wilder: We were aware of it. You know, they told us we could come and listen, so we knew that. Centers: Good. Wilder: And there is another public meeting May 1st. Okay. Thank you. Centers: Are you going to be there? Wilder: Yes. Borup: Maybe just a note on that, I have just been given a note by the clerk that said it's her understanding that the May 1st Public Hearing, testimony will be taken, but it may only be written testimony. Is that correct, Steve, or -- Siddoway: That's not correct. They said the written testimony would be taken up until April 25th and that was the cutoff for new written testimony, but that they would be taking verbal testimony at the May 1st hearing. Borup: Okay. I was wondering about that. Smith: Thank you, I will double-check the notice with the City Clerk. My apologies. I thought that was how it was written. Borup: Okay. Thank you. Next, I think is Ken Beckwith, is that -- Beckwith: I'm Ken Beckwith, at 2866 West Park Stone Street. That's in the Candlelight Subdivision, which is caddy-corner from the area we are discussing. I attended that meeting last night also and had to be quiet like everybody else did. A lot of the things there are being proposed here tonight by Mr. Forrey was discussed at that workshop and I really feel that until the new Comprehensive Plan is approved and in place, that any action should be suspended or at least continued until after the new Comprehensive Plan is in place. That's all the and's, if's, and but's are out and we have a clean mark in the sand to go from. That's all. Me~dian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Apd118,2002 Page 27 Borup: Okay. Any questions for Mr. Beckwith? Thank you, sir. Dana Borquist, do you still wish to come forward? Borquist: My name is Dana Borquist. I don't have an address yet. I'm considering -- well, I have broken ground in the Hartford Subdivision. This is all kind of new to me. It kind of hit me like a ton of bricks when I saw it in the paper. I didn't do my research before choosing an address to build my home that I'm going to be for the next, you know, 15 to 20 yeare, I hope, get my family growing. I would just like to thank you for the time that you have given us to speak. I would just like to remind you to think about when you make these decisions how it would impact your life and your family and your home. I don't have a problem with businesses going in, I know that's necessary. I would like to have businesses. I just don't want them open all night or if they are going to be near a housing development, I definitely don't want large trucks and smelly services. I know that the treatment center is over there, but that kind of comes and goes, I guess, with the wind. If there was a recycling place and the transfer site, there is always going to be something going on. The last and final note, it's great that they are thinking about putting in a park, but I don't know how many people would actually take their children to a park that's located right there. It's out of the way from everything. You have to walk, if they do build these things, you have to walk right through the middle of them to get to it. Then you have the Treatment Center, the Water Treatment Place that won't even allow people to be there for the liability, so thank you for your time and please remember everyone and put yourself in their shoes. Thank you. Borup: Thank you, sir. That concludes those who had signed up. Did we have anyone else who wished to come forward? Newcomb: My name is Paul Newcomb. I reside at 3837 West Harbor Point Drive. I would like to make a couple of comments. Commissioner Centers, you said you didn't believe that everyone in the area had been told by their real estate agents that a park was going to be built that on site. The thing I find quite ironic is Hubble Homes, which is one of Mr. Forrey's employers, one of the sales agents over there happened to inform me that to the best of her knowledge a park was going to be built on that site and that was within the last several months. I think it's kind of a widely spread rumor that at one point there was a park being planned there. A couple of other points that I think you need to take into consideration. The Nine Mile Drain and the Five Mile Creek there, if you have a waste transfer facility you're going to have blowing and drifting trash, you're going to have runoff. If any of you were -- happened to be out here yesterday or the day before yesterday when we had our quarter inch in 15 minute shower, when you have a large paved area like this you're going to have runoff. Where is all the runoff going to end up? Pardon me. All the runoff is going to end up in one of those two -- one of those two ditches and then where is it going to end up? I know what you're hinting at, Mr. Borup, but I have yet to see a sewer drain that will drain 100 percent of the water in the storm sewer system and have it treated. You are going to see -- you are going to see trash from this transfer facility and any other source of runoff end up in Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Apd118, 2002 Page 28 those two ditches. You cannot contrel 100 percent of the contents of this place, because nature is going to -- nature is going to take over at the worse possible moment when you're untarping a truck or when you're dumping a load or something. This stuff is going to end up in one of the two ditches and then not only are we dealing with -- Borup: You're talking about with wind, not with the amount of rain? Newcomb: I'm talking with both. I'm talking with both. You're going to have the wind blow the trash and you're going to have the rain leach out whatever -- or it tends to leach out and carrying it into the drainage -- the drainages. Then at that point with the -- once you intreduce trash into these two drainages, then it's gone frem a municipal violation to a federal violation. I believe one of these two creeks, I believe the Five Mile Creek, actually runs year areund and it is, therefore, subject to the EPA Clean Water Act, is it not? Am I incorrect in saying that? I believe frem my research that is true. This doesn't make sense to me. This is going to become the heart of Meridian in the next 20 years. We have the North Meridian Planning Area that's going to be building along the 12-mile corridor between Ustick Road and Chinden Boulevard. This is going to become the dead center of Meridian 20 to 25 years from now. Does it make sense to really put a trash transfer facility there when we already have a heavy industrial area over on Pine at Locust Greve? It seems to me that there are better places to put this. Thank you. Borup: Thank you, sir. Do we have anyone else? Staudenraus: Ron Staudenraus, 3967 