Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAugust 7, 2008 P&Z MinutesMeridian Planning & Zoning August 7, 2008 Page 50 of 61 Moe: It's been moved and seconded to continue CPA 08-009 for Biskay to the special meeting of August 14th, 2008. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? That motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 12: Public Hearing: CPA 08-007 Request for Comprehensive Plan Amendment to modify the Future Land Use Map by changing the land use designation from Medium Density Residential to Mixed Use -Community for approximately 10 acres for Zamzows Chinden by JR, LLC -south side of Chinden Boulevard, approximately'/ mile east of Meridian Road: Moe: Okay. At this time I'd like to open the public hearing for CPA 08-007 for Zamzows on Chinden and start with the staff report, please. Hood: Thank you, Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission. The CPA 08-007 is for Zamzows on Chinden. It's located on the south side of State Highway 20-26, approximately a half mile east of Meridian Road. The mailing address is 545 East Chinden Boulevard. This ten acre parcel, shown here, is currently zoned RUT in Ada county. It is within the city's area of impact boundary, which you can see right in the light blue teal color there along 20-26 and our urban service planning area, but as you can tell from this map, it's not currently contiguous to Meridian city corporate boundaries. So, therefore, not currently eligible for annexation. To the north, obviously, is the state highway. On the other side of the state highway is Castlebury Subdivision. It is an Ada subdivision, zoned R-1. To the east is a Lutheran church. To the south are some agricultural properties. There is an estate home on that ten acres there, zoned RUT in Ada county. To the west is a Catholic church, also zoned RUT in Ada county. The applicant is requesting approval to amend the Comprehensive Plan future land use map by changing the land use designation on approximately ten acres of land from medium density residential to mixed use community. Part of the property is currently being used as a commercial business, the Zamzows, obviously, and, then, there is a safe barbecue dealer -- I don't know if you can really make it out on this site plan, but it's somewhere in that location right near the state highway. The applicant has owned this property for approximately four years. In 2006 the city amended the Comprehensive Plan map, the one I mentioned earlier, for all of north Meridian, so from McDermott over to Eagle, Ustick, up to Chinden, there was a study done and we changed some of the land use designations in north Meridian. That map includes several changes, one of which was to move the mixed use community neighborhood center designation within this center. So, here is -- and, pardon me, this got skewed a little bit. You can see it's a little bit wider than it is tall, so it's a little bit out of whack. But here is -- here is the one arterial, here is another, and your mid mile half moon, if you will, with mixed use neighborhood center. And the Zamzows site is right here. You can see there is a small portion of it that was medium density residential even then. Here is the current designation. The parcel lines do not show up on this, so cut this into fourths, basically. Zamzows would be right about in there. And, again, there is your fourth. So, there is what the map would look like if you act favorably on this. It should be noted that Meridian Planning & Zoning August 7, 2008 Page 51 of 61 although the property did previously have a similar designation on the site, the mixed use designation, not the neighborhood center part of that designation, but the mixed use designation, that the -- the diagram that we do shoot for -- and I will grant you that we don't see a ton of them develop as envisioned with the Comp Plan map, but we do have some along Locust Grove. Quenzer Commons real similar, although they don't have real core commercial at their center, they have more core offices, but that's a development with Brockton Subdivision where you do have your core commercial fanning out to your high density residential and, then, on the outskirts of your medium density residential. So, if you look at this map, you know, a quarter mile is approximately here. The commercial areas aren't shown even within that half moon area. It's at the center of that half moon area that your core commercial areas are looked for. So, again, although the designation changed on this site over time from this designation to this designation, city staff have anticipated residential development of this once Zamzows has had their run at it and redevelopment is ready to occur at annexation that the city requested. All of the land surrounding the subject site, as you can see on the map, is currently designated medium density residential or public/quasi-public. I don't know why this church got the public/quasi-public, but the Lutheran church is shown as medium density residential. I couldn't tell you why that is there. But the surrounding properties are either medium density residential or public/quasi-public. The city has planned for a variety of commercial and retail opportunities in north Meridian. This site is not one planned for commercial and retail. Staff believes that the proposed mixed use designation will further saturate this area with nonresidential land uses, making some other sites planned for this type of development difficult to build. Staff believes that the map currently depicts appropriate future land uses for the site, which is medium density residential. As you can see tonight, but for the one in the wastewater -- mixed use wastewater treatment plant area, everyone wants to take residential and move it to commercial. The city did do