Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAugust 7, 2008 P&Z MinutesMeridian Planning & Zoning August 7, 2008 Page 10 of 61 Newton-Huckabay: Oh. A specially scheduled meeting for August 14th, 2008. Rohm: Second. Moe: It's been moved and seconded to continue CPA 08-00 and RZ 08-003 to the special meeting of the Planning and Zoning on August 14th. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? That motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 6: Public Hearing: CPA 08-006 Request to amend the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to change the future land use designation on 11 acres of land from Mixed Use -Waste Water Treatment Plan to Office (2+/- acres) and Low Density Residential (9+/- acres) for Kartchner by Richard Kartchner - 4325 and 4315 N. Ten Mile Road: Moe: At this time I'd like to open the public hearing on CPA 08-006 for Kartchner and ask the staff report. Hood: Thank you, Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission. I should have mentioned last time, these first three agenda items -- I'm, actually, filling in for Sonya tonight, so particularly wanted to mention that with this one, because there is a pretty in-depth noise and odor study that was analyzed by Sonya when she wrote the staff report and I did not have the time to -- I read through her analysis in the staff report, but I didn't go through that document and try to make heads or tails of it. So, Scott Steckline, I believe, is a little more familiar with that, so any questions you may have regarding that study, I think he's more prepared to tackle those than I am. But I did just want to put that disclaimer out there that I'm familiar with these, but not as intimately as Sonya is, so -- Kartchner -- this application varies from the last application in that it is only a Comp Plan map amendment. There are no annexation, preliminary plats, development applications submitted concurrently. So, it is only a change to the -- a proposed change to the Comp Plan map. The subject property consists of two tax parcels located at 4315 and 4325 North Ten Mile Road on the west side of Ten Mile, approximately a third of a mile south of McMillan. The parcels contain approximately 11 acres and are currently zoned RUT in Ada county. To the north of the subject site are some single family residential properties zoned RUT and R-2. The R-2 is city subdivision, Drawbridge Subdivision. To the east is Ten Mile Road and commercial offices and Bridgetower Crossing Subdivision. They are kind of cut off that area. You really can't see them. Zoned L-O and some R-4. To the south are rural residential properties, zoned RUT in Ada county. To the west are -- is agricultural property zoned RUT also in Ada county. The applicant is requesting approval to °amend the Comprehensive Plan future land use map by changing the land use designation on the subject 11 acres of land from mixed use wastewater treatment plant to office and low density residential. The office request is for approximately two acres along the frontage of the property and the low density residential would be, then, the remaining approximately nine acres behind the proposed office. This property, as I mentioned, is currently designated mixed use wastewater Meridian Planning & Zoning August 7, 2008 Page 11 of 61 treatment plant. The following standards apply specifically to mixed use wastewater treatment plant designated areas. Light professional offices, flex space uses, including light warehousing. No new residential uses will be permitted. Existing residential will be allowed to remain: Limited small scale retail uses, mini storage uses, are examples of uses allowed in this designation. This site was designated as such to reduce human exposure to odors and noise generated from the nearby wastewater treatment plant, which you can see the city-owned property is right here, the subject property is highlighted in the green there. So, it's less than a thousand feet away from the wastewater treatment plant property. The applicant, as I mentioned before, did not submit any development applications, but they have submitted a conceptual site plan with some elevations also shown on that site plan, showing how the property may develop in the future. There are 17 single family residential building lots, four office retail buildings. You can't hardly make those out at this scale, but, basically, four office buildings in there and a common area lot. Access to the site is proposed from a street that runs approximately right up the middle of the property out to Ten Mile Road. A stub street slash cul-de-sac is proposed at the north property boundary for access to the rural residential property northwest of the site at 3417 West Elk Bugle Lane. So, that would be this home right now. No stub streets or pedestrian pathways are shown on the south or the west of the site for interconnectivity. Further, there is a private street easement that runs along the north boundary of the site. That's actually where that home previously mentioned on Elk Bugle takes their access, as well as these properties. There is -- I believe the aerial shows it a little bit better. Let me jump back there. That red line kind of goes right over the top of it, but there is a shared access private street right up the north property boundary of the site. That will have to be vacated in the future when a development application is proposed in this area. Two story residential