Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMarch 6, 2003Meridian Planning & Zoning March 6, 2003 Page 2 of 94 and I am here given credit for taking the vote, but you, Mr. Chairman, took the vote. On page three, the very top sentence where I am speaking, I would like to add some punctuation for clarification. I say just: Just for clarification, I'm Sony, Steve, that parcel is not being rezoned. Period. Correct? Question mark. Not corrected, but, the word correct with a question mark and a period after rezoned. Those are my only changes. Borup: Okay. Any other comments? Do we have a motion and -motion would be on all the items. Zaremba: Mr. Chairman, I move we accept the Consent Agenda with the minutes of February 6 as modified. Centers: Second. Borup: Motion and second. All in favor? Any opposed? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 4: Public Hearing: AZ 03-001 Request for annexation and zoning of 10.006 acres from RUT to L-0 zones for Central Valley Baptist Church by Central Valley Baptist Church -east of North Ten Mile Road and south of West Pine Avenue: Borup: Item number -- the first Public Hearing is Public Hearing AZ 03-001, a request for annexation and zoning of 10.006 acres from RUT to L-0 zones for Central Valley Baptist Church by Central Valley Baptist Church. This is east of North Ten Mile and south of West Pine Avenue. I'd like to open this hearing at this time and start with the staff report. Siddoway: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. The subject property that is proposed for annexation is at the northeast comer of the railroad and North Ten Mile Road. You can see the existing character of the ground in the air photo. A large lot, rural residential, county parcels, and this is the subject property here.. They did submit a proposed site plan with the annexation request, so that the Commission and Council could get a feel for their intent in annexing this property. It is for a church campus for Central Valley Baptist Church. You should have a staff report dated February 13th from Sonya and Bruce. It is just over ten acres in size. The requested zone is Limited Office, which a church would be a permitted use in, and there are some notes under G on page three about adequate public services, saying that we find that they may be served adequately by all essentially public services and they will either have to construct a temporary lift station to get sewer service or participate with developers of adjacent lands to get service to their lots, but that it can work under one of those scenarios. I believe that's all I need to go over right now. Staff does recommend approval of the annexation and zoning request. The recommendation at the end incorrectly states an R-8 zone. It is L-0 that they are requesting. And with that correction I will stand for any questions. Meridian Planning 8 Zoning March 6, 2003 Page 3 of 94 Borup: Questions from any of the Commissioners? Zaremba: I have one. My reading the list of surrounding properties, they are all Ada county. Do we have any contiguousness with Meridian city limits anyplace? The southeast parcel? Siddoway: The southeast parcel and the railroad tracks up to this point are annexed, so though it's surrounded, really, on three sides -- well, on four sides, all the way around by county land, it's point of contiguity is along the railroad tracks at the property's southeast corner. Zaremba: We have accepted smaller comers than that before. That's my only question. Borup: Any other Commissioners? Does the applicant have a presentation they'd like to make? Houst: I'm Doug Houst with Olson and Associates Architects. We have Pastor Clint Henry in the audience and we also have the chair of the building committee Tommy Moser in the audience. We would be happy to answer any questions that you have. Borup: Apparently, you have no -- Houst: We have no - Borup: But no questions on any of the staff comments and you're in agreement with everything? Houst: We are in agreement. Borup: Okay. Any questions from any Commissioners? Centers: Mr. Chairman. Just one. You have read page five and the requirements -- the site-specific requirements of the staff comments? Houst: I'm sure I have. I would like to get to that page. Borup: Commissioner Centers, are you referring to the sewer service? Centers: Well, all the conditions required by the staff. I just wanted to make sure the applicant agrees. Houst: Yes. Centers: You're in agreement with everything? Meridian Planning & Zoning March 6, 2003 Page 4 of 94 Houst: We are. Centers: Very good. Thank you. Borup: Do we have anyone else to testify on this application? Seeing none, Commissioners? Centers: I would move we close the Public Hearing, Mr. Chairman. Zaremba: Second. Borup: Motion and second to close the Public Hearing. All in favor? Any opposed? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Centers: I don't find much need for discussion. I think it's very -- is everyone agreeable? All right. Mr. Chairman, I would recommend approval on Item 4, AZ 03-001, request for annexation and zoning of 10.006 acres from RUT to L-O zone for Central Valley Baptist Church by Central Valley Baptist Church, east of North Ten Mile Road and south of West Pine Avenue, including all staff comments from memo dated February 13th. And, as stated, it's L-O zone. Rohm: I will second that. Borup: Motion and second. All in favor? Any opposed? Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 5: Public Hearing: RZ 03-001 Request for a Rezone of 6.95 acres from L- 0 to L-0 and C-G Zones for Mallane Commercial Complex by The Land Group, Inc. -north of East Fairview Avenue and west of North Eagle Road: Borup: The next item is Public Hearing RZ 03-001, request for a rezone of 6.95 acres from L-O to L-O and C-G zones for Mallane Commercial Complex by the Land Group. This is north of Fairview, west of Eagle Road. I'd like to open this Public Hearing and start with the staff report. Siddoway: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. I spoke with Russ Hepworth, the applicant's representative today, and he said that he had submitted to the clerk's office a request to be continued tonight, because the property was not posted on the correct date. I also found one other minor issue, which they can get resolved and a new legal description to us by Monday, and that is that the description submitted states that the property to be rezoned does not include the lot that is adjacent to the existing homes and that the lot would remain limited office, so that the uses would stay less