Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutApril 3, 2003Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 3, 2003 Page 2 of 81 Page 11 of the February 20th minutes, moving up from the bottom, the first time you come to Zaremba, it says motion and second to close the Public Hearing. I believe those words were spoken by our Chairman Mr. Borup, not me. Those are my only comments for February 20tH Borup: Any other comments on the minutes? That being said, I'll entertain a motion. Zaremba: Mr. Chairman, I move we approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of February 20, 2003, and the minutes -- I'm sorry, February 20, 2003, as amended, and the minutes of March 20, 2003. Centers: As amended. Zaremba: March 20~' was not amended, unless somebody has something else. Centers: You made a change. You said that -- Borup: Pardon? Centers: Anyway -- Borup: Motion and second. All in favor? Any opposed? Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Item 4. Continued Public Hearing from March 20, 2003: RZ 03-003 Request fora Rezone of 0.35 acres from R-4 to O-T zones for Merlyn Schmeckpeper by Merlyn Schmeckpeper - 230 West Pine Avenue: Item 5. Continued Public Hearing from March 20, 2003: CUP 03-006 Request fora Conditional Use Permit fora Child Care Facility for approximately 30 children in a proposed O-T zone for Sunshine Academy by Sharon O'Toole and Debbie and James Sheridan - 230 West Pine Avenue: Borup: Okay. The first item is a Continued Public Hearing. These are Items 4 and 5, continued from our March 20th meeting, RZ 03-003, request for a rezone from R-4 to 0- Tzones, and Item 5 is a Continued Public Hearing for CUP 03-006. This is a request fora Conditional U se P ermit fora childcare facility, t he s ame p roperty, for S unshine Academy. I'd like to open these two hearings. They were -- this was continued to get some more input and redesign on the Site Plan, if I read the minutes correct and remember c orrectly. I t hink w e d o h ave a new S ite P Ian a nd, M r. M cKinnon, i f y ou would like to go ahead. McKinnon: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. Just for Commissioner Zaremba, who wasn't here at the last meeting, a little bit of background. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission MeeBng April 3, 2003 Page 3 of 81 This is an approximately 1,450 square foot house located on Pine Street adjacent to West 3rd Street. There is a small alley, 16 feet wide, it's owned by ACHD, it's part of the right of way that they have. It's unimproved at this time. They will be required to pave that. When this project came to the Commission originally, the access to the site was only through the alley, there was no connection to 3`d Street, so it would have been two- way traffic on a 16-foot wide alley. Staff recommendation at that night was that they modify their parking and their drive aisles to accommodate a drive aisle that would come around through the alley and back out to 3`d Street to accommodate drive-thru traffic, drop off, pick up, and provide for additional parking spaces. Those changes would also accommodate an additional amount of landscaping be located on the northern -- it's kind of upside down for you guys, but north is on the bottom. It would accommodate additional landscaping on the northern portion of the property. The revised Site Plan -- I know you all have a copy of the revised staff report that I included. You should also have received acopy -- I received a copy tonight myself of a letter in response. I just read through it this evening. The letter in response is just to provide additional information. Did you guys not get that? Centers: Didn't get the revised -- McKinnon: They have got it, though. They will hand it out. It's just some additional information. I just received it tonight when I came to the meeting. It looks like the applicant will present that information, as well as hand it out to you. The modifications were made for the additional parking, add four stalls here, handicapped parking stall behind the garage, two parallel stalls on the northern portion of the property, in addition to placing the trash enclosure off of the alley. They have widened the parking from -- the landscaping from five feet to nine feet and I think the application has also -- has enough room to go one more additional foot to provide a full 10-foot landscape buffer there. As you may know, the landscape ordinance requires a buffer between land uses at 20 feet when we are dealing with residential, which is to the north, and this property, a day care facility. Through the alternative compliance section of the Landscape Code, they can request that this be reduced a certain percentage and the percentage you guys can discuss tonight. That section of the code is the alternative compliance and the portion that they are using for that is that due to 12-13-18-2C, due to a change of use on an existing s ite, t he required I andscape b uffer i s I arger t han c an be p rovided. They have provided additional trees along the back that are closer together spaced than would typically be seen. In addition to that, which is not shown on the Site Plan, there was discussion amongst the Commission and the applicant concerning a fence to be placed at that location to provide an additional buffer. Because the 20-foot -- full 20-foot could not be provided and still, provide for the amount of parking that would be required for this project. The applicant has also revised the Site Plan to provide that access to 3rd Street, in addition to the landscaping and the tiling of the small irrigation ditch that was not shown on the previous Site Plan. Those are the changes that we talked about. The changes have been made. I know the applicant is here tonight and he can provide some additional information. They have worked with us to make the changes that were requested at the last Commission Meeting. I note at the last Commission Meeting there were no assurances given to the applicant that this project would be approved if the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 3, 2003 Page 4 of 81 changes were made. I point that out to both the applicant, the Commission, and to the people here tonight. At this time I'll end the staff report and ask if you have any questions of staff at this time. Borup: Questions from Commission? Okay. Would the applicant like to make their presentation? Zaremba: While the applicant is coming forward, I would comment that although I was absent on March 20th when this was first heard, I read all the materials that were provided. I have read the minutes of that meeting and for people in the audience, I have read your concerns that you voiced and read the petition. I appreciate them and would just say you don't need to repeat them for my benefit, because I have read them. McKinnon: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, there is one other thing that I would like to point out I just remembered. This project and the approval from the Ada County Highway District has been appealed to the Ada County Highway District concerning the improvements of the alley and the property, taking access off of 3rd Street. That decision has been appealed to Ada County Highway District and that will be heard on the 16~' of this month at their noon meeting. I spoke with ACHD and I have also spoken with our Legal Counsel who is here tonight, with Mr. Nick Wollen, and should you wish to approve this project tonight, you could approve that conditioned upon no changes to ACHD's.report. They have -- ACHD, as well, has issued a revised report allowing the 3rd Street access and, still, it's not requiring sidewalks adjacent to 3`~ Street. Schmeckpeper: My name is Merlyn Schmeckpeper I'm the property owner for the subject property. Good evening, Commissioners. I'm going to try to make this as quickly -- get it passed as quick as we can, so with that in mind I'd like to read a prepared statement that pretty much covers all the issues. From the March 20`h Hearing, we left three issues to