Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMarch 21, 1995 C/C Minutes• • Meridian City Council March 21, 1995 Page 3 MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #3: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY/FINAL PLAT FOR TEN MILE SQUARE BY ALBERTSON'S INC.: Kingsford: Questions of staff or the developer? Corrie: Mr. Mayor, I move that we approve the preliminary and final plat for Ten Mile Square. Tolsma: Second Morrow: Discussion Kingsford: Moved by Bob, second by Ron, discussion Mr. Morrow? Morrow: Would the motion include subject to staff conditions? Corrie: Yes it does. Kingsford: Would you amend your motion please? Corrie: I move that we approve the preliminary and final plat of Ten Mile Square by Albertson's Inc. with the consideration as a condition of the applicant with the staff s conditions that were recommended. Tolsma: Second Kingsford: Moved by Bob, second by Ron to approve of the preliminary and final plat for Ten Mile Square for Albertson's Inc. conditioned upon the staff requirements being met, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #4: SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR ALBERTSON'S INC.: Morrow: i have questions Mr. Mayor. The preliminary question is on the landscaping plan, on the border that borders Parkside Creek development for a certain percentage of that border there is a design that incorporates a 6 foot high block wall with a landscape berm against the block wall and then at the point where the building touches the easement line it changes to a 6 foot chain link fence and proceeds then to the corner of the Parkside • Meridian City Council March 21, 1995 Page 4 Creek and Wally Lovin property. It is my observation that because those homes that abut that have their backyards and bedrooms in there are lights that can shine through. In turning radiuses as per these blueprints in the parking lot that wall ought to also be a block wall as opposed to a see through chain link. I throw that out for discussion that is my observation. Tolsma: Mr. Mayor, I agree with Walter, I visited with the homeowners out there last evening and looked at the situation. Where the lots across the canal are situated (inaudible) headlights from cars or from trucks or whatever turning around out there would shine into bedroom windows. There are also several concerns of the homeowners that they have a beautiful view of the mountains now and want to know if Aibertsons would be willing to paint a mural on the back of their building. Kingsford: I am sure we would get a lot of (inaudible) as to what that mural should be. Any other comments or questions that you would like to ask of either staff or the developer? Morrow: I would ask for staff comments, Shari's and Bruce have seen this landscape plan, do you have any further comments other than our observations? Stiles: No, I would just make the additional observation that the people that came to the last meeting would like to have the council consider an 8 foot fence in lieu of the 6 foot fence. Corrie: Mr. Mayor, you said 8 foot, is that cinder block? Stiles: Mortar block whatever. Kingsford: It sounds like a bigger mural. Morrow: Well I think the issue with respect to the 6 foot as opposed to the 8 foot, when you begin to go with cinder block and 8 foot high there are several structural things that have to be changed with respect to trying to build a wall. I guess also in my own personal mind is that I recognize that this is the border between the commercial and a residential zone. What is our policy with respect to 8 foot fences and something that is not a junk yard or __ requires specific industrial screening. Do we have ordinance capability to require an 8 foot fence? Kingsford: I think we have a prohibition against it. Crookston: An 8 foot fence is allowed in the C-N district pursuant to ordinance. • • Meridian City Council March 21, 1995 Page 5 Kingsford: I guess that shot be down. I have some concern about an 8 foot fence and what that would do to that being a solid area, what that would do for vision. I can appreciate wanting to block head lights and noise and that sort of thing but you are not going to eliminate the parking area lights. I would think a 6 foot fence is going to eliminate most of the auto lights. to go higher than that you are certainly going to restrict the view I am not sure everyone out there is going to agree with that height. Corrie: Probably aesthetically it would be better with a 6 foot all the way down for everybody concerned. Mr. Mayor I agree with Walt, I think that 6 foot wall should be al{ the way down to the parking area and not the chain link halfinray and the 6 foot all the other way. I would like to hear what the developer has, if they have any questions there. Kingsford: The architect or whoever, if you would like to speak to that issue of the wall separating Parkside Creek and the development. Slocum: I am Craig Slocum from CSHQA Architects representing the applicant Albertson's. I guess in just addressing the comment from Council in regards to the chain link fence, what we felt would be better would be since we are providing landscape on our side of the easement putting up a 6 foot masonry wall is not going to allow those neighbors to see any of our landscaping other than the trees which are over that 6 foot height. I think the bushes and shrubs that we are providing with a chain fink fence at least they would continue to have that view. I think those, the 3 individuals that were here last week are these 3 lots and in fact I think what they are going to see is smaller scale shops building when it goes in if it goes in and some landscaping. The concem that we took from Council originally was the noise and headlights of the trucks and service vehicles behind the Albertson's that there is no traffic behind this area. There are no roads thus there would be no service vehicles. That is why we presented to Council to provide that masonry wall in the location that the headlights and noise was a concern. Kingsford: I think