West Moon Lake Street. Anyway, the point I'd like to make is the like planning -- the planner here, the developer, I don't know what you think about industrial -- light industrial, but I'll put it this way -- now if you know anything about light industrial -- in other words, if you went and wanted to bring in light indUstrial, you bring is a stabbing machine. Now I'll put it this way, you can hear that for a half a mile. I've seen light industrial going with building equipment, equipment coming in and as far as these trucks with the storage for the garbage trucks and that coming in. They have got to wash those down and that's going to -- like I say, you got the drainage, but that doesn't get it, because the standing -- you go areund to any of these places that handle any refuge at all, no matter where it is, you smell it. I live quite a ways frem that, but I hate to see the whole -- that whole Ten Mile shot, because once they get in the door, as far as Hubble -- as far as he cares, he doesn't care, because he's out the door tomorrew. As soon as he makes the deal he really doesn't care, because the developers -- I have lived in California, I have lived in Washington, Wisconsin, Seattle, Petaluma, California -- I have been all over. I did commercial sheet metal work, so I have seen what happens to a lot of these areas. Once they get in the door, then they keep just prodding a little further and as far as the developers they really don't care what they leave when they walk out the door, except a contract is done. Anyway, I just can't believe you would go this way, because there is so many areas areund here, even the other side of the highway down there, you know. There is so many areas that can be developed into that and kind of keep this -- you know, like it's basically a residential area. I'll give you a good example. You know where the Golden Gate Bridge Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 18, 20O2 Page 29 is, Petaluma, California. They wanted to build an overpass between Petaluma Boulevard and McDowell. They stated with that, a developer again, and when the interest -- they tried to develop that -- that bridge would have been longer than the Golden Gate and that's a fact. I mean that's just kind of what my opinion is. I can't believe anybody letting them come in something like that, because they really don't care, as long as they make their contract. Thank you. Borup: Thank you, sir. Hennings: My name is Cheryl Hennings and I live at 2696 North Morello here in Meridian. I have been involved in this adventure, if we can call it that, since I was made aware of the impact that it was going to have in the neighborhood that I had just recently moved into. I had my heart so set on that being open space and it's taken me several months to realize that that possibility is still a little flicker in my own mind, but probably isn't going to happen. As more meetings and more hearings began to take place I realized that I still knew inside me, inside my heart, that I felt that the type of proposed industry in terms of a waste transfer station and also recycling, I just didn't think it was appropriate for that area. I realized that there wasn't anything more I could say, because I testified, I have gone to the facts and tried to present myself hopefully semi-intelligently with some research that I have done. In my frustration I decided to go about some research in a completely different way and it really struck me in one of the early meetings when they said that they wanted to -- and it's going to sound a little bit like what you just heard, that they wanted to buffer the Waste Treatment Plant area with industrial. That always didn't make sense to me. In the past month, I have been researching trees and shrubs that are fragrance givers and it's been so interesting, because I have taken quite a bit of time to walk that proposed path. Being an avid greenbelt user in Boise, I had to remind myself that there are certain requirements for safety -- or, in other words, I'm sure that they can't have trees and bushes close to the path for fear that, you know, someone would hide and maybe use that to an unseeming advantage. It struck me that no matter how this path is developed, which is seriously going to be bordered on the north by the Waste Treatment Plant. My whole idea was to somehow provide a buffer of fragrance that would make whatever happens on the other side more pleasant and environmentally pleasing to the people that are going to be utilizing that property. Now that's all shot, because if we do put in something as -- oh, can we go just a little longer? Okay. ,As something as intense as the waste transfer site and the Western Recycling, I just don't think that there is any amount of visual barrier that can make that pleasant. The places along the greenbelt you do have office buildings, but they have buffered it with lawn and trees far enough away from the path that it's a truly wonderful experience and this path is going to be connecting neighborhoods. I just really worry that if we create an environment there that they are going to be walking through beautiful areas of Meridian and then for this treacherous, you know, section of this property is going to be just such an unpleasant experience before they break free again and get into the next residential area. I would like to envision something that -- that is not going to be a blight to what it is that Meridian is trying to do with projects like that greenbelt idea. I think we are really setting ourselves up for a fail situation if we don't try. I can give you my list of Meddian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 18, 2002 Page 30 trees and shrubs I have been gathering and also I just have a vision for that, I guess, that will be something that Meridian can be proud of. Thanks for giving me a little extra time. If you have any questions I will stay here, but if not I will go away. Borup: Any questions? Centers: You did live in the neighborhood, didn't you? Hennings: I live in the neighborhood? Centers: Right. Hennings: Oh, yes. Centers: Okay. Borup: Thank you. Do we have anyone else? Okay. Mr. Forrey, did you have any final comments? Shreeve: Mr. Chairman, could I just ask one question of Steve? Borup: Yes. Shreeve: Steve, the planning organization out there, what is it called again? Siddoway: Compass? Borup: The North Meridian Planning? Shreeve: What are the dimensions, what are the limits of that? Siddoway: It does include this area. It is from Ustick to Chinden and from beyond Black Cat to McDermott, I think, over to Locust Grove. Borup: Okay. Forrey: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. For the record, again, Wayne Forrey with Hubble Engineering. Let me give a few comments to some of the testimony you received. To Mr. Booth, thank you, of course, for your supportive comments and I do agree with the re-grading of those banks. That would be something we would want to propose in our Landscape Plan for that pathway portion. To Mr. Cody's comments, I have personally looked at Sanitary Services, I have looked at -- Falcon Creek has looked, neighbors have looked, they have called me and said, Mr. Forrey, what do you think about this parcel, what do you think about parcel? I have gone out, I have measured, I have paced, I have walked, I have got out GIS maps, I put a scale -- we cannot find any industrial land that is as far away from subdivisions as this particular 10 acre parcel. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 18, 2002 Page 31 Every other piece that we have identified that's zoned industrial right now or has the potential to be zoned industrial is closer to a subdivision than this particular parcel. I've been out a several, you're within two, 300 feet of a subdivision, and here we are six, seven, 800 feet. We have got that much more distance. That's why we can focus on this site so much. Also early, early on when Sanitary Services were in contracting discussions with the City of Meridian the discussion was, well, we need to add this type service, an oversight plan. We need to buy some more trucks and things like that. The Council said what is your future plans, we are a growing city, and Sanitary Services said, well, you know, we are looking for a site. We are having a hard time finding it and one of the Councilmen said, well, you ought to be out next to the Waste Treatment Plant, that's a good location. We have been steered certain directions here and we have looking high and Iow scouring this community to try to find a place to put an essential public service that we all use everyday -- or at least once a week individually, collectively everyday as a community. Mr. Hroma's comment, land is the problem and even though it's zoned I, I understand there are conflicts in the zoning codes. We can't rewrite the code, we have to live with what's in front of us today, and because the trash is generated everyday, they have got to pick it up. They are pinched -- they are pinched for land. They have literally no place to expand their current operation, but the city is growing. To Mr. Crane's comments, he's using the term dump and that's inappropriate. It's not. It's a well-designed, well-engineered 10,000 square foot waste transfer facility all indoors. It's a 100-by-100 cinder block steel building, very nice looking. The architect is here tonight, Mr. Lynn Brown. I'd like him to come up and give the Commission just a quick overview of what that is. They need 10 acres, because they are also in the business of parking some trucks and the contractor bins that you see around the community. They have to have a place to put those and a staging area will pick them up, wash them, and clean them and those things. They are thinking about the future, just like the city is when you went through the police station analysis in buying land and parks. There is probably only one and a half to two acres of that site that will be used in the near term, but as Meridian grows Sanitary Services has to grow. They have a long-term contract with the city. I think -- I think there is 17 years left on their contract and we could get Steve Sedlacek to clarify that. It's not just a today issue, they have got a long period of time here where they have to plan and implement waste management in this community. Borup: Mr. Forrey, while you're on that, could you have a little more detail on how the transfer station operates? You had mentioned it's in an enclosed 100-by-100 building. Can you go through a little bit on the process of how it could be? Forrey: Can we get either Lynn Brown or Steve Sedlacek? They are experts on that. Borup: Okay. Maybe we'll wait until -- we'll let them come up after you're through. Forrey: Yes, please. At one of the neighborhood meetings Mr. Crane said -- he says, well, I can see industrial next to the treatment plant, but we want something like office or residential to buffer the industrial area next to the treatment plant for the neighbors. In fact, he was quoted in the newspaper on the 16th of April saying that. Here is Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 18, 2002 Page 32 exactly what was said in the newspaper. Although Crane said he believes it's okay to allow industrial uses directly next to the treatment plant, he said the rest of the land should be used for office and residential space to better transition into nearby neighbors. That's exactly what we have done. The Council said no residential, so we have made that transition with office. All is subject to Conditional Use Permit. To Mrs. Wilder's comments, we are buffering that industrial with limited office. We think that's appropriate and Council felt it was appropriate. Many neighbors have said please do that and we are doing it. To Mr. Beckwith's comments, we currently have in this community an amendment to the current Comprehensive Plan and so we feel this complies with that, because we have got industrial right next to the treatment plant and then we are buffering to the neighbors. We do feel it's compliant with the current Comprehensive Plan, which the City Council amended two months ago. Centers: MaY 7th. Forrey: That's correct. Centers: May 6t~. Let's don't be misleading. Forrey: Okay. No. You are correct. May and we are hoping that that will happen, obviously. To Mr. Borquist's comments, the Conditional Use process is the best opportunity, being a new neighbor there, to get involved and all these uses will be subject to that. There is going to be a lot of hearings to decide on the intensity of these uses, the shape, the scale, the context, the color, the landscaping, all of those, hours of operation he mentioned, all of that will happen. You know, I'm thinking now that we need to remove that park designation, the one acre, Lot Number 12. Neighbors in direct communication to us said why don't you try this idea we'd like a little park out there? We knew that you had a five-acre minimum for a neighbor park and so we thought, well, maybe Falcon Creek will provide of one acre of that. Plus you have got all the land along the drain that's in the Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District and we have got the city and any other property owners, so that was a seed, you might say, to try that idea. It sounds like it's not going to work, so we can definitely take that off the table and make a change there. To Mr. Newcomb's comment, yes, those are all subject