Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes• Meridian City Council July 13, 2004 Page 30 of 56 • De Weerd: It's been moved and seconded to approve Item 14, CUP 04-012. Any further discussion? Mr. Clerk. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Nary, nay. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE NAY. Item 15: Public Hearing: ZOA 04-001 Request for Zoning Ordinance Amendment to allow small antennas to be mounted on existing and new light and power poles within residential, office, commercial and industrial subdivisions by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc: De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Berg. Item 15 is a Public Hearing on VOA 04-001. I will open this Public Hearing with staff comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is a zoning ordinance amendment request that is being brought forward not from staff, but from an applicant, and perhaps the best -- the recommendation provided to you from staff has the revised language as it came out of the Planning and Zoning Commission and I think that's probably the best place to start. The zoning ordinance amendment is fairly simple. They have added a number of definitions for the term antenna and -- but their primary request is that these antenna that would look similar to this be allowed to kind of co- locate on street lights within residential neighborhoods. Currently cell towers are prohibited in most of the residential districts. So, this would be a way -- they are small in area, less than five square feet or five square feet or less and they have asked that they be kind of considered as part of the stealth or camouflage allowances that are made for cell towers. And the Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended approval of this zoning ordinance amendment. At that hearing Dave McKinnon testified in favor of the application. There was no opposition to the application. The Commission's discussion focused on the -- primarily the areas I have talked about now, the number of -- and, then, in addition to that, the number of antennas that are likely to appear under this ordinance was discussed, kind of the question of proliferation and opportunities for co-location. There was also some discussion on the need for a license agreement with the city to place antennas on street lights that was either in there or added and whether the antenna should be allowed only on existing street lights or whether new ones should be allowed, so that they could -- they would be basically putting up a new street light for the purpose of putting an antenna on it and review process would include both Planning and Zoning and Public Works. I think staff is pretty comfortable with the zoning ordinance amendment. It gives some guidelines for staff, but it does give a lot of flexibility to both the Planning and Zoning director and the Public Works director, as far as whether or not these require a conditional use approval. And with that I will end staffs presentation. De Weerd: Thank you, Anna. Since there were all kinds of side conversations going on, did you catch that, Council? Meridian City Council July 13, 2004 Page 31 of 56 Bird: Yes, we did. De Weerd: I do have someone signed up here named Boy Scout. Bird: Boy Sprout. De Weerd: Boy Scout. You must be him? McKinnon: Will Berg, actually, asked me to sign in that way. Dave McKinnon, 735 South Crosstimber. Mayor and Council, as you remember, back in the cold bitter days of winter I came to you with these little antennas and said we want to do these on towers. It was in apre-Council meeting. And you said it looks like it's a good idea, let's go for it, go ahead and submit for it. Now it's the hottest day of summer so far and we are here back in front of you. Anna did a really good job explaining what this is. We had a long conversation with the Planning and Zoning Commission, they asked for a license agreement statement to be placed in there. We have added that as part of the revisions that you have in front of you. We have worked with -- actually, Bill's not here. I talked to Bill Nichols about the license agreement and he said it's something that can be worked out with the city and the applicant. The need for Public Works and Planning and Zoning to review this has been added to the revised report that you have in front of you and for the antennas to be allowed only on existing street lights and new ones. We have added the language to allow for new streetlights to be included. During that conversation we talked about the fact that the police department and most residential neighborhoods would rather have more lights than have less lights in the residential neighborhoods, especially in the older neighborhoods of Meridian where the street lighting is not adequate right now and so there wasn't an objection from the police department and staff felt that was a good thing. This is really what we are talking about tonight, an array of these, basically six of these mounted in a circular pattern, placed on top of a streetlight, and that's what you would have for wireless Internet connectivity. It's not a cell tower per se, but for wireless Internet. This is an antenna and that's why we have got the new definitions for antennas. These can be placed on the streetlights. One of these can be placed on a house to receive that and wireless communication for Internet can pass from the house to this router and, then, on to be able to get to the Internet. That's what we are asking for tonight. It's basically a simple request for the zoning ordinance to be amended to allow that to happen, because under current ordinances this would not be allowed