resolve. Issue Number 1 was the parking requirements, requiring a re-submittal of the plat plan. Number 2, the safety issues for egress and ingress and, Number 3, were some neighborhood concerns. As to Number 1, the parking requirements, as can be seen by the new plat plan, the parking issues have been addressed to the satisfaction of the P&Z staff. We now provide six standard parking s paces, o ne handicapped s pace, and two additional a mployee s paces w ithin the garage. The safety issues and the egress-ingress safety issues are resolved by addition of an access to West 3rd Street, as recommended by staff. This provides circular traffic flow, which greatly improves use and safety., The neighborhood concerns. There was some concern regarding pedestrian safety due to egress and ingress being by the alley. With the new, enhanced traffic flow provided -- provided, the addition to the access to West 3ro Street, pedestrian safety is now assured. To further alleviate neighborhood concerns, we now agree to, Number 1, increase the north buffer from nine foot to 10 foot, as you heard from staff. Number 2, we have further determined to install asix-foot privacy on the north property line. These commitments are intended to address the previous concerns of the Commission, the revised staff report dated March 26th, and the concerns within the neighborhood. These additions Meritlian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 3, 2003 Page 5 of 81 do, indeed, financially impact the overall operation. However, we cannot disagree that the completed project will, in fact, be a significant improvement and benefit to the community and the neighbofiood. We submit the following to you, the Commission. As you w ill h ear f rom M rs. S haron O'Toole, on t he -- t he a pplicant for t he C UP, t his i s, indeed, more than just a day care center. It is, in fact, a learning center for our children, which greatly increases the cost of the operation. We request that the number of children, therefore, be changed from the previously stated 30 to 38, as has been determined by the Meridian Fire Department regulations. Compliance with these regulations are required by the Idaho state licensing board that the Commission will concur with the staff recommendations and approve the rezoning and Conditional Use Permit as requested and presented. Thank you. Borup: Questions from the Commission? Centers: Yes, Mr. Chairman. At the last meeting, also, there was supposed have been an accurate measurement of the home, which would allow the number of children. Now, you're requesting 38 and I think the previous measurement you indicated it was probably 28. Maybe the CUP applicant needs to address that, but -- where the accurate measurement came from. Schmeckpeper: Well, basically, the kitchen area was in dispute or unknown by my clients, the CUP applicants, and that has now since been clarified. Borup: The state has come and done their inspection? Schmeckpeper: No. That was discussed between the CUP applicant and the Fire Department. Borup: The Fire Department did their inspection. Schmeckpeper: Yes. Borup: Okay. Schmeckpeper: And they were assured -- of course, there still has to be an inspection. Borup: Right. Schmeckpeper: So, there is -- I don't know that anyone can say it's going to be this exact number at this moment in time, but according to the regulations, the client -- the CUP a pplicant h as d etermined t hat i t w ill p robably a pproach 3 8. She discussed t he situation of the kitchen area with the Fire Department. Borup: What you're saying is they will be able to have the amount of children that the regulations would allow for based on the size of the house. Meridian Planning and Zaning Commission Meeting April 3, 2003 Page 8 of 61 Schmeckpeper: That's correct. That's correct. The financial thing -- and I'm sure that Mrs. O'Toole will cover that in much detail than I'm capable of, so I think we should probably leave that to her, rather than me stumble around and tell you something that's not true. Borup: Okay anything else for Merlyn from anybody? Zaremba: Well, I'm not sure which one to ask the question of, but let me -- Borup: Okay. He's only -- Zaremba: -start with you. Did I hear Dave McKinnon say in wrapping up his remarks that you are challenging the access to be provided onto 3rd Street? Schmeckpeper: No. No. No. No. We agree with that. Zaremba: Oh. Okay. I thought it sounded like you were saying that. Schmeckpeper: No. I'm sorry if you understood that. No. We have worked with the staff -- well, since our last meeting here to resolve these issues. Like I mentioned, I can't argue with the overall result, once we go this way, and, as a matter of fact, Ihave - - (did, (thanked Dave for bringing up that 3ro Street, because it really does clean up some things that could be potential problems, even though they are financially a burden, that that has to be done. Zaremba: I see in the ACRD report, even though they haven't held their official hearing yet, that they want you to provide a sign at the exit to say exit only. You have no problem with that, I assume? Schmeckpeper: No, I don't have any problem with it, but let me explain what happened with that -- with the Highway Department, the Highway District. Zaremba: Yes. Schmeckpeper: Basically, that was closed to petition originally and we had the response that they presented to you last time, which has not changed. However, when we -- at the request of Dave -- or the Planning and Zoning staff, when we opened up the 3rd Street, they requested an amended or updated plat. I filed this plat that you see before you with them. That, supposedly, opened it to hearings because of the dates involved. However, we do have their recommendations that, basically, have not changed. Now, what has changed is they have had -- have had to open up a Public Hearing to hear or air those complaints from whoever. I don't -- as far as the one-way traffic thing, that's a bit of a surprise to me. I don't have a problem with doing that, but I think that some of the neighborhood will, because that is a public alley and it will land lock their property from use of the alley. You know, I don't personally have a problem with it and maybe these things can be worked out, too. I think that we are going to have Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 3, 2003 Page 7 of 81 to revisit this with Ada County Highway District. Now, there are some approaches that could be basically implemented. My client can easily put into the contract or the documents with their clients, the parents of the children, that this is how they enter for the day care and this is how they exit. They, I don't believe, have a problem with that at all. To legally make that a one way, I think some of the people at the end of the alley -- and there is -- one of them is here tonight to present some testimony also, who is at the end of the alley. If I was him, I might have a little bit of a problem with that. I mean he can get in there, but how does he get out, unless he crosses private land. I don't know if this was an error on -- or oversight on the Highway District or not, but we do plan to revisit it. Zaremba: J ust a n assumption from your comments. They m ay b e t hinking t hat the alleyway is going to remain two-way, but only your portion of the driveway is a one way and that would mean -- Schmeckpeper: That's okay, too. Zaremba: --the other users would still go both ways on the alley, but -- Schmeckpeper: That's fine. Zaremba: -- your users would circulate one direction. Schmeckpeper: We have no problem with that. Zaremba: And they didn't specify -- Centers: What do you make the sign read? Zaremba: Yes. I would think that not putting any one way signs in the alley, but, perhaps, putting some one way signs farther into the driveway, so that people who use the alley for some purpose, other than yours, don't see one way signs. Schmeckpeper: I have no problem with that. Zaremba: But it might be -- Schmeckpeper: You're suggesting we locate them back on our