to the Clean Water Act. Those are live drains, year around drains, and so there a lot -- boy, a list as long as your arm of requirements for Sanitary Services to go and develop right there, just like there are for the city for your Waste Treatment Plant. Same DEQ and EPA requirements. An exhaustive list. To Mr. Staudenraus' comments, we do care. We have made significant changes. We started with -- remember the buses and the neighbors didn't like that, we took that out and we are now to, I think, a much better plan with some public policy direction here. We are trying to make this work and I think the transfer facility -- sometimes it may be misperceived, because we don't know what it is exactly, because we don't have one in Meridian. Now would be a good time, if we can, to hear a little bit from either Steve Sedlacek or Lynn Brown to tell the Commission about this facility. It's not very large. It's something that is needed in the future if the landfill closes. Meddian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Apdl 18, 2002 Page 33 Borup: Before that I just -- one other comment being listed on -- one of the staff comments was on the cul-de-sac length. They were talking about either shortening that or have access to Ustick. Have you looked at the access to Ustick? Forrey: We have. The Highway District preferred this concept and so did neighbors, because they didn't traffic going into Niemann Drive, I think it is. We would revise this plat given last night's direction from the City Council and resubmit some changes to the city staff. That was the third item on my list, to direct staff to prepare a new staff report and we would make those changes to the plat. Borup: This is what ACHD preferred? Forrey: Yes. Yes. That's correct. The cul-de-sac, rather than a through street for traffic management. Borup: Any questions for Mr. Forrey? Centers: Yes. Mr. Forrey, I think staff said to shorten the cul-de-sac. Can you live with that? Forrey: We can do that. Yes, we can. Centers: Yes. I think that was one of their comments, too. You're really wanting to come back to us within 30 days with a revised plat? Forrey: Yes and a legal description, zoning designation, Development Agreement. Centers: I don't think we have to direct the staff to do comments, I think they will do that. I think that is excellent, because it would give -- at least I can speak for myself, after I hear from Mr. Sedlacek, but time to think about it. I would like to hear from Mr. Sedlacek. Forrey: Okay. Thankyou. Borup: Thank you, Mr. Forrey. Would you like to come forward? I guess you're welcome to say anything else if you'd like to, but specifically about the operation of the transfer station, I think. Sedlacek: Thank you very much. My name is Steve Sedlacek. I'm the Business Manager of Sanitary Service, one of the owners of the company. We are at 722 West Franklin. First of all, I guess one comment I'd like to make to Commissioner Centers regarding all of the toter cads that are sitting on Harry Peterson's property. He is an employee of ours. He has a number of horses on his property right now. He takes broken toter cads and I'm not sure exactly what he does with them. He fills them full of grain and he feeds his horses, and maybe even barrel races around them. I don't know. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 18, 2002 Page 34 Centere: I didn't know either. Sedlacek: If you'd like them removed, I can -- Centers: No, it's not my -- you're on the County right now. Sedlacek: It is in the County. That's true. One other comment if I could, before I talk about how a tre nsfer station works. We have been looking for property for a number of years. We have looked at every -- I think every industrial zoned property in the city that I know of. Maybe there is something I haven't seen. First of all, when you read through the Zoning Ordinance we try to match what we do with the zones and we end up in an industrial zone. There is no heavy industrial that I know of and I can read in the zoning manual or the Comprehensive Plan that transfer stations are allowed in industrial zones, so I'm thinking I'm an industrial zone kind of business. I'm looking for that kind of property. This isn't the only industrially zoned property, but it's one of the very few that's 10 acres or larger. There are some heavier industrially zoned properties on the railroad tracks, they are either already built on -- Centers: Excuse me. It's not zoned industrial. Never was. Sedlacek: This property? Centers: Right. Sedlacek: That's correct but when I look at the past Comprehensive Plan -- I apologize, I'm not trying to misspeak, but when I looked at how that was called out in the older -- in the current Comprehensive Plan -- Centers: '93. Sedlacek: '93. Them was an industrial strip there. There was a green dot, too. I'm not trying to take away anybody's park I'm just trying to pursue industrially zoned property. Centers: Right. Right. Sedlacek: Okay. Whether or not we are light industrial, heavy industrial, I don't know. All I know is I'm going after industrial property. How that works out, I can't tell you. Anyway, I guess I'm in a bit of a quandary in that we are contre cted to the city and we serve -- probably everybody here in the mom is our customer. We are not here to upset anybody, but I'm just -- I do have an obligation to serve the city for the next 16 years. We take that obligation very seriously. There is 100 tons of waste generated every day and 16 years from now how many tons will there be there? Well, I have to plan for that and we have been telling the City Council for a number of years that this is coming. We are going to have to move into a larger piece of property, a transfer station will occur somewhere in this area. It has to. Let's talk about how a tre nsfer station works. It's basically a 100-by-100 square foot building. It might be, when we finally Meddian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 18, 2002 Page 35 design it, 80-by-120 or some slight change from 100-by-100. The trucks come into the property, they drive into the building, they dump their load onto a concrete floor, and then drive out when they are empty and all the waste is contained within the building. There is no rainwater or storm water hitting that material. What we will then do in the building is we put it into a compactor. Now most of the transfer stations that you see around in Idaho don't have a compactor. We intend to install one. It keeps the litter down, it keeps the waste, -- we get maximum payloads on our truck, that sort of thing. It's an excellent way to contain your waste. Basically what we are doing is we are making it into a brick, a very large brick, and it gets -- when