where they are discussing concern particularly as you go directly south there after you pull away from the drain and go to the north right at that point and from there up to Cherry Lane. Morrow: Let me ask you this Mr. Slocum with respect to Lot 2, which is where the accessory building is, is that building built at the same time that the Albertson's store is ___ built? Slocum: It is not proposed to be. Morrow: And so from our perspective now it could be 1 year, 2 years, 5 years before it is built. • • Meridian City Council March 21, 1995 Page 6 Slocum: It is market driven. Morrow: In the case of a market driven building it could be 1 to 5 years and under those circumstances then those folk would not have any protection from the lights in the parking lot shining through on lots from the corner of the building there to the corner of the property is that correct? Slocum: They would not have as much protection as if a building were there. However, as Shari is holding up the sections (inaudible) we would be berming in order to facilitate blocking the head fights. Corrie: Shari could you hold that up just a little higher? Where would that be, would that not be Section E, would you have a Section E up there, where is that over here then? Slocum: We don't have a specific section at this point, we have taken the section into Mr. Lovin's property at each street frontage and at the point of at the time what we thought was the Council's concerns. Corrie: So that is going to be a berm there, you don't show it is a bens. You just show a fence you don't show a berm in the section like your Section E which would be there because it is a fence not a berm I would think you would have another section cut to show us which I don't see one so I don't know if it is a berm or what it is. It could be just flat. Slocum: During our dealings with Planning and Zoning we received conceptual site approval, dealing with Shari. One of the comments that Shari gave us is that we would have to berm in order to facilitate blocking headlights from glaring onto adjacent properties. Kingsford: So you are talking the north-south section there between the Lovin property and down to the ditch. Is that a 20 foot width and what is the elevation of that berm? Slocum: At Mr. Lovin's property? Kigsford: All the way the north-south. Slocum: At Mr. Lovin's property it is 25 feet and the berm is presented to be 3 feet above ~ curb, so you are 3 feet above the asphalt. Kingsford: And then from the Lovin property south there is no berm? Slocum: We have not indicated one, only from the standpoint that we did not cut a section • Meridian City Council March 21, 1995 Page 7 through there. What I was trying to state that in fact we would be required to berm at any areas where headlights could glare into adjacent properties as my understanding from talking with planning staff. Corrie: That is a 3 foot berm than right, from the level of the parking. Slocum: Correct Kingsford: Any other questions? Thank you, what is the Council's pleasure? Morrow: I will state my position, I am not willing to approve a plan with a chain link fence given the fact that you have exposure the full length from the corner of the Albertson's store to the property. I think that certainly those folk are entitled to, those who abut that property are entitled to the same protection that the other folk have at the other end from parking lot lights and those kinds of things. I am not convinced that a 3 foot berm as opposed to a 6 foot fence will solve that problem. So from my perspective I would like to see the block wall the full length as with cross section (inaudible) with the block wall and berming and continuation of that landscaping (inaudible). Tolsma: !s that a motion? Morrow: Well, it was a point of discussion stating my position. If you wish it to be, if you agree with that concept I will make that motion. Tolsma: I agree with that concept. Yerrington: I second that motion, that concept. Kingsford: I would kind of be interested in a motion. Morrow: Mr. Mayor I would move that we approve the site plan as presented with the exception that we require the continuance of the 6 foot masonry block wall and landscaping full length of the southerly property line. Yerrington: Second Kingsford: Southerly property line? Morrow: It really runs from northwest to southeast, would you prefer that I make it that way? Meridian City Council March 21, 1995 Page 8 Kingsford: Why do you make it from point, do you want it to go all the way from Cherry Lane? At what point do you want that block wall to stop? Morrow: I want it to stop at the intersection of the Albertson's property and the Lovin property. Kingsford: You don't want it to going between Lovin's and the parking lot? Morrow: No Kingsford: Okay, is everyone clear on the motion? Is that agreeable on the second? Yerrington: Yes Kingsford: Moved by Walt, second by Max to approve of the site plan for Albertson's with the exception that the 6 foot block masonry wall with the adjoining landscaping run onto the north, to the Lovin property, that is to the southern boundary of the Lovin property is that correct? Morrow: Yes Kingsford: Alf those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: AI{ Yea ITEM #5: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR REZONE FROM R-4 TO L-O BY JAMES AND JEAN FULLER: Kingsford: At this time I will open the public hearing and invite either the Fuller's or their representatives to speak first. Crookston: Mr. Mayor I have a conflict of interest in this matter? Kingsford: Well get off this table, Mr. Riddlemoser would you step forward? Tim Mockwa, 1802 N. 33rd Street, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Mockwa: As I mentioned I am representing Mr. and Mrs. Fuller in their request for this rezone from R-4 to L-O. I would like to make this brief and cover just a couple of major topics. Briefly discuss the justification or reasoning behind this request and secondly cover a couple of design considerations facing this rezone. Probably the most important