Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996 01-09M~'f~'AN PLANNING & ZONING CO~ISSION AGENDA TUESDAY, JANUARY 9, 1996 - 7:30 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD DECEMBER 12, 1995: (APPROVED) TABLED DECEMBER 12, 1995: PRELIMINARY PLAT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR HIGHLANDS RANCH BY GEM PARK II PARTNERSHIP: (TABLED UNTIL FEBRUARY 13, 1996) 2. TABLED DECEMBER 12, 1995: ANNEXATION AND ZONING REQUEST FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION N0.2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: (TABLED UNTIL FEBRUARY 13, 1996) 3. TABLED DECEMBER 12, 1995: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO.2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: (TABLED UNTIL FEBRUARY 13, 1996) 4. TABLED DECEMBER 12, 1995: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR CENTRAL VALLEY CORPORATE PARK NO.6 BY BOB NAHAS: (TABLED UNTIL FEBRUARY 13, 1996} 5. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR REZONE REQUEST FROM R-4 TO L-O BY MERIDIAN FREE LIBRARY DISTRICT: (APPROVE AMENDED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSONS OF LAW; APPROVE DECISION) 6. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR 74 UNIT PUD FOR JAMES PLACE AT ASHFORD SUBDIVISION BY BRIGHTON CORPORATION: (PREPARE FINDINGS FOR FEBRUARY 13, 1996) 7. PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR JAMES PLACE AT ASHFORD SUBDIVISION BY BRIGHTON CORPORATION: TABLED DECEMBER 12, 1995: (TABLED UNTIL FEBRUARY 13, 1996) 8. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF .95 ACRES TO R-4 BY KENT 8~ MARY BARNEY: (CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW) 9. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF .48 ACRES TO R-4 BY STEINER DEVELOPMENT: (CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW) 10. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE LAKE AT CHERRY LANE N0.6 SUBDNISION BY STEINER DEV. (CITY ~!RNEY TO PREPARE FINDING~irACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW) 11. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR THE LAKE AT CHERRY LANE N0.6 SUBDIVISION BY STEINER DEVELOPMENT: (TABLED UNTIL FEBRUARY 13, 1996) 12. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR DOVE MEADOWS SUBDIVISION NO. 2 BY DAVE LEADER: (APPROVE PRELIMINARY PLAT WITH CONDITIONS) 13. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR REZONE OF 8.34 ACRES TO C-N BY SMITH'S FOOD AND DRUG CENTER, INC.: (CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW) ~RIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING OMISSION AGENDA TUESDAY, JANUARY 9, 1996 - 7:30 P.M. CITY COUNCIL, CHAMBERS ~/`Q,IZrrvtQflDh/ ~ rni /1~ ~!l/ //.~ir.~, {v~ l2 atJ D~ .T¢~-r/r 2z MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD DEC~MBER 12, 1995: ~~~rnve 1. TABLED DECEMBER 12, 1995: PRELIMINARY PLAT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR HIGHLANDS RANCH BY GEM PARK it PARTNERSHIP: ~~e f~:hr~,~ /3.~ / i~6 2. TABLED DECEMBER 12, 1995: ANNEXATION AND ZONING REQUEST FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION N0.2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: 3. TABLED DECEMBER 12, 1995: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: -~ ~:nh1 F-~b~uu~ y /3~, /996 4. TABLED DECEMBER 12, 1995: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR CENTRAL VALLEY CORPORATE PARK N0.6 BY BOB NAHAS: f~. ~ ~crvZ`i1 ~.2htawr,~ Ij, / 99~ 5. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLU510NS OF LAW FOR REZONE REQUEST FROM R-4 TO L-0 BY MERIDIAN FREE LIBRARY DISTRICT: approve Qr~eKaled ~/~' ~c% appr~rt dPPi3.r~.. 6. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR 74 UNIT PUD FOR JAMES PLACE AT ASHFORD SUBDVISION BY BRIGHTON CORPORATION: {t-t Fe bvucK of /3 ~ {~+ ~-, 7. PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR JAMES PLACE AT ASHFORD SUBDIVISION BY BRIGHTON CORPORATION: TABLED DECEMBER 12, 1995: -fa,b~ce ~7 F~ bra.. /3, ~ y 96 8. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FO~ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF .95 ACRES TO R-4 BY KENT 8~ MARY.BARNEY: 9. PUBLIC HEARING: R QUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF .48 ACRES TO R-4 BY STEINER DEVELOPMENT: 10. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE LAKE AT CHERRY LANE NO.,~SUBDIVISION BY STEINER DEV. L'r ~cffa~c y Ev~-,e a-te S,~' r 11. PUBLIC HEARING: QU S FOR P EL M NARY PLAT FOR THE LAKE AT CHERRY LANE NO.JI~~UBDNISION BY STEINER DEVELOPMENT: ~. rug-t~G~ flhua-, jj~d f~zi~, 12. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST F~ PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR DOVE MEADOWS SUBDNISION N0.2 BY DAVE LEADER: Gip~rvve w~ condi~ irx,r 13. PUBLIC HEARING R UEST FOR REZONE OF 8.34 ACRES TO C-N BY SMITH'S FOOD AND DRUG CENTER INC.: L'i'nt ~7~~~ ~ ~~~ ~~~ Vic'/C CITY OF MERID P~LIC MEETING SIGN- SHEET ~A ~ ~" ~4 Z ~ S C~ ~~ -/yet oY/ ~~2 ~ ~~- 00 Z-L CITY OF MERID PU~LIC MEETING SIGN- SHEET ~r~ ..L PHONE NUMBER - /c7'7 2~ MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 9 1996 The regular meeting of the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairman Jim Johnson at 7:30 P.M.: MEMBERS PRESENT: Tim Hepper, Jim Shearer, Greg Oslund, Malcolm MacCoy: OTHERS PRESENT: Will Berg, Wayne Crookston, Gary Smith, Shari Stiles, Paula Devaney, Shelley Monks, Ardis Schlafke, Marylin Bauer, Dale Sharp, Helen Sharp, Kris and Joe Miller, Chris Jack, Ron Santi, Mary Santi, Kelly Maupin, Terri Maupin, Marie Ann Christen, Robert Buchanan, Michelle Buchanan, Dixie Lee Roberts, Georgia Mackly, Pam Bennett, Sharon Litzbauer, G. Dee Carter, Patricia Stouer, George Stouer, JoAnn Baker, Michael Boone, Dan Barbin, Ed King, Rick Baer, Vicki Baer, John Shipley, Bonnie Bradshaw, John Craig, Steve Cullin, Sharon Litzbauer, John George, Mike Wardle, David Turnbull, Steve Bradbury, Ted Hutchinson, Dave Leader, Julie Pipal, Don Brian, Gary Funkhauser, DeeRay Olsen, Daniel Blunke, Lisa Johnson, Brent Perkins, Leslie Peters, Marvin Bodine, Terri Muffin, Randy Nash, Wanda Lansberg, Elizabeth Gwen, Terry Scofield, Dan Bickni: Johnson: The first item on our agenda is not on our agenda. In consideration of the past twelve years of service to the City of Meridian I would like to present a certificate of appreciation to Moe Alidjani, Mohammed Alidjani, who served and contributed his times and efforts to the City and community service over the past twelve years. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD DECEMBER 12, 1995: Johnson: Are there any correction, additions or deletions you would like to make at this time? Entertain a motion for approval please. Shearer: I so move. Hepper: Second Johnson: It has been moved and seconded that we approve the minutes of the meeting held December 12, 1995 as written, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #1: TABLED DECEMBER 12, 1995: PRELIMINARY PLAT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR HIGHLANDS RANCH BY GEM PARK II PARTNERSHIP: Johnson: This was tabled last time because we had not received any new information that had been requested, are we in receipt of any new information since our last meeting. Shearer: Mr. Chairman, I heard from the representative of this group and I move that we Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 2 table items 1 through 4 until our next regular meeting on February 13 as representatives from all of these have requested that they be tabled until next month. Johnson: Shari would you comment on item number one please? Stiles: Yes, Chairman Johnson, the applicant had submitted a new preliminary plat however he didn't have time to get all of the information required on that plat so I believe they will be re-submitting this month for the February meeting. Johnson: Thank you Shari, we do have written requests on items 2, 3 and 4. So we have a motion is there a second? MacCoy: Second Johnson: Seconded by Mr. MacCoy, all those in favor of tabling items 1 through 4 say aye. Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Johnson: Those were tabled to a date certain which is the next regularly scheduled meeting which February 13, 1996. ITEM #5: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR REZONE REQUEST FROM R-4 TO L-O BY MERIDIAN FREE LIBRARY DISTRICT: Johnson: Are there any corrections, deletions or comments regarding these prepared findings of fact and conclusions of law? Hepper: Mr. Chairman, we have a small correction on page 9, under the approval of the findings, second line, the word Council should be struck. Johnson: So noted, also on page 4, middle of the page, 1 believe that is striping not stripping, is that correct Counsel? Crookston: Yes Johnson: Then I had a question regarding the testimony. As I recall there was a lady whose name escapes me but I will get it for you, that expressed some concern about a redtail hawk I believe, it was nesting in the tree. I actually think that should be part of the testimony included in the findings of fact. I don't see it in here, I believe her name was Edna McDaniels. Meridian Planning i~ Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 3 Crookston: That was her name Mr. Chairman. Johnson: Are there any other corrections or deletions to that? If not I would entertain a motion to have those approved with the additions and corrections. Shearer: Mr. Chairman, in regard to that, I believe that part of her statement was that the redtail hawk was an endangered species. I don't believe that is a fact. Johnson: I think we should note that it was brought up however and not just ignore that comment and that is my point. Shearer: I agree with what you are saying but I am not sure that we state that as a fact. It should either be researched or something. Johnson: I would like to see reference made to the bird. Shearer: I have no problem with that. Johnson: We need a motion. Shearer: Mr. Chairman, I move the Planning & Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian hereby adopts these findings of fad and contusions of law including the two amendments that we just mentioned. Hepper: Second Johnson: We have a motion by Commissioner Shearer and a second by Commissioner Hepper to approve the findings of fad with the corrections so stated, this is a roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: Hepper -Yea, Oslund -Yea, Shearer -Yea, MacCoy -Yea MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Johnson: Is there a decision or recommendation you wish to pass onto the City Council at this time? Shearer: Mr. Chairman, I move the Meridian City Planning & Zoning Commission hereby recommend this rezone request by the applicant for the property described in the application with the conditions set forth in the findings of fad and conclusions of law and that the property be required to meet all city ordinances regarding safety, sewer, water requirements etc. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 4 Hepper: Second Johnson: We have a motion and a second to pass a recommendation onto the City Council as stated by Commissioner Shearer, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Oslund: I may have missed something and pardon me if I did, there was one thing I wanted to bring up on that application and it may be too late. Johnson: Does it have to do with the findings of fact or just the application? Oslund: I believe it has to do with the findings of fact. Johnson: The only way you can address that is with a withdrawal of the motion that we just voted on. Oslund: Well, I would appreciate it if you would do that just this one time, next time 1 will do better at this. Johnson: Commissioner Shearer? Shearer: What is your problem, we can listen to your problem. Johnson: Okay, go ahead let's have the discussion and see whether he wants to withdraw the motion or not. Oslund: The only issue, I went out and looked at the site between the last. meeting and this meeting. The only concern I have, and would think that it would be a condition probably or possibly is that the applicant talked about doing a one way in and out arrangement for the access to this property. The exit was the driveway to the east. Currently the property owner immediately to the east has quite a bit of landscaping immediately abutting the back of (inaudible). From what I can tell with that kind of arrangement, the site distance is going to be very much restricted and so that was my concern that there wouldn't be adequate site distance to provide for safe exiting of that property. There are a couple of possible solutions I can guess but that is the issue and if you are willing, if you believe it is worthwhile then I think we need to go back. Shearer: I would think that would be covered by our codes, the neighboring landscaping presents a hazard or if any landscaping presents a hazard it should be cut back. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 5 Johnson: We had a late arrival on this from ACHD, did you get an opportunity to review their comments, they came in yesterday. Oslund: Yes, a little bit. Johnson: I think their comments in general cover your concern. I tend to agree with Commissioner Shearer that the vision (inaudible) is covered by our ordinance. At this time probably my opinion we don't need to redo anything on that. They will have to comply with those ACHD comments which should have been here prior to our last meeting but they didn't arrive until January 8. ITEM #6: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FORA 74 UNIT PUD FOR JAMES PLACE AT ASHFORD SUBDIVISION BY BRIGHTON CORPORATION: Johnson: We do not have findings of facts prepared for that tonight because there was discussion which the conclusion of which that perhaps we as a Commission could have done a little better job in asking some questions last time. There are some unanswered questions. I would invite the representative for the Brighton Corporation, Mr. Mike Wardle to come forvvard at this time if he would and would like to see if we couldn't move forward with this and answer some of the questions that were brought up during the preparation of the findings of fact which never came to conclusion. Would it be necessary for him to be sworn at this point or not? Crookston: No, it is not. Johnson: Mike, one of the, you and I have talked briefly, one of the concerns that came up during the preparation of the findings of fact is the width of street. I believe the width proposed was 29 feet. The concern came, and those are in culdesac areas, as to how emergency vehicles might function. I don't see anything in our minutes where we properly addressed that. Wardle: Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, let me address a couple issues that does relate to the question of whether these will become public or private streets. (Inaudible) something that I thought we had discussed at the meeting but nevertheless the proposal that was before the Commission at the last meeting did not yet have the benefit of Ada County Highway District review. As proposed and as submitted to ACRD the street system was to be a public street system. There are two considerations, there is a loop street so ident'rfied on this particular plan that ties the project to Ashford Boulevard at the west and east ends. That street was proposed to be a 29 foot back to back section within a 45 foot right of way with sidewalk generally on one side in a detached mode. There are Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 6 a couple of places there there is sidewalk on both sides. That standard, the 29 foot back to back section under ACRD policies is approveable if the traffic load on that street is 200 vehicle trips per day or less. The fact that this is a loop street, there are 74 units, there is a factor associated here that suggests there would be more than 200 trips per day because it is going to be hard. David could you came and hold this for me a moment so I can use the pointer. There are three areas, this area alone, the westerly area and the third, if these two alone were there it would meet their criteria. When you put this into the mix and it has the potential then to split the traffic it becomes marginal. Ada County Highway District's technical review comments as adopted by the Commission are that if public streets are required and that is a decision that the City of Meridian can make, if they are to be public then they would want in this segment, this loop street a 37 foot back to back section within a 50 foot right of way. Of course their standards also require sidewalks on both sides of the street. The culdesac sections actually conform to their requirements with the exception that we do not show sidewalk on both sides. But it is exactly the same as they would require under their current policies and standards. So there is no difference on these little short culdesac sections than what ACHD would allow. The other interesting thing is that when the discussion occurred generally ACHD does not allow a backing movement into the street section. But they were silent on that and we specifically asked shy because normally they would say you can't do that. But they felt that the traffic generation meter and the low volume of traffic would not really be impacted and it is not a thru street system and therefore they had no problem with that backing movement. So the comments that were finally adopted and passed on and I don't know if your staff has those comments whether they are on the routine transmittal list from ACRD or not is that its Meridian's choice, Meridian can approve this as a private street system as proposed but if Meridian chooses not to do that and require that they have to be public then this street would have to be upgraded to a larger standard. We are proposing as a result of ACHD's input that the City of Meridian consider approving this street system as a private street system. Johnson: Are there any other items other than the street system that we should bring up at this time. Commissioners do you have any questions of Mr. Wardle? Oslund: In the application you showed the width of the street being 29 feet and that included parking on one side. So that is part of the proposal we are looking at here is to include parking in that 29 feet. Wardle: Mr. Chairman and Mr. Oslund that is correct, under Fire department standards that we have been dealing with in the various communities in that section even ACHD would be a one side parking requirement only. So there would have to be signage or other means of identifying and policing that. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 7 Oslund: But that section isn't acceptable to ACHD as a public street then is what you just said because of the capacity. Wardle: Mr. Chairman and Mr. Oslund, they weren't terribly concerned with capacity because this is not, there is nothing else that will enter into this project. Its marginal but because they don't really like to waive their standards the only way that we could go back and request is to specifically make an application or a waiver of ACHD standards. They discouraged us from doing that, they felt that it probably would work as a private street system but they really like their 37 foot pavement and sidewalks on both sides for a public street. Oslund: At the 37 feet would they allow parking on both sides? Wardle: Mr. Chairman and Mr. Oslund yes they would. Hepper: Could you re-address from the last meeting the square footage of the homes that would be in this project? Wardle: I will have to pull out the, Hepper: I remember there was a mix but I can't remember exactly what the footage were. Wardle: The plans ranged, there was one plan of 1225 square feet, it was a single story plan. The others ranged from 1425 to 1640 to 1721, and 1836 then another 1881. So there are five plans and that 1700 and 1800 were just a variation, a choice that the resident could make. So a range from 1225 and then to 1425 and up to 1886 square feet. Johnson: The 1425 was a single story right, and the ones in excess of that were a two story right? Wardle: I can't remember Mr. Chairman if, there is one other plan the 1425 square foot is also a single story and then the others I believe are all 2 story or partial story. Johnson: There is nothing in the minutes that reflect that we talked about the number of units. Our concern of course is with the smaller unit, the percent of total units that might fall into that 1225 category. Dces the developer or do you have any information regarding the anticipated number would be out of the whole? Have you talked about percentages at all? Wardle: I have not been privy to such. Mr. Turnbull could respond to that question if he Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 8 has such information. Turnbull: Mr. Chairman and Commissioners, we really don't know definitively what the breakdown would be. We prepared five plans we assume that there would be a selection of buyers in each price category and each size range. So, whether the smaller unit is going to be 10% of the market or 30% of the market I really don't know but I would imagine there would be some kind of an even distribution across the spectrum. Johnson: Thanks Crookston: Mr. Chairman, I just have a question on that. Mr. Wardle mentioned during the public hearing he said that only one of five would meet the 1400 square feet that is required in the R-4 zone. Is that what your thinking is that 1 out of 5 would be 1400 or more square feet? Turnbull: No, four out of the five are better than 1400 square feet, one of the five is not. Crookston: Thank you Johnson: Anyone else have any questions of the developer or Mr. Wardle? Wayne are you comfortable that we can go ahead and proceed with findings of fact? Crookston: I think that I have some more questions. In Shari Stiles comments she mentioned that this was a planned development and that the restrictions or the requirements of the R-4 zone could definitely be changed. She mentioned however that your minimum lot sizes street frontages minimum roadway widths, private drives and lots not fronting on a roadway, that you show parking areas closer than 4 feet from the road. Right of way that the depths are less than our ordinance requires, that the ditches remain open, provision for five foot sidewalks on each side of the roadway in accordance with City ordinance 11-906 B, she then mentions front and side yard setbacks. Those are many of the standard requirements that are in our ordinances for subdivisions, can you just comment on those. Do you happen to have her sheet? Wardle: Mr. Chairman, I was looking through my previous notes to see if I could find that. Johnson: What is the date of that letter? Crookston: I am just looking for it Mr. Chairman, it is dated December 8, 1995. Wardle: Yes, Mr. Chairman, unfortunately I did not come knowing we were going to get into this so I have the comments that I had from the last meeting in which I did site those • Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 9 issues that Shari ident~ed an acxording, I believe if I remember correctly what she stated, she does indicate a planned development would provide for exceptions from use, density, area, bulk parking, signs and other regulations. Then very specifically we went through and concun'ed with that because she didn't state there was anything in the proposal that did not conform or was not approvable under the PUD ordinance. The only thing that we brought into the discussion that we wanted to clarify was that in the terminology of bulk under the ordinance and the definitions as we read them allows the Commission the latitude to consider the 1225 square foot building which is different from the 1400 square foot standard requirements of the R-4 zone. So I believe that in response to Shari's comments and I hope you had my annotated comments back to her they were provided at that earlier meeting in which we didn't find any particular problem just clarifying the issues that she had addressed. Crookston: Is that a letter from you Mr. Wardle? Wardle: Well, Mr. Chairman, let's do a remodel on this particular dias so we can stack things (inaudible) those were the annotated responses we made to Shari's comments that were returned at that last meeting, I don't know if you have a copy of that or not. Crookston: I don't have a copy of this. Wardle: I believe we received them the day of the hearing and so we simply responded as quickly as we could. Hopefully there is a copy in your file. Crookston: You referenced a memorandum that was dated December 12, 1995 which addresses what she called other variances/exceptions that would need to be approved to grant the conditional use permit in an R-4 zone as presented would be and she mentions minimum lot sizes and goes through that. Is there a memorandum that addresses that because it is not in this document. Wardle: Mr. Chairman, all of this information was provided earlier, that actually the December 12 was provided to all of the Commission members. Johnson: Well, December 12 was the date of our meeting. It is possible, I don't recall it. Wardle: Well I see that Mr. Oslund has a copy in his possession. Oslund: I believe we all received this, it had a yellow post it note on the comer. Johnson: What was the date of the letter you just received, we need a copy of that if we don't have that letter, do we have that letter? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 10 Wardle: It is the December 12th memorandum. Johnson: We have a copy of this. Is this the letter you gave to Crookston? This was the second letter you gave him wasn't it, didn't you give something that had your letterhead on it? Wardle: No, I gave him something that had the City of Meridian's letterhead, it was Shari Stiles' comments with just my annotations and responses. Crookston: I did not end up with a copy of this which is certainly not your doing Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Mr. Chairman, I would like to make just one comment that I know it is frustrating for you folks it is frustrating for applicants and it is frustrating for the public to have to come to meetings when in fact you don't have the advantage of having a complete staff report that ident~es the information and the issues so that you can address those without a great deal of difficulty. I would strongly encourage the City to get into a program where you are provided with a staff report for not just comments but the one that clearly states the issues and provides a recommendation so that you don't have to start from scratch and we don't have to take everybody's time in such meetings to address the issues. Johnson: Well, with all do respect I think we do a fairly good job with that for the most part. I fully anticipate that we will be stumbling around tonight and t am doing this really for your sake so that we can move the findings of fact up as soon as we can. That is why we called and asked that you even though we don't have the findings of fact prepared. This is very unusual to do this today. As a matter of fact I can't recall when we have had findings of fact on the agenda and not have them prepared. In this case we didn't feel like we had enough information to do it correctly and to finish it. So in the interest of trying to do things right we asked you to come by and maybe provide some additional information and I did know it would be a stumbling session, but it is better than no session in my opinion and that is why I made that call. Wardle: I appreciate that. Crookston: The other questions that 1 have is that in Shari's comments on seven items she references that they are variances or exceptions, those types of things can be handled with the planned development. One note that I did have is that it showed 46 feet of frontage for let's say an average lot. I felt that was rather small to be in a planned unit development in an R~ district. I needed to get the opinions of the various commissioners as to what their thinking was on that. I assume that you are still going with that 46 foot wide lot. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 11 Wardle: Mr. Chairman, Mr. Crookston, generally that is correct. You recall that when the original conceptual approval was granted in December of 1994 that this project was not detailed but had a maximum density allowance of 8 units to the acre. This particular application comes in considerably less than that in the range of five point something and I don't have that information. So it is clear that of necessity there would have to be something substantially less than the standard 80 foot frontage of an R-4 parcel in anything that would equate to a medium density project of up to 8 units to the acre. I think the key is the way the particular project itself details and the feeling that you would get of these units with a great deal of open space and a variety of orientations so that you don't end up feeling like you have a lot of small lots facing a street. In fact the way they work out you won't have that feeling at all. There are just a few places where there is a run of those parcels, a lot of them are turned to the side and a lot of them back into the open space. Johnson: Anything further? Oslund: A couple of things. Last time we talked a little bit about the fencing and the need to keep the rear fences open using shorter fences or fences with more open area in them to keep the openness in the common areas. Because this is a conditional use permit I think that my opinion anyway it would be useful anyway as part of this conditional use to have some discussions, specific discussion about just what you have in mind with that. Maybe it is, ultimately you are going to handle it with covenants and restrictions maybe if you have some wvenants and restrictions from another development that have been used similar to what you have in mind here if we can look at those and incorporate those right into the conditions. Turnbull: Mr. Chairman, Mr. Oslund, we did have some discussion on that at the last meeting and we discussed what we have done at our Hobble Creek subdivision where backing onto common areas the maximum height of solid fencing is four feet high. We allow fences up to 6 feet high but the portion from 4 to 6 feet high is open and I do have some details that I can submit to the Commission a detail of what we would be proposing to do on this project which would be the same as we have done in the Hobble Creek project. Oslund: Great, the second thing is also last time we talked about there was concern expressed about the small floor plan, the smallest of those, I think it was 1250 or so. The question was asked about, I don't know if there was a question asked, but there was some testimony given to the fact that the development was going to be higher quality, kind of a step above what you typically see in terms of amenities and features. So I guess my concem is just what are those and possibly if you have some ideas in terms of materials and things like that, siding, roofing, fencing those kinds of things that would be useful as Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 12 well to take a look at. Turnbull: Okay Johnson: Any questions from staff at all? Any comments? Anyone else from the Commission here have any comments? Hepper: I had a question for the counselor, there is a stipulation, I believe it is in our comp plan, maybe an ordinance, that says that with a density transfer where they donate land to the City as park area or golf course area that they can transfer some of the, they can end up with a higher density and perhaps lower square footage. We had this question come up before, does it mention a 25°~ reduction, the question is that all the lots can have a 25% reduction in their square footage or 25°k of the houses can have a reduction in footage? Has that been decided upon what the interpretation is on that? Crookston: Not that I am aware of. That does need to be answered but it is not answered in this application. That just needs to be decided. Hepper: My interpretation of that if we have a 1400 square foot minimum and we have a reduction of square footage of 25% that would say that all the houses could go down as low as 1050 square feet. And I don't feel that was the interpretation that was intended. My interpretation of it is that 25% of the homes could be less than 1400 square feet. In this case where we have five different plans one of which is 1225 I would think I would like to see incorporated in the findings that no more than 25°k of the homes could be less than 1400 square feet and that would be my interpretation of that unless we are looking at some other interpretation. Crookston: The City does need to interpret that to basically declare what the meaning of that language is in the ordinance. It is in the planned development section of our subdivision and development ordinance. It is not in the comprehensive plan it is in the ordinance. That does need to be decided. Hepper: Did you follow that? Turnbull: I followed you. Johnson: Anyone else? Gary Smith did you have a comment? Smith: Mr. Chairman, Commission members, I know there has been an ongoing question concerning street widths. We had a subdivision, Haven Cove No. 5 Subdivision that was also proposing a less than 50 foot street right of way. I submitted a memo to our fire, Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 13 police and school district asking for their input on that particular subdivision and I just received that on the 4th of January. I know we talked to Mr. Wardle and Mr. Turnbull about the width of the right of way and it was part of our comments on the review of this plat and conditional use permit. I gave Mr. Wardle a copy of these wmments this evening. If it is appropriate I will give you one also for your reading pleasure but there is some concern from police, fire and school district concerning the width of the streets. Johnson: I would appreciate it if we can have a copy of the comments. (End of Tape) Crookston: I was concerned with the street widths because of Kenny Bowers comments from the fire department where he says with streets of the 29 foot size that he would have to back his emergency vehicle from however he got in he would have to back it out. I thought that was something that needed to be discussed. Wardle: Mr. Chairman, may I discuss that one more time in the sense that a PUD offers an opportunity to create a living environment that differs from a standard subdivision. Now, I don't know what Haven Cove No. 5 subdivision looks like, I don't know if it is a thru street system or not. In this particular case with the exception of the question on the whether the loop street can function under the standards as proposed. These culdesacs conform to Ada County Highway District Standards. They can be constructed just as shown if ACRD agrees. The only thing that ACRD questions on these is whether or not you would have sidewalks on both sides which is their standard. The street is exactly the same, therefore if this project were to go forward and the loop street was upgraded to a 37 foot back to back we would construct these culdesacs just as shown and ACHD would stamp the plat they would sign it and agree to take maintenance. So, there certainly needs to be some dialogue between the safety departments of the various communities and ACRD, but this conforms. So rf under any normal circumstance the fire department got into one of these and had to back out it would be exactly the same under a standard subdivision because these all conform to that requirement. It is purely the loop street and since this loop street really diffuses a fairly small area we believe that the narrower street is not going to create a safety concem for any of the fire or police departments. Johnson: I think that is a good point, the responses by the three entities (inaudible) by Gary Smith I think will be well anticipated. Anything else that we should gather here so that we can go on with findings of fact at our next meeting. We are going to await your remodel and redesign of our dias here so that you can submit that whenever you are interested, we will subcontract that to you on the side and you can build it in your garage. We are tabling seven because we can't act on that until we get the findings of fact. Shearer: I move we table item #7 to February 13, our regular meeting. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 14 MacCoy: Second Johnson: Moved and seconded we table item #7 until February 13, our next scheduled meeting, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #8: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF .95 ACRES TO R-4 BY KENT & MARY BARNEY: Johnson: I will now open the public hearing and invite the applicant or his representative to come forward and address the Commission. Steve Bradbury, 300 N. 6th Street, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Bradbury: Mr. Chairman and members of the Commission. This item and the next item are annexation which are really I think what I might describe as clean up matters. They were little parcels of ground that were, at least the next one is a little parcel of ground that was inadvertently left out of a previous annexation approval by the City for I believe it was the Lake at Cheny Lane No. 3. Mr. and Mrs. Bamey's property is immediately adjacent to that other piece and it was also intended to be annexed by the City in connection with the previous application and simply got left out through inadvertence or some other mistake. Beyond that I don't have anything in addition to tell you and I would be pleased to respond to questions if I can. Johnson: Thank you very much, any questions concerning the applicant or the application. This is a fill in project. Does anyone have any comments? Anything at all from staff? Thank you very much, this is a public hearing, is there anyone from the public that would like to address the Commission on this application at this time? Seeing no one then I will close the public hearing. What is your pleasure this requires findings of fact and conclusions of law. Hepper: Mr. Chairman, I move we have the attorney prepare findings of fact. Shearer: Second Johnson: It has been moved and seconded to have the attorney prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 15 ITEM #9: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF .48 ACRES TO R-4 BY STEINER DEVELOPMENT: Johnson: At this time I will open the public hearing and invite the representative for the applicant to address the Commission. Steve Bradbury, 300 N. 6th Street, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Bradbury: I would simply reiterate what I said in the last public hearing. It is simply an infill, small parcel of property which was inadvertently left out of a previous annexation. I would be pleased to respond to questions if you have any. Johnson: Any questions of Mr. Bradbury? This is a public hearing, anyone from the public that would like to address the Commission on this application? Seeing no one I will close the public hearing a this time. Hepper: Mr. Chairman, I move we have the City Attorney prepare findings of fact on this application. Shearer: Second Johnson: Moved by Commissioner Hepper and second by Commissioner Shearer to have the City Attorney prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law on item #9 a public hearing for annexation and zoning of .48 acres by Steiner Development, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #10: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE LAKE AT CHERRY LANE N0. 6 SUBDIVISION BY STEINER DEVELOPMENT: Johnson: I will now open this public hearing and invite the applicant or his representative to come forward. Steve Bradbury, 300 N. 6th Street, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Bradbury: Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission I have been asked to introduce this project or perhaps reintroduce the project to you on behalf of Steiner Development. The applicant or Steiner's representative is also here, Doug Campbell, he is hiding somewhere in the back of the room I think. What you have before you tonight are two applications, this one and the following one on the agenda which are a conditional use for a planned Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 16 development and a preliminary plat going along with that planned development. By way of background to put it into context the City Council a month or so ago approved the preliminary plat for the Lake at Cherry Lane Subdivision No. 5 and 6. In approving those applications a portion of the 40 acre parcel which was under consideration was zoned R-4, a portion of the property was zoned R-8 and a portion was zoned R-15 for a little higher density. That approval, you will probably recall of those of you that were on the Commission a# the time was conditioned on the applicant coming back and applying for a conditional use permit and filing a new preliminary plat for those portions of the property which were approved to be zoned R-15. There were two portions, a portion was in the northeast corner and a portion in the southeast corner. All of you should have a booklet like this and I will kind of go through and show you what is in here for you. But if you want to get a feel of what I am talking about go behind tab four and you will see the conceptual layout which was approved by the City Council here a couple of months ago. The application you have before you refers to this most southeasterly portion of the property which consists of approximately 10 acres which was zoned R-15. That was shown on the preliminary plat which was approved by City Council as Lot 10, Block 11. What we are doing essentially now is we are attempting to re-subdivide or re-divide that Lot 10, Block 11. There has been a little bit of confusion with staff and perhaps with your folks 1 don't know with respect to the numbering and the phasing of this project. We met with staff yesterday that is Doug Campbell and I met with the staff yesterday and tried to straighten this out a little bit to the extend that we could, hopefully we didn't make it any harder. (Inaudible) a map that looks like this. Originally as proposed, the applicant proposed a preliminary plat for Lakes at Cherry Lane No. 5 and 6. Essentially two phases of an ongoing project. The original phasing plan as shown on the plat divided the plat east and west. For some reason that didn't get taken off of the preliminary plat even though the plans changed to phase it not east and west halves but instead north and south halves. So what I am trying to depict on this drawing that I have given you like this is to show you what the applicant is intending to do, to develop the south half of the property first as the Lake at Cherry Lane No. 5 and the north half of the property second as Lake at Cherry Lane No. 6. I think we have that numbering system worked out with staff, Gary is nodding his head yes but he is hesitant and I don't blame him. It took a little while to figure it out but we are on track. So what I am talking about now is Lake at Cherry Lane No. 5 and we are talking about Lot 10, Block 11 included in the Lake at Cherry Lane No. 5 which would be further divided by this application. The booklet that 1 have got here that we have submitted to you behind tab 1 just contains some background information and just gets you up to speed about where we are and why we are here. Behind tab #2 are the application materials which were filed in case you need to refer to those. Behind tab #3 is the findings of fact and contusions of law adopted by the City Council. Behind tab #4 are a series of drawings and maps. The first one shows the concept plan as approved by the Ciry Council. The second one shows the concept plan as is being presented tonight and there is a difference and I will talk to you about that. The third one is a drawing a reduced one of the i • Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 17 preliminary plat which is before you tonight. The fourth one is for purposes of making sure you all understand what is what, is just a color coded rendering of various zone designations which are included over the entire 40 acre parcel. Behind tab #5 is a list of the basic amenities being provided in this project and a rendering of the recreational, the rec center and clubhouse which is being proposed. Behind tab #6 are a series of floor plans which are proposed for the project and elevations, two elevations for each of the four different floor plans. Behind tab #7 is a drawing showing the proposed setbacks for the various structures to be constructed in the facility. And then a list showing what all the set backs are in front, rear and side, what the proposed setbacks are. Then behind tab 8 there are some materials showing the colors and the building materials which are proposed for the structure to be constructed. I will talk a little bit about each one of these things. I will try not to get into too great of detail because I know you have a long night ahead of you. The project is contemplated a senior citizens housing for older persons as it is defined under federal law. It is a senior citizens complex, that is consistent with what was presented to this Commission some months ago. This particular project contemplates this portion of the project contemplates 52 lots for single family detached dwellings. Now it is over approximately 10 acres so we are talking