Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMarch 6, 2003Meridian 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 13fh. And, as stated, it's L-0 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- O to L-O 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 I invited office, so that the uses would stay less Meridian Planning & Zoning March 6, 2003 Page 5 of 94 intense and be better neighbors there. In spite of that description in the narrative, the legal description submitted was for the entire parcel. So they are going to amend that. There may be people here to testify on it, so we may still need to take testimony, if no one can come to the meeting at which it will be continued to, but I would recommend that it simply be continued to the March 20th meeting two weeks from tonight and we should b e a ble t o h ave t he c orrect I egal d escription a pproved a nd t he p osting t aken care of at that time. With that I will stand for any questions. Borup: Questions from the Commission? Zaremba: I do have one. On the staff comments, page two, item D, delta, there is a sentence in the middle. It says the city has recently completed construction of a new police station within this subdivision. Is that true? Siddoway: No, it's not. Zaremba: I didn't think that was where it was. Siddoway: Yeah. Zaremba: So we can delete that sentence? Borup: Delete that sentence. Yes, sir. Zaremba: Okay. And the first sentence is still valid. Siddoway: Yeah. It is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan does show this parcel as commercial and so the rezone would be in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan under the new comp plan future land use map. Centers: Mr. Chairman? Borup: Commissioner Centers. Centers: If I recall, March 20th is -- my little box at home is full. Borup: It's full. I mean it's -- well, we have a couple of large projects. Centers: Right. Borup: It depends on how they do. Centers: I guess, you know, if the applicant is desirous to continue it, it should be at a meeting in which we can handle it. Meridian Planning 8 Zoning March 6, 2003 Page 6 of 94 Borup: Shall we go ahead and see how -- what public testimony there may be first and, then, decide? Centers: Yeah. Borup: But, yeah, I agree, I don't know that we -- do we have anyone here that would like to testify? Please come forward. Knighton: Cheryl Knighton, 2580 East Clarene Court, the second cul-de-sac up on the purple. This was not very well publicized, as Steve has pointed out. No one was notified and all there was, was a little 11-by-17 notice that the hearing was tonight. But I have talked to some of the neighbors and we do object to this being changed to commercial and, especially, in light of the fact that we still do not have a light at Hickory and Fairview. With the added traffic from the car wash, from Louie's, the church will be -- Capital Christian Center has proposed to put a school in their facility and we just feel that at this time changing that to commercial from light office will impact the traffic even greater than it already has been impacted. We are the exit for three subdivisions, Dove Meadows, Packard Estates, and Chateau M eadows, and this would just cause even more traffic concerns for that area and if there is a school being proposed at the church, I feel that's a safety issue for them. Thank you. Centers: Ma'am? Knighton: Yes. Centers: One question, please. Would you say that you, live within 300 feet of the project? Knighton: No, I don't. I'm on the second cul-de-sac. Centers: Okay. That's the code, that we have to notify homeowners -- or property owners within 300 feet. Knighton: Okay. Those two little purple lots on the first street going to the left -- Centers: Yes. Okay. Knighton: -- I talked to the lady that lives in the second house over and she was not notified and I realize now that after the comment's made that they will put a buffer there between the back of that house and the lot, but she was not notified. Centers: What's her name? Knighton: I don't know. Centers: Okay. Meridian Planning & Zoning March 6, 2003 Page 7 of 94 Borup: One of those t hat t estified p reviously. Yeah. That zoning was n of g oing to change on that lot, for those -- for those. That was staying as it is. Knighton: But the other -- the rest of it towards Fairview will change; right? Borup: That's what they are proposing. Knighton: Okay. Well, we still feel that that's a negative impact on the neighborhood, both for safety and additional traffic. Borup: I might just mention 33 notices were sent out. Knighton: Okay. Well, she did not receive one. Borup: What's her name? Knighton: I don't know. I'm sorry. Borup: Well, then, we can't verify that without her name. We have got names of 33 individuals that it was sent to. Knighton: Okay. And this will be continued when? Centers: We don't know yet. Zaremba: We haven't decided yet, but we will. Knighton: Okay. Zaremba: Y ou m fight b e i nterested t o n ote t hat w hoever d evelops t his a nd h owever they develop it, there are separate hearings at ACRD and one of the subjects was the signal that you asked about. Whoever develops this will be required to give a 3,200 deposit -- 3,200 dollar deposit into a trust fund for putting a signal there. So they intend to have this happen and this developer will pay a portion of it, whatever they develop. Borup: Anyone else like to come forward? Zaremba: I take it the applicant is not here. Borup: Is that correct? The applicant -- oh, I'm sorry. Would you still like to make a presentation, even though you have asked to be continued? Hepworth: I don't care to make a presentation. I think staff has covered it as well as can be. But I just wanted to state that the reason that we did request a continuance, because we were negligent in posting that property the seven days prior to this council Meridian Planning & Zoning March 6, 2003 Page 8 of 94 meeting and so we felt to be fair to the surrounding owners, or whoever wanted to be here, that we should continue it. As far as comments for the stop light, this developer has met with ACRD and tried several times to expedite that stop light, that he is more than willing to contribute to the installation of that and has tried to push that. However, ACHD has commented that it's not on their five-year plan, so, basically, there is nothing that they could do. I mean he's more than willing to work with the surrounding neighbors to do whatever that needs to be taken care of to that intersection to provide that -- a safe place. He realizes that it is a dangerous intersection and he is willing to do what it takes to make it a safe location. Borup: And what do you mean by willing to do what it takes? Hepworth: Well, he's willing to -- Borup: Short of installing it himself? Hepworth: Yeah. Short of installing it himself. He's gone to two or three Ada County Highway District meetings, has met with them numerous times trying to see what he can do to get this stop light installed, and he's always ended up with a block there, that it's not on our plan as of yet, in the five year plan, and so he's paid into this fund once, I believe. With new conditions on the property he's probably going to have to contribute again and I think he's done his fair share to try to get that light installed. He realizes that it needs to be there. Borup: Okay. The parcel is retaining the platted lots as they now are; is that correct? Hepworth: Correct. As approved on February 4th. The final plat was approved by City Council. Borup: Okay. And, then, you will have a new legal description next time? Hepworth: I can have a legal description by tomorrow, but -- and I have my surveyor preparing that now. Borup: Okay. Would that also -- would that also include a plat showing which lots were staying as presently zoned and which ones were -- Hepworth: Oh, it certainly could. Yeah. I could -- Borup: I would like that. I don't think our packets have that now. Hepworth: Yeah. I could provide a copy of the final plat with that. Borup: Okay. Questions from any of the other Commissioners? All right. Zaremba: I do have one. Meridian Planning & Zoning March 6, 2003 Page 9 of 94 Hepworth: Okay. Zaremba: In ACHD's comments on their page four, item H, they ask you to provide a recorded cross-access agreement, so that surrounding properties can use your driveway to access Fairview. Are you agreeable with that or in the process of making that happen? Hepworth: Yes. That will be a condition, I believe, attached in the CC&R's, with the final plat application. There are cross-access agreements between those two lots and through the subdivision and also it will be required as part the final plat that we have a cross-parking within the development also. So we are completely in agreement with that. Zaremba: No problem with that? Hepworth: No. Borup: Okay. Thank you. Hepworth: Thank you. Borup: Was there anyone else that would like that come forward? Okay. Commissioners, for your information, on the 20th we have two subdivisions. One about 40 acres and the other one a fairly large multi-use subdivision. Besides those two, just a couple of small items and both of them in Old Town. A child care and a rezone. So mainly it's the two subdivisions. Zaremba: I will abstain from expressing an opinion, because I will be absent that date. Centers: Well, I guess I don't have a problem if you don't, Mr. Chairman, continuing it to the 20th. Borup: I think we have a full agenda. Don't know that it's going to take a lot of time, though, on this item. Centers: So, what are you saying, do you -- Borup: No. I think that would probably be -- Centers: Well, I would so move that we continue item five on our agenda to our hearing on March 20th. Mathes: Second. Meridian Planning & Zoning March 6, 2003 Page 10 of 94 Zaremba: Before we vote, I thought of a question I would ask the developer, if I may. Would you be amenable to having a small neighborhood meeting? It sounds like there may be some objections in the neighborhood that you could workout before you come back for the Public Hearing. Hepworth: Yeah. I'm certain that the owner of parcel would have no objection to that. Zaremba: And get this lady's name and number. Hepworth: Okay. Yeah. He's -- he's more than willing to try to workout any complaints or disagreements with the neighbors, hence, his leaving that lot that's buffering or next to the homeowners as L-O. He does -- you know, he feels that's right -- Borup: Well -- but I believe that was one of our requirements last year. Hepworth: Not to leave that lot L-O. Borup: It was discussed. Hepworth: It was -- we were just denied the whole rezone to a commercial site and, then, we -- after talking with staff, they recommended, you know, perhaps leaving this one lot to L-O as a buffer to that, you know, and he has no problems with that and I think he would be willing to work with any neighbors. Zaremba: I just wanted to suggest that before we move on to the next item. Hepworth: Okay. Zaremba: I call the question. Borup: All in favor? Any opposed? Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. , Item 6: Public Hearing: AZ 02-034 Request for annexation and zoning of 5.0 Acres from RUT to R-3 zones fro proposed Bleak Subdivision by Kent And Nancy Bleak-4920 West Cherry Lane: Item 7: Public Hearing: PFP 02-005 Request for Preliminary/Final Plat Approval of 1 building lot and 1 other lot on 5 acres in a proposed R-3 Zone for proposed Bleak Subdivision by Kent and Nancy Blaek - 4920 West Cherry Lane: Borup: The next project, Items 6 and 7, Public Hearing AZ 02-034, request for annexation and zoning of five acres from RUT to R-3 zones for the propose Bleak Subdivision by Ken and Nancy Bleak. Is that -- that's not the address, is it? 4920 West