Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMay 23, 2006 C/C Minutes -7 ~. Meridian City Council May 23, 2006 Page 27 of 74 De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Bird. Any comment, Mr. Borton? Borton: Yeah. Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Borton: Question for legal counsel, if we can or should be permitted to approve variances other than -- that are different than what's requested? If you ask for a variance for A and we say, no, but you can have B, are we within our purview to do that? Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, you certainly -- you certainly have the discretion to grant a variance up to whatever you think is reasonable. All I had suggested earlier is simply stating what the reason is. And if I understand Councilmember Bird and Councilmember Wardle -- and I think the prior testimony you had was that you had already granted a temporary use exception for 750 feet. There is a city code that has the same size and if I understand the discussion correctly, that's the basis of why you feel 750 feet is more appropriate temporary use size than 500 feet or the 200 that the International Fire Code has for fireworks stands. So, I -- if I'm correct, I think you're trying to simply be consistent with your prior exceptions and that's within your discretion. De Weerd: Okay. If there is no further discussion, Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Wardle, yea; Borton, nay. MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES. ONE NAY. ONE ABSENT. Item 12: Public Hearing: VAR 06-011 Request for a Variance to allow for larger temporary structures from the maximum 500 square feet allowed per UDC 11-3E-4C1 for fireworks sales, Christmas tree sales, and produce sales for Fat City Fireworks by Richard Handke - 535 N. Eagle Road, 3301 W. Cherry Lane, 20 E. Fairview Avenue, 1375 E. Fairview Avenue, 97 Main Street, and for the lot at the northwest corner of Ten Mile Road and W. Franklin Road: De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Item 12 has been -- needs to be reposted or they have additional sites to post? Berg: Madam Mayor, if I may, I think we opened the hearings, but we held it so the requirements for posting are met, because my understanding is they did not post all the properties that they are asking for a variance. Nary: Madam Mayor, I think our history has been we haven't opened the -- I don't think we have opened the hearings, if I'm correct, when they haven't posted. We have ~. Meridian City Council May 23, 2006 Page 28 of 74 continued the matter, but I don't know that we need to open the hearing itself. I mean they haven't posted all the sites. They need to comply with that. I believe part of the discussion that I was aware of is they have not held a neighborhood meeting, which is required for a variance. And so they need to hold that prior to having a public hearing. So, I don't know that it would be appropriate -- I don't think it's appropriate to open a hearing that hasn't been noticed properly. They will have to notice it properly. You can continue this matter to your meeting to make sure that they have complied. De Weerd: Okay. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, if you would indulge me asking Mr. Nary a question. Is that okay? De Weerd: Do I have a choice? Canning: Mr. Nary, we had talked about having Council comments on the location of the neighborhood meeting. Would they need to do that in a -- with an open Public Hearing or can I present that information now? Nary: There is -- if I understand correctly, they still have not held a neighborhood meeting. They have posted one site. Canning: Correct. Nary: But have not held a neighborhood meeting for any of the sites. Canning: Correct. Nary: Is that correct? I guess for the limited purpose of at least advising the Council of that, not to take testimony, but simply to open it and advise them of that. The concern, Madam Mayor and Members of the Council, is because you have a meeting next week and you don't have a meeting the following week, if there is any need to cure an issue, really, tonight is your only opportunity to cure that and that's what Mrs. Canning wants you to be aware of, if there is any concerns that you have. So, for the limited purpose of at least accepting that information and if you wish to discuss it or not, you don't need to do that, you can continue the matter for that point, I think you're okay. Does that make sense? De Weerd: Well, Mr. Nary, you're suggesting to open the Public Hearing to accept that information. Nary: Correct. And if the Council wishes to discuss that, you can certainly do that or just continue the matter to the following week. I just don't want the applicant to be caught short if that is -- if what Mrs. Canning has to tell you is of concern to you, they won't be able to cure it next week and they will have to wait two weeks, which will put , Meridian City Council May 23, 2006 Page 29 of 74 them unable to actually sell their products within the time period allowed by the statute. So, I don't want them to be injured and so I think that might be the safest way to do that. De Weerd: Okay. Council, then, if there is no opposition, I will go ahead and open this Public Hearing on Item 12, VAR 06-011, and ask staff comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, when we were drafting the UDC, we did consider putting strings on where and when folks could conduct neighborhood meetings. We elected not to, mostly for the reason that, you know, most people use good judgment when they set up those neighborhood meetings and I had seen cases where it backfired for the city that an applicant was not able to choose a reasonable time and place for that. As any in code, it's open for abuse and I just wanted to point out that the neighborhood meeting for this project will be held in Mountain Home and wanted you to be aware of that situation. Bird: What? Nary: And, again, Madam Mayor, the reason -- the only reason I asked to open the Public Hearing to get that information and if you wish to comment, is because if you found that out next week and found that to be defective, in your opinion, the applicant could not cure it in time to be able to sell their product within the time allowed by law. If that is of a concern to you, then, you certainly have the ability to make comment about that tonight, so he has the opportunity to address it. Canning: And one of the affected property owners did send me an e-mail asking if this was a reasonable location for a neighborhood meeting. De Weerd: I don't think it's very friendly to encouraging attendance. Canning: And I was told by a staff member that that is why he held it at that location, was to not encourage attendance. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: This is one councilman that if he's going to do it in Meridian, he's going to hold his public meeting in Meridian or -- or he don't need to come before me. We are not making judgments in Mountain Home, Idaho. De Weerd: Okay. It looks like Mr. Bird just spoke for the Council. Borton: It's held in Mountain Home at his peril. That doesn't make any sense at all. Canning: I will inform him and suggest that he change location and get that notice out quickly. He won't be able, probably, to get them the required five days notice before he l Meridian City Council May 23, 2006 Page 30 of 74 conducts the hearing -- oh, sure, he -- well, it will be very close. But we will inform him of your concerns. De Weerd: Thank you. At what date does this need to be continued to? June 6th? Okay. Council, I need a motion. Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: I move we continue Item 12 to June 6th. Bird: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion to continue Item 12 to June 6. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 13: Public Hearing: AZ 06-014 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 20.16 acres from RUT (Ada County) to R-4 (Medium Low-Density Residential) for Cabella Creek Subdivision by A TM Development, LLC - northeast corner of East Victory Road and South Mesa Way: Item 14: Public Hearing: PP 06-012 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 47 single family residential lots and 11 common lots on 18.84 acres in a proposed R-4 zone for Cabella Creek Subdivision by A TM Development, LLC - northeast corner of East Victory Road and South Mesa Way: De Weerd: Okay. Items 13 and 14 are public hearings on AZ 06-014 and PP 06-012. I will open these two items with staff comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Cabella Creek project. You formerly saw a portion of this as just an annexation request, which was denied. It contained different properties, but if you -- if the aerial looks vaguely familiar, that's why. It's north of Victory Road and east of Mesa Way and it is -- this is Locust Grove to the further east. It is an annexation, zoning, and preliminary plat request. The gross residential density is 2.49 units per acre. It includes 47 single family residential lots on 18.84 acres and it's got about .13 percent open space. There are currently three houses on the property and two of the homes will remain. One of them will continue to take access off Mesa Way. The one that currently takes access off Victory will take access from within the subdivision. There is also -- it's the Ten Mile feeder, I believe, that comes through the site and that's -- they put their open space amenity along that feeder, along with the park, as you will see there. There is a development agreement proposed with this. Our staff has recommended one. Some of the nonstandard items in that development include -- develop agreement include that the applicant will construct a ten