buildings -- elevations are depicted on the conceptual plan submitted with the CPA application. There weren't any conceptual building elevations shown for the office buildings. Without an annexation and zoning application and subsequent development agreement, the city cannot require the applicant to develop the site consistent with the submitted concept plan and elevations. If the subject CPA is approved, the site may be developed entirely different from the plan and elevations. So, that will hold true for all these this evening that we only have a Comp Plan map amendment proposed. We don't condition those. There is no way to condition them. This is the owner's -- applicant's representative's best guest at how they intend to develop the property, but as the market changes or shifts or new property owners acquire the property, the site plan could look entirely different. So, I just wanted to put that out there as well. So, the City of Meridian had an odor and noise assessment prepared for the wastewater treatment plant in 2004. The assessment was prepared by Carollo Engineers and it was intended to assist with evaluation of development proposals in the surrounding area. This study designated a buffer zone, approximately 4,000 feet, around the wastewater treatment plant property line. This buffer zone is in the area that the study determined is affected or may be affected in the future upon expansion of the plant by odors and noise created by the operation of the wastewater treatment plant. I have a bunch of slides in here. I'm not going to try to bore you with all of the lines. Basically, in a nutshell, there are two levels that are talked about in the study. Level one is kind of some intermediate mitigation and the impacts that it would Meridian Planning & Zoning August 7, 2008 Page 12 of 61 have on adjacent properties. Level two would be some pretty stringent improvements that would be -- that would be put up on the water treatment plant site. These could include air scrubbers and tall walls and other things to keep odor and noise basically contained on site. Right now there are no plans to make the wastewater treatment plant a level one or a level two facility, but those are what's evaluated, basically, in the -- in that study that was done and it shows, again, basically, if you're assuming -- I think it's seven DTs is acceptable, your nose -- the human nose can pick up things at seven DTs. So, there is frequency charts, as well as duration -- or -- yeah. Duration, frequency, and levels, of course, that are expected based on current conditions, future conditions, and if the plant is improved to level one or level two standards in the future. I do want to read a few of the excerpts from the staff report. At level one the subject property is shown have a peak DT of between 26 and 50, with a frequency between 40 and one -- 40 and 160 hours per year that are greater than seven DT. These levels exceed the accessible level for odor control. Upon expansion of the wastewater treatment plant to capacity -- right now that's planned for 2023, but we don't know exactly when we will get there to capacity. If there are no odor control devices in place, the subject property is shown to have a peak DT of between 37 and 64, with a frequency between 98 and 250 hours per year that are greater than seven DT. These levels far exceed the afore-mentioned levels of acceptable odor control. As I mentioned before, our wastewater treatment plant has not been rated. It's not required to be rated and it's neither -- it's even at a lesser level than the level two or the level one, so -- noise levels weren't evaluated in that study, but certainly noise from the process can have an impact on adjacent properties. Because the odor generated from the wastewater treatment plant and the area of the subject property exceeds the odor control performance standards noted in the wastewater treatment plant odor and noise assessment, staff cannot support residential uses in this area. Staff does not believe that low density residential uses on this property are appropriate, as the property lies within the mixed use wastewater treatment plant designation and is within the area affected by odors and noise generated from the wastewater treatment plant to the southwest. Further, staff believes that a mix of commercial uses would be more appropriate in this area, as allowed under the current/future land use map designation. Staff believes the existing designation is the most compatible designation for the property and that new residential uses should not be allowed in this area at this time. Staff does not believe approving the requested CPA to change the future land use designation for this property would be in the best interest of the city. Therefore, staff is recommending denial of the subject application. As with the previous application, we are not asking that you make that recommendation this evening, though. That is my presentation and I will stand for any questions you may have. Moe: Are there any questions of staff? Newton-Huckabay: I have none. Moe: Okay. Would the applicant like to come forward, please. Meridian Planning 8~ Zoning August 7, 2008 Page 13 of 61 Kartchner: My name is Richard Kartchner, 4325 North Ten Mile in Meridian. First of all, I guess I'd like to just state briefly that the main objection of staff is the odor and noise problem that they perceive to be a problem on this piece of property. Caleb, could