about 5.2 units per acre. The change from this, from what was presented earlier and approved by the City Council to what we are proposing now is that we have taken out all of the two and three family dwellings and substituted instead only single family dwellings. Originally as approved there were 63 units now we are reduced down to 52, so we have a net reduction in density from 6.3 to 5.2. The reason for that change to the extent that you are interested, I guess there are two reasons. One based upon the recommendation of this Commission and adoption by the City Council, the southerly portion of the property was zoned R-4 rather than R-15 meaning that it had to be larger lots and had to meet the dimensional requirements of the zone. As a result that required the roadways to be adjusted and moved up so that we could accommodate those larger lots. The second reason for the change was that since the applicant was here before they have undertaken some additional market research and concluded that a project is more likely to be successful if it was an entirely single family detached project as opposed to a mixed single family detached and single family attached unit dwelling. So it is simply a reaction to what the market research seems to indicate. I just want to reiterate as a result of this change you are actually seeing a reduction of density as opposed to an increase in density. The lot sizes vary from 4640 square feet to 8000 square feet meets the requirement. The 4640 I think that is somewhere around twice the minimum lot size. The applicant proposes to offer 4 different floor plans, they range in size from 1440 square feet up to 1872 square feet with 2 in between. They are fairly well distributed, there are 15 of the smaller ones, 13 of the 1500 square feet, 15 of the 1600 square feet and 9 of the 1800 square feet. If you are interested in seeing the floor plans and elevations of each of those they are behind tab 6 you can look through each of those. If you are interested in seeing where each of those various sizes are proposed to be included in the subdivision they are behind tab 7. For the moment ignore the colors Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 18 because those colors will confuse you, they don't reflect the size of the building, those reflect setbacks. Inside each one of the foot prints is a number, that number designates the square feet which are proposed for the dwellings on those lots. It appears to me there is a pretty good mix of the various sizes. All the dwellings will be single story, all of them will include 2 car garages. There is an option for a third three car garage on the units in the R-4 zone designation on the larger lots to the south. As I said all of the color and material choices are shown to you that would be offered to be shown to you behind tab 8, there will be a combination of stucco and siding and some brick and if you are interested in that you can look at those things. Other features of the project, the developer intends to do a great deal of landscaping, we talked about this before when we were here. We have this rendering to my right, it is to your left which was presented to this body and to the City Council the first time through. That is a fair representation of the entrance off of the proposed entrance off Ten Mile Road and then the entrance into the Complex which is proposed before you tonight. The top drawing is the entrance into this portion of the project, the lower drawing is the entrance off of Ten Mile Road into the entirety of the project and the entrance into the 40 acre parcel. Briefly there is a perimeter wall proposed around the entire project. Landscaping, a 20 foot landscaping strip on Ten Mile Road. One of the things you will see if you look at the plat is that there is a proposed golf cart pathway that goes across the lot which is designated at number 14 so that people who live in the subdivision will have easy access or easier access to the golf course from the project. The applicant still as before intends to donate to the City a fire station site that is designated on the plat as lot #26. One thing you need to know is that the dimensions of that fire station site have changed from what was previously proposed as a result of the re-design. Previously it was 160 by 160 square, the applicant is proposing now 148 by 170 feet. The preliminary discussions with the Fire Chief indicate that is acceptable to him, I don't know if he is here tonight and might say something. We can sure work out any details if you have any concerns about that. There is a recreation center and club house proposed, that would be built on Lot 52 in the Subdivision, that would include kitchen facilities, a pool and 11 parking spaces proposed for that facility and that exceeds the minimum requirements of the off street parking provisions of the ordinance. If you wanted to see the layout site plan that is behind tab 5 in that booklet. This is a planned development, we are proposing that it be developed as a conditional use, pursuant to the planned development procedures. As a result of course the planned development statutes or ordinances permit some exceptions from the standard district regulations. In this case we are seeking some exceptions. One is the provision for private streets on the interior of this portion of the subdivision. The main entrance road which is called Teter Boulevard I think on the plat would be a public road, but the entrance into this portion of the project is ten acres the interior roads would be private roads and there would be a private security gate installed at that location. The right of way widths which are proposed are 40 feet, they would include a 5 foot sidewalk on one side of each of the streets in the subdivision. Staff asked us if we wouldn't provide a drawing of where the sidewalks would go, so I have not Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 19 the best presentation in the world but it will hopefully suffice to get the point across. Behind, the second page to this document I handed to you, a plat with yellow marks on it. Those yellow marks are intended to indicate where it would propose to construct the five foot sidewalks. So in each street within the project will have sidewalk on at least one side, some places there are sidewalks on both sides. There had been some discussion about whether parking should be permitted on these private streets, it would be 40 foot right of way streets. Preliminary discussions with the fire chief indicate that he wasn't too terribly concerned about it. I am not sure that will hold. Let me put it to you this way, the applicant is willing to handle parking or no parking as the fire chief and the City sees fit. And for safety concerns there should be no parking and the applicant will certainly abide by that and will install no parking signs and will include in the restrictive covenants prohibitions against parking and require the homeowners association to enforce the no parking requirements. Another item that we are seeking some relief from is the minimum street frontage requirements on a few lots. The general requirement is 40 feet of street frontage, we would like to have a few lots reduced down to 25 feet frontage, these are primarily the lots that are found on the four corners, the outside corner of the subdivision where the roads turn and necessarily to fill the corners the lots tend to be a little narrowed on the street frontage. Those are obvious, they are shown on the plat, the numbers are there, I think it shows the ones that are 25 as opposed to the required 40. A third item that we are seeking an exception to is the requirement that the parking spaces that would be provided for the rec center be separated from the road right of ways by four feet, that is what the ordinance requires. The parking spaces that we are proposing are immediately adjacent to the road right of way. Our thinking is that since the road is a private road and it will not likely be a too heavily travelled road there shouldn't be any conflicts there. to addition we are providing considerably more parking spaces than are minimally required by the ordinance. Finally we are requesting that there be some consideration given to reducing the minimum setbacks on some of the lots, not all of them. Actually there are a fair number of them that we are however. That is where this chart will help you to see what we are talking about. This is a color coordinated chart that shows the proposed front yard setbacks for each of the different tots, each of the different structures in the proposed subdivision. The smallest front yard setback that is being proposed is 12 feet, by the way the standard is 20. The smallest is twelve and then we have a few that are 14, a few that are 15, a number that are 15 and then one that would be a 16 foot front yard setback. On the following page it shows in list form what the setback, proposed set backs for all of the lots in the subdivision and the colors correspond with what was shown on the previous page to get an idea of what we are talking about. There are a few rear yard setbacks that we are seeking some relief from. The standard 15 we need to go down to, well there are a couple of 13's, a 14, a 12, a 10 and an 8. The request to reduce these setbacks is driven largely by the redesign and we are simply asking that the Commission recognize that although there is a need to deal with some setbacks we do have an overall reduction in density so we are not cramming more in than were previously approved we are reducing Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 20 the numbers but we still have some of these setback problems. Yesterday, Mr. Campbell and I met with Gary and Bruce Freckleton and Shari and went over some of their comments. I have provided to them today written responses to their comments. I think that we are all on track with these folks, if not I know they are not shy about standing up and saying so. With respect to Mr. Freckleton's comments, I might say this, we will supply all the information that he has requested and hasn't already been provided. We will comply with all of the requirements that are set out in his comments. He did ask about pressurized irrigation, I can tell you very quickly we intend to provide pressurized irrigation it would be from the same source as it proposed for the Lake at Cherry Lane Subdivisions No. 3 and 4. I have been working with Nampa Meridian Irrigation District to secure contract from them in order to provide the system. The developer will build it and then turn it over to Nampa Meridian Irrigation District for its ownership, it will take title to it and maintain it in the future. With respect to Shari's comments, she has correctly identified I think the areas where we are seeking exceptions from the standard district regulations of the planed development provisions. I have already discussed most of those. The one exception to that is with respect to her comment about minimum lot sizes. I spoke to her this afternoon and she and I agreed I think at least as of this afternoon that we meet the minimum lot size requirements so that would not be an issue. I think that the designation that number and name designation has been worked out to staff satisfaction. We have also seen a draft report from the Ada County Highway District a staff report. It is to be acted on tomorrow night 1 believe. We have reviewed that and the applicant is satisfied with that report and we will comply with it in all respects. I would pleased to answer any questions if you have any at this time. I hope that you will be able to pass this thing on with a favorable recommendation to the City Council. Of course the applicant and I are willing to work any additional details out with your staff in the mean time. Johnson: Thank you Mr. Bradbury, any questions from the Commission to Mr. Bradbury? MacCoy: On the deal with the setbacks, I am a little concerned 12 feet is really pretty small. I am interested to know by giving up the front distances are you trying to get more space in the rear for their backyards is that the whole point? Bradbury: The whole point was, Mr. Commissioner, the point was we were attempting to preserve the rear yards for these people given the tight spacing, a couple of things. We wanted to keep the road right of ways reasonably wide and second we wanted to preserve some backyards for these folks. That is why there are only just a few setbacks that we are asking for acceptance for backyards and a large number of them for front yards. In order to preserve those backyards. MacCoy: I am a little curious, the ones like 12 feet setback approximately what is your backyard distance, what are you giving them in other words? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 21 Bradbury: I guess I would have to look at the list to tell you exactly, they vary. Some of them are larger and some of them are smaller, but the range is in the 15 to 20 foot backyards. MacCoy: The deal with the fire station, you have changed that from one dimension to another based on the fire chief approval you said is that right? Bradbury: Well yes, in a sense, the dimensional change was brought about by the need to provide 80 foot frontages for the R-4 lots along the south boundary. So we squeezed that dimension down a little bit to get those lots in there. So instead we added some, an extra 10 feet in the opposite dimension to try and catch it up. Now the fire chief, of course he didn't ask for it but Mr. Campbell spoke with him about it and asked him if it would be acceptable to him and he indicated he thought it would at least preliminarily. MacCoy: Okay I will take that for myself. On your landscaping view point here, (inaudible) you said that is a pretty good realistic view point of what it looks like. Bradbury: Well not right now but someday. MacCoy: I think that, we look at this and us and the public and we see (inaudible) and we end up with trees that are 4 foot high and we will see this picture here in 25 to 30 years is a long time away of getting a decent tree. Are you planning on putting in some big trees or are you going to put in these small trees? Bradbury: Mr. Commissioner, that is a fair question and I know when we present these drawings we always want to put the best foot forvvard and show you something that we think is really going to wow you and sell you on the project. I will come right out and say sure that is what we do. But let me tell you this and I recognize that you were not on the Commission when we presented this project initially. As a part of the presentation which was made many months ago and as back up to the drawing we were showing you we presented to the Commission a proposed budget for landscaping. I have to tell you that I can't remember the dollar amounts now. (Inaudible) I was going to say between $100,000 and $200,000 was the number, $180,000 was anticipated to be budgeted for landscaping. The idea was that we were in fact going to put in, the applicant and developer intends to put in not little sticks and twigs but put in substantial trees and shrubs and grass and walls so that it would look nice immediately. I don't want to over state, I am not going to tell you that we are going to have 40 foot trees drug in there and plopped in the ground. But as it has been explained to me and the intentions of the applicant are to do a first class top notch landscaping treatment. I can perhaps take it a step further and say we are more than willing to work with staff on the details of the landscaping plan and in fact we will want to work with staff on the details of the landscaping plan so that the staff Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 22 is satisfied that we are providing the types of plant material and the sizes of plant material which would make the City happy. Johnson: Anyone else? Shearer: On your setback (inaudible) that has the setbacks, that front garage is that a setback that you are listing under that? Bradbury: The reason that is on there is that is the front of the garage to the road right of way. The reason we wanted to show that is to let you know that even though we have front setbacks that are smaller the garages are recessed back and so there is plenty of room for a driveway. Oslund: That is the concern I had, looking at the plans and Mr. Campbell was kind enough to give me a sneak preview yesterday, looking at the plans that 1 got and one of them is the preliminary plat and the other one is unlabeled but it is the same base map as the preliminary plat in addition it shows the building foot prints (inaudible). What I can't, there seems to be a difference in the drawings, but this plan that I see shows on that row of houses that you are talking about a 12 foot setback it is at, it scales and there is a line drawn on there that is about 15 feet back. I took a look at it and it seems like there is room on the other side to move the street over just a little bit to squeeze out a little extra front yard for these homes. I guess getting back to this point of the front garage. Bradbury: Excuse me you are talking about this row of houses here? Oslund: Yes, it looks like there is extra room on the other side. When you look at this table in the tab here, tab 7, you have got a front garage dimension and I am assuming this front garage is measured from the garage door to the setback line or to the back of lot? Bradbury: This would be to the, as the I understand it to the property line. Oslund: Because this doesn't really seem to, when I look at the building foot prints you have provided this would indicate that those garages would be setback 6 feet from the face of the house and it dcesn't seem to, they looked much smaller like in the 2 foot range, 3 foot range. I guess what t am getting down to bottom line is I don't believe that you can have a distance from the garage to the back of walk less than absolute minimum is 18 feet. Bradbury: You are right and I think that we tend to agree with that thinking. As proposed the smallest distance from the garage to the lot line on this list is 18 feet and there are only 8 of those out of 52. We are certainly willing to comply with the condition of approval that would make that requirement. That is certainly something that we will work with. And if Meridian Planning 8 Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 23 there are some scaling problems on the drawings we will sure fix those too. Oslund: I understand that, it is a lot of conceptual sketches and that is exactly what I was going to propose is 18 feet for the dimension from the garage door to the back of the walk be 18 feet at a minimum. Bradbury: Sure, we don't have a problem with that. Oslund: Other than that it looked pretty good. I had one other question, there is an area, there is that center island where there is a recreation building and four homes on that particular block. two of those homes have a street both on their back and front, and when I look at those two homes I am a little concerned about, obviously the front is going to look no different than any other home. But it seems like we have a little bit of an issue and think there needs to be some kind of special treatment in that area at their back yard because what we are going to see there if nothing else is done about it other than what we normally would do is just a long fence. Bradbury: I see the problem that you have got there and I have to tell you that I haven't discussed that with Mr. Campbell spe~celly but maybe I can help you a little bit with your concerns by telling you this. Part of the, the applicant intends to construct all of the dwellings in the project. Along with the construction of the dwellings in the project would be provision of landscaping for each and every lot. 1 think we might be able to address some of those concems with landscaping treatment and perhaps that might be something that you might want to consider conditioning approval of the project if that is the direction that you are headed is that we work out to the city's satisfaction landscaping treatment for those lots that you are concerned about. It seems to me that the backs of some of those maybe we don't include any fences, as I picture it in my mind based on my discussions I don't envision fences there. Oslund: Well, the idea I had was possibly one idea is in this area right in here is extend this common parcel over and get their fence back and put this and landscaping in here. It is kind of an odd thing, it doesn't happen very often. Bradbury: I see what you are saying and maybe we can work out some berming and trees and shrubs along in those areas. We will certainly work with staff to untangle those problems. Oslund: I noticed a couple of notes and pardon me if they take some more time here. A couple of areas that seem to kind of jump out at me and I don't have a lot number here. these two lots in here are two of the lots that you are requesting a 12 foot minimum set back on. I am looking at these and they are even down to at least the way this is drawn Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 24 they are down to less than 10 feet on the comers anyway, (inaudible). Bradbury: 1 don't, I guess I am going to have to suggest that you not take that particular drawing too much to heart. I think that maybe this one that you have got in your booklet might be better scaled. I am only going to suggest that and not promise it. Oslund: That is the same one as this it is just reduced in color. Bradbury: I guess what I would like to suggest is that the proposed, the distances that we're proposing I think are going to be accurate once we get on the ground. If you are concerned about the translation between the proposed distances and numbers and the way it appears on the plat let's go with the numbers as opposed to the drawing itself. Oslund: A couple other little things and I promise I will stop. It seems like and I talked about it a little bit, it seems like there are little adjustments that could be done to get some of these front yards a little closer. My personal feeling is that 12 feet is awfully small and I think we as a commission have to decide on a number that is going to be the minimum for this PUD. Right now your proposal is proposing that 30% or so meet the standard 20 foot and then all the rest would be lower as low as 12 feet. Me personally I don't know that I would like to see anything less than say 14 or 15 feet, 12 feet seems awfully, like I said if there are some minor adjustment in that street location all 6 of those 12 foot setbacks could be eliminated and uped. so that is something I think needs to be looked at. Bradbury: I understand and I haven't attempted to scale the sideyards on those. The ordinance requires a 20 foot sideyard when it is adjacent to the street and that is one of the things we are trying to maintain there. ff there is additional room we can see if we can't (inaudible). Oslund: Well I didn't (inaudible) if you look at that, what 1 sketched doesn't meet 20 feet here but you are meeting 20 feet here and (inaudible). Bradbury: What you are suggesting is perhaps we go down to maybe 15 on those side streets and perhaps pick up some more feet for the other lots. Oslund: Something else, the concern I am having where with these 6 homes they are going to align right up on a, you can draw a thumb line in there and it is going to be right on. If there was a way to mix things up a little so that the front faces tend to stagger a little bit and they are not so kind of. Bradbury: I understand that and that is a good suggestion too. We will sure try to do something with that, maybe if we can find some extra feet, move (inaudible). Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 25 Oslund: That is my main concern, when I looked at this I originally though that you had these small setbacks out of necessity because you were squeezed in you had to live with those constraints. But it looks like to me there are ways to tweak things here and there to try and achieve better setbacks. The last thing I want to discuss is the entry. Johnson: Are you sure this is the last thing? Oslund: I am sure this time. This is what the developer gets when he comes out and gives me an early presentation. I actually got to look at this one. The entry way has 80 feet of right of way I believe and (End of Tape) we have a house on each side of that entry way that has that minimum five foot sideyard setback. Yet these homes are on a corner lot. I am assuming that they, if we were to follow the standard we would have 20 on that site as well. Bradbury: That is a good point, I think that was something that was overlooked. Oslund: That right of way can be reduced down to 60 and tighten up that entry a little bit, it seems more than wide enough. That is all I have to say on that, if you can look at that. Bradbury: Sure, I would be happy to look at that and I think that you are correct, as I look at my list those two lots didn't get included and they should have been. You are absolutely correct maybe we can work on that. We would be pleased to do it and 1 don't know if the Commissioner wants to perhaps set up a meeting with the developer to go over some of these thoughts in detail but we would sure do that if you would like. If you want, I don't know if your schedule permits it. Oslund: It worked so well for you this time you decided to do it again. I have some time a little here and there. Bradbury: We would be pleased to work out with you or staff at your convenience. Hepper: I just had a quick question, you referred to the footprint of the home sitting on the lot then you have a number plugged in like 1440 and 1620 is that livable living space not counting the garage? Bradbury: I would say yes to that question and Doug is nodding his head so I think I am right. Hepper: So that is not necessarily the total footprint of the building. Bradbury: That is correct, the living space. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 26 Johnson: Anyone else from the Commission? Thank you Steve. This is a public hearing, anyone else from the public that would like to address the Commission at this time on this application? Seeing no one then I will close the public hearing. Hepper: Mr. Chairman, I move we have the City Attorney prepare findings of fact. Shearer: Second Johnson: Moved and second that we have the City Attomey prepare findings of fact on the application for the Lake at Cherry Lane Subdivision No. 5, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #11: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR TWE LAKE AT CHERRY LANE NO. 6 SUBDIVISION BY STEINER DEVELOPMENT: Johnson: I will now open the public hearing and invite Mr. Bradbury to come up for four times in a row. Steve Bradbury, 300 N. 6th Street, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Bradbury: I will just give the same presentation over again for you. What I would suggest that perhaps we do is simply agree to incorporate the comments I made in my previous presentation into the record into this one and let it go at that unless you have any particular questions. Johnson: That is a good move thank you. Any questions from the Commission on the preliminary plat? This is a public hearing is there anyone that wants to address the Commission on the preliminary plat for this application? Seeing no one then and assuming you people are finished I will close the public hearing at this time. Shearer: Do you just want to table this until the next meeting? Johnson: That is about all we can do. Shearer: I move we table this item until the February 13th meeting. MacCoy: Second Johnson: We have a motion and a second to table item 11 until the February 13th meeting, all those in favor? Opposed? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 27 MOTION CARRIED: All Yea TEN MINUTE BREAK ITEM #12: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR DOVE MEADOWS SUBDIVISION NO. 2 BY DAVE LEADER: Johnson: I will now open the public hearing and invite Mr. Leader or his representative to come forvvard and address the Commission. Ted Hutchinson, Tealys Land Surveying, 109 S. 4th Street, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Hutchinson: Mr. Chairman and members of the Commission, this is the second phase of Dove Meadows No. 2, as you recall the original portion of this when it was approved did expire and we have now completed the application and brought it forward to you in this fomt. There is a slight change from the original form that was reviewed and approved by this body and that is on the northwest end. Originally there was a stub street that went to the west to the Avest property, however because of the changes in the development plan on that property we have looped the street and connected it up and also have connected with the stub street into Wingate Place Subdivision No. 2. We have reviewed the comment sheet from Bruce Freckleton in the City Engineer's office. We responded in writing to his comments and submitted the amended preliminary plat, I believe you should have that before you today. We have gone through those comments, we have no problem with complying at those comments with the exception of I believe it is lots 3 and 4 of Block 3 we do have a problem with the frontage on those because it is on a curve. Johnson: This is item #3 on the site specific comments? Hutchinson: Site speck comments from Mr. Freckleton. Lots 3 and 4 of Block 3, Lots 21, 20 on Block 2 have been adjusted so that they do have the proper frontage on the revised plat. Lots 3 and 4 because they are on the outside of the curve we are unable to get the 65 feet of frontage at the street line. They are a little bit closer if you are at the setback line however we are going to have to request a variance from the street frontage standard and that application will be forthcoming. The lots do, Lot 3 I believe is about 9000 square feet, Lot 4 is 8000 square feet or vice versa I can't recall exactly which one is which. They are both in excess of 8000 square feet. So they are good sized lots just because the way that curve happens on the street that it is a little difficult to meet the frontage requirement. Johnson: How much is a little difficult? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 28 Hutchinson: The ordinance requires 65 feet, I believe we have 54 on one and 53 on the other. Johnson: Thank you Hutchinson: We will be seeking a variance on those. I got Shari's comments today regarding the plat items, we have gone through those, we didn't see any problems with the exception of item 6 where the perimeter fencing. 1 believe fencing against the other commercial uses are on the southwest portion of this would be appropriate. However fencing against other residential uses might be inappropriate so we would ask that the perimeter fencing only on that southwest corner where it is up against the commercial properties. They did, Mr. Leader does have an agreement with the church on the eastern end of this because they have their open area lot back behind the church which is on the east end of this property and maintaining that sense of oneness they were working out a benn rather than fencing along that portion of the property. The sanitary sewer lot under Item 3 from Ms. Stiles asked that be a numbered lot. The lot that the sewer easement is on is a drainage lot it is an open space lot so the entire lot is actually an open space lot and we think it can be accommodated just by being a part of that open space lot without it being its own numbered lot. That is also where the pedestrian access will be located for access out of the project on the west end. With regard to item 10 which has to do with the westerly 10 feet, Mr. LeadePs deed includes that ten feet. There was some question apparently about the ownership of that property at one time. It was included on this plat because it was Mr. Leader's deed however if we can verify that there is a clear ownership there than that ten feet will be taken out of this plat. We just had some concerns about when we get to the final plat stage and it is reviewed by the County Engineer whether or not we would have to go back and put that ten feet in depending upon what the deeds and the research by the County Engineer's office would review. With that I would entertain any questions that the Commission might have. This is compatible, we are providing the extension of Hickory Way into the Packard No. 1 subdivision. That will be continued as a 60 foot collector wide street. It will make that final connection, it also interconnects as I stated into Wingate Place No. 2 by providing the extension of Hickory Way it will provide additional access and traffic ways for Wingate Subdivision No. 1. With that are there any questions from the Commission? Johnson: With respect to Shari Stiles' letter of January 5, item #5 for the record then you have no problem with the bonding cash requirement that would be required for all improvements prior to signature on the final plat? Hutchinson: No problem there. Johnson: Thank you, any questions of Mr. Hutchinson? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 29 MacCoy: I have one, you state here that your minimum square footage for structure is 1300. Hutchinson: That was an oversight on ours, it will be corrected to 1301 as Ms. Stiles pointed out in her letter. MacCoy: Okay, are all of them that same size or are we looking at a variation or some kind of stair stepping situation. Hutchinson: That note is a requirement from the ordinance, that is a minimum that is required. I am sure that there will be a variation, there are some larger lots in there so I am sure there will be some larger homes built on those as well. It is not going to all be 1301 square feet it will be larger. MacCoy: Do you know how many or percentage wise? Hutchinson: I don't have that number. Mr. Leader will be able to provide that information. Johnson: Commissioner Shearer? Shearer: I don't have anything. Johnson: Greg? Oslund: Nothing from me. Johnson: Commissioner Hepper? Hepper: Yes, I had a question on Shari Stiles' notes on the bottom she stated this property is zoned L-O and apparently that was an oversight when this was done the first time is this something that needs to be rezoned? Hutchinson: I don't know what was done originally on it, there was just a portion of this site and that would be the east end there behind the church that is zoned L-O. Apparently when this was originally processed the entire plat was processed under (inaudible). I don't know if we need to do anything or whether counsel can advise on that issue (inaudible). Hepper: I think it was just a oversight but it looks like something that needs to be cleaned up. Shearer: It has to be a mistake Tim, we never approved that for an office. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 30 Johnson: Well, we did the one portion as I recall. Crookston: I would assume what happened is that the property was zoned L-0 for the church purposes and the legal description somehow intertwined but that should be corrected if it is Mr. Leader's property and he is going to develop it with homes. Hutchinson: We would ask then that any decision on the preliminary plat be based, we will proceed with that under your direction but (inaudible) so that it will be done prior to the final plat. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Leader would you come forward and be sworn so we can ask you some questions too. Dave Leader, 110 Parkway Drive, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Leader: In regards to the square footage I think it is block 1, there are 12 lots in block 1 those require a minimum of 1550 square feet. Typically they are larger lots and that is the same as we did in phase 1, we had 10 lots in block 1 that required a bigger square footage than the rest of the plat. Does that answer your question? MacCoy: I just wondered if everything was 13 or if there was a graduation as you heard me say earlier. Johnson: Any other questions of Mr. Leader? Oslund: Either Mr. Leader or his representative, just a small comment. On the walks you have 5 foot walks, you intend to widen those at the mail boxes, you are going to have mail boxes on the street I presume? Leader: I wasn't aware there was a requirement to have widened, I thought when you had a 5 foot sidewalk you didn't have to have, when you have 4 foot sidewalk we always widen them out where you have a mailbox. It is my understanding that when you have five foot sidewalk you didn't widen them out. If I am wrong and that is the policy we will widen them out. Oslund: I think you have the policy right, I just would encourage that having kids and being in a neighborhood with five foot walks and mail boxes, it just doesn't seem to work that well. Hepper: I have a question for you, we have a letter from the Homeowners Association in Dove Meadows No. 1 are you aware of that letter? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 31 Leader: I was as of today. Hepper: Would you care to address that? Leader: Yes I will, it certainly wasn't our intent not to put landscaping in there and normally as a developer we want landscaping in as soon as possible because it is an advantage to us in selling the project. In this case the water system was, part of our sprinkler system was tied in with Capital Christian and was hooked onto City water. Apparently the contractor that did the sprinkler system didn't have a proper permit or something and Meridian Water asked them to disconnect the system. So we had no water for the sprinkler system that was installed, it wasn't until late sometime in July that the pressurized system was built and operational that we could use. The lots that had the landscape easements on them the plans were to hook onto the individual home systems because that is part of their lots. However Meridian water changed their policy there and (inaudible) that you couldn't have service without building permit. So until a house was built on those lots we Mad now way of hooking up our sprinkler system. It is kind of comedy of errors 1 guess if you want to put it that way, it cost me a lot more money trying to keep down the weeds and re-doing it than it ever would have cost to (inaudible) and obviously we had trees in last year, a year ago last fall. We started putting the trees in, we anticipated that we had water and (inaudible) a matter of trying to get water. Again, I don't feel good about it but that is what happened. Hepper: Do you have a time frame for completing that? Leader: We do have one comer lot that has been sold for some time and the owner has said they were going to start a house and we can get a permit. They promised me last fall (inaudible) and so far he hasn't. At that point in time we are waiting for that permit so we can finish it all up at one time. I guess at this point in time if he doesn't start building well we will have to do a temporary provision for water to that (inaudible). Hepper: Would you have any problem with tying in the completion of the landscaping of this phase along with the landscaping on No. 2. Leader: (inaudible) Landscaping on one will be done before we get the final plat on 2 so I have no problem on that. Hepper: You wouldn't have a problem with making that a contingency that this landscaping be completed prior to the final plat on number 2. Leader: That is correct. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 32 Hepper: That is all I have. Johnson: Anyone else? Thank you, we will give you an opportunity to respond if there is testimony. Anyone from the public that would like to address the Commission on this application? John George, 2252 East Grapewood Drive, was sworn by the City Attorney. George: I just had a concern for Mr. Leader about pressurized irrigation. What he plans on Johnson: You need to address your questions to the Commission and we will give Mr. Leader a chance to respond. George: Okay, in phase 2, what he plans on doing with that, my understanding that it is a requirement in Meridian to provide pressurized irrigation to any new subdivisions. The ordinance passed in 1993 and of course before that also. The streets during construction, I am just asking that they be cleaned. On a periodic basis there is quite a bit of mud and it causes quite a bit of concern not only for safety but appearance as well. I do live in, my residence is located in Block 3, Lot 1 which is at the very end of phase 1. That is the reason for my concern. The time frame that Mr. Leader was stating for the completion of the landscaping for phase 1, what is the date, what are we looking at? What is the actual cut off. Hepper: They have one year don't they, their application is good for one year. Crookston: On the plat, yes. Hepper: So we can't say when they are going to do it but their application is good for one year. George: Okay his application for phase 2 is good for one year. Do we know when that was originally filed? Hepper: The first one expired, now he is coming in for a second one. So he starts his construction within that year and of course we don't have any say so how long it will take him to complete it or sell the lots. But before they can build any homes, before they get the sign off on the final plat the landscaping will have to be done. George: I am talking in reference to phase 1. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 33 Hepper: We just put a stipulation that phase one will have to be completed before they can get the final plat on phase 2. George: And pressurized irrigation? Hepper: That is an ordinance they have to do that. George: Is it a requirement? Hepper: Yes George: So if I had stipulations on that do I address the City with that? Johnson: What do you mean by stipulations? George: Well, if I don't see it, if it doesn't appear, if it doesn't happen, if it doesn't come about what are my rights as a resident there? Johnson: You can contact the City, that would be a good place to start, the Public Works Department. Anything else? Anyone else from the public that would like to address the Commission on this application? Julie Pipal, 2350 E. Apricot Drive, was sworn by the City Attorney. Pipal: Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, rather than take up your time, Commissioner Hepper addressed my concerns and I would like to submit this as written testimony. Johnson: Thank you, is there anyone else that would like to address the Commission at this time? Mr. Leader, is there anything you ~prould like to respond to that was brought up in testimony or Mr. Hutchinson either one? Hutchinson: Thank you Mr. Chairman, with regard to the pressurized irrigation system under City ordinance Dove Meadows No. 2 will have a pressurized irrigation system. Presently there is a system being designed by JUB Engineers which is going to serve Dove Meadows Subdivision NO. 2, the Wingate Place Subdivision and Packard Subdivision No. 1. The source of that 1 think when I responded to Mr. Freckleton's letter I indicated that the source was at the point where those 3 subdivisions meet, I was in error. It moves straight north to the end of the Packard Subdivision where the Stokesbury lateral, there is a take out there. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 34 Johnson: Is that Packard 1? Hutchinson: Yes, there is a take out there that traditionally served this area I believe that the source is going to be developed at that point. There is a pipe already existing across the part of the Wingate Subdivision No. 2 and a 15 inch pipe that JUB is working on, the system that will serve all three of these subdivisions. Then I believe Mr. Leader has addressed the concerns about the landscaping and completing the landscaping prior to the final plat for Dove Meadows No. 2. Johnson: He had a comment about keeping the streets clean during construction. Hutchinson: I don't know what we can, we can make an attempt or see what we can do. I am not sure what kind of requirement Johnson: What is the requirement on that Mr. Crookston? Crookston: On the landscaping? We have no requirement City wide for keeping the streets clean. If let's say a subdivider a builder puts something in the street, dirt or bark, landscaping material there is a State statute that if they leave that there and that causes and axident the person who left that in the street is liable for whatever damages occurred. Hutchinson: I think there is some concern, it is probably from the construction trucks going back and forth tracking the dirt onto the paved sections before the streets are (inaudible). Crookston: The City does not have a street cleaning ordinance. Hutchinson: I don't know if the Highway District makes provisions for (inaudible). Crookston: Like I said there is a State statute and I have had relationship with that and it does work. Johnson: Don't we touch on that in our development agreement Shari Stiles? Stiles: Mr. Chairman and Commissioners this development was annexed before the requirement for a development agreement was in effect. Johnson: So what you are saying is we do not have one with this subdivision. Stiles: No we do not have a development agreement, t would suppose we could have it as a condition of approval. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 35 Johnson: I know we have addressed the debris removal, fencing, to keep the debris from flowing in the wind etc., the streets and the mud and that sort of thing into those agreements before but you are saying we don't' have it on this specific case. Okay, thank you, before 1 close the public hearing does anyone have any last comments? Leader: Just a quick comment to clarify this one thing on pressurized irrigation. Dove Meadows No. 1 we paid well development fees for that however in phase 2 we do plan t retrofit any adjacent lots to phase 2. So if you have a lot that is now adjoining a lot of phase 2 we do plan to provide your pressurized irrigation to those lots when we do phase 2. If you don't why we have no way of extending that line into phase 1. I think there is something in the neighborhood of 17 or 18 lots that are adjacent to phase 2, all those lots we do plan to provide pressurized irrigation too. Johnson: I think we need to clarify for the public then the option exists for the pressurized irrigation requirement to pay into the Well fund is that correct Mr. Crookston? Crookston: Yes Johnson: Anyone else? Don Brian, 2070 North Locust Grove Road, was sworn by the City Attorney. Brian: There are a lot of questions coming up about this irrigation water and now that there are three subdivisions involved, Packard, Wingate Place and Dove Meadows on the past history of Dove Meadows and all the messed up messes with irrigation water down there. My lateral comes down through all three of these subdivisions and there is going to have to be some real close calculations done, the time frame of all these things going on. They just approved the plat for Packard but I don't know when the start date is. I came to you guys and the City Council and made sure that was going to be tiled at the time of annexation well that didn't' happen. I don't know when they are going to the it, probably before they develop it. All these things are coming together and I am at the end of the line. There is going to have to be a lot of planning to make this happen right. In this irrigation, this pressurized irrigation thing that is going on and nobody is sure how to do it or when to do it and Nampa Meridian takes it over it is coming right out of my head gate. That has got me concerned because I don't know how it is going to work and how it is going to affect my water coming down whether they are going to be using the same ditch, are they going to use separate water. Where the drain water is going to go, I have talked with all three developers and they are easy to work with, but I haven't talked with Packard and it is going to have to be a total plan. It cant' be here and there like we did with first phase of Dove Meadows that got all screwed up. That is my only concern, are there any questions? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 36 Johnson: Are there any questions of Don? Thank you, anyone else? Seeing no one then 1 will close the public hearing at this time. Hepper: Mr. Chairman, I move we have the City Attorney prepare findings of fact for this development. Crookston: We don't have findings on preliminary plats. Hepper: I move we approve the preliminary plat on this with the stipulation that the landscaping on Dove Meadows No. 1 be tied in with the landscaping of Dove Meadows No. 2 that No. 2 be completed before the final plat on No. 1 is signed off or that No. 1 is completed before the final plat on No. 2 is signed off. Shearer: Second Johnson: A motion on the floor has been made and seconded with stipulations to recommend approval of the preliminary plat, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #13: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR REZONE OF 8.34 ACRES TO C-N BY SMITH'S FOOD AND DRUG CENTER, INC.: Johnson: I will now open the public hearing and invite the applicant or his representative to address the Commission. Mike Wardle: Mr. Chairman, I am going to propose to make the presentation from the side because of the exhibits that most of crowd apparently would like to see. So if you will (inaudible) Mike Wardle, 50 Broadway Avenue, Suite B, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Wardle: Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission I would like to introduce some individuals that are here representing Smith's application this evening. Again I am Mike Wardle dealing with planning issues. David Neilson, from Smith's out of Salt Lake City, Doug Kowallis of Crest and Company, who is a real estate representative from Boise, Teri Scofield and architect from Boise that does all of their site architectural work, Joann Butler of Spink and Butler and attorney from Boise and Gary Funkhouser of Bell Walker and Associates also of Boise to deal with traffic issues. Several will speak, all are available to answer questions. We do our take our responsibilities seriously of providing information to the Commission and to the community in terms of dealing with the request for a change Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 37 of zone. The parcel in question lies north of Cherry Lane, West of Linder Road, approximately 7.25 acres in size. The change proposed is to go from an existing R-4 single family residential zone to a C-N neighborhood business. The area in question lies in what might be described as the bedroom community of Meridian that being generally the western side of the City. The proposal by Smith's is fora 60,000 square foot front load store. I want to stress in terms of the front loading aspect, it means that there is no service to the store in terms of truck activity at the rear. All of that service occurs on ramps either in the front of the store with screening walls on both sides of those so that there is other than for purely emergency vehicle purposes there would be no service activity to the store at the rear. The area in question is somewhat interesting and unique in that there is already existing C-N zoning to the south with a Maverik station directly across the street on the comer, next to that are two other small C-N businesses, a Dominoes pizza and a car wash. There is also undeveloped C-N zoning southeasterly on the opposite corner of the southwest comer of that intersection. The process that we have undertaken began in October when we met with staff representatives of the City to discuss issues of concern with that would need to be addressed by an application. We followed up that meeting in October with a meeting at the Meridian Assembly of God Church on the 9th of November in which some 80 area residents came and expressed their opinions and concerns. Among the concems expressed dealt largely with traffic, concem for crime, proximity to the schools and property values. There was also some quiet support expressed that evening in written form particularly by senior citizens who live in the area that desire to have services closer to them. In response to some of the impacts there have been some changes in the proposed site plan. Originally at that hearing the building was substantially to the north with just a buffer between the store and existing Glenfeld Manor residents. We have moved the store southerly and proposed an extension of the public street somewhat close to the original alignment. Originally the preliminary plat for the subdivision brought it in about this point where it would connect back as it was platted in the first phase. By moving the store south and adding that street Smith's is proposing then to develop and addition 6 lots that would provide the buffer between the store and the existing residents to the north. That buffer at the back of the store then would be a 25 foot landscaped area again with no service activity at the back and so the building height of 26 feet with a berm going up the back and then the landscaping both in terms of sod, ground treatment and a lot of vertical activity would provide a buffer between the proposed new residences in the back of that store in this area. This illustrates that 25 foot buffer. That is the same buffer, in fact this rendering is from a store that was approved in Boise across the street from an existing single family neighborhood. That was the solution that was worked out with those neighbors and the City staff to assure that there was buffering against those residences. In addition, the other side of the concern that the residents had expressed parti~larly those that were in the Linder Falls Subdivision area was what would occur between them and the proposed building. There are 2 options, the first is illustrated by a culdesac which is close to what was originally proposed in the preliminary plat Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 38 application. The second option would be the discussion with and possible dedication to Meridian of a 2.7 acre park. So those are the two options for the way to buffer existing residents in that subdivision, that is two additional rows of houses or the possibility of a neighborhood park that can serve for other purposes in that quadrant of the community. Question concerning the schools related also to the issue of crime as expressed by some residents in the area at that point. One of the things that we assume is that there is nothing that currently preGudes students from those schools to go to the Maverik store across the street or to get into their vehicles and to drive a mile to the east to the Albertsons and other commercial complexes in the area. While there is certainly a concern this is not something that is unique or would be a problem because of a Smith's store at that location. Traffic issues will be addressed momentarily by Mr. Funkhouser of Bell Walker. Question of why there was on the minds of many of the people that we met with. Commercial services are predominantly located on the easterly side of town either in the Old Town area or to the southeast or further to the east. This is a map that shows existing commercial zoning and some L-O parcels and of course the schools that are in the area. The only proposed commercial activity that has been discussed out here is the Albertson's proposal for a store at the comer of Ten Mile and Cherry Lane. That is just exactly a Mile to the east of this application shown in the pink. There are no neighbofiood services of the type discussed in the Comprehensive Plan to serve this large bedroom community of Meridian Currently. The only thing that is available is the Maverik Station, the Dominoes Pizza and the car wash. There are some scattered items, there is a day care center here, there are a number of churches in the area. So there are services that are coming to the floor but nothing of a commercial nature that deals with the neighbofiood needs. Albertsons obviously recognized that problem and need when they proposed their store a mile to the west. Now in comparing and contrasting the two applications both Smiths and Albertsons abut residential. Albertsons is contiguous to Parkside Creek and to the north of course the long established Cherry Lane Village project. The proposed Smiths project is contiguous to (End of Tape) only Smith's of those two applications is contiguous to other existing C-N zoning. Two of the other three quadrants of that intersection are already established C-N zones. Only Smith's proposes to buffer the existing residences with additional residences or a park and take the risk that those units with the knowledge of the stores coming would be marketable. Only Smith's compliments the characteristic of a neighborhood where services are congregated at a transportation (inaudible) surrounding residences, schools and churches. Only Smith's proposes the potential of a neighborhood park to buffer that area if in fact the City is interested. I am going to just hand out an item for the record so that each of you can read. These are citations from the Meridian Gity Comprehensive Plan that address. I am only going to read one item from these two pages. The Meridian City Comprehensive Plan is generally silent with respect to changes or improvements within what t hey term as the existing urban area. It is a large area on your comprehensive plan map (inaudible) it does not show future facilities even though some of those facilities will be required. I would like to read just one paragraph that is sited here it is from the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 39 comprehensive plan document of December 1993. It says and it is referring obviously to these areas that don't have the benefit of a proposed comprehensive plan some kind of a bubble in another location. And I quote "Within the community there are unique neighborhoods which comprise the Meridian urbanized area. Only a few of these have traditional neighborhood characteristics. Others are essentially developing districts and contain some elements of traditional neighborhoods. But at present they lack nearby schools, churches and commercial support services. In time the developing districts will become neighbofioods as the community continues to expand and develop neighbofiood facilities and services." I would like to conclude my comments by just taking one last look a this zoning map that demonstrates how this proposed application and actually works to complete elements that are considered in the Comprehensive Plan and articulated in those two pages to provide neighborhood services on sites ranging from three to 8 acres as a neighborhood shopping center is defined. Where the concentration actually is already begun with C-N zoning on two of the four quadrants of that neighborhood with other vacant land around it that could well in the future be coming to the City for changes of zone. It is also a location of where buffers can be provided. A neighborhood center is already established. I would like to have Mr. Funkhouser of Bell Walker Engineers talk to traffic issues briefly then I believe that Joann Butler has a few comments and at the conclusion of the public testimony we request the opportunity to respond. Thank you. Gary Funkhouser, 827 La Cassia, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Funkhouser: Again, I am a transportation engineer with Bell Walker Engineers and we prepared the traffic impact analysis for the proposed development. The analysis was based on the 60,000 square foot shopping, or the store with one out parcel. The estimated trip generation for this site will 6600 trips per day. Now, the trips are, there are three types of trip making when you do an analysis like this. One of them is primary trips, that is a trip from a residence that is heading directly for this site. Then there is a diverted link trip where by you are travelling down another roadway and you divert over to this site and then head bads to your next destination you were headed. Then there are pass by trips where you were currently on the existing roadway and you turn into the site and turn out and continue on your trip you are already on that roadway. Now, the new trips to the site are primary trips and diverted link, in other words those are other trips that will be coming to this site aren't currently headed in that direction. Pass by trips are estimated for this type of development at approximately 50% of the 6600, in other words approximately 3300 of those trips are already on the systems that are already going by this site. This also doesn't give you a true picture even though those other trips are going to be destined the primary trip and diverted link are going to be destined for this site some of those are already currently on this roadway headed for the existing shopping that is available for them. In other words the only store of this nature the center of this nature is down at the Albertson's site therefore the people in these areas and some of these are already on that Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 40 system. So, it really doesn't give a true picture but there is no way of estimating how many of those are going by this site already that will get to the Albertsons that will actually be stopping short of that and changing trip patterns on certain sections of the roadway. There was some concern about the schools, in other words what the trip making characteristic of this will have on children going both to the high school and the junior high. During the a. m. portion in other words around the 8:00 o'clock time less than 2.2% of the trips are generated totally during this site will be coming there during that time frame or less than 120 trips at the 7 to 8 time frame when children are going to school. In the afternoon that is about 6.5% of the trips are heading for this site when children are going to and from their 3:00 o'cock dismissal time. And again those same trips, some of the same trips are already currently going to the shopping that is already available on Cherry and Fairview Avenue. The roadways that are serving the site are both arterial roadways, they are both minor arterials, one is a five lane and one is a three lane. The existing capacity or the existing level of service at this intersection is a level of service C which is desirable both by Ada County Highway District that is their level of service at this intersection. It will remain a level of service C when this thing is completed. The change in average delay by addition of this is average delay of one extra second per vehicle on an average because of the addition of this site. Unless you have any questions that is what I have to report at this time. Johnson: We may have some questions but we will listen to the entire presentation and see what we have. Joann Butler, 607 N. 8th Street, Boise, was sworn by the City attorney. Butler: What I have just handed out to the Commission was a set of findings for approval for the Commission to peruse at tonight's hearing as they make their deliberation and vote tonight whether to not to approve or not the rezone. And also for use by the City Attorney as I know the Commission will direct the City Attorney after they take their vote tonight to prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law. What we have done with those findings for approval is taken the criteria this commission has to assess in connection with any rezone whether it be this Smith's site or any other site within in Meridian. Those are found in 416K of the zoning ordinance, listed them out and provided you the information t hat you need to make those particular findings. That along with the other verbal and written and verbal testimony that is presented to you will enable you to make the findings that you can rezone this site to C-N neighborhood business in compliance with the comprehensive plan. I am very pleased to be here tonight on behalf of Smith's representing them in Meridian. I worked a little bit on the comprehensive plan on behalf of some other clients back in 1993 and was able to see Meridian in its process when it went through and tried to define what it meant by its various goals and what it was trying to accomplish. And back in 1993 Meridian clearly was trying to identify maybe stemming from its last comprehensive plan Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 41 when you tried to identify neighborhoods. Meridian in 1993 really made a concerted effort to try and define what it meant to be a neighborhood not just a residential area here, not just a commercial area over there but what it meant to integrate and what it would take to make that integration possible. One of the things you did and the particular passage that Mr. Wardle read out of the comprehensive plan that some neighborhoods throughout, some residential areas throughout Meridian presently lack facilities, presently lack commercial facilities but the City would do what it could to encourage and promote commercial facilities and other facilities in and next to neighborhoods so as to promote identifiable neighborhoods. Places where people could walk, more readily, didn't necessarily have to travel so far in their car to create that sense of neighborhood. Just a little anecdote I happen to live in an area that was once might have been perceived as a sea of residential. A large supermarket, not Smith's moved in just down the way. There was a lot of consternation, neighbors were concemed, they brought up a lot of good questions and a lot of good concerns. They met with the developer, site plans were changed a bit, it didn't alleviate everybody's fears always, but now it is several years later. My neighborhood what has happened is it has turned out to be in someways a public place. A place where neighbors didn't see each other because they were in their cars now have a place where they can recognize, sometimes talk to each other, it is an identifiable place and it helps that neighborhood become a neighborhood. The site is intended to be developed under all the existing regulations found in your zoning ordinance and you subdivision ordinance. We have pointed that out in those findings of fact beginning on page four of those findings for approval we list out all of the goals of the comprehensive plan. Each of which encourage and support this rezoning. This rezoning next to a residential area at a transportation node that will help provide the community services that a neighborhood needs. Again that continuing theme happens throughout the comprehensive plan. It is summarized on page 6 of the comprehensive plan that again residential areas only become identifiable as neighborhoods as they have the other facilities that they need. In keeping with State law and Meridian's ordinance the rezoning of this site will implement the goals of the comprehensive plan. So we do believe that these findings, the written and verbal testimony that you have before you can lead you to direct the City Attomey to prepare the findings to approve the rezone of this site.. Of course State law does require that the deliberation of this Commission and the decision whether to approve or not a rezone has to be made here tonight in a public hearing. With that re respectfully ask the Commission and vote tonight to recommend to City Council that this site be rezoned to neighborhood business and then to direct the City Attorney to prepare findings of fact. If there are not any questions I will leave it I guess open for public testimony. Johnson: Mr. Wardle, did you have anyone else that you wanted to testify? Wardle: No • • Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 42 Johnson: Does the Commission have any questions they would like to direct to any of the people who spoke on behalf of Smith's at this time? Oslund: I have a question regarding the traffic study. You talked about the different kinds of trips that are generated, in aggregate of all the trips that visit that site how many are new trips