property? Zaremba: Well, they are saying an exit only has to go here and I'm -- that doesn't necessarily have to make the alley a one way. It does make this part one way. Anybody that doesn't turn in there, but continues on to some other property, would still have two way, but I can see your point, that -- Schmeckpeper: There is only one piece of property here and, then, we hit the school. Okay so, the school is fenced off. Of course, we have got a large piece of property here Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 3, 2003 Page 8 of 81 where there is a four-plex and, then, of course, one on the corner. Then, there is another piece of property here that basically matches this one and, again, the school. It would be this piece of property, this piece of property, and this piece of property that would probably have the objections to it. One of those gentlemen is with us this evening and will offer some testimony. Zaremba: Well, I agree that it needs to be clarified whether they intend the alley to be one way or not. Borup: Well, yes and that's what I wanted clarify. The way I read it, they don't. I mean it says entrance that they had under their site-specific conditions was one would be an egress only onto 3`~ and the other was that that is not an entrance, but an exit only -- would it be --onto 3rd. Right. Zaremba: Which, essentially, makes the driveway on the property one way -- Borup: Yes but I don't see anything where they said anything about one way on the alley. Centers: I never saw that either. Zaremba: I think the alley can still be two way and -- Borup: Yes. ACRD doesn't -- ACRD doesn't even address that, so I don't think that's even a factor. Schmeckpeper: If that turns out to be correct, then, we don't have a problem with that. Borup: Right. They were just saying once it's on your property it is one way. Schmeckpeper: Don't have a problem with that at all. Zaremba: That sort of would be my assumption. Schmeckpeper: And, as I said, the operators of the academy, they can put that in their rules and regulations with their clients, too, and are willing to do so. We can do a little bit more than just put signage up to cause that to happen. Zaremba: So, the net result is that you don't have any problem doing the exit only sign that ACHD asked for and you would be okay with maybe putting aone-way sign somewhere in the driveway, too? Schmeckpeper: I have no problem with that. I'll hang it on our new fence. Zaremba: In the driveway, not in the alley. Meddlan Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 3, 2003 Page 9 of 81 Borup: Probably rely on ACHD, but the way I read there --they don't even address the alley either way. It just says that the 3`d entrance is exit only. Schmeckpeper: We can live with that. Not a problem. Borup: It doesn't say they can't exit out onto the alley. Zaremba: Right. Oh. Well -- Borup: I mean unless they -- Zaremba: The driveway does need to be one-way traffic. Borup: Right. Zaremba: Is that the way you're interpreting it. Borup: Well, that's -- Zaremba: The only thing they are doing is preventing inbound traffic off of 3`d Street. Borup: Right and no parking on the alley. That's -- I mean that's pretty clear, I think, what they state. They could change their mind. Schmeckpeper: We will clarify it with -- Borup: Yes. Maybe -- I don't think there is anything to clarify. Schmeckpeper: It wasn't quite that clear to me, but I thank you for helping us out. Borup: Don't they have --just, really, the four conditions? Okay. Schmeckpeper: And that's, really, all I have, gentlemen, unless you have some questions. I offered you some testimony there from neighbors that are within 30-foot of our property. The photos I think speak for themselves. I'm not going to address them in any way, unless you have questions on them. Borup: I have none. Schmeckpeper: Thank you very much. Borup: Thank you. Mrs. O'Toole, did you have some additional things you'd like to add? O'Toole: Good evening. Yes. Actually, I do have a few things I would like to add. Meddian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 3, 2003 Page 10 of 81 Borup: Go ahead. O'Toole: Let me address -- Borup: Could we get your name for the record? O'Toole: My name is Sharon O'Toole and I'm one of the applicants for the CUP. Pursuant to the last meeting, we also prepared some -- some prepared comments to address the issues that came up, so I'd like to share those with you. Okay. We have talked about a couple of these issues and I don't want to rehash them, but the issue of the flow o f t rafFic t hrough t he p arking I of a nd t he i ssue of t he buffer I t hink w e h ave talked about. What I would like to respond to are some of the objections we have heard from neighbors at the last meeting and, also, the issue of how many children the center will serve. Basically, the objections came down to a couple of things. One had to do with increased traffic, additional noise in the area. There were some discussions about safety concerns. There were also some objections to changing the -- I think the comment was changing the nature of the neighborhood from residential to a mixed-use. In terms of additional traffic, my comments are that this is --this is a very small center in terms of day care centers, whether we go with 30 or 32 or 38, or whatever the number ends up being, is still a very small center. It is true that -- I travel that road a lot, every day. It is true that between -- right before school and right after school there is quite a bit of traffic right there at the corner of Pine and Meridian Road, that's where the school traffic tends to -- most of those children arrive at school between 8:30 and 9:00 and leave at 3:30 when school is dismissed. However, our center will have clients who arrive and leave at times that are more spread out than that, they won't be congregating into that same time period. I heard a lot of comments about how congested it is right there. There is a school there and there is some traffic there, but I really, truly; believe that those comments were somewhat exaggerated. The area where the center is, is a couple city blocks away from that intersection. In terms of noise, there is an outdoor play area that will be utilized and it is right within a block of Meridian Elementary. The area that we use is separated by the building from the houses on one side and by a garage on the parking area from the house that's behind us. There is considerable buffer there. It's also a relatively small play area, which will probably be used by 10 to 12 children at one time. They are spaced out through the day., There will be children out there playing, but considering that there is a large school playground there, I don't think our ten children are going to make a lot of difference. Okay? In terms of safety, I heard some comments from neighbors about people who will just drop their children off or do anything they need to drop their children off. I really want to emphasize that that is not the case. The center will have a policy handbook that every parent receives and in there, there will be procedures for picking children up and dropping them off and that means parking your car, walking into the building, signing your child in, speaking to the teacher. It is not true that people can just drop their kids off and leave. That will not happen at all. If we have any parent who does not respect the flow of traffic through the parking lot, that would be addressed immediately by the center. It would be made very clear what the regulations are and there will be a sign posted there as well. We are in an area where there is already a 20 mile per hour speed limit due to the presence of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 3, 2003 Page 11 of 81 elementary school there. We are not going to see a tot of fast traffic up and down that road at all. In terms of the nature of the area, my understanding is that that area has, for the long-term plan for that area, is to rezone it as O-T and that the intent is for it to be mixed use. We