you do the -- show the aerial for a second? Hood: Is that one okay? It's the aerial. It's just got those other lines on it. Or do you want me to go to the other aerial? Kartchner: Yeah. The one with the satellite. That -- there we go. So, I think any other -- many of the other comments or their concerns about noncompatibility with the surrounding area are -- are not a valid argument. As you can see, there is all kinds of homes here. These are the kinds of homes that we would propose to put in the back half of this property. And even the existing homes south of this are similar to the kind of homes that we want to put in. All of these people, including ourselves, would like to protect our -- our property value by providing homes compatible with those surrounding us. There are homes -- many homes like this over here in Drawbridge as well. Also, the proposal to put commercial in the front of the property is very consistent with what's happening on this side of the street and when the Ten Mile Road is increased in width and whatnot, then, that will become even more compatible with that kind of use and our proposal is to provide a buffer between this commercial and the residential, so that it is acceptable to all of the people that are here that are in the area presently. These people have no more desire to have the kind of use of the land that the treatment plant designation allows, which is storage facilities -- I don't know. Auto -- auto-type things. Commercial, industrial type use that we don't -- nobody here would like to see that and so we are providing an alleviation of that problem on this piece of property. Now, if I can talk for just a minute about the noise and odor. First of all, I'd like to eliminate the concern about the noise. Even the staff report on page ten indicates at the bottom of that page, if you want to turn to that, that noise wasn't even considered in the evaluation, because all of the reading of the noise were taken on the wastewater treatment property and those levels are so close to acceptable levels based on some evaluation of other sites, that they don't think it's an issue either. So, the only thing we are really concerned about is odor and I have lived on this property for the last 20 plus years and have never experienced an odor problem there. Now, I can't say never. Some calm summer evenings once in awhile we get a little drift of it -- of some of the plant odor. But, essentially, it's anon-issue. You have never had complaints from this subdivision of odor from that treatment plant. The city has never had that. Now, can we go to another one of those -- the -- yeah, the line maps. Now, you do have problems down here with complaints from people because the prevailing winds go like this from north -- from northwest to southeast and so these odors, whatever they might be -- and they are sometimes excessive -- blow into this subdivision. They don't blow up this way to this subdivision. So, the odors are just not a problem. I think that the evaluation of this study -- and it's a fairly thick study, as Caleb has suggested, was done -- hasn't been done carefully and applied directly to the land use here. There -- this is our property right in this little square here and as you can see it's between these two lines and there is many many homes in this area and down in this area, way down into here, that are in that same category and because of the prevailing winds you do get some Meridian Planning & Zoning August 7, 2008 Page 14 of 61 complaints here, but never any up this direction. And, in fact, we are outside of that area of concern. One other item I would like to mention in concern in regards to the odor is that these levels to -- to simplify it, the level -- the dilution level of odors in these areas have -- are based on a subjective evaluation that's a computer model. There has not been one measurement of odor, because odor is so objective you just can't measure it. And so they assume there is going to be some sort of throw or diversion of the odor and, then, put it in a computer model and, then, they overlay it on the land and so what we have here is an evaluation based on the computer modeling and it doesn't mean anything unless you have got some actual substantial information and that information I have given you, I guess, is that it doesn't exist this way of the plant. If there is -- if some of this information -- and I assume there is some relevance to it, of course -- is acceptable, then, when '03 comes along -- '23 comes along and the plant has been expanded, they are going to have to do some sort of treatment of whatever they do, because the odor levels are unacceptable for the kind of use that the treatment plant has designated. So, whatever they do, if they expand the plant, they are going to have to do some odor control or you will be outside the acceptable levels of odor even for the commercial use designated. That said, I still don't think it's a problem, even though there will be treatment and some mitigation of those odors, that those odors are not going to be affected by this parcel. So, I would entertain any questions, I guess? Moe: Any questions of the applicant at this time? Okay. Thank you very much. First sign up is Brent Rassmussen. Rassmussen: Brent Rassmussen. 