and how many are trips that are simply diverted trips? Funkhouser: We didn't calculate the diverted, all we calculated was the pass by which are (inaudible) trips existing in the area and that is that 50% of them are pass by trips already on the system on Linder and Cherry Lane. We didn't calculate diverted link. Oslund: Would it be fair to characterize that because this is a smaller grocery not a regional facility like a home base or a home depot that draws traffic from other traffic zones that for the most part you are diverting trips rather than creating new trips? Funkhouser: Well for one thing you are going to be diverting trips from an existing Albertsons store. In other words people in this area have very limited shopping for of this type in this area. Unless they are stopping by Fred Meyer or another Albertsons on their way home rf they work in the Boise area they are shopping at an Albertson's out here. So, in essence at this point they are going to be sharing trips with Albertsons. So they are not all new trips for shopping they are just new trips coming right to this area right here. It is hard to calculate how many would have been going here and now we are going to this area. So we have to when we analyze it using ACRD standards we have to calculate them as new trips to the area. They are diverted from another store and from different roadways. Oslund: That is what I was getting at, this is a neighborhood store, it is not in my mind anyway, it doesn't appear that it is going to pull trips from outside Meridian that already are coming here to go shopping. Funkhouser: No, the normal zone that you analyze this is two to three miles from this site is the normal drawing area for this type of a store. Johnson: Any other questions of Mr. Funkhouser? Any other questions from the Commissioners to any of the people representing Smith's? At this time then I will open the public hearing or continue the public hearing which is already open and ask that anyone form the public would come forward and address the Commission if they have a concern. Paula Devaney, 1703 W. Sunnyslope Drive, was sworn by the City Attorney. Devaney: Mr. Chairman and Commissioners, having reviewed the City's comprehensive plan extensively myself and bads in September and October having the occasion to speak Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 43 to a lot of Meridian residents two things I know are clear one is that the City needs additional neighborhood services and we need additional parks and recreation. In the campaign for our new Mayor and City Council that was prominent in their promises that we would get additional community commercial development and they would try and work on parks and recreation. Smith's I think has an exceptional plan here, they have a good commercial neighborhood development. Since the original meeting with the neighbors they have come back with what I feel are very generous concessions. Every item that we heard tonight on your agenda with the exception of the library was houses, houses and more houses. This plan gives this Commission and the City Council a chance to maybe set some precedence here and develop a partnering with Smith's. At the neighborhood meeting for instance we asked representatives from Smith's about that park site. Rather than just set land aside for the City because the City has land set aside everywhere we don't have money to develop it. Would they take it one step further and develop that into a park, the Police Athletic League said they would like to get more youth involved in reducing crime but they don't have enough soccer fields. Why not partner with Smith's and build that into soccer fields. The representative from Smith's said they would be willing to look at that option. As it stands now if you develop that in residential you are going to have 36 more houses, I think is what it was originally platted for. That is going to increase the traffic, that is going to increase the burden on schools. A personal note on the traffic, I live south of Cherry Lane on Linder, whenever I have to buy groceries I have to drive through the middle school traffic zone and then back home. Usually since I forget everything (inaudible) my husband has to go back through the school zone and back for something that we have forgotten. Just as a personal thing I know for our subdivision the Vineyards that a lot of that would come down in fact most of the time we could walk to the store. Also additionally we are looking for more park space and we do need park and recreational space very badly in this City if you develop the lot into homes and if you want to address well we will put impact fees on it. Thirty six homes would just generate just over $14,000 in impact fees, that is not even enough by the City's calculations to develop one acre of park. Here we have Smith's willing to and whether we make it contingent or get a further commitment from him to get 2.7 acres in park land. I just think this is a really great opportunity for us to set a precedence to start doing some partnering with our developers and getting what the City wants as well as what the City needs. Johnson: Any questions of Paula? Anyone else from the public that would like to address the Commission? Pam Bennett, 1963 S. Silver Falls Court, was sworn by the City Attorney. Bennett: I am nervous so this might be rough. We are opposed, I have 160 signatures from people in the area, homeowners in the area that are opposed to Smith's moving into our area. These are just homeowners surrounding Linder Falls and Cherry Lane. First I Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 44 would like to say we don't need another grocery store in the area within a 3 mile radius there is already going to be 3 supermarkets two of which are being under construction or in the process of being under construction. They are all in already zoned commercial areas. We are not opposed to Smith's we are opposed to the rezoning and the location that Smith's has chosen. When the people purchased their homes they knew where the commercial properties were. The rezoning of the second phase of our subdivision from commercial, residential to commercial would be devastating to our property values. No one wants a large supermarket in their back yard especially one open 24 hours a day with noise, the traffic, the crime and the large lights that will be on most all of the time. Linder Falls formerly known as Kastle Falls has already has it problems attracting people to purchase homes because of litigation and foreclosure between former and present owners. We finally get that resolved, a few homes have been built and some sales of existing homes have been closed and now comes in Smith's proposal. Again construction and sales of lots have come to a standstill. We need homes to be built and sold for any of the property owners in our subdivision to try and get any equity at all let alone lose money. I personally have been in this type of situation before and it took over 2 years to sell my home and we took a $30,000 loss on a $100,000 home. The location wasn't desirable anymore and because of the traffic, noise and pollution. We purchased our lot and built our home in Linder Falls in Meridian because we like the livability aspect of the area. It is close to all the schools so that when my daughter becomes of age she will be able to walk to school and participate in school activities. Our subdivision also has strict CC&R's which were very attractive to us and our lifestyle. Just a couple of examples, Article II, Section 2.3, nuisances and offensive activities and no commercial activity. Section 2.19 on exterior lighting, no exterior or interior lighting shall be placed to cause glare, excessive light spillage onto neighboring lots. Remember Smith's is proposing this site of phase 2 of our subdivision. It would be violating all the CC&R's that we believed in and complied with when we built our home. Virtually making all of our CC&R's worthless. Linder Falls wasn't the only one to suffer, there are many subdivisions around the area that will suffer as well. Our home is approximately 314 feet from the proposed site and we are one of the farthest away. Many of our neighbors are much closer. Should we compromise our beliefs and values in raising our families for a business to come into our subdivision to make a profit at the homeowners expense. 1 think rf Smith's wants to get into the residential property business a solution might be to buy the homes of the people who this proposal would directly affect negatively and we know that is not going to happen. Please in making your decision consider what is more important quality of life for residents of Meridian or big business making a profit. We are an organized, concerned and serious taxpaying group of homeowners prepared to fight Smith's rezoning proposal. And we will do whatever it takes for our subdivision to be kept as it was designed and proposed to use when we purchased our homes. If Smith's is having trouble finding suitable commercial we as Linder Falls residents will be happy to find a good commercial realtor which can put them in contact with commercial zoned locations. Thank you. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 45 Johnson: We can't have that, that just delays us and it upsets us. No more clapping okay. Shearer: Can we ask her some questions please? Johnson: Yes, return to the podium please. Shearer: Whereabouts is your lot that you live at. Bennett: 314 feet directly Shearer: Which street is it on? Bennett: West Silver Falls Court. our backyard faces Cherry Lane. Shearer: So you are down on the culdesac? Bennett: Right Shearer: I find it hard to believe that commercial property that far away from you will affect yours. I can see where it would affect some of the others but 1 don't see where it could affect yours. Bennett: We have a group of three speakers and I am one that was chosen. Shearer: Thank you Hepper: Do you have a copy of the petition or signatures? Bennett: Yes 1 do Johnson: We need that for the record please. Crookston: Do you have a copy of your covenants? Bennett: I didn't bring one tonight but I would be happy to bring one for you. Crookston: Can you bring it down to the City Clerk? Bonnie Bradshaw, 1909 North Cool Creek Avenue, was sworn by the City Attorney. Bradshaw: I am new to the area and I haven't studied the comprehensive plan of Meridian Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 46 but I picked Meridian because it is a bedroom community to Boise. From what I can tell 1 have lived in bigger cities and have seen things go on, I think it is really good that Smith's wants to come to Meridian and enter into it because it will make our food prices better, but why do we have to have it on Cherry Lane. It seems Meridian is, downtown Meridian and Chevy Lane and everything is there. Why can't Smith's go up to some place in Ustick area where homes are (inaudible) commercially zoned. Like I said 1 don't know what your comprehensive plan is but it would seem that would be a little more viable to me to the neighborhoods needs instead of just making two big thoroughfares with stores why not spread it out. If Meridian is growing like it is there is going to be the need for that those other stores. 1 have a question, when is this other Albertson on Ten Mile due to open is that very soon. Johnson: We don't know their plans for opening. They have been approved for about a year. Bradshaw: The thing is people pick the communities they are in because they don't mind driving, I mean to drive a mile to the store is not a big deal. If we are going to have one Albertson's is going to be a mile away if you live at Cherry and Linder and another one in the other direction it seems like. We have Fred Meyers going in and eventually a Waremart in the other area. Why can't we move, have Smith's go somewhere other than Cherry Lane and that is just basically my thoughts. Johnson: Thank you Bonnie, any questions of Ms. Bradshaw? Anyone else? Shelly Monks, 1679 West Sunnyslope Drive, was sworn by the City Attorney. Monks: I don't have a huge speech prepared and I don't have a list of 160 names. What I do have is a list of 14 names that I collected in support of Smith's on my block alone. Do you want that now. Johnson: Please, if you want a copy we can give you a copy. Monks: I grew up with Smith's I think Smith's is a great store. I would like to see one on the corner it would make my shopping easier. I have three small children and to walk to the store with them would be much easier than climbing them all into a car and driving a mile down to Albertson's. Albertson's is extremely crowded and I would like to see more opportunity for us to do our shopping than just one place. I can't foresee with my children going into school that it would create a problem for them to get to school or from sc"~~'. Our community is growing, we are getting more homes and more homes and more homes and no place for us to go to do our shopping. What people have to underseas ~ _= growing community and whether people like it or not it is going to happen. I would like to Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 47 see it convenient for me and on my corner rather than two miles away where I still have to travel. Johnson: Any questions? Thank you, anyone else? Dee Ray Olsen, 2186 W. Santa Clara, was sworn by the City Attorney. Olsen: I don't have a long speech prepared or anything gentlemen, I don't want to take too much of your time. I am excited with the prospect of Smith's moving into that location. I can walk to them to the store and meet my neighbors as I go to there. For about seven or eight years I lived close to the north end of Cole Road in Boise while Smith's located at Cole and Ustick. I used to walk to their store many times and found them to be good neighbors with their stores well maintained and lighting and that sufficient so that there were not problems in the parking lots and that because people came and left. They are a good neighbor and 1 think we would enjoy having them in the neighborhood. Thank you. Johnson: Thank you, any questions? Kristen Miller, 1749 W. 10th, was sworn by the City Attorney. Miller: I was one of the volunteers that went around to get the petition signed and most of the people I talked to are in favor or Smith's but just not at that location. We chose that area in Glenfield Manor and we have to live there. There are a lot of things I don't want to repeat but as far as Smith's being so concemed for us shopping how far we have to drive and things obviously we knew where we were buying, we didn't know that another Albertsons would come there or a Fred Meyer and we chose to live there. Some other things, I have two little boys and some things that need to be considered in the summer the Meridian High School puts on all types of summer events. Children are riding their bikes and walking to and from all coming from Glenfield Manor that way. Now f drove my boys because they were small but I promised them that this year they are a little older they will be able to walk and they will have to go right by Smith's. So now they are not going to be able to. The High School puts on those events. Now think of all the children that are going to be walking and riding their bikes to and from there so that is going to (inaudible). A library is going in and I am assuming the library is for all the public and children. The children are going to be walking that way from Glennfield Manor, that is going to be endangering our children. Our children are not going to be able to walk to the library that we all just voted to pass a bond on. Some other thing that I am very concerned about, as far as Smith's coming into the area would be wondertul but I don't understand why they just can't go to another area as far as down to Ustick, where there are no homes developed. Let those people choose to live by a grocery store. We did not choose to live by a grocery store. Also I five in Glenfield Manor off of Linder and Sandalwood. I want to Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 48 be able to get out and go to work in the moming. I want to be able to get out onto Linder at different times of the day. Right now it is even hectic so I can imagine when that store is put in there what the traffic is going to be like. Now when my boys get older I would like them to walk to the middle school. In the morning it is dark and with the traffic and trucks coming at all different, I know they said about 8:00 dclock in the morning and things like that there are early release days there are all different kinds of days where kids are going to be coming. I drive by that way in the moming going to work and f go down Cherry Lane and they have it 20 miles an hour for cars coming and going. There are kids that just dash across that street all the time. So I think if we are considering what is good for Meridian 1 think we need to consider what is good for the children as well and their parents and we will all go shop at Smith's if they go and let us come to them. I don't think we should be forced to have them in our neighborhood. Shearer: Is there a sidewalk along this property on Linder at this time? Miller: I don't think there is right now, no there is not. Shearer: It appears to me that when there is a sidewalk there they will be safer than they are right now. Miller. No they won't, I don't think, I understand that the people in the Vineyards are very much for this, 1 can understand that. But it is not on their side and that is why there are so many people in Glennfield and Linder Falls that are opposing it. 1 think I would want it if it were on the Vineyards side too maybe. That is just my opinion. If my kids are walking to school there is going to be drive ways going into Smith's to cross and there are going to be trucks and traffic going in there and with the growth of Meridian I think we as homeowners and taxpayers can make the decision to drive. I go to Costco so that really probably blows their mind I guess because it doesn't really matter to me. Shearer: When they walk today where do they walk? Miller: Linder elementary. Shearer: Do they walk in the street? Miller: There are no lights, no stores no commercial area in that way. Shearer: No, but they have to walk down that street and you say there is no sidewalk. Miller: They don't go to the middle school yet, they only go to elementary school. I am talking about the future. But I am talking for this summer the high school does offer all types of events for fifth grade and under. I don't know if any of you have driven around in Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 49 the summer and just seen bikes and kids and it starts at 8 in the moming and goes until noon. They are just back and forth and back and forth because there are all different times that Gasses start. Now that you have the library going in here I think you need to consider the extra added traffic that is going to put on the street which I think the library is great but there are going to be kids walking, adults walking and it is just going to be too congested. That is all. Johnson: Thank you. Dan Barkini, 1745 West McGlinchy, was sworn by the City Attorney. Barkini: First I am not against the Smith's food store chain itself, I would welcome the competition between supermarkets. I am against the rezoning of the northwest corner of Linder and Cherry to anything except single family residences. Those of us who purchased homes here and knowing that the property around was also zoned for homes. I am very concerned about increased traffic, we have three schools in the area. Linder elementary, Meridian Middle and Meridian High School involving thousands of students. This area has no bus service. In the moming there are students walking, riding bikes and driving cars. The students who walk or ride bikes across Linder and Cheny streets not only at the comers but the middle of the street. As you know they where a lot of dark clothing and are very hard to see in the moming. They do not have lights on their bikes and ride fast darting in and out of traffic causing dangerous situations even now without the increased traffic. One moming I was taking my son to school when it was still dark and there was snow on the ground. A student was riding his bike in the snow covered bike lane with no lights on the bike wearing dark clothes trying to maneuver his bike through the snow. With increased car and truck traffic what could happen. The proposed street that would be in the rear of Smith's would increase traffic on Kastle Falls Avenue. Drivers will use it to avoid the fights at Linder and Cherry. The street will also be used as entry and exit from the parking lot. The street will change from a residential street to a highly (ravelled side street. This in turn will make the proposed six new residential lots less desirable and make the existing homes very undesirable as residences. What type of single family residences are they proposing, and if they don't want to build they can buy our house which is right behind the proposed new buildings, new houses. Will we be able to get out of Sandalwood and other streets onto Linder safely and easily. Noise, we had a business by a supermarket, supermarkets have lots of their deliveries before 8 a.m., bread, potato chips, beer, soft drinks just to name a few. They also have their own 40 foot plus diesel tractor trailers making deliveries. They are noisy and their emissions are smelly and dirty. Supermarket parking lots are also power vacuumed, this is also done in the very early a.m. We now have a quiet neighborhood, if this change is approved we wilt have noise 24 hours a day caused by the increased traffic 24 hours per day. Truck traffic, street sweepers, air conditioning, refrigeration and freezer compressors. The garbage Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 50 compactors have hydraulic pumps and motors which are noisy. Late afternoons and weekends will no longer be quiet in our neighborhood. This would also apply to a soccer field with the increased traffic and parking at the soccer field. There will be an increase in trash all around the area. Parking lot lights and rear security lights because we are right behind the building will be on all night shining into our bedroom windows. Would the back of the store be nicely landscaped and into the shade for most of the afternoons and evenings what better place for people young and old to sit and smoke drink beer and throw their trash out and drive home while the area children walk home from school or play in their yards. Again making the area a less desirable area to