in a residential district and we'd ask for your approval tonight. De Weerd: I did see you carrying a dish. Bird: Yeah. What's -- De Weerd: What's with that? Meridian City Council July 13, 2004 Page 32 of 56 • McKinnon: What's the dish? What's with that? If the range for this is too far away from the one site, this would have to be mounted to that. We are primarily talking about an array of these. This is something that also could be mounted to a house, just like you see for satellite dishes, in case the sight distance to the array -- or this to be a relay station is too far, so there is a possibility for some of these larger parabolic dishes, but they are still under the five feet in size. De Weerd: I don't mind seeing that on a house, but on a streetlight, that's a little different. Bird: Pull that up so we can take a look at it. De Weerd: That's on my house. It looks like you took it out of my backyard. Bird: For your TV? McKinnon: Okay. Wardle: Would that be placed on the street-light, Dave, or the house? McKinnon: There is a possibility for this to be placed on a streetlight. More than likely this would be placed on a house for the sight distance to get to that pole that has this for the router. Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Nary. Nary: Yeah. I heard you say it was less than five feet in diameter, is that what you said? McKinnon: Five square feet. Nary: Right. But the parabolic dish definition doesn't have any foot size in it, it just says a parabolic -- this is what an antenna is and one of them is a parabolic dish antenna. McKinnon: That's correct, Councilman Nary, but it says further in the rest of the ordinance that the antennas would be allowed only if they were under five feet in size. And so the antenna definition for parabolic dishes includes parabolic dishes that are much larger than this. It does describe the antenna. The limiting factor for these to be placed on those would be the size. They would be limited to less than five feet in size. Nary: Okay. So, that could be on top of a pole and -- but there is still language that the planning director could decide if it was still -- McKinnon: That's correct. Meridian City Council July 13, 2004 Page 33 of 56 Nary: -- hidden enough. McKinnon: And the Public Works director as well. De Weerd: Well, how big is that? McKinnon: That's just about four feet. Canning: Four square feet. McKinnon: That's correct. Canning: We need to get a correct term in there. Bird: Square feet. That's not no four foot diameter. McKinnon: That's four square feet. De Weerd: Okay. Any further questions? Nary: Didn't you write the ordinance the way it was already? • McKinnon: I did write the ordinance that way it was, without anticipating that this change would be needed. Nary: We seemed to like it the way it was. Bird: We passed it. McKinnon: Yeah. We got it through. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you very much. McKinnon: Thank you. De Weerd: This is a Public Hearing. Is there anyone else who would like to provide testimony on this application? Hearing none, Council, do you need any further information from the applicant or for staff before you close the Public Hearing? Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Nary. Nary: One more question, Mr. McKinnon. One of the things I recall in the previous discussion we had about this was the intent for stealth was to make it look like the pole. Now, some of the light poles I know that have these towers on them, they look odd, • Meridian City Council July 13, 2004 Page 34 of 56 because the light's, you know, ten feet below where the antenna actually is on the pole, but they all match the pole. I mean they are all black and the pole is black or whatever. Can that -- is that intended with these types of antennas? McKinnon: No. And the reason why -- I guess it's atwo-fold answer to that question. This is small enough that we don't believe that it would interfere. It's not something that stands ten, feet above in a cylindrical case; it's something that's small enough that it would be stealth in and of itself, because of the small size of that. Nary: Yeah, but you said there is six of them. McKinnon: Six in an array. It's about this big around. Nary: So, it's a big halo on top of a light pole is what I'm thinking and if you have got a black light pole and six of those, it doesn't seem very stealth-like to me. McKinnon: I'd prefer the term small halo to a big halo. Nary: Of course you do, but -- so, no, they can't necessarily be made to match the pole? McKinnon: This is just a plastic area and these can be painted to match. Nary: Okay. Same thing with that thing? McKinnon: Sure. Nary: So, if we inserted language that said they had to match the pole to be considered to be stealth, that would be okay? McKinnon: That would be fine. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Along that same line of questioning, how do you propose to make an array of those -- a halo of those consistent with some of the period type architectural type light poles that we have in some of the higher end, even middle level neighborhood? McKinnon: The decorative light features -- that's, again, why we have the discretion of the Planning and Zoning Commission -- or the Planning and Zoning director to be able to make that call. It's something we discussed quite a bit at the Planning and Zoning level where we said these aren't intended to go on decorative light fixtures. Typically in those types of neighborhoods you have the taller 35-foot lights at the entrance and once you get inside from there they have the decorative light fixtures. These are not intended to go on those. Meridian City