4315 North Ten Mile Road, Meridian, Idaho. So, I also live on the property. My property is the one under consideration and most of my information has been said, but odor is, obviously, the biggest hindrance right now to changing it. I have lived there for 16 years and have never had an offensive odor there. And only occasionally, once or twice a year, been able to even know that -- notice it. And both my wife and I have obtained a copy of the study that was done and went through it quite thoroughly and we are outside the limits, like they are saying, of the prevailing winds, make it such that that particular property is outside the -- the range and a lot of other houses exist within it already that were outside the boundaries of what the city has done. So, I wanted to just reaffirm that I don't think the odor is really a concern, because I have lived out there and haven't noticed it. Moe: Any questions? Newton-Huckabay: No. Moe: Thanks very much. The next name was Beth Rassmussen. From the audience she passes. Again, that was all that was signed up. If there is anyone else that would like to speak? There is no one. Any comments, Commissioners? Rohm: I have a couple of comments. Moe: Commissioner Rohm. Meridian Planning & Zoning August 7, 2008 Page 15 of 61 Rohm: This kind of reminds me of -- of a new development going in adjacent to farmland where they are raising cattle or growing beets and in the past what we have done is we have said, well, you know, this other condition existed prior to your application and we have always made it a -- I don't know about always, but we have traditionally made it a part of the plat, that if accepted that they put right on those lots that it is adjacent to property that's been previously developed and the potential is there for the added odor or something to that effect, but allow them to continue with their project, full well knowing that that could be an issue. The one thing that the applicant did say that makes sense to me is that the prevailing wind does come out of the northwest to the southeast and there are subdivisions that have developed that are probably insolenced by the odors from that plant significantly more on an annual basis than this property itself. So, I guess my thoughts are I kind of agree with the applicant's comments. Moe: Okay, Mr. Rohm. Anyone else? Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Chair? Moe: Commissioner Newton-Huckabay. Newton-Huckabay: I have a couple questions. Moe. Yes. Newton-Huckabay: One, I'm curious what kind of factor is put into the calculation to account for wind in this odor study, because it does seem somewhat uniform as it explodes out from the center and if it does even have a calculation for wind. And then -- we will answer that one first. Thanks, Scott. Steckline: Mr. Chair, Commissioner Newton-Huckabay, Commissioners, as Caleb stated, we did a study in 2004. I just wanted to clarify, just because they are in between these two units of measurement doesn't mean they are outside of that area of impact. What it is is it's from area 100 to area 50. In the book -- give me just a second. What that is is a dilution content. So, they are, actually, in that area of impact. They are not fully absorbed by it, it's just it has a longer duration time to threshold from area 100 to area 50. The other factor I wanted to make was over the lasts three years we have been doing some plant upgrades to the Meridian wastewater treatment plant. We aren't currently sanctioned by DEQ for noise and odor. This assessment is for the year 2023, with the impacts of new clarifiers and digesters, we might potentially have some noise and odor factors heading north to these properties. For the noise, they did do most of their assessments within the wastewater treatment plant and that is computer modeled, as the applicant stated. What they did with that computer modeling was took the duration dilution to time from how far it went from a generator within the plant to the fence and carried that out without obstructions and that's how you get your set ratio for it. In the report they do not show a wind current factor for noise and odor. What they do Meridian Planning & Zoning August 7, 2008 Page 16 of 61 is they projected out off of a computer model also. The other factor that the applicant had brought up with the developments around the surrounding area, these were all approved before our study was done in '04. Had we had that study done before we would have not allowed residential components to go in this area. I know that was kind of long winded. I apologize. Newton-Huckabay: That's okay. On the dilution to time, what is getting diluted? How are you measuring -- Steckline: Basically, what they -- this study that we had done -- I apologize -- for a level one to a level two -- and keep in mind the treatment plant is not rated at a level. We are not required to by DEO. What we wanted to accomplish was to stay ahead of the grade curve and be proactive as opposed to reactive with the treatment plant. From that, basically, what is being diluted is like you can put a muffler on a diesel backup generator and that will muffle the sound, kind of like Caleb has said. An attenuator wall that blocks the sound from going. But we have a couple other things on plants -- on our plant that we can't -- can't noise reduce. Like we have a dog kennel that's in a facility there. Newton-Huckabay: Right. I guess I'm talking about what -- how is that -- so, the dilution to time is for noise, not odor? Steckline: Is noise, yes. Newton-Huckabay: So -- Steckline: There is also for odor for our -- for our digesters. There