Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutApril 8, 1997 C/C Minutesr • ~- Meridian Planning & Zo~g Commission April 8, 1997 Page 13 MacCoy: Second Johnson: Motion and a second for approval, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #10: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR APRELIMINARY/FINAL PLAT FOR TEN MILE SQUARE BY ALBERTSON'S INC.: Johnson: I will now open the public hearing and invite the applicant or the applicant's representative to address the Commission. Gordon Anderson, 3979 W. Aspen Creek Court, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney. Anderson: I work for WH Pacific, we represent Albertson's Inc. What we have here is a subdivision that we submitted two years ago, got a one year extension on it and that expired March .21st. Part of the reason that the extension expired was dealing with some easements on the property trying to get that drafted up between the neighbor to the west and tried to get everything together and get this finalized but time just ran out on us. But what we are asking is for approval of a two lot subdivision, lot 1 would be another commercial site lot and we previously obtained a zero lot line variance between lots 1 and 2. This site currently is built up at the new Albertson's store and there is parking on a majority of lot 2, part of lot 1. All the public utility easements and private easements are shown on the copy of the preliminary and the final. These consist of an access easement to the property to west. A private water line easement and a private sewer line easement to that parcel. Also near the southerly part of lot 2 is an easement. for the Eight Mile Lateral and also an easement for the power transformer in the back of the building. There will be a strip of land dedicated to ACRD (inaudible) along Ten Mile for additional right of way. Proposed use for lot 1 is going to be a small retail building, really don't know what the plans are. I think there was something submitted to the City on that. Can I answer any questions? Johnson: Any questions of the applicant's representative? Fitzgerald: Mr. Chairman I do have one question. You had mentioned there was some issues regarding easements with your neighbor to the west from Albertson's Inc. Has that all been resolved and settled? Anderson: By the time this plat is signed and recorded it will all be signed and recorded. I know that the documents have been written up, I don't know if aN parties have signed them yet. To the best of my knowledge the previous conditions of approval stated that there would have to be easements in place. I was kind of assuming that would be the case again. But I don't know if I saw that on any of the City's comments. Gary did you Meridian Planning & Zo~g Commission • April 8, 1997 Page 14 know if there were any additional comments (inaudible) to make sure that is in place, access easement (inaudible). Smith: No I don't, if the highway district didn't comment I don't know. Anderson: I didn't see their comments here, I had a review, a tech review meeting with them. They implicated that the would like to see that document recorded. Plus there will be some negotiations made on the impact fees on Ten Mile Right of Way take also. Johnson: Any other questions? Have you read the City Engineer's comments and do you have any questions on any of those? April 2"d letter. Anderson: I have a copy of that here and I see that Gary would like to see a 10 foot permanent utility easement along the right of way lines. That is a pretty typical subdivision requirement to allow a corridor for public utilities to lay their lines. Through this development we found out that the utilities didn't need that corridor plus I received some letters from the utilities that stated that they weren't interested in the easement. If that satisfies Gary I would like to remove that one comment. That wouldn't make or break the subdivision if that was still on there. It was never utilized and there wasn't an easement. I can furnish Gary a copy of those letters. Johnson: So on those comments that letter April 2"d are we talking about page 2, site specific 1, (inaudible). , Anderson: Correct Johnson: Okay, any other comments or answers? Any other responses to the Engineer's letter? Anderson: The general comments on outside lighting, 1 just wanted to comment on that. The lighting is going to be replaced, revised, modified and I did get word today from Albertson's that they are going to be shipping, the parts, poles and lights to the site. Shipment will start on the 12th and if the shipments arrive and everything is in place they plan on completing that work the week of the 21 ~ of April. That is pretty much all that I have. Johnson: Thank you very much, this is a public hearing is there anyone from the public that would like to address the commission at this time. Seeing no one then I will close the public hearing. Oslund: Mr. Chairman, 1 move that we make a recommendation to the City Council that the preliminary plat be approved. Borup; Second Meridian Planning & Zo~g Commission • April 8, 1997 Page 15 Johnson: We have a motion and a second to recommend approval of the preliminary plat to the City Council all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Smith: Mr. Chairman, point of clarification, is that with conditions of staff with exception of the one item that Gordon talked about on the City Engineer's comments? Oslund: It doesn't appear, not explicitly. Not being one to take back my motions let's see how I can weasel out of this one. It is going to go to Council and it is going to have another public hearing and you will be there and you can tell them your concerns and we are all set. (End of Tape) ITEM #11: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR DRIVE UP WINDOWS, AND 2 BUILDINGS ON THE SAME LOT BY R.T. NAHAS CO.: Johnson: I will now open the public hearing and ask the applicant or the applicant's representative to address the Commission at this time. Larry Knopp, 355 South 3~d Street, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Knopp: We are submitting a conditional use on two buildings and two drive up window facilities on a lot out at Corporate Valley, Central Valley Park. The buildings are approximately 4,000 square feet each. They are retail commercial in nature. The one building the tenant in building A he has one tenant that is florist. Building B that has a drive up facility on it is a coffee drive up, fast food, coffee, espresso. That is why we are asking for the drive up window facility. Located one on each end of the building, we don't know if both of them will be used. The owner wanted the flexibility as far as lease space goes to have the option on drive up window. That is why we are requesting two of them on that one building. Johnson: Anything else or is that it? Knopp: I think that is about it. Johnson: Any questions of the applicant's representative? MacCoy: I do, how about your building. elevation construction (inaudible) Knopp: It will be a combination brick and stucco. We will also have some fabric awnings that will be decorated and designed over the window areas. MacCoy: And your roof is?