have selected that center kind of with that in mind. We wanted a center that will be part of the neighborhood, and that will have the characteristics of the neighborhood and feel homey to the children, that's why we selected and opted to do such a small center. I think that's a good area where -- I think that would be an asset to the neighborhood, I really do. In terms of the numbers, let me explain what happened with the numbers. When we originally measured the house and made our estimate of the number of children that could be served there. What we did was go in and measure each room, wall to wall, and we did not measure the kitchen at all, because, in many instances, the kitchen is not allowed to be usable space. However, this is a big open room and meals will be seared in there and large muscle activities can take place in that area. We have spoken to the Meridian Fire Department and what they are telling us is, Number 1, you don't measure wall to wall in the rooms, you take the square footage of the house and you subtract those areas that are not usable. What they are telling us -- the only areas we have that are not usable are restrooms .and a pantry, a storage pantry. They told us that we could use the entire kitchen space and if take that space and divide it by 35 square feet per child, we come out with 38. What I would like to do is not specify the number, but, instead, stipulate that we would abide by the number of children that the Meridian Fire Department tells us the facility is licensable for. They make that decision for every day care center in the city and I think they can make that decision adequately for us as well. Thank you. Do you have any questions? Zaremba: I do have some. While you're h ere, this first question is for staff. If the number changes from 30 to 38, does that mean one more parking space is needed? McKinnon: Yes. If we -- it's one for every 10 kids and if you go over five -- I mean 50 percent of the value of -- so, if they go over five more kids you have to add one space. If I remember correctly, though, they have parking right now that they aren't including in the garage that they could include. They have six spaces, no including the garage and seven if you count the handicapped space. They do have seven handicapped spaces on site -- sorry. It's going through my head right now adding it all up. One, two, three, four -- two p arallels, o ne h andicapped --that's s even s paces, b ut t hey s till m eet t he requirement per our code for one for each of the teachers and one -- Zaremba: Three -- McKinnon: Yes. Three teachers and up to 40 kids, that they meet the parking requirements for that, not counting any parking in the garage. Zaremba: Okay. That answers that question. O'Toole: Okay. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission MeeOng April 3, 2003 Page 12 of 81 Zaremba: The next q uestion. The note t hat you h anded us, comments to the staff comments, you're saying that your new plan shows a 10-foot buffer on the north property line. I assume you mean the latest plan we were shown only -- O'Toole: I changed it from nine to 10, because my understanding is we are changing it to 10, so I just went in and erased nine and put in 10. Zaremba: All right so you're comfortable with making it a 10-foot buffer, as opposed to nine? O'Toole: I think that's the current plan. Even though the site shows nine feet, we are saying there is another foot there and we can make it 10. Zaremba: Can and will do that? O'Toole: We can and will do that. Zaremba: All right. Let me ask you another question on a subject that -- I don't believe this has come up, but has come up in other day care centers. Can you show the site plan? Okay. Let me orient myself. This area to -- what would be the south and west of the house, is that an outside play area for the children? O'Toole: That will be a fenced play area, yes. Zaremba: Okay and the fence is what I was going for. O'Toole: Okay. Zaremba: We have in other childcare facilities required that it be anon-sight-obscuring fence. O'Toole: It will be a six-foot chain link fence. Zaremba: Chain link non-sight-obscuring so you don't have a problem with that? O'Toole: Correct. Zaremba: Pretty well gets all my questions. O'Toole: Okay. Borup: Okay. Did you have another question, Commissioner Centers? Okay. Thank you. O'Toole: Thank you. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 3, 2003 Page 13 of 81 Zaremba: Oh, I'm sorry, I did have one more question, hours of operation? If we were to specify that it can only be like 6:30 a.m. to 7:00 P.M., is that okay? O'Toole: Our plan at this time is 6:30 to 6:00. Zaremba: 6:00 to 6:00? O'Toole: 6:30 to 6:00. Zaremba: 6:30 to 6:00. Okay. Borup: Does that answer your -- Zaremba: Yes. I assume you would not have a problem if that were made a condition? O'Toole: Not at all. Zaremba: Okay. Borup: Okay. We'd like to open it for public testimony. As we mentioned last time, we have -- it was continued to get a revision of the Site Plan. We have got the previous testimony and -- so would be interested in anything new that -- I think there was a gentleman that started to come up before I started talking, if you still want to come up, sir. Schroeder: Sure. Borup: No. No right behind you. Oh, you're just letting them in. I'm sorry. Okay. Come on up. Schroeder: Thank you, Commissioners. My name is John Schroeder and my wife and I, Margaret, we own the -- I don't have the aerial, but could outline it briefly. We own the -- we own the four-plex that is -- oh, here we go. Thank you. Appreciate that. We own the -- here we go. We own this four-plex right here, we have owned it since 1984, and we purchased this property in December of 2002. I will briefly summarize -- I have a few quick comments. I don't want to take a lot of your time. I know you're busy. We strongly -- if not -- I mean we strongly support this proposal and there are reasons why. First of all, we have been a good member of this community for a long time, Pine Street has gotten very busy, and it's going to continue to be busy. It makes sense. It's a major thoroughfare. As a result, we have seen more light office come in, churches, chiropractors --and this is a nice blend. I mean to be simple arid to the point, I think this is nice. Furthermore, owning the property that I do, I was just telling the day care operators, I was happy to see that the day care was on this side of Pine, instead of over here. The reason why is because if they have latch key kids going to Meridian Elementary, I would rather have them take this sidewalk and never have to cross Pine. I have got tenants and I just don't want my tenants having to worry about latch key kids Maddlan Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 3, 2003 Page 14 of 81 crossing P ine i n t his area. I'm t hrilled t hat i is o n t his s ide, because, t hen, t hey c an literally stay all the way on the sidewalk and never have to cross Pine to go to Meridian Elementary and that is a nice plus. There are already 600 children at Meridian Elementary and they are wonderful kids. I am now in the process -- in fact, I submitted a pre-app plan to staff to put in very nice townhouses in that property I just purchased. These are extremely upscale and very nice and so I might add even if we have a day care center there, it's discouraging, very nice residential development, and my wife and I are hoping that that will occur, as you will see, it's very ,nice. I say that, mainly, because i is n of d iscouraging n ice r esidential d evelopment and I wanted t o a dd that. The alley is -- Commissioner, I think, Borup and others pointed out I do need that two way alley, because Idon't -- I'm only going to have - what I have proposed was what is going to be -- I'm sorry. Two very nice garages on this side, on the alley side, two on 2"d My four-plex is -- it works will with this, because my garages here are solely on 2"d and I have a fence here. I'm going to improve this fence and I don't want any access coming on here, because it puts too