is -- they had a study. It would be about 2.8 million dollars for the digesters, to have those to the point of where you would not have a DT at the fence line. We currently don't have that budgeted at this time. Newton-Huckabay: And we will or will not in 2023? Steckline: It -- that's a question for the Public Works director. I'm sure we do have money budgeted, set aside for plant upgrades. We have gone through a lot of annexing other properties into the north and to the west that will be dumping into that wastewater treatment plant. We also have two other wastewater treatment plants out at McDermott for those surrounding areas, but with development kind of being spurred down right now, we are allowing other developments to flow to our Black Cat wastewater -- or wastewater treatment plant until that time when those developments can build those treatment plants out there, so -- Newton-Huckabay: Okay. You're going to have to -- I'm sorry, you're going to have to keep -- Steckline: Sorry. I know it's -- Meridian Planning & Zoning August 7, 2008 Page 17 of 61 Newton-Huckabay: No. You're going to have to humor me on this, because this is stuff I don't have a total grasp on. So, this computer model here on this slide, that's measuring noise? That greater than seven DT is noise is what you're telling me? Or it's some measurement of some chemical compound of odor? Steckline: I apologize. We have seven slides. This is for level one for odor control. Go to the next slide. This is for level one for frequency control, which is noise. This is if the plant has set aside the funds to do the noise and odor, which has been outlined in this book, for controlling methods for a level one at the wastewater treatment plant. Go ahead to the next one. This is odor control for a level two and, then, the next slide is odor control for level -- or, excuse me, frequency control for number two. This is the slide that the applicant was referring to. This is the most stringent that we have for our study that was done in '04. So, this was four years ago at plant capacity with smaller digesters, smaller diesel generators. So, yes, he is outside that area of impact, but now with the growth of the treatment plant and not even being a level one or a level two, if we did the study today, those areas would probably grow even further. Newton-Huckabay: Uh-huh. Steckline: That's why we are asking for you to recommend to keep that boundary that we have set and abide by this book for the noise and odor control for the wastewater treatment plant designation. Newton-Huckabay: Okay. Thank you. Steckline: Thanks. Moe: Mr. Marshall, do you have anything? Marshall: I don't have any questions, but I have to admit I -- I think a lot of work went into not only the odor and noise control studies, but an awful lot of work went into the Comprehensive Plan and that area was set aside with the idea that that plant would be expanding in the future and that when it does oftentimes you get people that will come in and complain to the city at length that we have destroyed their property values and everything else. And that would be out in the future. I have no doubt that the applicant is right, that there is probably no odor or noise problems at this time, but I worry about the future. Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Chair, I want to comment. I do have an issue that this analysis doesn't account for wind. I mean ignoring that is really looking at an analysis in a vacuum, because you're always going to have wind, you're always going to have wind patterns, and that -- I think that's -- I think that that's an Achilles' heel and understanding as well as I can this, that I think without some kind of a wind factor in that -- in that equation to calculate these boundaries, I don't really think you're telling yourself a true Meridian Planning & Zoning August 7, 2008 . Page 18 of 61 story. But, then, also I'm sure that a lot of money -- I know a lot of money was paid to a lot of very smart people to do this analysis, but -- Marshall: Again, I agree that there may be an Achilles' heel there that when maybe something that should have been factored in -- I don't know, to be honest. I rely on the experts. That's what they do for a living and that's what they are hired for and, again, the study is about the future, not right now, and that's what bothers me. Newton-Huckabay: Uh-huh. Moe: Mr. O'Brien, any comments? O'Brien: Pretty complex issue. I like the analogy Commissioner Rohm made about knowing that there is an issue there for a subdivision or before buildings are built -- before residential buildings are built and on the same -- the same token, the increase in usage of the plant downstream is going to -- I think going to provide a true measure of -- of the issues that will come out and if I was to buy a piece of piece property on the sole word of previous owners that surround the area, even if I sign something, there is going to be I think potential for complaint, either against the city, against the previous homeowners, or something that may cause a problem and Ijust -- I think that the true measure right now -- that's the only thing we have, we don't measure the wind, which wish we could, but I think that would be helpful. But right now the only measure we have is what study has been provided and later on, if things -- when things change, I -- we don't have that crystal ball to say, yeah, there is going to be a problem, no, there