Council July 13, 2004 Page 35 of 56 De Weerd: I guess as someone with a light pole in my front yard, you know, I would hope that I would be consulted by the planning staff before something -- I wouldn't want that in my front yard, because it is in my front yard, and it would look -- I like halos, but don't think I'd want that in my front yard. So, you know, as far as a neighborhood, guess, I would like the assurance that when those decisions are made the neighbors are consulted or if it is in someone's front yard, that that person does have something to say about it, especially the dish. I wouldn't want that. McKinnon: Like I said, if the smaller arrays can be placed on, there won't be a need for the larger dishes. It's just this is a distance. It's a -- right now this is a line-of-sight product and if the distance gets too far away from that, then, these are needed, but right now these are planned to go into the newer neighborhoods where they are expecting and they are advertising for the wireless Internet connectivity and that's the area this would start in. It wouldn't start for those other smaller neighbors right now, but if there is a demand for that that would move forward in the future. De Weerd: Who maintains them? McKinnon: The owner of the -- De Weerd: So, if they are painted, they will keep them painted? McKinnon: Yes. De Weerd: And if there is ever an issue with that pole, would you share in the cost of that repair? McKinnon: The license agreement typically handles that. It's very similar to a license agreement that you'd see with Ada County Highway District, where you have landscaping in their right of way you're required to maintain that in such a manner that ACRD or the public allows that to be -- I guess just to make it properly maintained. De Weerd: Okay. McKinnon: And the license agreement could spell that out. De Weerd: Council, any questions? Bird: Yeah, Madam Mayor, I got a question. De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Is there any percentage of what has to have that bigger hanger put up over just the little ones? Is there any percent? Fifty percent or what -- • Meridian City Council July 13, 2004 Page 36 of 56 Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, while Dave is conferring with his applicant, I did want to point out that the definition for stealth addresses some of those issues. I was looking for any reference to the paint. It should probably be in the definition of stealth tower and it has the including, but not limited to, and we may want to put similar paint to the utility pole that it's on. It talks about making use of utility poles, but it doesn't address color and paint. That might be the appropriate place for that change. McKinnon: It sounds like I missed something while I was conferring, but the need for these dishes -- this is what we intend to have is this. It's not for those. There is maybe a possibility for that. As far as a percentage, the percentage would be very low for these, because this is what we intend and this is what the client wants to have. It's better for them to utilize these than those and so as a percentage goes this would be a very low percentage use compared to these. They don't have this product in Idaho right now and it's hard for me to say right now this is exactly what the percentage would be, but the intention is to use these. Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Nary. Nary: Mr. McKinnon, I'm looking -- I think Mrs. Canning pointed out that probably we would need to -- if we were to approve this ordinance, we'd also need to amend 11-22-3 and the definitions of stealth to include that the appearance of the product -- the appearance of these antennas would have to be of the same like texture and color of the pole they were attached to, so that they did blend into it and they couldn't put any advertising on it. Would that be problematic? McKinnon: No. Nary: Okay. But I also look at 11-22-4, camouflage tower review -- now, unless there is a different spot for it -- in there it says stealth, hidden, or otherwise camouflaged cell tower shall be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning director to determine if a conditional use permit shall be required, stealth or otherwise hidden tower shall not exceed the height limitation of the zone for which it is located. McKinnon: Okay. Councilman Nary, are you reading from the recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission? Nary: No. I'm reading from the city code. McKinnon: Okay. It's been modified. Nary: Okay. To give notice to the neighbors? Meridian City Council July 13, 2004 Page 37 of 56 • McKinnon: No. What you just read -- I was trying to following along. I have got a copy of 11-22-4B that you were just reading, as modified by the P&Z Commission at our hearing. Nary: Oh, I see. McKinnon: And it read much different than that. It said camouflage tower and antenna review, stealth and hidden or otherwise camouflaged cell towers and new antennas that are less than five square feet in area, can be mounted onto existing poles, buildings, towers, et cetera, or street lights, shall be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning director and Public Works director and their designees. Nary: Thank you. The certificate of zoning compliance process, Mrs. Canning, is that providing notice to neighbors? Canning: No. We could make that -- if that's the desire of the Council, we could make that an accessory use. The accessory use process does notify neighbors. The question becomes what do we do if they complain, similar to the fence ordinance. We probably need to think a little bit more about it if we are making an accessory