the chamber is full we extrude it into a truck and the truck drives away. There is no dumping of waste, this isn't a dump, and there is no storage of waste. It's not allowed. This is a means of transferring waste from a smaller truck to a bigger truck. That's all it is. You know, we might want to try to segregate grass clippings from lawn care companies that come in, something like that, and then get that to a dairy farmer for reuse, you know. There might be some source separation issues that we might want to try to address, but that's how a transfer station works. It's -- we are not allowed to store waste at all. I guess one other comment I'd like to make, we have been working with the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality to develop rules for transfer facilities across the state. The DEQ is proposing some temporary emergency rules to address C&D landfills. That's not what we want to do, but within that rule -- contained within that rule are new transfer stations rules and regulations. I can't just decide to build one of these things, whether I had a Conditional Use Permit with you or not, these are state regulated and Health Department controlled facilities. They inspect us constantly, routinely -- or they will. For example, there are three steps you have got to develop the facility. The first step is we have to have a siting application. We have to show a proximity to flood planes. We have to not take out any habitat that supports endangered or threatened species. There are surface water restrictions. You have to have a surface water management plan, which was mentioned before. We will have to have that. You also cannot be too close to a park, scenic, or natural use area. That's basically saying you can't too close to a national park. Now the second step we have to do is we have to submit design requirements. We have to show that we have an impermeable tipping floor. This is the concrete floor in the building. We have to have leach-aid storage and management systems. Some of the waste that comes into the building will have liquid in it. Just naturally occurring. Well, that's going to be contained on the slab in the building somewhere, it's going to flow into a drain that's contained in a tank. That material has to be pumped into the sewer system when it's full. We can't -- it doesn't get discharged outside the building. It's absolutely controlled. We also have to send in the building and construction design blueprints and we have to show a waste capacity calculation to prove that the building is properly sized. You know, you don't want to have 1,000 ton per day operation in a 100 ton per day building or the waste is going to pile up outside. You have to show how you are going to manage your waste. You have to have the throughput capacity to handle it. Then beyond that you have to get an operating plan and it has 13 different sections. The first one discusses speculative accumulation. That's not allowed. For example, I can't go out and try to pull out all the iron from the waste that comes into the building and pile it outside to try to resell it. That's not allowed, hoping that the iron market goes up and I can make five dollars. There are Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 18, 2002 Page 36 signs required, so there is a section there about where your signs are going to be, how do you direct traffic. You will have to state what type of waste types will come into the building. You're not allowed to take radioactive waste, car bodies, you know, think of some odd types of waste -- you know, you can't take dead animals, that kind of thing. You'll have to state that in your operating plan and live up to it. You also have waste monitoring measurement requirements. Every truck or car that goes in there will have to be weighed or somehow measured and you have to keep records of that. You will have to have a communication plan of how to -- how do the people on site communicate with each other in case there is a problem. There is a fire prevention plan, sprinkler systems, fire extinguishers, and dust suppression devices, that sort of thing. There is a scavenging, salvaging section. That's not allowed. If somebody is in the building and they happen to see something sitting around that they might want to take home, it can't happen. It's not allowed. One of the more important ones is a nuisance control section where you have to discuss how you control vectors, odor, and litter. You have to have a litter management plan and you have to have an odor management plan. You have to live up to those things. There is a bird hazard to aircraft section. That doesn't apply here, because we are not near an airport. Open burning fires are addressed. You can't have any of that. Storm water runoff and runoff controls there is a plan for that. You have to address how you manage those storm water events that occur on your property. Whether or not they can -- or hit the garbage, you still have to have the, you know, 25 year storm year control system on the property, a pond, an infiltration bed, something to deal with that. The second to the last section is a cleaning procedure for the tipping floor. It has to be cleaned on a routine basis. I'm not talking about mops and some guy scrubbing it, but, you know, it's got to be broom cleaned on a nightly basis and we will have equipment to do that. Then you have to have a leach storage and management plan, which we talked about before, you have a system to manage that. There are all of the things that go into a transfer station design and construction. I got this as a handout if you'd like to read it. Centers: You don't intend to build that unless Seaman's Gulch is closed is that correct? Or it's still possible? Sedlacek: It's still possible. What we do every year is we run an economic model and we try to figure out the cheapest way to handle waste. That's our business. What we are seeing is as the city grews there is more and more waste coming to us. That's great. We have to have more and more trucks. Well, at some point it's cheaper to build a building and then buy less trucks, because the trucks can be more efficient. Centers: They don't have to make a trip. Sedlacek: Right. They don't have to make that hour-long trip to the landfill. They will make a, you know, 20 minute trip to the transfer facility, so we can get more preduction out of each truck. Here is my preblem. I underetand -- I understand what everyone said here tonight. I guess what I'm struggling with is the obligation that I don't know where the landfill will be operating. I talked to the County Commissioners, they are pureuing expanding the existing landfill, and that's great. They may not succeed. There