is not going to be a problem. I just don't think this is going to work. I just don't think it's going to. Rohm: I do have just one additional comment. Moe: Yes. Rohm: The property to the south of the wastewater treatment plant has come before us on a number of occasions for redevelopment and we have consistently not allowed development that -- that circumvents this same type study. I don't know that we have referenced that specific study, but, basically, the wastewater treatment plant was there first and adjacent properties can only be developed based upon their compatibility with the existing wastewater treatment plant. So, that -- I guess there is more than one way of looking at this than just the fact that it would a nice redevelopment to protect the -- the properties of the existing people in that vicinity. But we also have in the past kept other people from redeveloping on the south side of that same plant. Just throwing that out. Moe: Thank you very much. Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Chair'? Meridian Planning & Zoning August 7, 2008 Page 19 of 61 Moe: Newton-Huckabay. Yes. Newton-Huckabay: I want to ask Scott another question. Can you answer my question why there is not a wind factor in that study? Steckline: Mr. Chair, Commissioner Newton-Huckabay, Commissioners, I cannot. I can speculate a little. I think when the study was done, the first preface in the book is that the surrounding areas that they looked at were all farm -- farmland. I think it might have been even a taxer study at the time when they accomplished it, opposed to if we did this study to today's standards and today's date, I think you would find more stringent areas in there, but as far as factual evidence in the book stating why they don't, Idon't -- don't know. I don't know if it's something that they can calculate or if they can factor or how exactly they would do that, to be honest with you. Newton-Huckabay: Okay. And odor is measured primarily on perception, is that how I'm reading this and understanding it? Steckline: That's -- Mr. Chair, Commissioner Newton-Huckabay, Commissioners, it's dilution to threshold. In other words, it's basically what -- kind of what Caleb had said is the human nose, how it can be -- an odor can be detected and with the study that they did from our digesters, figuring out from the point of where the digester is working in relation to the wastewater treatment plant, how that travels in time -- or in feet per second to where a human would be and how fast that reacts to their -- their sense of smell. Newton-Huckabay: Oh. Okay. Steckline: So, you're also going to have a dilution factor with wind. I think with as much time as we have spent on the odor section, it's more of a noise problem. I think we are going to be proactive in the future with the wastewater treatment plant, because odor is more offensive. We are definitely going to take care of that. It's the noise. With the construction that we have going on right now, we have got cement trucks and construction trucks working out there all the time. Also, with the mechanical mechanisms that we have working the wastewater treatment plant, too. Your most offensive thing is going to be the noise. Any complaints that we generally get from DEQ are for noise, as opposed to odor. Moe: Well, that just shoots my theory all the way down. My biggest concern, quite frankly, was the fact that the DT levels and such and whatnot, when they go to expand this thing, based upon the study and whatnot, they are going to be 37 to 64, you know, peak levels, you know, that would be a way greater level and, therefore, it's going to be more offensive, you know, as this plant expands. Newton-Huckabay: Uh-huh. Meridian Planning & Zoning August 7, 2008 Page 20 of 61 Moe: That is a big concern with me and, no, I don't know that I won't put something on the plat saying, yes, I understand that, but, gee, I still want to build here. Yes, Mr. O'Bien. O'Brien: Yeah. Mr. Chairman. I -- just to add to that. And I agree with that. I live about a quarter mile from a feedlot and the prevailing wind, which is south of me. The prevailing wind right now is usually from the west, but if those -- one or two instances during the summertime when the wind does shift, oh, wowy, you sure know it's there and it's very offensive. If I -- if I was to build in this area, and even if I signed whatever, I fear that as this thing increases in noise and odor, that the value of the homes are going to go down and I fear for the homeowners of the future, more than anything that this is going to get worse before it gets better. The waste treatment plant is always going to be there, the feedlot will not, so I had my concern. Newton-Huckabay: Uh-huh. Moe: Any other comments, Commissioners? Newton-Huckabay: I just have one comment on the -- because there is no development agreement, approve -- recommending approval on just the land use map in such a controversial area -- we are going to get ourselves into trouble on that. That's going to come back. If I were to recommend approval of a residential development in this area, I would want apretty -- pretty high level of comfort about what it was going to look like and the -- I think I would want to see a development agreement with that and I think the -- I think that the applicant's being extremely optimistic that they will be able to build and develop that subdivision the way they have it planned out. There are a lot of