use as to what we do if one of the neighbors does complain. Nary: Because that would be my concern. I mean I would assume most of these are going to be in neighborhoods, mostly, because that's who's using wireless networks, so -- but if it is outside someone's -- you know, right next to their driveway, they may have more of a concern if it looks like that thing, instead of those little things, and at least they'd want to see at -- or at least have some notice of what it is before they do that, so what do you think about that? McKinnon: Madam Mayor, Councilman Nary, the Planning and Zoning director has the discretion, if it's the Council's wish, that all of the parabolic dishes would be required to have the neighborhood, you know, notification and that the smaller antennas not be required to do that. That's something that can be directed directly to the Planning and Zoning director and those ones would come back to you, not just as a certificate of zoning compliance, but, rather, through the CUP process. And through the CUP process all neighbors within 300 feet would be notified. And that's the way that 22-4 was modified to read is either through the CZC or the Conditional Use Permit process at the discretion of the Planning and Zoning director. De Weerd: I don't know, Mr. McKinnon -- I guess I look at our street and all of the streetlights are very visible. If you go into our older neighborhoods where you have some cover by trees, street trees or anything else, they are not so noticeable, but all can envision is the halo on top of the street light in front of my yard and when you drive down that road, that's going to be the first thing you see, because that -- I already don't like that street light right there, but I live with it. but to have a halo that's going to even draw more attention to it, I know I would like the opportunity to comment. But, you know guess, my point is -- but, you know, I guess when someone has that visibility in their • • Meridian City Council July 13, 2004 Page 38 of 56 front yard, that -- and it can detract from their home, they should have the ability to know that something is going to change and I guess that's my biggest concern. Yes, I appreciate your comment on the dish, but I do think 12 -- or six of those in a halo effect, will change the appearance of that street light and I believe that the neighbors do deserve to know that that has a possibility of happening, but I don't even have a vote, so -- Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Madam Mayor, just a comment about the use of what is currently kind of a utilitarian sort of street light, which is needed in the neighborhoods to create some business opportunities is something we are talking about and while I do agree that many of the neighbors in Meridian would certainly like to comment on your dish on any of their poles, I think that our Planning and Zoning director and Public Works staff have fairly good judgment and would utilize that when approving any of these other types of things with our direction. So, I like the use, because I think the end product is a service for those neighbors within the community, but we do need to be sensitive to the overall visual effect to our city. De Weerd: And I agree with you and I know our staff has good judgment. That's not my concern. As a citizen I would like the opportunity to comment and as a taxpayer who pays for those lights and maintains those lights, if you're going to put a business venture on top of them and it is in my front yard, I would like the ability to comment on that. So, I -- and Idon't -- I don't doubt the judgment of our staff on this, Ijust -- I just think that the public has -- should have an opportunity to make a comment and that's -- I won't say anymore on that. Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Nary. Nary: I guess for me, Dave, I would only be supportive of what you're proposing with the language that was amended if we included an amendment to the stealth definition that required it match the pole and that we change the section for 11-22-5-A-2 that you have already asked to amend and allow the new antennas that are less than five square feet in area that are already in the existing zones with a certificate of zoning compliance, R- 15, R-40, C-N, and OT, and that the R-2, three, four, and eight all require a CUP, because Idon't -- I don't know what the neighbors will care and if you do this for awhile and no one cares and we send out notices and nobody cares, then, maybe we would look to amend it again. But I don't know. We specifically left those out when we created this ordinance, because of our concerns about neighborhoods and how they would look and what the appearance would be and that's why we left them in the more -- the non- residential areas, even though there are a couple of residential ones -- R-15 and R-40s are generally larger, more commercialized kinds of areas of town. So, at least for me think I can only support it if that was further amended that all of those residential zones, two, three, four, and eight, required CUPs. So, at least I'd know the neighbors had notice and if they don't care, then, they don't care, but at least I'd know they had some opportunity to comment. Meridian City Council July 13, 2004 Page 39 of 56 Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, one other option might be, if this is acceptable, is we could ask them to submit a letter of consent from any -- all property owners within 50 -- a 50 mile -- or 50 foot radius. That would get those that are primarily affected. Right now we do 300-foot radius, which seems a bit excessive for a streetlight, maybe. So, if