a study in 2005. I'm not going to go into the merits of that study or if it's valid or not, but it did compare us to other -- to Boise, to Eagle, to other similar type agencies in the Treasure Valley. Even nationally. And they said you already have enough in north Meridian to support more than the residential you have planned in north Meridian. Again, take that for -- with a grain of salt. Read it for yourself. But, basically, they said you have about three times what you're going to need, roof tops to office particularly, but even retail. We had way too much planned. Not built, but planned. We have lots in Paramount still, Lochsa Falls that we got zoned and approved -- Bridgetower -- that are approved -- not necessarily that the building's there yet, but are planned in the future. So, the fear is is that if we keep changing this map and all these places are going to compete against each other and, then, some of the places we really wanted it, it's not going to be feasible, because they got -- someone else got the designation and the land use. The applicant has not submitted elevations for concurrent annexation or development application. They have submitted a conceptual development plan shown on the screen, showing how the site may develop in the future. The landscape nursery. So, there is a retail aspect. And their greenhouse will remain. This building is in approximately the same location as the current building, although on the site plan it says a new retail user there. There is the drive-thru shown on that site. These access points appear to be the ones that are there now. There is a shared driveway to 20-26 here with that Catholic Meridian Planning & Zoning August 7, 2008 Page 52 of 61 church. It continues on on their side and, then, feeds back -- I think it eventually leads back over to their parking lot that they have closer to Meridian Road. But there is a shared driveway there and, then, this one that the subject site uses for it, so -- and, then, there are residential units, attached townhomes, zero lot line homes, something similar to light duplexes, if you will, in this area and, then, some additional retail users are shown due west of the existing landscape nursery store. So, across-access to the east and west are shown. As you can see from this plan, they haven't shown any connectivity to the medium density that's shown just to the south. Staff will recommend both vehicular and pedestrian accesses to those in the future. Regardless of land use we are going to want to see some connectivity. And, again, we have done the song and dance a few times tonight, but, again, the UDC prohibits direct access to 20-26. The thing that I think is different about this one than some of the other projects that we have looked at on highways -- and we talked about it before. This site neither has access on the arterial -- the other ones were on a corner of an arterial and a state highway and this one is a quarter mile in from that and they only have access to the state highway. So, there isn't that ability to even look at having another access for commercial purposes off of your adjacent arterial, because you aren't there, you're internal to the square mile and you're not at the mid mile, so you're kind of in no man's land, if you will, on this property. So, just, basically, the reason staff is not recommending approval of the subject application is due to the access. We can't, again, support access that would require a variance for both of these access points proposed. Even if the accesses weren't there, staff has a difficult time envisioning how retail would work on this property, because, then, you're taking -- I'm going to go to more of a regional view. You would be taking that commercial traffic through either residential to the south up and through or back over to the Hightower development and through a church and back through. So, a backage road even for those retail users don't seem to be appropriate, based on future and existing land uses surrounding the subject site. Again, we don't have any commercial users on any of the sides around them, so getting commercial users there would have to be from Chinden, essentially, and, again, we aren't supportive of any access, let alone two to the state facility. So, because of that and -- so, access and future land uses and existing land uses around, staff is not supportive of the applicant's request for the Comp Plan amendment. Staff is recommending denial of the CPA and I will stand for any questions you may have. Moe: Any questions of staff? Would the applicant like to come forward? Eisenbarth: My name is Darin Eisenbarth. I live at 307 Windsor, Nampa, Idaho, and I'm the president of Zamzows. We are a little different than most of the applications that you saw tonight. What we are, actually, asking is to have our designation restored back to us. When we purchased this property -- or when we were considering purchasing this property about five years ago, we came in and we met with staff and we kind of went over our, you know, future development of the property and they said, yes, it meets with exactly what we are trying to do, we are trying to develop mid mile and we saw our designation there and, you know, not that they were giving us any, you know, warranty, but it seemed to meet with what they were looking for. When we were in the process of developing our Overland store about two years when that started, we came Meridian Planning & Zoning August 7, 2008 Page 53 of 61 in and noticed that our designation had changed, had been moved. When we inquired about that, they said, well, we -- we moved that to the east to facilitate another property owner and we can't support you having any access to Chinden, which I thought was odd, because we already have access to Chinden. We have been