places to build homes in this valley right now and not very many of them are next to a wastewater plant and those are some pretty -- I think it's very optimistic that -- that that's not going to be a detractor and so I would myself -- I agree with the applicant that when -- what little base of knowledge I have, the study is flawed. I think the wind is a key factor. live in north Meridian and I agree with you on the odors. I think that -- that from a perception level that they do blow -- blow predominately to the south and all those folks who live in Bridgetower probably go, hum, wish I would have known that before I moved in. And so I -- but I am not comfortable just making a Comp Plan amendment recommendation. Rohm: I think that's going to be the consensus of this Commission. I think you have well stated it. Mr. Chairman? Moe: Yes. Rohm: I think we have discussed this -- Newton-Huckabay: He gets to rebut. Rohm: Oh. Go ahead. Meridian Planning & Zoning August 7, 2008 Page 21 of 61 Kartchner: I do get a rebuttal, I guess; right? Moe: Yes. Kartchner: I appreciate your concern. But this is our property and we feel like this is the best thing for that piece of ground and we are willing, without any problem, to put a statement in our selling agreement that notifies these people of this question. I'm a professional engineer. I have had this study for awhile and 1 have studied it. I don't want to shed any ill light on those others that have stated this, but I also don't want misinformation given out. All of these graphs here are odor only. They have nothing to do with the noise. The noise is a different section of the study. Frequency and dilution, DT levels, is a odor measurement here. And this frequency issue that we are saying may be a problem here is 195, maybe, maximum if there is no treatment. That's eight days out of 365 days. Very small impact. So, also prevailing wind is an issue. The fact that this odor measurement is done without any uninhibited movement and there are trees. If there is a development made there will be more trees, more buildings, more stopping of any kind of odor migration that might go that way. So, we feel comfortable in being able to develop this land as we have shown it, without -- without a problem. And maybe not today or next year, but soon. And so we would still request that you honor our request to have this changed and be able to do what we need to here. I understand that your job is to evaluate these things and I would expect you to be able to tell people south of the plant that the prevailing winds make it pretty stinky and maybe you can't approve that space. But north is a different story. Completely different story. And I would expect you to take that into account and do what needs to be done for ordering the city in that way. We think this is a very good use of the land in that area, as have stated initially. Thank you. Moe: Thank you. Newton-Huckabay: I have a question. Rohm: Go ahead. Newton-Huckabay: I want to understand -- I just want to make sure that I fully understand the implications of -- if this Comp Plan amendment were approved, this would, then, be zoned -- or have the future land use designation of office and low density residential, which, then, if the applicant were to find that they could not develop the property, they could apply for a step up to R-4; right? Hood: Let me jump in there real quick. R-2 and R-4 are both consistent with low density on the Comp Plan future land use map. So, if you're looking -- if they requested a step up, they could potentially step up to an R-8. We have even looked R-15 before. I don't think they'd probably do that, but there is potential without having to go through this whole process again. Meridian Planning & Zoning August 7, 2008 Page 22 of 61 Newton-Huckabay: And you can apply for that step up on the short plat -- or you have to come back before us. Hood: It's done with annexation. Newton-Huckabay: With your annexation. That's right. Okay. Boy. I still think I -- I don't disagree that potentially residential is a good use here, but I think approving this just as a Comprehensive -- or a Comprehensive Plan designation, without a development agreement, I think is a risk I'm not willing to recommend to City Council. Moe: Any other comments before we need a motion? Mr. Rohm. Rohm: Mr. Chairman, move that we close the public hearing on CPA 08-006. Newton-Huckabay: Second. Marshall: Second. Moe: It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearing on CPA 08-006. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? That motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Rohm: Mr. Chairman? Moe: Mr. Rohm. Rohm: I move that we continue this CPA 08-006 to the special meeting of August 14th, 2008. Marshall: Second. Moe: It's been moved and seconded to continue CPA 08-006 to the special meeting of August the 14th. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? That motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 7: Public Hearing: CPA 08-001 Request to amend the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to change the land use designation of 15.46 acres of land from Medium Density Residential to Mixed Use -Community for Janicek Ten Mile /Chinden Property by Janicek Properties, LLC - SWC of N. Ten Mile Road and W. Chinden Boulevard: Moe: At this time I'd like to open the public hearing on CPA 08-001 for the Janicek Ten Mile /Chinden Property and ask for the staff report.