we did everybody within 50-foot radius or 100-foot radius, they just had to get approval. If they can't get the approval, they can move onto the next one. Then, at least there is some certainty on their part, they just know they have got to find these places or if they can't find them, maybe it's a conditional use process, if they can't get approval -- consent from the owners that are -- adjoin that. It's something to consider, anyway, rather than making all of them go through a CU process. Nary: I guess my concern would be the same, though, as what the Mayor's previously stated. You know, if I live in a subdivision and I have got to drive by it every day and I live one house over, I guess I still feel like I should be able to comment and I know there has got to be a line somewhere. But, currently, without any changes to our ordinance, it's either the immediate property owner or 300 feet. We don't really have a lot of variation in where the noticing requirements are, but -- so, to me, without changing a lot more ordinances to make that for this particular one, I guess I'd just rather go with the larger and if we find -- like I said anecdotally that nobody seems to complain and we have sent them out three or four times and we have done this a bunch and no one cares, maybe it would make more sense to amend it. But without knowing, we specifically left those out for a reason and this was the reason that I remember. McKinnon: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Commissioner Nary -- Councilman Nary. Commissioner, I think, at the time that we went through this. Just a couple comments. One, to address what you have hit on, Tammy and you, Bill, are the issues that -- I have lived in Meridian for about three and a half years now and I can tell you I can count on my hand -- one hand how many times I have looked at a street light and said that's a really ugly street light. I very seldom find myself driving along saying I don't like that street light, that's something that I'm annoyed by with that street light or see structures on a street light that would annoy me, because I'm typically not viewing up, I'm looking I guess horizontally across the plane. I know in your case, Mayor, you have a street light that you don't like and I can understand that, but typically some of the things that you're looking at, these aren't at eye level, these are not things that you typically see as you're driving, you will see them -- they are up and you would have to view up to see them and so it's not typically something that's in your eye view. To address the issue of whether or not they should be allowed in the R-2, R-3, R-4, and R- 9, one of the major reasons that we have went away from there is to stay away from the cell towers and these aren't cell towers, these are something much smaller than that. They are basically taking the existing street light and having an 18 inch tall projection to the top of that street light and I have no problem agreeing to the changes that you have made, Councilman Nary, about the -- adding the stealth language, that they have to be painted and match in texture type of thing. No problem with that. I think that I do like the idea that Anna had about you're requiring the neighborhood, but if we deal with a CUP for every antenna, it comes to a point of how many antennas are we going to allow • • Meridian City Council July 13, 2004 Page 40 of 56 under one Conditional Use Permit. Is it for the whole neighborhood or is it every individual pole that would require a Conditional Use Permit? If we are trying to do a neighborhood such as Tuscany Lakes and you have to do several poles, that's a very large number of people you would have to contact within 300 feet for every single one of those poles and that's that many conditional use permits that you would have coming in front of you and going through the Planning and Zoning Commission process and the City Council would have the hearings for that on each one and I think that you using the discretion of staff would lessen the load on you, rather than having to have everything come back to -- having to come to you and the Planning and Zoning Commission. think what we tried to accommodate with the Planning and Zoning Commission was to allow them to come to you if the planning director felt that it was necessary that they should come to you and they would cause a problem. De Weerd: I guess it's one thing in an existing residential subdivision versus a new subdivision, so when they purchase that home, they know -- they already know what it looks like and there are grades -- I mean not all houses are at the same grade as the sidewalk and so, you know -- and in my case we sit above and so it is a lot more noticeable and I'm sure this is not unique, it's probably more common. So, it's going to be different in an existing residential subdivision. Mr. Rountree. Rountree: In your crafting this ordinance and thinking of the use of the antenna, not the antenna itself, you talk about a license agreement with the city. Did the applicant contemplate a fee structure associated with that license agreement, similar to franchise fees? McKinnon: To pay for that, yes, that is something we have discussed and they could enter into. Rountree: Okay. De Weerd: Does that need defined in an ordinance? Rountree: I think so. Bird: We have to draw up a franchise agreement. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, maybe Mrs. Holinka can help me out. would think that the franchise agreement could follow. It would still be something that the Council would decide upon, but I'm not sure it needs to be spelled out in the zoning ordinance. We don't usually see those specifics in the zoning ordinance. De Weerd: I guess I would defer that to the city attorney for response. Holinka: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I think Anna is right with that, I mean think you could -- if it's something that has to be approved by the Council, the license • Meridian City Council July 13, 2004 Page 41 of 56 • agreement has to be approved, then, you're approving the fee anyway, so I don't think it needs to be a separate ordinance. De Weerd: Okay. Any further questions or comments from Council? McKinnon: Thank you, Mayor, Members of the Council. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Is there anyone else who would like to offer testimony in this application? Okay. Any further comments from staff or the applicant? Council, what would you like to do? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I move that we close the Public Hearing on Item 15. Bird: Second. De Weerd: It's been moved and seconded to close the Public Hearing on Item 15. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Discussion or motion? Rountree: Madam Mayor, just -- De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: -- for discussion purposes, given some of the unknowns associated with the discussion we have had and the ordinance, I'm not inclined to act favorably on this request at this point. I'm concerned about the points that you mentioned, Mayor, in terms of public notification and the difficulty of individuals who have ownership of these particular lights in their yards or in their neighborhoods seeing these things occur without notice and without an opportunity to have a say. In addition, the point that Anna brought up that what do we do if we get a complaint. That's not spoken to. So, I think there is some issues here that we need to deal with, as well as I believe that if there is going to be some kind of a fee associated with this, it should be mentioned in the ordinance, not necessarily the structure, but the fact that that's our intent. De Weerd: Any other comments? Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Nary. ~~ Meridian City Council July 13, 2004 Page 42 of 56 • Nary: I would agree with Councilmember Rountree. I mean I think there is some work -- Ithink we can get there, I think there is just some work to get there, because I do -- to me you may say this is a small halo on a small pole, but it looks to me like a smaller version of large cell towers that have these big halos on the top of them. It's the same thing, it's just a smaller version of it, and -- but I guess I'm maybe looking to Planning and Zoning for some direction on whether you want us to simply defer or to -- I guess, Mr. McKinnon, on whether to defer this and work on this some more -- I think there is some ways to get there, I just think there needs some better definitions in some things, rather than us simply taking action on it tonight. Canning: Madam Mayor, Councilmember -- or President Nary, I think that the discussions we have had today are really good and I think if I could talk with the applicant, that I think we could come up with some language to address your concerns. You have closed the Public Hearing, if you want to defer it; I think you would need to open that -- the hearing back up again, so that we could defer it, rather than making a motion one way or another tonight. But if you could give us a few weeks, we could probably come up with some revised language. De Weerd: Okay. I would entertain a motion to open the Public Hearing with direction on -- oh; I guess we would, then, have a motion. Bird: To continue it. Yeah. Wardle: So moved. Nary: Second. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: It's been moved to reopen the Public Hearing on Item 15. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: I move that we continue Item No. 15 to August 17th. Is that enough time? Canning: Sure. Wardle: August 17th, 2004. Nary: Second. • Meridian City Council July 13, 2004 Page 43 of 56 De Weerd: I have a motion to continue this item to August 17th, 2004. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 16: Public Hearing: PP 04-014 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 8 commercial building lots on 6.9 acres in an I-L zone for Reagan Subdivision by Quadrant Consulting, Inc. -east of North Eagle Road and south of East Presidential Drive: De Weerd: Thank you. Item 16 is a Public Hearing on PP 04-014. I will open this Public Hearing with staff comments. Canning: Moving forward. This is a request for eight commercial building lots on 6.9 acres. This is off of -- it runs between Presidential Drive and Pine Avenue as shown on the vicinity map, just south of the Crossroads shopping center and west of the Crossroads Subdivision, the residential portion. This is, actually, portions of a former subdivision. This is the aerial. You can see the shaded parts where the -- portions of the subdivision that have already come in for certificates of zoning compliance. There is -- the Ram restaurant is going on one lot and a bank is going on the other. This subdivision takes those remainder properties and re-subdivides them. It's difficult to see the lot layout. Basically, the applicant is requesting for a number of fairly narrow lots, the idea being that it affords them some opportunities for lot line adjustments or combining properties as their applicants come in. This is one way that this applicant has found for dealing with that struggle that we have on these commercial properties on how exactly big to make the lots before you know who wants to buy it. This is what they have proposed. We don't have a site plan, do we? I apologize for