Meddian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Apdl 18, 2002 Page 37 is a new subdivision right next to the landfill. I can't remember the name of it. It's Hidden Springs or Spring Valley Ranch or something like that. I don't know but they face their own siting and Public Hearing problems, as do we. They have the power. Of course, they own all the land and they can build their own landfill there, probably even if there is public opposition. They have also talked about maybe obtaining a piece of property in southern Ada County, which will be much farther away from Meridian. I don't have the trucks to drive out there, you know, a two hour round trip, and come back and pick up enough waste on the trucks to complete my task within a days time. That's why you have transfer facilities. With this uncertainty out there, I have the certainty of the contract, but the uncertainly of where I can go, and so that's all we are trying to do. That's all we are trying to address here is how do we -- how do we resolve this tension. Centers: How many trucks do you have now and how many do you anticipate to have in 10 years? Sedlacek: Right now we have -- we probably -- let's see. We operate, depending on the roll off, you know, the number of roll off boxes for the day, we have 12 to 13 trucks that leave the yard in the morning. Centers: And that would probably double in 10 years, wouldn't it? Sedlacek: I would imagine. It's a linear function to the city's population. If the city's population doubles in 10 years, we will double the fleet. Centers: And it probably in the -- in my packet -- maybe not -- it talked about fencing. Sedlacek: Around the property? Centers: Yes. Sedlacek: I'd have to ask Wayne. Centers: There is nothing -- okay. I didn't see it but, of course, that wouldn't be objectionable, would it? I mean fencing would be -- you were planning to fence it, I would imagine. Sedlacek: Absolutely. We would -- you don't -- Centers: That's a screening fence? Sedlacek: Absolutely. Just as you don't want kids wandering around the Wastewater Treatment Plant right across from a City Park, you don't them wandering around, you know, our facilities. Centers: And each one of those trucks, before you get the transfer station, makes one trip out and one trip back per day. That's it right? Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 18, 2002 Page 38 Sedlacek: It depends on the type of-- Centers: In between the time they are going in the building. Sedlacek: Typically they make two trips to the dump a year -- a day. I'm sorry. Now a roll off truck makes six trips a day to the landfill, because it takes a box from a construction site, takes it to the dump, brings it back and goes and gets another one. That's where you see -- that's where the analysis comes in where if you build a transfer facility. Rather than having an hour-long trip, I have got a 20-minute trip. I can get more trash on the trucks and reduce my costs and that's where we start trying to evaluate where it becomes economic to build a facility. Borup: Wouldn't that also reduce the amount of trucks as the population grows? You're talking about -- if you had the transfer -- Sedlacek: Absolutely. Yes. Centers: Would this be a possibility, too, Mr. Sedlacek, for the trucks that were stored in some type of facility that was shielded to the human eye? I'm not talking an expensive, enclosed facility, but something that was -- you know what I'm saying? I think that's part of the problem is those green trucks sitting out there. Sedlacek: I mean it's my understanding of the way the property is going to be laid out it there will be a berm all the way around it, on top of that berm is going to be a fence on the north side. Siddoway: South side. Sedlacek: Our intention is to not be seen by anybody. We've put ourselves in the farthest back corner there, because we don't want to be seen by anybody. Centers: That wasn't conveyed to us. That wasn't conveyed to us, to me. Anyone else miss that? Sedlacek: What's that? Centers: That they were going to have berms -- Borup: Oh. Well, the berms they are talking about were on Ustick. Centers: Shielding, yes, the whole thing. Borup: Yes. On Ustick they were talking about the berms. Centers: So are we still talking about Ustick? Mr. Forrey will address that. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Apfl118,2002 Page 39 Sedlacek: Okay. Shreeve: I have one question. Now let me get a picture. See, you have got this enclosed facility. When a truck backs in or whatever, does the truck, then, before it makes the dump, is it completely enclosed within this building? I mean is it a large building or is it just -- Sedlacek: It's sitting inside the building on the floor. It drives in headfirst and turns. Shreeve: Okay. Sedlacek: Typically. Shreeve: So at one point in the process the truck is completely out of sight, it's enclosed in the building and it -- Sedlacek: The opening of the building will face north, northwest, toward the Treatment Plant. Any noise generated in that building is going to be projected to the north. That's the way it will be laid out. Shreeve: And what is the noise? I mean is it loud? I know it's all relative, but is it a -- just mechanical? Sedlacek: The truck will be running. You will hear the diesel engine. When the truck unloads, the hydraulic pumps turn on and you will hear a -- you might hear a small pump noise. I don't know that you will hear it over the engine. Shreeve: Well, what about odors? Are you going to have -- is there a generation of odors there that would need to have some kind of a filter system or -- Sedlacek: Typically there are no filter systems on transfer stations. Again, the waste is sitting there for a few hours and it's gone. You know, it's not sifting there rotting for days. I'm not going to say we don't bring in a stinky load now and then, I mean -- what was I going to say? I mean there is some -- there is an odor management plan we have to comply with. I think, quite frankly, you know, and DEQ is talking about this, is my thought, then is how are you going to distinguish between us and the Wastewater Treatment Plant. The anaerobic digesters from the Treatment Plant are going to put out a lot more odors than we will -- we ever will. If we have odors I'll say this, I think they are seasonal. They tend to occur more in the summer. Someone will cut their grass on Monday with a Friday collection and it sat there on the curb for a week, it starts to smell and it goes in a truck. Now, again, once we put in the transfer facility it's going to come back, extruded into a truck, and driven off. We are just trying to be efficient and we are trying to meet our contract obligations. Centers: And it sounds like