Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMarch 20, 2003Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2003 Page 20 of 64 Mathes: It works for me. Centers: Commissioner Mathes, I had one little technical thing that -- if you can believe it from me. On page five, the availability of public services, down about five lines it says the Blackstone lift station shall upgraded. I'd like to insert the word be upgraded. Shall be. It was omitted. Thank you. Borup: Commissioner Zaremba is not here. Someone has to handle that Centers: I second that motion, by the way. Borup: I mean that in a good way. Rohm: Sure you did. Borup: Okay. We have a motion and we have a second. All in favor? Any opposed? Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 6: Continued Public Hearing from March 6, 2003: 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: Okay. Our next item is also continued. That is continued Public Hearing RZ 03- 001, arequest for a rezone of 6.95 acres from L-O to L-O and C-G zones and we'd like to open this continued hearing and start with the staff report. McKinnon: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, as you stated, this is a continued Public Hearing. The last time that you heard this application the property was not posted correctly and there were some issues with, I believe, a legal notice and some issues concerning what piece of property was being rezoned to C-G and what pieces of property were staying as the L-O designation. If I could direct your attention to the overhead, we have highlighted the area that's remaining as L-O. The rest of the property right here, including this small piece, over to this small triangular shaped piece of property, stopping there, that's all to be rezoned C-G. The reason for that is so that this p iece of p roperty w ill remain a s a n L -O u se to buffer t he I arger C-G a nd h igher intensity uses of the C-G zone. The property has been noticed correctly and just one more map you will be able to see it more clearly. This piece remaining is L-0 adjacent to the single family residential. The rest of the property would be zoned C-G. Staff supports the requested rezone application. The request is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and I'd ask if you have any questions for staff at this time. Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2003 Page 21 of 64 Borup: Questions for staff? Is the applicant here? Come forward. Is there anything you'd like to add to the staff report? Hepworth: Russ Hepworth with the Land Group, 128 South Eagle Road. I just wanted to clarify a couple things in the staff report. It states that -- the lot that would stay L-O is designated as Lot 3 on this. Lot numbers have changed according to the final plat and that should be Lot No. 4 will remain L-O and that the rest would be rezoned to C-G. That is stated in the application summary and also in Item F. Centers: That's also on the first page in the application summary. Hepworth: Correct. Centers: Right. Hepworth: And we have no further comments to the staff report: Borup: Okay. Any questions from the Commission? All right. Thank you. Do we have anyone here to testify on this application? Come forward, sir. Hill: I'm not sure I'm -- Borup: Go ahead, we need to get your name. Hill: Hill. Dale W. Borup: Okay. Hill: I live at 2561 East Grapewood Drive. My property backs up against this piece of property, I think. May I approach the map? Borup: Yes. Yeah. This is Grapewood right here, I believe. Hill: Right. This is our lot. Borup: Okay. Hill: My understanding is this is the piece that they are trying to rezone? Borup: No. Okay. Come on -- we can -- come on up to the microphone and ask some questions and we can explain that. This piece is staying as it is. It's been L-O -- it's presently L-O and -- Hill: When we purchased the property it was L-O. Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2003 Page 22 of 64 Borup: Right. And that was why -- I think maybe they would have liked to, but this Commission said, no, it needed to stay the way it was. Hill: Okay. Borup: So, this has the -- is that where the restaurant is or over here? Anyway, but the rest of the property is what is changing. Hill: All right. Borup: The part against you is staying that and I believe even -- if I remember right, don't we have asingle -- is that single story -- or am I thinking of something else? Whatever it was originally approved as -- Hill: In my understanding a single story business -- or I mean office space. Borup: Yeah. Or anything that would comply with an L-O zone. Hill: Yes, sir. Borup: Yes. No, that is not changing. Hill: Fine. Thank you. Borup: All right. Thank you. Do we have anyone else? Okay. Commissioners, the only other comment I would make -- and maybe -again, this is kind of a typo to -- in a motion o n p age t wo, i tem D, w e a Iready - okay. D elete t he reference t o t he p olice station. I don't know if there is anything else to carry it over, unless I think that it carried over from a previous report. Centers: I would make a motion we close the Public Hearing. Mathes: Second. Borup: Motion and second. All in favor? Any opposed? MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Mathes: I make a motion to approve the continued Public Hearing from March 6, 2003, 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, including all staff comments dated March 6th, with the changes on -- under application summary and background, it's, actually, Lot No. 4, Lot No. 3 that's remaining L-O and on page two, item D, where it says furthermore, to the end of that paragraph, we are scratching that off. On page three, Item F, another reference of -- it's Lot 4, not like Lot 3 that will remain L-O. That's it. Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2003 Page 23 of 64 Centers: Second. Borup: Motion and second. All in favor? Any opposed? Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 7: Continued Public Hearing from March 6, 2D03: AZ 03-003 Request for annexation and zoning of 14.31 acres from RUT to R-8 zones for proposed TimberFalls Subdivision by Dan Wood -south of East Ustick Road and west of North Locust Grove Road: Item 8: Continued Public Hearing from March 6, 2003: PP 03-002 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 50 building lots and 6 other lots on 14.31 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for proposed Timberfalls Subdivision by Dan Wood -south of East Ustick Road and west of North Locust Grove Road: Borup: Okay. The next is also a continued Public Hearing, AZ 03-003, request for annexation and zoning of 14.31 acres for Timberfalls Subdivision and PP 03-002, request for preliminary plat approval on the same project. Open this hearing and start with the staff report. McKinnon: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. You should have all received a copy of the revised staff report from Steve Siddoway. Steve has gone through and made the revisions that were required from the last Public Hearing and he stated that in this -- he added a new summary to that stating that the only remaining substantive issue, in his opinion, was the hard surface pathways and whether or not those hard surface pathways entering into the dinosaur shaped common lot, whether or not they should be required to be -okay. It's a dinosaur. There are the feet. The tail is over here. It looks likes a tyrannosaurs. There are three entrances into this open space and there is some discussion as to whether or not those pathways should be just hard surface pathways or whether they should be considered as micropaths and landscaped and fenced in accordance with the landscape ordinance. There was a lot of discussion in the original application that -- I should recognize at this time Sonya Allen, who actually wrote the majority of this report. She is here tonight and this is her first time here, so we welcome her here. And if you have any questions, we could probably address those to her. There also should -- you all should have received a copy of the land consultant's letter, dated March 10th, in response to the revisions that were requested at the last Public Hearing and staff does not disagree with any of the comments from the land consultants and the staff report, as revised by Steve Siddoway, is reflective of the comments of the applicant's letter dated March 10th, so the only real issue, I guess, that we have left from actually having read the minutes and reading Steve's revised report is to whether or not those pathways going into the common lot should be considered micropaths and handled as such. The applicant has received a letter from the Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District allowing them to encroach within the