operating -- that property has been operated in that manner for 17 years. Originally, it was -- the preliminary plan was done in '91. So, it kind of leads us -- and they originally had said, well, you would need to negotiate with the other property owners around you to get access back to your property, which I don't know that that leads us anywhere. So, basically, it was landlock us there. We have not submitted an annexation and rezone permit yet, but today we did meet with the Catholic church, with two representatives from the Holy Apostle, and they were supportive of our planned development and they are in the process right now of getting everything ready for an annexation and rezone on their property as well. They have got that one small parcel that they need to get finished and, then, they are going to submit their application as well and that's what we met with them about today. So, that would make us contiguous to come into the city. We think this designation is what the city was trying to do with the mid town center and all of that. We have, obviously, been operating in this location for a very long time. As far as not, you know, violating some else's designation around there, I don't really understand that. I mean retail clusters together usually and to disadvantage one property for the sake of another's potential development down the road, I don't really understand. This is our -- we own six properties in Meridian. This is -- we own five business -- we operate five business locations in the city of Meridian. What we do feel about this is, if you could show our proposed site, is that we are going to buffer with this -- we are going to kind of buffer in between two other commercial or quasi-commercial uses. We have the Lutheran church to the east and we have the Catholic church to the west and so we offer kind of a transition into that. We also offer atransition -- we spoke with Mr. Beeler, who owns the property behind us, and, you know, I don't really want to speak for him, but he's looking at medium density residential for his property. We offer a good transition from Chinden, accomplishing noise buffers and, you know, good transitions in that way. So, this site plan is very very preliminary, but it does represent the spirit of what we are going to try to do with this. So, I think that's really all I have to say.. And, for the record, it won't be a Wal-Mart. Moe: Any questions of the applicant? O'Brien: No. Newton-Huckabay: Not right now. Moe: Thank you. Eisenbarth: Thank you. Moe: Douglas Zamzow. Meridian Planning & Zoning August 7, 2008 Page 54 of 61 Zamzow: My name is Doug Zamzow. I live at 415 Schmeizer Lane in Boise, Idaho. I act as the construction manager for Zamzows. You have probably seen me before when we did the Overland project here a couple years ago. Read through the report. Caleb's been good to work with. We have met with Anna several times and Caleb and Sonya. We are optimistic, similar to the Overland store, that we can make this work for everybody's benefit. I'm not sure if any of you have been to the Overland store, but it's doing well and we have had a lot of compliments from the neighbors and the -- and the clientele. I don't have a whole lot to offer. I just wanted to make a couple clarifications. The pedestrian connectivity to the south, as well as vehicular, is a doable item. There is water. United Water is already on the site. The staff report at this point says there is no services at the property, but we are hooked up to United Water. I haven't told Caleb that yet, but we do have United Water already at the site. And I feel it's a good transition from Chinden to the medium density to the south. Thank you. Moe: Any questions? Newton-Huckabay: I have none. Moe: Thank you very much. Any comments, Commissioners? Marshall: I just had a quick question for Caleb. Moe: Okay. Marshall: Caleb, could we go back to the future land use map in that -- right here. That's good. So, right here, what's this intending to be right in this area, the neighborhood center, the NC? Hood: Mr. Chair, Commissioner Marshall, that -- that's the Comprehensive Plan land use map before it was amended in 2006. That's -- that's the request -- they are, basically, asking to go back to what it was. That's what Mr. Eisenbarth was saying is that they are requesting to have their old designation back put on the property, so -- and, again, what happened was, especially along Chinden, we lost these half moons and, again, that designation doesn't come out very well here, but it's moved along -- linearly along Chinden a half mile right here. The access is all set just a hair into that Hightower like right in there. But the core commercial is around there with higher density residential townhouses. So, this -- the way this is developing was what was intended for here. But, again, not necessarily on the Zamzow's property, the core commercial would have been right here to there and, then, fanning out so this -- the fringe of this area is meant for your higher density residential to support some of that core commercial at the mid mile. So, I don't have any problem giving them that designation back, but it still means we are still looking for residential development. The mixed use, as you know, I mean it includes commercial, retail, office and residential from three to 15 dwelling units per acre and that's what we would be looking for is the three to 15 dwelling units per acre. So, that's what that old designation was. Meridian Planning & Zoning August 7, 2008 Page 55 of 61 Marshall: Refresh my memory, then, please. The concept plan that is being presented, how much more commercial is being added to what's there? Hood: You know, the applicant may -- I didn't see any square footages on there, but -- so, Idon't know exactly what this