that. I didn't realize that as I was reviewing the proposal. There is a common drive aisle -- I guess you can see it here -- that comes through and connects Presidential to Pine Street and, then, there will be -- it's just a drive aisle, though. There is no parking to the side of it, so it's a restricted drive aisle. There will be a separate drive aisle with parking for -- in this area, with the buildings being located either to the side or to the rear. And, likewise, over here I believe there is a separate parking area and drive aisle. So, this will just be a drive aisle that does connect the two roads. There is the light now at Pine Street for those of us who don't like to take our lives in our hands trying to make the left-hand turn onto Eagle Road any longer. So, it does provide that interconnection of the commercial properties to the light. In the former subdivision that created these lots, there were several variances given to them and those variances have continued. One was for the Eagle Road landscape buffer. The second one was to put that landscape buffer in a common lot. And the third was to reduce the minimum buffer width between incompatible land uses from 25 feet to 20 feet and that was on this -- this eastern property boundary. So, those continue with the subdivision and this subdivision is consistent with those. Variances do run with the land, not with the prior application, so that was appropriate for them to be able to make use of those variances. This does Meridian Planning & Zoning • • June 3, 2004 Page 41 of 65 Borup: Motion and second. Discussion? Was that intended the CUP modification approval -- Zaremba: I'm sorry, say that again. Borup: -- would be under the -- would be under the -- okay. Staff can approve the modification is what you're saying. Zaremba: Yes. Architectural design features and materials. Borup: Okay. Zaremba: Staff can approve it, but the way we are meaning this is if it's a significant modification, the planning director may require a separate CUP for a significant modification. Borup: Well, that's what I was wondering. You didn't say may, I don't think, in how heard your sentence. Zaremba: No. I did read it will. I left it will. Borup: Does that work for staff? Okay. Okay. Motion and a second. All in favor? Any opposed? MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Borup: Okay. I think this would be a good time. We will take a short break and we will reconvene in a few minutes. (Recess.) Item 4: Public Hearing: ZOA 04-001 Request for Zoning Ordinance Amendment to allow small antennas to be mounted on existing and new light and power poles within residential, office, commercial and industrial subdivisions by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc: Borup: Okay. We'd like to reconvene our meeting. If Mr. McKinnon is here -- or shall we go on -- do you want to -- oh, they are here. Okay. We'd like to -- Item No. 4, the zoning ordinance amendment. So, we will continue with that. McKinnon: Thank you, Commissioner Borup, Members of the Commission. Again, Dave McKinnon, just for the record. Steve and Wendy and Craig and Bruce and Tim and I, we all got together and worked this out and this is what we have come up with and it addresses the issues that you wanted addressed, Commissioner Zaremba, concerning the agreement, the license agreement. In fact, I just had a moment to talk with Will Berg, the city clerk, and he said that, yes, it should be a licensed agreement Meridian Planning & Zoning ~ • June 3, 2004 Page 42 of 65 with the city and it would be something that would be required, even if it wasn't part of this, but he didn't see any reason not to put this in. And we changed a little bit the first paragraph there, so that instead of saying light poles, everything would be consistent to say streetlights and to include new streetlights as part of that, instead of just saying existing. It includes new streetlights. And so we just got rid of some inconsistency and added the language that you wanted to see there, Commissioner Zaremba. Bruce Freckleton added one more comment to that that you see in the first paragraph there, it says shall be reviewed by the planning director and the public works director, because Bruce wanted to make sure that Public Works was involved as well and we have no objection to that and we had Steve write it, so you could read it and we are ready to get this thing moving forward. If you have any other questions, be happy to answer them at this time. Zaremba: Does the clerk have a copy of that, so that it can just be referenced or will need to read it? Siddoway: I will give this copy directly to the clerk. Zaremba: Okay. Borup: Okay. That covers what we had discussed? Zaremba: I'm satisfied that staff is satisfied. I think it covers the issues that we brought up and, therefore, Mr. Chairman, I move this hearing be closed. Moe: Second. Borup: Motion and second to close the hearing. All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Zaremba: Mr. Chairman, I move we forward to the City Council recommending approval of ZOA 04-001, request for zoning ordinance amendment to allow small antennas to be mounted on existing and new light and power poles within residential office, commercial, and industrial subdivisions by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc., to include all staff comments of their memo for the hearing date of June 3, 2004, with the following change: The statement provided to the clerk regarding Section 11-22-4, B, shall be incorporated into the proposed amendment. Moe: Second. Borup: Motion and second. All in favor? Any opposed? MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.