you're kind of making plans for that transfer facility. Meddian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Apd118, 2002 Page 40 Sedlacek: We are. Yes. Centers: Whether Seaman's Gulch stays open. Sedlacek: There will be an economic time, it won't be within two years, but it won't be 10 years from now, where the economics will justify the construction of the facility and we will pursue it. If this isn't the place for it, tell me. I will go somewhere else and look for an I-L zone or an I zone, I guess. You know, I have got to have something, so - - I guess we will be back to talk to you about another place. We -- one thing we talked about -- again, I pursued this, because I thought in the past that the city was interested in an industrial buffer around the treatment plant. Maybe I was mistaken. Now we have got this MU zone -- I'm not sure where I am now. Although that's not official yet, so -- thank you for your time. Borup: Any other questions? Thank you, sir. I think that was good information. Did you have something concluding, Mr. Forrey? I might say just for -- Commissioner Centers had asked a little about the buffering. I was looking at one of the submittals that you did that showed some landscape buffering around. I don't know if you had any additional comments on that. Forrey: That's what I wanted to talk about, Mr. Chairman, and for the Commission, we wanted to take this in kind of three steps. Step one tonight was to present the land use changes to the Commission and get a reading from the discussion of-- if this was -- if we are on the right track or not. Then our second objective was to update the plat and all of the design criteria, submit that to the staff. The third step would be a new staff report -- an amended and updated staff report to come back to the Commission at a future date. If your discussion says these fellows are on the wrong railroad track and this isn't going to work, then there is no need to go to step two and three. We really felt let's focus on land use, if we are on the right track, and, if so, then all those development details will be submitted to the city right away and generate a new staff report from the city to address all the site development criteria. Yes, we do envision significant buffering around that industrial zone. Centers: The height of the berms, say, you know, two, three feet in height all around? Forrey: No. Higher a four or five foot berms and then on top of that -- Centers: You have a fence on top of that. Forrey: Yes. We want to screen that entire facility. Centers: Well -- which makes sense if you are going to have offices in here you're not going to want to look at garbage trucks. FOrrey: That's correct. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 18. 2002 Page 41 Siddoway: Mr. Chairman? Mr. Forrey, just for clarification, were you talking about the buffers being at the separation line between the I-L and L-O or just as street buffers around the perimeter?. Forrey: No. I'm talking about internal between the I-L and L-O. Siddoway: Okay. Forrey: Which would be in addition to the perimeter landscaping per the City Landscape Ordinance. Centers: It makes a lot of difference, as far as I'm concerned. Borup: So you're saying the buffering would be between the zonings, the buildings themselves that would go in, and then the buffering on the street. Forrey: Perimeter. Borup: The perimeter streets. Forrey: Correct. Borup: That's almost a three-phrase buffer. Forrey: I would just repeat. I guess you heard Mr. Sedlacek say let him know. We need to know. Appreciate your help and the time you take on this. Borup: Do you have -- and we will -- I think we will have an opportunity to do some discussion here, but preference as far as timing. You had mentioned to continue it to -- Forrey: At a convenient time for the Commission. Borup: Well, the first available will probably be May 16th, which would mean the staff would need the information back by May 1st. Does that work with your time frame? Forrey: That's fine. Yes. It does. Borup: Okay. That's what I wanted to know. Thank you. Forrey: Thank you. Borup: Well, Commissioners, it sounds like they are asking for at least our feelings at this point. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 18, 2002 Page 42 Centers: Yes. Do we want to leave the Public Hearing open to continue this or do we want to close it? We have heard testimony on this at three different -- Borup: I think more than that. Siddoway: Mr. Chairman-- Borup: The problem we have is if they are going to be submitting changes, then we do need to continue -- is that what you were going to say? Siddoway: That is what I was going to say. Yes. In order for them to submit new plats, new information, we have to leave it open. Centers: So then we would leave it open and I guess, as I mentioned earlier, that it would give time to mull it over and a lot of new information was obtained tonight. Mr. Sedlacek's information was very interesting and I never heard anything about a five-foot high berm with a fence on top of it. That's interesting. I think the 30 days would be -- would work for me. Shreeve: Mr. Chairman, I think there is a couple issues -- Number 1, of course, we brought up the litter on the canals and all kinds of different things. I think certainly it was mentioned that the DEQ, Department of Health, all those folks are going to be very much a part of this process. I don't know what the fines or whatever would necessarily be from something like this, but I think that certainly they would have the environment in the best interest and be watching these folks. I guess I would just offer my initial opinion would be that I think they are on the right track. I think that berm to me as well makes a big difference and so, thereafter, I guess I would say that they are on the right track and proceed. Centers: One thing I wanted to add was in the benefit of the group, we won't have the buses, you know, regardless of what happens. That was a plus as far as I'm concerned. Shreeve: Well -- and that's another comment, is there are very few testimonies on the office space, so I think the L-O zone, -- I didn't hear any testimony against that. I think that's pretty well -- it appears to be agreeable with everybody and so it just sounds like it's this industrial -- proposed industrial zone. I think that this applicant's made some attempts to try to alleviate and provided some excellent information that certainly answered a lot of my questions. Borup: Commissioner Centers reminded me of comments from a lot of the neighbors on the first meeting. A lot of them said they could live with the Sanitary Services if the school buses were gone. Centers: Most of the testimony was regarding the -- not most, but a good share of it was regarding the school busses. That's right. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 18, 2002 Page 43 Borup: And all of them didn't say that, but there was a good number that said they could live with the trucks -- Sanitary Service trucks if the other -- the school buses were gone. I kind of forgot about that. Commissioner Mathes? Mathes: It just sounds like the -- we have state regulations, so I think where they were worried about the water runoff and that type of thing. I think they are regulated pretty well. Centers: YeS. One thought. Don't leave -- I mean don't take that park away. The city doesn't want it deeded to them, because they are smart. They want to pay taxes on it -- or not receive taxes on it, so you keep it in the plan when you come back in 30 days as a designated park that won't be necessarily improved. At some future stage, 10, 20 years down the read, then the city may be interested, who in the heck knows. Shreeve: Take a look at those fragrant plants. Centers: Yes. Exactly. Siddoway: Mr. Chairman, is there any direction from the Commission about pathways that Mr. Kuntz mentioned before he left? Mathes: How does that berm work along the pathway? Siddoway: I don't know. I haven't seen the cross-section, but there is land, I believe, available for the pathway outside of the property line within the land that's owned by the Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District that it could be built within. I haven't looked at that closely. Borup: So it sounds like we are saying that they'd like to know the Commission's opinion on the pathways? Siddoway: Yes. If you look at the map that's up there, the edge of the color down there, I believe, represents the actual property line. The line that you see through here is the Five Mile Creek and on this side, we have the Nine Mile Creek. The white space between the two is where I believe that pathway would be built. Same along here. I would just like to hear from the Commission whether we are directing the applicant to show that pathway and construct it as condition of the application. Shreeve: On the north side who owns the property? Is that just part of the -- Borup: That's the treatment plant property. Shreeve: That's the treatment plant. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Apdl 18, 2002 Page 44 Centers: Well, I think the city's intent is to have the connectivity, you know, and the one individual stated here tonight he didn't think the pathway would be worth a darn, because you're going to be walking along and there you have the green trucks, rather than -- I think it was Mrs. Hennings and -- I don't know. At this point, I think it should be left in. If they had a berm along here that's five feet high and the pathway is below it, and then that berm is landscaped, that might not be so bad. Right, Mrs. Hennings? Borup: But the berm wouldn't be along the canal or that would make that bank even steeper. Siddoway: The berm would be on their property and the pathway would be between the berm and the canal. Centers: Right. Siddoway: So it would be buffered by that berm and the fence, so I see it potentially as a -- Shreeve: And if it is landscaped with nice fragrant trees -- you know they certainly wouldn't be seeing the facility with a five-foot berm, plus a six-foot fence. Centers: And depending on how fast they jog, too. Shreeve: I would say, yes, leave the path in, do something with the path. Borup: I have always been a strong advocate of the pathways. My only concern here is there has been a lot of testimony where people said they wouldn't use it and saw no use in it and I think -- Centers: There was only one. Mrs. Hennings -- Borup: Well, there was someone else -- two others that said that, too. Centers: Maybe previously. Borup: But if it's done nicely, I think it would get some use. Centers: Can I make a motion? Borup: Yes, please do. Centers: That we continue Public Hearing AZ 01-015 and Public Hearing PP 01-017, continue these Public Hearings to our second meeting in May, which would be Thursday, May 16th. Shreeve: Second. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 18, 2002 Page 45 Borup: Motion and second. Any other discussion? All in favor?. Any opposed? MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Borup: Thank you. Commissioners, I think we'll take time for a short break and then we will proceed with Heritage Commons. Centers: Staff needs to meet in the back room. I have something for you. RECONVENED AT 9:45 P.M. Item 9: Public Hearing: AZ 02-006 Request for annexation and zoning of 76.16 acres from RUT to R-8 zones for proposed Heritage Commons by Brighton Corporation - west side of North Locust Grove Road between East McMillan Road and East Ustick Road: Item 10: Public Hearing: PP 02-007 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 273 building lots and 12 other lots on 75.39 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for proposed Heritage Commons by Brighton Corporation - west side of North Locust Grove Road between East McMillan Road and East Ustick Road: Item 11: Public Hearing: CUP 02-007 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development for single-family residential dwellings, private open space with club house, gazebo, parks and neighborhood scaled commercial site for proposed Heritage Commons by Brighton Corporation - west side of North Locust Grove Road between East McMillan Road and East Ustick Road: Borup: We'd like to reconvene our Planning and Zoning Commission meeting this evening and proceed on Items 9, 10, and 11. Item 9 is a Public Hearing AZ 02-006, request for annexation and zoning of 76.16 acres from RUT to R-8 zone for the proposed Heritage Commons by Brighton Corporation. Hearing PP 02-007, request for Preliminary Plat on the same property, and, finally, CUP 02-007, request for Conditional Use Permit for a planned development for single family residential dwellings, open space, club house, gazebo, parks, and a neighborhood scaled commercial site for the same proposed Heritage Commons by Brighton Corporation. We'd like to open all three Public Hearings at this point and begin with the staff report. Siddoway: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. You can see on the screen the vicinity map for the proposed Heritage Commons project. It is on the west side of Locust Grove between Ustick and McMillan. The property just across Locust Grove. On this side is the Charter High School. These are some site photos of the property today. It's a field. The first photo is taken looking directly into the site from Locust Grove at the northeast corner of the project. Just turning a little bit south from