building entails. There is one -- it looks like multi- tenant retail building here. Something about half that size there. Again, a new building -- it looks like new. Replacing the existing shed type building that's there now with the drive-thru. That's pretty much it for new retail. So, not -- not a ton of new retail on the site. You know, half or a little over half of the site is for residential -- I mean there is kind of a demarcation line between retail and residential. So, they are doing a mini mixed use project on their site. Again, access is really the -- the big thing, the hump that we couldn't get over, because you can't -- if you can't get there, retail is not going to work. Marshall: So, what we are saying is the current Zamzows, as it stands there, would be removed and be gone? Hood: Eventually some day. I mean that's the -- Marshall: Well, as a part of this proposal. The Zamzows is not part of that? Hood: No. No. I'm sorry. So, these were the new construction. This is the existing building with their nursery area that's here. And, then, they are keeping some ponds, too. These ponds are also on the side of -- I can't remember if that one is there or not. But there is some of these larger ponds are on the site and they are retaining those as well, but, yeah, this would be -- be kept. Some of their bins for bark and sand and other things are in this location here. It looks like they go away. That may be what -- yeah, it says bark storage on it. That's what this is. So, they are still retaining some of those accessory uses to the landscape nursery business, building kind of a little mini community around it, if will, too, so -- but, no, that stays. And just to be clear, we are not -- definitely like to support local businesses and these folks are great to work with. I wish them continued success in that location. It's just long range, when it does redevelop, this just isn't really what the city had envisioned for the property, so -- and I know that directly conflicts what they have envisioned for the property, so that makes this one tough. Moe: Before I get any other comments from any of the other Commissioners, I had gone through the signing list. Did you have any comments, sir? Okay. Thank you. So, any other comments? O'Brien: I have question. Moe: Mr. O'Brien. O'Brien: Was there any type of traffic study or going to be a traffic study on the amount of traffic that was maybe seeing going out onto Chinden from this kind of a proposal? Meridian Planning & Zoning August 7, 2008 Page 56 of 61 Hood: Mr. Chair, Commissioner O'Brien, Commissioners, depending on square footages -- and, again, I don't remember seeing any numbers with, you know, concept square footages. It may not meet the ACHD warrants for requiring a traffic impact study. That's certainly something the city can do when it comes to the annexation stage is say we want you to prepare one. Quite honestly, I don't know what that traffic study would address. I mean there is a lot of variables to -- to look at. You evaluate it with two access points to Chinden, you look at it with no access points or one access point or not knowing when the other properties around are going to develop some other way out, how do you really evaluate that traffic study would be pretty difficult. Now, again, ACHD and ITD, if a permit is submitted to them, could require a traffic impact study, but, again, they have those thresholds and I don't, off the top of my head, know what those are. O'Brien: Thank you. I just look at this as we have to make the assumption that there is not going to be a back road to get out of that particular complex and there is going to be probably one major access, aright-in, right-out period. To me that's what it looks like. And that could be a problem; but that's for somebody else to decide. Thank you. Moe: Any other comments, Commissioners? Newton-Huckabay: I like it. Rohm: I have a couple comments. Looking at the property as it's currently being utilized, it's more of the mixed use commercial now and doesn't even potentially look like medium density and it seems counter to me to say, okay, even though that's the way you're using it now as being part of the county, if, in fact, you come into the city, we are going to make you change what you're -- how you're using it. So, from my perspective, the way it's currently being used and the way they are proposing to expand just makes sense and Iwould -- I would be in support of this myself. So, that's the end of my comments. Newton-Huckabay: Ithink fundamentally we have -- down there in that section of Chinden, coming up on Locust Grove, when Hightower came in and the -- that county subdivision at Jericho -- I mean I think closing that off was the biggest improvement we are going to get in that area and having access from -- through Hightower and Ithink -- I like this. Ithink it's -- you know, you got a church on each side, there is another landscaping company right out there next to the other, I believe, and I like it. Moe: As far as access to get into the property, would you condition that into aright-in, right-out type of situation or -- Newton-Huckabay: No. Moe: -- given them full access? Meridian Planning & Zoning August 7, 2008 Page 57 of 61 Newton-Huckabay: No. I'd leave the full access. It's been a full access, so -- like Mr. Eisenbarth said, for 17 years and I don't think you're going to get a back road in there very easily and -- I mean I suppose if you come in and -- I mean this a major redevelopment of the property, but you're leaving the existing business use on it, so I guess forme that kind of gives you some kind of a grandfather right there somewhere. Marshall: Mr. Chair? Moe: Mr. Marshall. Marshall: To be honest, I like the layout. I think it kind of fits the area. But I have to admit I really