live in. That is it. Johnson: Thank you Lisa Johnson, 1970 Emerald Falls Court, was sworn by the City Attorney. Johnson: In Mr. Wardle's presentation, he stated that Smith's was willing to take the risk of developing some residential lots there, therefore stating that there is a risk to our property values. What kind of risk I would like to know is it for a gigantic supermarket chain to take versus the risk it is to me and my family when we just recently purchased a home in a subdivision with strict CC&R's, a subdivision that was definitely planned on being a very close subdivision so it would be very little traffic, very little noise, very little of anything with a small subdivision private little park thing. This was the plan when we purchased our home and it needs to still be the plan. I thought that is what Planning and Zoning was for to protect the homeowner. That is all I have to say. Shearer: Which lots is yours? Johnson: Down Emerald Falls, the opening to Linder is Emerald Falls and we are down at the end of the culdesac there, Lot 21 1 can't remember the block. Sharon Litzbauer, 1922 W. Emerald Falls Court, was sworn by the City Attorney. Litzbauer: I am going to be really brief because everything I was going to talk on has pretty much been touched on. I have little graphics, this is just to indicate, this is what our subdivision basically is, it is the yellow are homes. This is the whole plat map of what is really existing from what you see there on over. I took this from the notice I got in the mail and blew it up showing the two streets that Smith's plans to bring in off of Linder into the back of this. (End of Tape) What I feel is going to happen to this subdivision as you can see this is going to create this to be a thru street. Drivers are notorious for going around traffic signals whenever they can. Where this is going to come from Linder to Cherry Lane this is going to open this up, this is the park they are indicating. There actually is playground equipment and volleyball there and it is used by the subdivision kids. That is Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 51 going to become virtually useless. That lot, we would not feel safe to have our pets or our kids over here while traffic is coming in and out to a grocery store. The other thing on this park is this is dedicated to the homeowners association which means that is liable for anybody who comes into that park to use it whose shopping at Smith's decide to eat their fast food there or their lunch there after shopping for whatever reason. The other things I wanted to touch on which they did touch on was the walking of the schools. There are a lot of parents in the morning that you see out at these streets. Unfortunately these kids are bussed to other schools, they do not get to go to the Linder elementary because of the school division. They go to Lake Hazel and fun places like that, they are bussed but they are standing out here and any morning if you come by there you will see mothers in their cars who come out and stand with their kids. Once Smith's comes in I wonder what is going to happen, those parents are definitely, the ones that are out there now aren't going to be safe out there by themselves. They are going to have to have supervision, t certainly wouldn't want my elementary child standing there for the bus. So that is going to create that traffic, the library which they did touch on, parents do work in the summer, some of the older kids will be allowed to walk or middle aged kids will be allowed to walk to the library. Some of them probably won't be able to benefit for it at all without adult supervision due to the traffic. That is basically most of the points have been on, I just want you to see this. Shearer: Which lots is yours? Litzbauer: I am 23, I am right at the edge of the culdesac. Hepper: How many homes are built in Linder Falls? Litzbauer: All of the yellow, the filled in yellow are existing homes. Hepper: Are those all sold? I realize the lots are sold, the builders have the builders sold all those homes. Litzbauer: People live in every one of these homes, this home, this home, all of these are lived in. Every one but this one are lived in, in the entire thing. So this is the only one that is not lived in at this point, it is built, it is existing and it was for sale. Unfortunately the sign has been taken down and I think what the real estate company is facing is the disclosure of this to anybody that is interested and it is my understanding there are some lots options but they are having to disclose that this is a proposal of Smith's because it is public knowledge and these people are deciding to build their homes elsewhere. Which is the point that some of these other people are bringing that they have the choice prior to building your home that might not have been a decision we would have made and. others might not make it. The highlighted ones in the first phase for sale and there are no homes Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 52 on those as of today. Oslund: I think you bring up an excellent point about the cut through traffic. Litzbauer: It will, drivers cut through. Oslund: The only thing I will point out is there are I believe there is a technical solution to that. Litzbauer: Not speed bumps. Shearer: Does it really make a difference if that is a Smith's store there with a road coming in and out or if that is all residential and the road goes through. Litzbauer: Yes it will because the difference is one thing that f did ask before k bought here and they said call the City and what I was told is that this is residential and you have a problem with traffic coming through they would come out and look at putting speed bumps in and check the traffic. Shearer: Well, that still goes. Litzbauer: The thing of it is, if it is residential and speed bumps it is not such a good cut through if it is residential. If 1 am living over here in the Vineyards and I don't want to wait for this long line of cars and this light boy it would behoove me to just hop over and go right through here and get in the grocery store and park get back out and get back to my subdivision. Oslund: l don't know if you. have convinced me of what your question was. If the road cuts go all the way through I don't see the difference between whether there Litabauer: Excuse me what is the difference? Oslund: Well he just pointed out that road is platted to go through regardless of that comer development. ff the road goes through whether it is residential or commercial the potential for cut through exists either way. Litzbauer. I guess I could add to that with Smith's has just told us that it is going. to add art additional 3300 cars a day to that corner, those 3300 cars would not be at that corner if Smith's was not there with the opportunity to cut through my subdivision. Crookston: Excuse me, does the Kastle Falls excuse me, Linder Falls Subdivision can you Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 53 point out to me the east boundary of that subdivision on that map? Litzbauer: I can't on this map, I can show you underneath where Smith's is. This is the east boundary of phase 1. We are phase 2, this is Linder and Linder is to the east. Crookston: Is that whole 114 section platted? Litzbauer: Yes, phase 2 is platted Shearer: It has been drawn up but 1 don't think the plat has ever been approved. Litzbauer: Well, that is what 1 am being told it has been platted, however there are no improvements just as Smith's shows. The road ends as far as improvements go, the road ends right there and right there today. And then it is dirt and there are two existing homes up here. Shearer: I don't think there was a plat registered for the rest of it. If there is it has been over a year. Litzbauer: If it was than it has expired at this time if it was because it has been a while since they started it. Shearer: It was originally laid out but the plat was not approved I don't think for that phase. Stiles: Mr. Chairman and Commissioners the plat, the final plat for No. 2 was approved August 3, 1993, a one year extension granted Juty 5, 1994, but the plat is now null and void. Johnson: I think that is in the letter that you wrote as I recall, that was some time ago that I read that though. Thank you. Brent Perkins, 1854 West McGlinchy, was sworn by the City Attorney. Perkins: A couple of points, the people in the Linder Falls, I feel song for. They have gone through a horrible situation here. This has nothing to do with Smith's coming in but they have kind of gotten the shaft. I kind of feel like it adds insult to injury to continue to cause them problems which nobody can tell me different, this will affect their property values. That store being in that proximity to a subdivision of that nature is bound to affect the property values. When they went into that subdivision it was supposed to have this nice fancy brick fence it was supposed to be more of an upscale neighborhood, I know those lots ran probably ten grand more than my lot did right on McGlinchy which is you can Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 54 almost see it on that map. They paid that for a reason; they were wanting an upscale neighborhood. It doesn't affect me nearly as much as those people but I really feel like allowing this to go through is going to dramatically affect their property values. Whether they are over on this subdivision or not you can't tell me it is not going to bleed into that because that whole neighborhood was designed as more or less a closed neighborhood because of this. A heavy fence was supposed to be around the subdivision it was supposed to have the private park etc. Another thing 1 have been around Meridian for a lot of years. I remember when Smith's was here before, although I am impressed with a lot of things they are showing us here and it looks very nice and very fancy I know that there was a definite trash problem around the old Smith's store, I remember driving around the end of that store which 1 did hundreds of times and there was always a huge trash problem and it looked like heck. I think if they are allowed to go into this spot that there should be some kind of control ofthat. Because if that is the way it is going to be again I don't think that is fair to the neighborhood either. I think it is in my opinion a little absurd to put another grocery store in this tight an area we are already going to see a tripling of our available space for shopping why this has to go in this spot when it is definitely going to impact some of the residents of this community. I can see it easily dropping the house prices $10,000, $15,000 to $20,000 a piece. Johnson: Thank you Leslie Peters, 1661 W. Sandalwood Drive, was sworn by the City Attorney. Peters: I have a question for the gentleman that talked about the highway and he said we have a five lane and a three lane, where is the three lane? 1 don't know what a three lane is? Shearer: There is a fuming lane on Linder. Johnson: That is called a three lane highway when you have a turning lane or a merging lane that is ACHD's terminology, that is what they call a three lane highway. Peters: The other concern I have is for the City Commissioners is that Linder Road, I have two daughters that go one to the middle school and one to the high school and there is only one side of Linder Road that is partially paved or sidewalked and they put that subdivision in and I have seen in the last year and a half two children hurt, one of them which was my daughter because she walks home on the east side of Linder, she is going north and the kids and adults drive upon that and they try to miss something or whatever.. Are you guys going to plan on maybe possibly paving that road so the children would have a safer walkway if they are going to put that road off onto Linder Road. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 55 Johnson: That is easy to answer because the City of Meridian has nothing to do with the streets. They are all maintained by contract with ACRD and they do all of the development. That is where you need to go if you want Shearer: Are you talking about north of Cherry Lane? Peters: Yes sir, Shearer. If this project goes in then there will be a sidewalk along Linder Road all the way past this entire (inaudible). Johnson: That wiN be a requirement from ACRD Peters: You are talking about on the west side of Linder. Shearer: Yes Peters: Not on the east side at all. They mentioned about putting speed bumps in, well I live right on Sandalwood Road and I live in the second house on the left side if you are going west, I have got two broken sprinkler heads because what they do is they drive around those speed bumps into my yard or they speed and one day I counted 30 people speeding over those like it was fun and most of them were adults. So my concern is you were talking about speed trumps and it is not going to slow them down. Shearer. Unfortunately Sandawood was done years ago when. connector streets still had houses facing them, today we don't do that anymore. If we had a street Tike. sandalwood, al the houses would face away from it onto side street and stuff and that would be a connector through. Peters: They put those speed bumps in because the traffic increased so much when they put an outlet for this phase 3 for Glennfield Manor subdivision and I have ten times the traffic and the teenagers and their boom noises and I don't live that far away and my house just rattles as it is. They put in another commercial place in there it is going to get worse. Shearer: 1 can't see that this will affect your traffic very much up there. All those subdivisions to the north are still going to go by there, all the subdivisions out on Cherry Lane t hey are still going to go by this corner and most of the shopping will come from those people. Johnson: We certainly don't mean to be argumentative. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 56 Peters: That is okay, the other question I had about enforcing the traffic flow because of the trucks and stuff. Now 1 take my daughters to school when the weather is bad and they put those nice little lights in for people to slow down to 20 miles per hour, do you know how many people I pass in the morning that are passing me by continuously. All these truck drivers, I know tnxk drivers, my ex is a tnu;k driver they don't follow the speed limits. So are we going to have law enforcement to monitor this a little bit more? I know it is going to happen. Shearer: That 1 can't tell you, you have to talk to the chief of police about that. Johnson: Anyone else? Mary Ann Christman, 416 Elm Creek, was sworn by the City Attorney. Christman: I want to say that first of all I am a resident of Meridian, I live at the Parkside Creek subdivision. I am wondering if there was a map that showed the two Albertsons? First of all I want to say I am very much for Smith's going into the area exactly where it is located. There are several reasons for that. Number one I happen to live in Parkside Creek Subdivision and 1 do travel Cherry Lane to get to the only and only shopping store which is all we know is Albertsons. I would very much like to see some competition. I travel Cherry Lane frequently and regularly and I would be one of those that would just happen to stop in and use the grocery store which would be very convenient for me. As a matter of fact if Smith's was located there it would cut my traffic considerably down. So, now, if the Albertsons does go in where the second Albertsons where it is proposed would still like to use Smith's simply because I like Smith's. I have used them in other states where I have been located before. I like the idea of competition. I am also a real estate agent and there are a couple of them in this room and a couple of them have spoke. 1 can tell you4or a fact in all of my communications especially when I attended the first meeting on this that there is a substantial amount that I have communicated with. I live in Meridian and I sell a lot in Meridian who want Smith's exactly where it is located because they do travel. They do travel the Cherry Lane frequently and it would be very convenient. They want the competition, they are tired of the same old store and the same old place. They feel it is a very convenient location for them. I feel for the people in Linder Falls but I can tell you from personal experience 1 happen to have a lot right here. My lot backs up to where Albertsons' is going to be. I bought that lot knowing that, but I would give anything to those this proposed park between me and where Albertsons is going to be I don't have even that. So I think they have done a beautiful job in considering the people around the area with the proposed parks, the berms the landscaping. 1 am not going to have any of that. So I understand how they feel because 1 back up to that area but I plan on planting a bunch of trees myself. Also, I do want to point out that this Linder Falls Subdivision a lot of people that have spoken here are basically living in that area and Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 57 again I said I feel for them, but I have personally shown property in the Linder Falls which was Kastle Falls at one time way back when they opened those homes and they have had trouble selling those homes from day one. t know this from personal experience t have shown homes in there, seven, eight and ten times, 1 was not aware of the controversy between the owners neither were the people that 1 showed the homes to. That subdivision has never really done well. There are a whole lot of agents that know that for fact, I am not so sure if Smith's doesn't go in there with the residents if it is going to make it. Now there will be some people here that will argue that point and I can tell you for a fact there has been a point that was brought up here that with the drive thru traffic one time 1 showed a house and that was brought to my attention. Because they showed the whole planned area and the street that came off of Linder and wrapped around and went right down thru and they said I don't' want to by this house because there is just going to be, people are going to cut right through there and go out on Cherry Lane. So that point was brought up but it was brought up by someone I was showing property to said that was there anyway. So, those are points that I think are important to bring out that subdivision has always suffered. I don't think the Smith's is really going to impact it that much more than what they are already experiencing for sales. I want to look at my notes because a couple of points were brought up. Another point is like t said 1 market a lot in the Meridian area because I think it is real important to point out that being that I have been in real estate many years I am getting a lot of comments about the fact that there is not enough grocery stores or amenities in the area. I think it is really going to hurt the community, 1 think Smith's in general is going to help a lot, because it is going to offer competition, it is in a convenient location for drive by drive on the way home and I am getting a lot of comments from people who don't like the idea that there isn't enough shopping nearby especially when you go out to Golf View or Parkside subdivision further out there, there is just nothing there. It is areal pain to have to drive all the way down to the Albertsons. So that has been brought up many times. That is it. Johnson: Thank you Mary, any questions? Bredon Johnson, 1970 Emerald Falls Court, was sworn by the City Attorney. B. Johnson: I agree with a lot of what has been said in support of Smith's. We need additional shopping in Meridian, I don't disagree with that at all. I agree that we need some competition for Albertsons. I think that is all well and good. I think that the problem really though is why take residential space to build a store on, there is commercial space out there. Albertsons found some. I thought it was good, this lady bought a lot right behind the proposed Albertsons spot but she bought that knowing that was commercial that is a little bit different from those of us in Linder Falls who bought because it was residential because it was a small section of residential. We new that there were some risks we new that the subdivision had going through some problems and we knew that there were a lot Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 58 of legal issues related to that. The Tots were over priced, there were issues and those are still as I understand it in the courts. We bought in there, my wife and our four children and I we bought in there in September. At that point the subdivision had been turned over to the lender who was then completing the development of the subdivision. He met with us and told us he was committed to completing the subdivision, phase 1 and phase 2. We were under the understanding that he was going to complete the subdivision. That this part that exists there that was so important to us was going to be central to this subdivision. Now, we have Smith's coming and saying hey we don't' care that there is commercial property around, we want this piece of residential. tt doesn't make sense to me, it doesn't make sense to me. Johnson: I all fairness 1 don't think I heard Smith's say that, did you hear them say that that they don't care that there is commercial property, did you hear that tonight? B. Johnson: Did they go out and Johnson: No, you said they said that and that bothers me because we are taking public testimony here and it is on record and it will be typed up and I don't think that will appear on those minutes. B. Johnson: 1 agree with that Johnson: And you are under oath. B. Johnson: I agree with that, I guess what I am saying is that by putting this proposal to us that is what it appears to me to be. Does that make sense? Johnson: Yes B. Johnson: I think there are other plaoes they can build, I think there are other places that can serve them just as well through the next several years as the location that they have chosen. t think it is unfair to the homeowners in the Linder Falls Subdivision to rezone that residential property for their purposes when it is going to so drastically affect our purposes and our families purposes. That is all I have to say thank you. Shearer: You don't believe that if you have a two acre park on the other side of your small subdivision and it stays a small subdivision that you think this is going to hurt your property values and stuff in a major way? B. Johnson: If I believed that wasn't going to hurt my property values I wouldn't be here talking to you. If I believed that