much pressure on that alley. I'm just going to have two g arages h ere a nd two t enants t hat would h ave i ngress a nd egress o n t he a Iley. The way that the Commissioners and the staff have devised the traffic flow is wonderful, because if they ingress here and egress here, that's going to take the pressure off that alley and work well, especially, for emergency vehicles, if that should ever arise. As I think the Commissioners pointed out, the 6:30 A.M. to 6:00 P.M. is wonderful for me, because by 6:00 P.M., it's quiet and that works. If you want to make it a provision of the Conditional Use, that would be marvelous, because by 6:00 P.M. everything is quiet and there are no loud stereos and that sort of thing going on in neighboring properties. Mr. Schmeckpeper has been a neighbor for a long time. He takes very good care of his property and he's been a wonderful neighbor. That's all I have. Thank you very much. Borup: Any questions? Centers: Mr. Chairman? Yes, sir. Do you live in the area now? Schroeder: I believe in Boise. Centers: Okay. Do you intend to occupy one of the townhouses that you speak of? Schroeder: That's a good question. I'm designing those -- well, they are 1,200 square, two full bathrooms, two bedrooms, oversize garages, very nice. I'm designing them that if I ever had to reside in one I could. I wanted to. I mean I don't want to design anything that I don't want to live in and these are so nice that I could easily live in them myself. Centers: Okay. Thank you. Schroeder: Or one of my children. Centers: Thank you. Borup: Thank you. Do we have anyone else that would like to testify? Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 3, 2003 Page 15 of 61 Rokovitz: Good evening. My name is Rocky Rokovitz. I am co-owner of the property to the north of the proposed development. That would be this property right here. I also act as a spokesman for the folks that have signed the petition against this development. I'd like the Commissioners to note that that petition doesn't say they want modifications to this development, they don't want Variances, and they don't want it at all. Period. Which seems to be missed by the Planning and Zoning staff, it seems to be missed by the Commission Members, it seems to be missed by ACHD. It didn't say we want this development with Variances, with Conditional Use Permits, it said we don't want it. I don't want it, because my property is the most affected property of any property there. I need access to that alley. I don't want people using it for parking garages. There are utilities in that alley. It is the only access I have to the back end of my property. Any further development restricts my ability to get to the property, restricts my ability to use that property, downgrades my property in terms of value, either as a rental or in terms of selling it. It does not agree with the use that the neighborhood is now. That neighborhood is strictly residential to the tune of about 90 percent. That area is old. We have a lot of elderly people living there without children. They don't want this noise. My guess is that most of you guys wouldn't want this noise next to your house either. There have been no provisions put in for any kind of noise barriers by anybody. It hasn't been considered. It hasn't been looked at. We are going to have immediate noise -- added noise in that area once the center is opened up. I want a buffer zone. I want a full 20 feet as required. I don't want 10 feet, nine feet, five feet. There is room if you put up the Site Plan there is room for 20 feet there. This buffer zone right here, first of all, it should be evergreen trees, so that offers some kind of a noise buffer and is there year around. That kind of tree, the leaves fall off the trees. These two parking spots could be eliminated and you can get the full 20 feet. All variances to date and all changes to the plat have been in favor of the developer. Nothing has been in favor of the surrounding neighborhood. Now, by your own laws and your own P&Z requirements, you have to consider how it affects the neighborhood and how it affects the adjoining property. It affects my property probably more than the other properties. That access is public property it's not private property. That alley belongs to everybody in Meridian. It doesn't belong to one person. By making it an ingress -- Borup: That is not what is being made. You missed some of the information here. Rokovitz: Okay. How do I get to my alley? Who is responsible for snow and ice removal in that alley? Borup: The same people that are responsible right now. Rokovitz: You guys. McKinnon: No. Rokovitz: Your City of Meridian, ACHD, who? Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Maeting April 3, 2003 Page 16 of 81 McKinnon: Ada County Highway District. Rokovitz: Okay. What's the track record of ACHD in removing snow in alleys and cul- de-sacs? McKinnon: Mr. Chairman? Borup: Yes. McKinnon: Would you like me to respond at this time? Borup: Go ahead. McKinnon: What's their track record? Rokovitz: Yes. McKinnon: There is no representative from ACHD here tonight and I won't answer for them. Rokovitz: Okay. I have an answer for you. I work as a Public Works Inspector for the Public Works Department of Boise. I work very closely with ACHD all the time, day in and day out. Cul-de-sacs and alleys are the lowest priority they have. In case of a snowstorm, they get the main drags -- Borup: Well, I think that's logical. Rokovitz: Yes, it is logical. Borup: That's the way it should be. Rokovitz: How do we access those alleys when there is two and a half feet of snow in them? How do these people drop off their children? Borup: Two and ahalf -well -- Rokovitz: Who is -- Borup: I don't know if that's something we can address tonight. Rokovitz: Well, if you guys --dropping off the children -- Borup: You're assuming there is going to be two and a half feet of snow. Rokovitz: I don't know anymore than you do but how do we drop these children off when those alleys are full of snow? Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 3, 2003 Page 17 of 81 Borup: At that time the operator of the facility is going to have to get it plowed and I'm sure they are going to take care of that or they are not going to have their people be able to come in. That's just like any other business. Rokovitz: It's not been addressed on the plat. It's not been addressed by P&Z. It's not been addressed by ACHD. Borup: That's not something we ever address on any businesses, whether they have to shovel the snow in their parking lots or access to get into their parking lot. That's just normal business. Rokovitr: If you're going to turn a public alley into private property -- Borup: We are not turning it into public property -- or private property. Rokovitz: Is it going to stay public? Borup: Yes. Rokovitz: Okay. Borup: That's what the whole testimony was -- Rokovitz: We are going to worry about it when the problem occurs, rather than now? Borup: Well, what should we do at this time? Rokovitz: As I understand it, ACHD acts as an advisory board to you folks and you folks contact ACRD for recommendations. I think there needs to be some communication between the two agencies. Borup: We have got a recommendation from ACHD. Yes. Rokovitz: Okay. There is nothing being addressed by either agency regarding the irrigation pipe, except that the irrigation ditch has to be piped. Borup: And will continue to flow. Rokovitz: What size pipe? What type of pipe? How much cover? It's not on the Site Plan. It's not being addressed by anybody. Borup: Is there a concern there? Rokovitr: Yes. There are ISPWC requirements that I'm very familiar with that have to be addressed. Nobody's addressing them. Meddian Planning and Zoning Commissfon Meeting April 3, 2003 Page 18 of 61 Borup: It has to be approved through the Irrigation District, besides the -- Rokovitz: I talked to the Irrigation District. They tell me it can't be downsized and it's got to have enough covering. Borup: Right. Centers: Can't be downsized same size that's there now. I think that's a logical answer. Rokovitz: But where i s i t written? I is n of on t he p lat. I is n of a ddressed i n w riting anyplace. Centers: As our Chairman just stated, that's the Irrigation District that controls that Rokovitz: And who is going to inspect it? Who is going to keep track of it? Who is going to watch it same thing with the alley? It has to be ISPWC standards. Is anybody going to be out there taking compaction tests? Is anybody going to be out there to take core tests on paving? Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, you want me to address that? Borup: Please do. Freckleton: The alley is to remain public. ACHD will take care of any improvements that are done on the alley. Rokovitz: Okay. Freckleton: State Statute, I'm sure you're aware of in your position, requires them to not i mpede t he flow of the w ater i n t he ditch. They h ave t o deliver t he w ater --the historical flow of water through that and deliver it to the properties downstream, at its historical delivery point and historical delivery flow. Rokovitz: Okay. Is there going to be provision for storm water control, erosion control, and the best management practices? Freckleton: On site? Rokovitz: Yes. Freckleton: Yes, there will. Rokovitz: Okay. Again, it doesn't seem to be addressed anyplace Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 3, 2003 Page 19 of 81 Freckleton: It is in the staff report and it's Item Number 10. They have to do a detailed Drainage Plan. The drainage has to be retained on site. Rokovitz: You say in your staff report that there is not going to be any increase of noise, fumes, lights -- I don't quite understand that when we are going to have all these cars. We are going to have a security light in the parking lot, headlights in the morning. I don't follow your understanding of that situation. The staff report seems to ignore that. I would ask -- if I was granted more time and ask for a continuance of this hearing, I'm sure I could get more signatures on that petition that says we don't want this. Now, by your own rules and regulations you're supposed to take into consideration the wishes of the neighborhood. We got 12 people signed that says we don't want this, are we paying any attention to this at all? If I can get you 12 more signatures, will you pay more attention to it? How many signatures will it take? I can go out there; start pounding the pavement tomorrow, and get you more signatures. Nobody did a canvas of this area. Nobody called. Nobody sent out any surveys to see if the surrounding area wanted this. They don't. I know you're not required to do that, but as P&Z Commissioners, I thought you might be interested in what the people want. Centers: Excuse me, sir. They sent letters to all the property owners within 300 feet. That's 100 yards of the subject property. All those people received a letter. Rokovitz: Okay and you had 12 sign the petition and that's not everybody you notified, I realize. Centers: I just told you, everyone within 300 feet of that property. Rokovitz: Okay. I was talking about the petition. I wasn't talking about the people that you sent letters to. I was talking about the petition that was submitted a week ago and I think you all have copies of it. Centers: We do. We sure do. Rokovitz: You know what does it take to get the Commission to respond to the public? Does it take more signatures? More petitions? Every variance that -- Zaremba: It's a process that, actually, starts much farther back. You talk about what we a re o bligated to do. We are obligated to comply with M eridian's C omprehensive. Plan, the recent revision went through years and years of Public Hearings and discussions, and the end result was that this area is a transition area that's designated now to be converted to what's called Old Town. Old Town is a transition zone, changing from residential to compatible businesses and commercial and that's the law that we must follow. The time for changing the Comprehensive Plan that I'm sure will go through another revision, but, unfortunately, we can't change the Comprehensive Plan by petition so more petitions aren't going to help that. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 3, 2003 Page 20 of B1 Rokovitz: No. I'm not asking you to change the Comprehensive Plana I'm asking you to consider what the people want. Centers: Let me add, too, the Comprehensive Plan is not a law. It's a guide for us. It is totally not a law. Zaremba: But it went through several public hearings. Centers: Yes. I will agree with that but your comment regarding the number of signatures and you would want a continuance to get more, we had a Public Hearing on thismatteronthe20~'. Thisisthe 3rdofAprilso,youhadtwoweeksfromthento provide more if you wanted to. However, what I have here is sufficient for me. If you -- you know, one signature is enough for me, depending on the situation. We handle each item on a case-by-case basis and there is no slam-dunk coming in the door. Rokovitz: Okay. According to your staff report is that this has to be taken into consideration before any Variances are granted, if it's going to impact the neighborhood -- Centers: That's correct. Rokovitz: Yet, there has been -- on that plat there has been variances granted for the buffer zone. There have been Variances granted -- changed from the original submittal for ingress and egress. Borup: That's not a Variance. Centers: Well, I think he means exceptions. Rokovitz: Well, change to the alley. Centers: Exceptions. Rokovitz: Exceptions. No exceptions are being granted to the neighborhood. No exception has been granted to the adjacent property owners. Borup: The first plat that was in did not even have a buffer, did not have the fence, didn't have trees, and those things were both added. Rokovitz: It says 20 feet. That's what I want. I want 20 feet. My property is the most affected property. I'm the one that's got to put up with the noise. If I put a day center next to your house tomorrow, you'd want some kind of noise buffer. Borup: Did you understand the area that the children would be outside in? Rokovitz: Yes, sir. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 3, 2003 Page 21 of 81 Borup: Clear south of the garage. Rokovitz: We have already got all the racket from the school, which I could not do anything about, because the property was owned by the school. Borup: Okay. Rokovitz: That alley was not created for ingress and egress, it was not created for entrances to garages, it was -- Borup: It was not created for entrance to garages? Rokovitz: Not to the best of my knowledge. It was created for access for the people that border that property. Borup: Right. Rokovitz: It was never vacated publicly. Rohm: And it's not being now. Rokovitz: But doesn't each property owner own to the center of the alley? Borup: No. Rokovitz: If it were vacated they wouldn't get that part of the alley? Borup: I don't understand what that has to do with anything. We are kind of going in circles here again. Rokovitz: I need access. Borup: You got access. Rokovitz: At anytime we need to get in there. Borup: You got it. Rokovitz: T here a re utilities i n t here. There a re fences i n there. T here a re t rees i n there. There is -- Borup: We understand. That's -- none of that's changing. Rokovitz: Okay. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 3, 2003 Page 22 of 81 Borup: I gave you some extra time, because you had stated that you were speaking on behalf of all of your neighbors. Is that still the case? Rokovitz: Yes, it is. Borup: Okay. Rokovitz: I don't think there is anybody here tonight that I'm acquainted with -- there is one other gentleman I know that's against it, but I don't know very many people in favor of it. Certainly, the majority is against it. Rohm: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to respond to -- your comments seem to sound as if this board is not listening to any of the input from you folks. We are only taking a look at the adjusted Site Plan. I'm here to tell you that that's exactly what we are here for, is to listen to every word that you say and anybody else says. That's not to say that the final decision is ultimately going to go one way or the other, but this board is here to take -- to listen to your testimony and have done so. I think that that's the best that we can do and there you have it. Rokovitz: I appreciate your time. C. Rokovitz: Okay. I'm the other part of the homeowner there. Borup: Name? C. Rokovitz: Oh. Charlene Rokovitz. I think the thing is we are just totally frustrated, because it seemed like whatever they wanted they have been able to squeeze in there. They didn't want the 20 feet, so they go to -- you gave them -- I think it was 11 or 15 last time and, then, they went to 11. Then, they went down to nine and now they are back up to 10. It's like the buffer, I called and asked what kind of a buffer is that and the guy just really laughed, he says those trees that they have scheduled there grow about four or five feet without any branches. They lose all their foliage in the wintertime. He says they are not any type of buffer at all. Centers: Who is he? C. Rokovitz: The guy over at Greenhurst Nursery. I called over there and asked -- I got the name written at home. I talked to him and he says what you need is an evergreen and we also, you know, would like a privacy fence. The thing is, in talking to some Legal Counsel -- Borup: What height would you like that fence? C. Rokovitz: At least six foot. Borup: Okay. You got it Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 3, 2003 Page 23 of 81 C. Rokovitz: And not a wire fence. Borup: Okay. Six foot solid cedar fence. C. Rokovitz: But the -- in talking to some -- some Legal Counsel, he says -- he just really laughed when he saw this and he says when did they start putting trash in amongst the buffer. He says trash bins don't go in to be hidden by a buffer. The trash should have been up by the garage. He says the same with the parking there. He says that is -- shouldn't be part of your buffer. You know, it's things like that -- we are going to be having the car doors opening and closing, opening and closing, you know, the same with -- there was 30 kids and then -- Borup: Well, I -- C. Rokovitz: And, then, we are back down to 28 and now we are up to 38. I mean it just keeps -- everything just keeps -- seems to be bouncing around and we are frustrated. Borup: My understanding is those two parking places would be for the employees C. Rokovitz: I thought the employees were supposed to be in the garage? Borup: Some of them can be, but it doesn't --the people coming and going are going to be pulling in up by the building, so they are not walking across the parking area. The ones down there on the north are the employees parking. C. Rokovitz: Well, as Mr. Angstman said, you know, it's still -- it's doesn't belong by the buffer and he says -- he said that we had the right, you know, to insist on a 20-foot buffer. I don't really want to have to go into a lawyer full total to try and keep this down, but we are frustrated. We are just terribly, terribly frustrated with all the bouncing around and it seems like if he comes up with a new plan or he comes up with something else -- Borup: Well, we have only seen -- C. Rokovitz: And we are frustrated. Borup: We have only seen two plans. The first one had no fence, no landscaping. C. Rokovitz: Right. Borup: The revised one has a full 10 feet with trees and asix-foot fence. C. Rokovitz: But it's -- I believe that one of your things said that they should have a 20- foot and we would really like to have that extra -- extra noise buffer. You know, I mean Meddian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 3, 2003 Page 24 of 81 that -- the school -- there is a lot of kids at school. The school does an excellent job at keeping the kids away from the house and away from the fence and out in the middle of the field. Borup: Is that your concern, ma'am, is the noise? C. Rokovitz: A lot of it. A lot of it is the traffic that's going to be there. I'm sorry. I -- Borup: Do you have any idea how much difference 10 feet would make in the noise? Have you seen any noise studies to see the difference? C. Rokovitz: I haven't. Borup: Okay. C. Rokovitz: I get -- I get a little tongue tied, so I leave a lot of this stuff up to -- Borup: I've done some calculations and -- and it's minuscule. The difference another 10 feet is going to make is -- doesn't amount to anything. The buffering -- the noise buffering is going to come from the fence and from the trees. C. Rokovitz: Well, I can't argue with you, but Istill -- I still feel that we should have the 20-foot. As I said, the school keeps the kids out in the middle of their yards. There is - and I am absolutely no good on distances. They are far more than 20 feet. They are probably 75 to 100 feet out away from the houses that they keep the kids. They do not allow them up around there. Igo to Meridian all the time. My son is the one who is -- he's asingle dad and he has two kids back there and, as he said last time, he has to sleep in the daytime, because of his evening work. He just happens to be on vacation here for a couple weeks. Igo there all the time and visit him and I have sat there for five minutes trying to just get out of 3`d now and that has not been when school is out. That has not been when people are coming and going to pick up their kids or dropping their kids off at school. This has just been an average day. There is a lot of traffic on that -- on Pine and trying to get in and out of 3`d, I mean you sat -- like I said, I have sat there for five minutes now. Borup: Okay. We appreciate that. C. Rokovitz: And with all the extra, it's going to be more. Borup: Thank you. C. Rokovitz: Okay. Borup: Do we have anyone else? Okay. Any final comments from the applicant? You don't need to, but you have an opportunity if you'd like to sum up. Meddian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 3, 2003 Page 25 of 81 O'Toole: I guess I'd like to just make one brief point about the noise and that is the children who attend the center will be playing a lot more than 20 feet away on the other side of that garage, which I'm sure you have already noted. They will be escorted in and out of the center and there will not be children running around the parking lot at anytime. Thank you. Centers: Mrs. O'Toole? O'Toole: Yes. Centers: What about the traffic? You know, you increased it to 38, so you got 38 cars coming and going four times a day, if you're having morning and afternoon shifts, and I'm familiar with Pine Street. I have a son that lives up the road from there, I know there is a lot of traffic on Pine Street, and I think you, in fact, mentioned that. O'Toole: Right. Centers: So, how do you address that that many additional cars coming in and out, when there won't be any drop off on Pine right? O'Toole: There won't be any drop off on Pine, no. Centers: Right. O'Toole: No. Absolutely. I guess I don't know exactly what you want me to address. I don't think there will be 38 cars coming and going four times. By far the majority of the children who attend the center will be there all day long, so they will be arriving in the morning and leaving when their parents get off work in the evening. Now, there may be some -- there may be a few instances of where we have a child enrolled in the early morning -- in the moming preschool and that child -- and there is a child who fills that slot -- a kindergartener who fills that slot in the afternoon from the Meridian Elementary. That will probably be a situation where the teacher walks over to the school and escorts the children back to the center. I don't see a lot of traffic in the middle of the day. I think most of our families will arrive between 7:00 and 9:00 and most will leave between 4:00 and 6:00. Those will be the times when we will have cars coming and going from the center. Centers: The heavy traffic time. O'Toole: The heavy traffic time. Correct. Centers: Right. Thank