don't like the access to Chinden and we are putting a lot of traffic back out there on Chinden and that's one nasty road to get on and off of and it's going to slow traffic down and it's going to be a mess. But, boy, I sure do like -- you know, to be honest, I think it fits as far as -- I'm very torn on this. I just -- but the access I keep stubbing my toe on that. Newton-Huckabay: Can I ask you a question? I mean is this going to stub off to the west, is that going to stub into the -- isn't this a private driveway on the church on the west side, isn't it? Because doesn't that exit out to Meridian Road? Yeah. That one comes in from the north. Marshall: I don't know. I -- I don't -- Newton-Huckabay: That's the question I have. Hood: It doesn't. I have got the aerial I can go to as well. But, no, it doesn't -- the church currently has undeveloped parcels in here, so there isn't -- they have one access to their parking lot right there and -- and, then, this driveway does come into their site, but it's not -- again, the properties on either side of that is -- are undeveloped. Now, if there is some cross-access amongst the properties, which is what we would want to see. I mean at the bare minimum, if we are going to approve something at the quarter mile, we'd want it to be shared. Newton-Huckabay: Yeah. I mean I would take away -- I mean I don't have any problem taking away one of those accesses. I mean that -- that I would think would be with the intention of getting that east-west connectivity, because I would think your -- at some point you're going to be able to hook into that Hightower development, if, unfortunately, the soccer field went away. Hood: And I guess that's part of the problem that staff had, too. I mean you have got church, church, commercial. How do you get -- it has to go out onto Chinden. There is nowhere else for it to go. And even if it does redevelop with medium density residential, you still don't want to push that commercial traffic through medium density residential to get here, so -- Meridian Planning & Zoning August 7, 2008 Page 58 of 61 Rohm: Well, the point is, though, I mean even if it was medium density residential, it's still going to exit out onto Chinden, is it not? Hood: No. If it's medium density residential, they can develop back through here and you.use access points this way and you have got medium density to the south. There is a stub street here. We have talked to the church about developing this. They don't have any plans to, but we have -- they haven't ruled it out, developing this medium density residential and stubbing right up through -- it's not Wheelers -- whatever these folks here is, so -- Beeler. Thank you. Beeler's property. So, you will have -- through residential subdivisions you will come back out to Meridian Road in this location. So, it is fully feasible that this could be medium density residential and have multiple access out to the arterials and even through the development back through Saguaro and back all the way back down to McMillan. Moe: Well, Commissioners? Rohm: I think we are ready to close. Moe: Okay. Rohm: Mr. Chairman? Moe: Mr. Rohm. Rohm: I move that we close the public hearing on CPA 08-007. Newton-Huckabay: Second. Moe: Did you second it? Newton-Huckabay: Yeah, I did. Moe: Oh, I'm sorry. We have a motion and second to close the public hearing on CPA 08-007. 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 item number CPA 08-007 to the special meeting of August 14th, 2008. Marshall: Second. Meridian Planning & Zoning August 7, 2008 Page 59 of 61 Moe: It's been moved and seconded to continue CPA, 08-007 to the special P&Z meeting on August 14th. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? That motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 13: Public Hearing: CPA 08-002 Request for Comprehensive Plan Amendment to modify the Future Land Use Map by changing the land use designation for approximately 10 acres from Low Density Residential to Mixed Use -Community for Eagle and Victory by Rose Law Group - NWC of E. Victory Road and S. Eagle Road: Item 14: Public Hearing: AZ 08-010 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 3.75 acres from RUT and R1 to C-N zoning district for Eagle and Victory by Rose Law Group -NWC of E. Victory Road and S. Eagle Road: Moe: All right. Just to note, sir, we -- no, you're fine. The rest of the hearings tonight are going to be continued. There will nothing to open -- it will be opened to be continued to the 14th. At this time I would like to get a motion to continue -- wait. Yeah. Well, continue CPA 08-002 and AZ 08-010 for Eagle and Victory to the special meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission for August 14th. Newton-Huckabay: So moved. Rohm: So moved. Newton-Huckabay: Second. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to continue CPA 08-002 and AZ 08-010, to the special meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission for August 14th. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? That motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 15: Public Hearing: CPA 08-008 Request for Comprehensive Plan Amendment to modify the Future Land Use Map by changing the land use designation from Medium Density Residential to Mixed Use -Community for approximately 5 acres for Postal Annex by Jack Gish -Southwest Corner of Meridian Road and McMillan Road: Item 16: Public Hearing: AZ 08-009 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 5.56 acres from RUT in Ada County to L-O (Limited Office District) for Postal Annex by Jack Gish -Southwest Corner of Meridian Road and McMillan Road Moe: At this time I would like to get a motion to continue CPA 08-008 for the Postal Annex to the special meeting of the Planning and zoning Commission for August 14th.