you. Schmeckpeper: Excuse me, Commissioners. I have got one quick comment. I think you're going to find that many of the people that use this center already drive up and down that street to and from work. That's kind of the habit of people, they like to hit Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 3, 2003 Page 26 of 81 something on their way to and from and if there is a good day care center, they are going to probably use it. Thank you. C. Rokovitz: Can I have two quick -- real quick. Borup: You have had your chance. You have had your chance, ma'am. This is not -- C. Rokovitz: They got to. Borup: He's the applicant. They had a final comment. This is not a back and forth debate b ut w e n eed to m ove o n. T hank y ou. A nything a Ise f rom t he s tall? Okay. Commissioners? Rohm: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to comment on the revised Site Plan. I think that the applicant, through the last Public Hearing, listened to the testimony of all of the respondents. Tried to adjust the Site Plan to take into consideration the concerns of the public and trying to meet their objectives of having a development within the Old Town zone and still meet the concerns of the public. I think they have done a very good job of making adjustments to the site plan. They have added off-street parking. They have ingressed and ingressed, so that the flow is better than what it was before. They have expanded the buffer zone. They have added additional trees and, possibly, if the trees haven't already been purchased, maybe an evergreen is more in order. I think that the applicant has tried very hard to address the issues brought before this board at the last Planning and Zoning meeting when they presented their plan in the first place. I think they have done a very good job addressing those. Borup: And maybe this is -- just an additional comment of on that and that's on the buffer and that's -- I think Mr. McKinnon could explain it better, but when the -- the alternative landscaping, by increasing the amount of landscaping as one of the --one of the conditions on decreasing that buffer, normal landscaping spacing on the tree would be 35 feet. These are spaced at 13 feet. It's -- what is that, two and a half times less, to get a lot more dense area. Comment on the type of trees? Commissioner Rohm mentioned the evergreen. I think that probably does make sense for a year around -- Zaremba: I would agree with that. They should be evergreen. Centers: Mr. Chairman? Borup: Commissioner Centers. Centers: On a controversial Conditional Use Permit, I have always been one to really consider the neighborhood and the people there. I think they have been there, they deserve a voice, and they deserve to not have someone move in that is not normal -- normally allowed. I have always supported accessory use permits in subdivisions when people didn't come and object. Totally in favor of when they didn't object, some one wants to have a day care in their home, fine or an expanded Conditional Use Permit Meddian Planning and Zoning Commission Meetlng April 3, 2003 Page 27 of 81 where they have 12. If no one objected in the neighborhood, fine. Let them do it. I'm not in favor of this, because the neighbors don't want it. The only reason they are going O-T is because it's not approved in an R-4 zone, which it's presently zoned as. They have to rezone to O-T to get it. My rationale is just quite simple. You have a petition where the neighbors don't want it. It's not predominant in the neighborhood. The neighborhood is predominately residential. We can't dictate by a Comprehensive Plan that we want that to go O-T and have businesses in the neighborhood. That's probably not g oing to happen. I g uess m y p osition i s c tear, I'm a gainst i t, a nd a ny m otion to approve it would have to be without me. Thank you. Borup: Okay. We still have the hearing open. Centers: Right. Rohm: Mr. Chairman, I move that we close the Public Hearing. Zaremba: Second. Borup: Motion and second to close the Public Hearing. All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Rohm: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to move that we forward this application, RZ 03-003, request for a rezone of .35 acres from R-4 to O-T zone for Merlyn Schmeckpeper by Merlyn Schmeckpeper, 230 West Pine Avenue, including all staff comments a nd the following conditions -- Borup: This is just the rezone. Rohm: Oh, just the rezone? Including all staff comments. End of motion. Wollen: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Rohm, was that a motion for a recommendation of approval? Rohm: Yes. Yes, it was. Borup: We have a motion. Waiting for a second dies for lack of a second. Centers: Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a motion to deny Item Number 4 on our Agenda, RZ 03-003, request for a rezone of .35 acres from R-4 to O-T zone for Merlyn Schmeckpeper by Merlyn Schmeckpeper at 230 West Pine Avenue. Zaremba: Second. Borup: Motion and second. Any discussion? All in favor? Opposed? Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting April 3, 2003 Page 28 of 87 MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE NAYE. Centers: Moving on. Mr. Chairman, I would like to recommend denial of Item Number 5 on our agenda, CUP 03-006, request for a CUP for a child care facility for approximately 30 children, which was amended to 38, in a proposed O-T zone Sunshine Academy by Sharon O'Toole and Debbie and James Sheridan at 230 West Pine. Zaremba: Second. Borup: Motion and second. Any discussion? All in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE NAY. Borup: Okay. That concludes these items. That's the motion that will be sent to City Council. Thank you. Item 6. Public Hearing: AZ 03-007 Request for annexation and zoning of 2.223 acres from RUT to C-G zones for Comfort Suites by Kanti Patel -west of South Eagle Road, south of East Magic View Drive on South Wells Street: Borup: The next item is Public Hearing AZ 03-007, request for annexation and zoning of 2.223 acres from RUT to C-G zones for Comfort Suites by Kanti Patel, west of Eagle Road and south of Magic View. I will open this Public Hearing at this time and start with the staff report. McKinnon: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. Still trying to get organized, but I do have up on the overhead right now a map that shows the area that we are looking at annexing tonight for this hotel. This property is contiguous to the City of Meridian via I-84 and the land adjacent to I-84 is zoned I-L and that's how it's contiguous to the City of Meridian. The requested zoning for this piece of property is a C-G zone, which is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. The reason for the requested use on -- I'm trying to go back. It's thinking. There it is. The reason for the requested rezone and annexation to the City of Meridian with a C-G zone is so that the applicant can apply as a permitted use for a hotel facility at this location. You should have all received a submitted Site Plan. I'm sorry I don't have it on the overhead for you tonight. I can get a copy of that for those in the audience to place on our overhead and I will do that in just one moment. This piece of property, because the use itself, the hotel use that will be proposed for this Comfort Suites Hotel, is a permitted use, it would not come back to you. This would be something that would be handled at a staff level, unless you make, as a condition of approval for this project tonight, a requirement for a Development Agreement that they have to submit for a Conditional Use Permit for your further review. If you do not do this and it is not in the staff report, or requested by the staff for you to do that, the hotel could be approved as a staff level approval through the certificate of zoning compliance. This submitted site plan -- thanks, Bruce. The submitted Site Plan -- I will. go to it really quick -- currently does not meet all requirements of the Meridian City Code. The buffer between land uses along the