wasn't going to hurt my families chosen location I wouldn't Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 59 be here talking to you. Oslund: I have a question for you, are categorically opposed to the project or are there things that the project could do to mitigate their impacts. Are there things they can do or is that just a waste of time? B. Johnson: I don't know, at this point 1 disagree with the concept by building one row of houses that they are going to solve the problem. Shearer: They are putting a buffer between the building and the road besides the houses. B. Johnson: What kind of houses are going to be built in that row of houses they are putting in there. Are they going to be the same value, the same quality as the houses that we have been building in Linder Falls. I kind of doubt it. Is that going to then cause some domino effect that starts decreasing the values of homes all the way through, I think it will. Shearer. That could possibly be a condition of zoning too as to what kind of houses that will go in there. B. Johnson: Can you say they have to be $150,000 houses or better? Shearer: (Inaudible} at least the square footage and so on. B. Johnson: That they have 30 year roofs that they have, the roof design etc. to match Linder Falls requirements. I think if you could do that I think if you (Discussion Inaudible} B. Johnson: It is just the concept that it is taking away from what we were expecting what we wanted, what we needed, what we bought that place for. I am sure there is nobody that would disagree that there isn't other commercial property around that they could have gone to. I mean Albertsons picked a spot down here, that was specifically commercial property. The way 1 understood as they built that subdivision behind it that they set aside planning and zoning set aside that piece for commercial because of the neighborhood built. B. Johnson: Did they do that on Linder and Cherry lane? No we are here and they are doing that later on. There is commercial property just exactly kitty corner from the corner that they want to build this on. What is wrong with that property. Shearer: We hear the same story, we heard the same story when Fred Meyers came in, Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 60 there are logical places for commercial building and that is dictated by the subdivisions. Somewhere out in that district there is going to be commercial, there is a mile and a half square there of nothing but subdivisions and that Albertsons site is the only thing there. Oslund: The point I was trying to make is that with every issue there is going to have to be some compromise. I don't expect that this Commission is just going to leave this room tonight or any time and say well sorry Smith's no deal, we have to come to a compromise so that means knowing what are the things that can make a difference. Is it possibly its that road that goes all the way through instead of putting speed bumps maybe we can make it two roads that won't go through. Okay, so that takes care of cut through, maybe you have some problems with lights, well there are things we can do to take care of light. Or maybe there isn't in your opinion. tt seems to me it is going to be hard to make a decision unless we know what are the things that are going to be acceptable mitigation measures or if there are none then you need to, we need to know that you are opposed to the project period. B. Johnson: I am not opposed to Smith's being somewhere, 1 am opposed to them trying to merge commercial that closely with residential. I think if it is pre-planned as that and the residential people know that is commercial that is great, if the residential people go in buying property knowing that this next door neighbor property is commercial that is great. But the other way around is completely wrong. That is my opinion thank you. Marvin Bodine, was sworn by the City Attorney. Bodine: I feel sorry for you guys sitting back there. How many people in here would buy a place and then feel good about when the stores are coming in right next to them. I don't care what the store, I don't want to say Smith's, Albertsons or any store. If they know it is commercial than it is their fault. But if it is not zoned Commercial than I think it is a disaster for them. I think those people and 1 think anybody here would feel that way. It does cost money. Where is the park, rf the parks comes bads to Meridian we will never get a big parkrf we have very many small ones, I think all you know what it costs to take care of the little parks, they are a detriment. They don't do us any good. That is all I have. Terri Maupin, 1672 North Kastle Falls Avenue, was sworn by the City Attorney. Maupin: I live on North Kastle Falls directly behind, my backyard will be looking at the parking lot of Smith's. My husband and I just bought that home as a matter of fact we were unpacking our boxes when I got the flyer on my door about Smith's. I can tell you without reservation I would not have bought that home had I known what I know now. There are two empty houses next to me those houses I am sure will remain empty because most people will feel the same way I do and the same way my neighbors feel, they would not Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 61 have bought a home knowing a grocery store would be in their back yard. That is all have to say, those are my concerns, as well as lights shining in my bedroom window. Johnson: I have a question, when you asked your realtor about that comer when you bought that house what were you told? Maupin: When t looked at, they were maps when I looked at the home. All the time I looked at the home, it showed that was going to be a residential area behind me that it was going to be the next phase of the subdivision. Johnson: Did you have a discussion with your realtor? Maupin: Yes, my realtor got her information from the realtor that was representing the building that said that was the neM phase of the subdivision. Hepper: Did you buy your home at a discounted price, I am not asking what you paid for your home but I have heard some of those sale prices has been reduced knowing that maybe that was going to a commercial so the price of those homes was reduced. Maupin: I had no idea it was going commercial, I thought I got a good deal on my home, I didn't think it was a reduced price no. I thought it was a good deal because it was in Meridian not in Boise. I am new to the area. Hepper: Because the subdivision itself, it is a nice subdivision. Maupin: I had no idea it would be commercial, I wouldn't have bought it. Thank you. Chris Jacks, 1778 W. Hendricks Street, was sworn by the City Attorney. Jacks: First of all, welcome Smith's. I do not have any objection to Smith's coming to Meridian or Boise for that matter. I just don't agree with the location they have chosen. I live in Glenfield Manor. I don't know, it has been brought to my attention what are the plans for Linder Road, it is going to stay two lanes? Oslund: Ultimately, it is a section line road, ultimately it will probably be five lanes. Well I can't say that for sure, I can't say that for north of Cherry Lane, you need to ask ACRD, they should be able to tell you. Jacks: I know Smith's proposal with the street that would be north of their store. Between the Smith's food king and Glenfield Manor they are putting a street which will then out onto Linder Road. 1 live off of Sandalwood and Linder Road, it has been my experience in the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 62 past I have lived in a subdivision where they had taken a two lane road and turned it into a four Zane road. It was then impossible to make a left hand tum out of my subdivision. The traffic increased, my children then and now walked on that four lane road to go to school with the increased traffic and 1 welcome the sidewalks. I always thought that Linder Falls would be in phase 2 and 3 completed and there would eventually be sidewalks there for the children to walk on. Now with the grocery store and the increased traffic whether or not there are sidewalks there it is still dangerous for the kids. My experience and my children were walking to school in the winter on the sidewalk on this four lane road and cars skidded, a car came up and onto the sidewalk and almost hit them. You can't control that and with the increased traffic and everything. Everyone here they love Smith's food king at this location live in other subdivisions not directly abutting that. Everyone of them has said I feel for those people in Kastle Falls, why. Because they have to know what it is going to do to those homes and the traffic and the property values and everything. 1 guess that is it. Randy Nash, 1727 North Kastle Falls, was sworn by the City Attorney. Nash: I live directly across the street from the Smith's store or where they are proposing putting it right next to the park. I bought the home in good faith with it planned as a residential area and no commercial. It is our final home hopefully bought it in an upscale neighborhood so we wouldn't have to live around low income people and things like that which we have all of our lives. This Smith's store is basically going to devalue the home quite dramatically. The rest of the homes that go in the area are going to be devalued quite radically. There is no disputing that, I would be willing to bet somebody that it wouldn't, 1 think you are looking at a 20°k devaluation especially on my home where it is one of the more expensive homes in the subdivision. Shearer: Which lot is yours? Nash: I don't know which lot it is. Shearer: Which street are you on? Nash: Kastle Falls, we are the only home on the left side of Kastle Falls going north. Shearer: You have lots plus a road between you. Nash: However, our lot sits fairly high so we do see pretty much right on top of the roof right above of, we are a couple about 3 feet higher. With Smith's going in there this is not going to be an upscale neighborhood, it is going to be a down scale. The homes on the back you can (inaudible) for square footage and types of products, they are gong to be Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 63 cheap cracker box homes that is the only thing they are going to be able to sell there or they are going to be vacant lots or commercial. Same with the park area. Shearer: I am not an appraiser so I couldn't argue you with you. 1 know that on the north side of Waremart in Boise, they put a block wall in there, they didn't use a front entrance like this one does, they put a block wall in there and they put a landscaping strip and stuff between their store and the subdivision and between you and me the people that are on that street are better off now than when they had houses across the street. It is nicer and everything. Nash: I don't know if that is going to be the same for this (inaudible) we are going to have increased traffic, granted you would have traffic come across that loop I am not going to deny that, with a Smith's store you are going to have increased traffic. You are going to have noise, lighting, I am probably about 200 to 250 feet from it, I didn't buy the home that way. If this is okay to put a Smith's there I am going to feel like you reached in my wallet and took a bunch of money. Shearer: Would you feel more comfortable if Nash: (Inaudible) that is the way I feel about it. It is a nice home and my wife likes it and that but I would be willing to pack and run for the hills at this point. Shearer: If Emerald Falls came on out where it does now and a culdesac was put in there and stopped at the point of this project and proper landscape buffering heavily between your subdivision and this property which would mean you would have one entrance into your subdivision and out. Nash: That is probably the best way to go but I still feel like it is going to devalue it. Mainly because of the noise and the lights. My homes faces directly at the parking lot and t don't really want to look at there and see building or light or anything. 1 want to look out there and see low lighted roofs of houses. Shearer: We would all like to have a mountain view and no neighbors. Nash: I will be more than glad to be quiet if Smith's would buy from me what t got into it. Johnson: Anything else? Ooes anybody have anything new to add? Wanda l.ansbury, 1383 Storey Street, was sworn by the City Attorney. Lansbury: In the first place I don't think anybody has ever stopped to think that if they don't Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 64 build that in with more houses there is likely something else to come along less desirable than a market. There could be a dog kennel, there could be a bar, there could be a drive in, be a lot worse than a market. We know what a market is like, 1 have lived in Meridian for 52 years and I have watched progress and there have been a lot of things go up that can't I couldn't stop and I have survived it, it hasn't hurt me I am fine. It has helped Meridian. There come a time in everybody's life and everybody gets older you can't get away from, there will come a time when I won't be able to drive a lot of my neighbors that live around there won't be able to drive and we have a market Dose by where we can walk to it. We can still keep our independence. t for one I live across the street and down the road just a little bit and I would appreciate it being there. Thank you. Georgia Mackly, 1287 North Santa Rosa, was sworn by the City Attorney. Mackly: I am testifying as a citizen of Meridian on one hand, on the other hand I want to disGose that when Mr. Heward inherited this property through a deed of lain foreclosure, a deed of foreclosure, a deed in lieu of foreclosure that he did hire me to make arrangement to clean up phase 1 of Linder Falls as we market it now. 1 just want to make Gear that there are no more issues before the court as far as this project is concerned. And that he has done everything that he told the homeowners he would do as far as cleaning up phase 1. He also spent substantial amount of money to clean up the empty field that is there and the lot prices have been reduced almost a 1 /3 in phase 1. I will tell you I am in development nothing is going to affect the homeowners value more than houses not selling and the houses were not selling in Linder Falls. Since Smith's has made the announcement that they want to build there, there has been one spec house sold and we have 2 options on 2 more lots. That is the new lots that we have sold since Jim has inherited this property. So, I don't think that it is going to slow the construction in Linder Falls I don't think it is going to affect the property value at all, in fact I know for a fact that before Smith's made the announcement some of the homeowners did get good buys on their homes. So, I would also like to encourage the speed bumps, I know where I work in Eagle there are speed bumps on Edgewood and believe me you go over those once the way they put them in now you don't speed over them again. (End of Tape) The school children on Linder Road, I go to work between 7:30 and 8:30 straight north on Linder Road from the Vineyards. The sign there says 25 miles an hour when children are present. I am always looking for children so I don't speed because I did get a ticket in front of the junior high once and I don't see the children on Linder Road, I don't know if the parents drive them or what, but I just don't see the children on Linder Road. I think that the fact that this commercial property that Smith's wants to rezone this commercial at the comer of two major roads, Linder Road and Cherry Lane is a wonderful idea. I think it is a lot better than doing it on residential type size roads. Last but not least, one of those people who shopped at Albertsons in December, I went to the store for seven items and 1 spent an hour and fifteen minutes there I timed it. I would love to have Smith's there and like I said Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 65 this testimony is partly as a citizen of Meridian but also knowing what Jim's good faith effort is and trying to do the best thing with the property that is at that comer. I strongly encourage that you approve the rezone application. Thank you Kelly Maupin, 1672 North Kastle Falls, was sworn by the City Attorney. Maupin: Just a couple of quick comments. First of all Mr. Shearer keeps talking about the landscaping and stuff to block the store. I am going to be looking at the parking lot and the lights on the light towers. There isn't anything you can do to block that When 1 purchased my home like my stated earlier we had no idea. And to address the people who keep saying we got a good buy on the home, I paid appraised value on the home. So I don't really consider that an exceptional buy I paid what they appraised it at. That is all I have to say. Elizabeth Goon, 1862 Emerald Falls Drive, was sworn by the City Attorney. Goon: I happen to live right across from the proposed Smith's in Lot 26 and 1 kind of had the feeling that you would like to hear from somebody that does live right across from it. I have listened to a lot of what was said tonight and we brought here 160 signatures they were not all from Linder Falls Subdivision. If you look at the names on the list they are from subdivisions on all sides of Linder and Cherry Lane. There are a lot of people who do not want a grocery store that close. If I understand this traffic study there will tie 6600 trips a day past that comer. There are currently 3300, that is 100% increase in traffic. That is all I have to say. Shearer: Whereabouts do you live now? Goon: Lot 26, right across from the park. Shearer: Okay, you are on Emerald Falls. Mary Lou Bower,. 1838 East Emerald Falls, was sworn by the City Attorney. Bower: We live in Lot (inaudible) that would be three doors away from Smith's. I have mixed emotions tonight. I am definitely against Smith's coming in. I sell real estate, I don't think anybody in here can sit and say that isn't going to hurt my property value when I sell that property, it is. I too am not opposed to Smith's but I don't think that it should be residential. I think they should find commercial property. The subdivision has been in litigation for a long time. We have heard some misconceptions about the subdivision. It was in litigation that is not, that is why the subdivision didn't move, it wasn't because people didn't to buy in there. It just simply they couldn't buy a lot and it was brought up Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 4996 Page 66 that it is out of litigation, it is being marketed and it was on a fast track I felt like until we heard about Smith's. Now we have brought you 160 signatures of people in about three weeks time to put this together the opposition that we feel. That isn't just Linder Falls that is everybody. I feel like if we had more time we could have brought triple that many, maybe quadruple that many. There were people that called us, the last few days that wanted to sign these petitions. I think that I hope you will listen to the people because they definitely have views on this. We have tried to express them tonight and I am not going to stand up here and say that Linder Falls isn't going to move I do think it will. But it is definitely going to hurt it and it is going to hurt those that are closest to us and that is McGlinchy and those of us in Linder Falls. I would just like to ask you to please give us a chance to show you the opposition to this Smith's food king in this area because it is there and it is the people that want to voice this opinion about it. Johnson: Is there anyone else from the public that would like to address the commission as this time? Crookston: I would like to ask Mr. Wardle Johnson: 1 was going to ask those people if they have a rebuttle first if that is okay. Mr. Wardle you and your representative do you have anything you want to comment at this time or would you rather not, it is up to you. Wardle: Mr. Chairman, there are a couple of items that 1 would like to address. First I would like to present to you an exhibit that shows the original preliminary plated area of the several subdivisions around as well. It will show you where the proposed roadway lies in relation to what was originally conceived is very close. So there would have been even in the future if residential was approved there a bypass if people chose to do that. There are solutions to that that we can talk about. One of the citations that I included in my handout to you earlier on page 71 of the comprehensive plan policy 1.1 on that page states, "all commercial and industrial", this in this case we are talking about only commercial, "all commercial developments should be reviewed by the City for adequate site planning". Now our comments and our commitment is that Smith's will work with Meridian City and area residents to resolve concerns to mitigate problems to provide appropriate screening, landscaping and control of lighting and signage. We have made numerous attempts at dialogue, we held a meeting with these residents because we knew that there would be concerns. In recent weeks I have made telephone calls and provided information to those that are most directly affected asking for the opportunity to present the new site plan, the changes, to discuss it with them to see if there are issues that could be resolved. Now the comprehensive plan is silent on where neighborhood facilities can and should be placed within the existing urbanized area. But it is not silent to the effect that there will in fact be services within those areas. One statement over and over that has Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 67 been made this evening is concern for the children relative to traffic. What I find hard to understand and I find very illogical is that fact that there is going to be any improvement to the safety of the children in this area if everybody in that neighborhood has to get in their car and travel through or outside of that neighborhood to get services. It is an absolute illogical conclusion drawn that by having these servk~s here that in fact there will be a greater threat to the safety of anybody that walks on those streets. The west side of Meridian does not have any uncommitted commercial area. It has been stated why doesn't Smith's go find another commercial site on the west side. There was a statement made about the one undeveloped parcel, it is much too small for any kind of a facility other thana convenience store. I will restate there is no zoned commercial property on the west side of Meridian that is not currently committed and that commitment is to Albertson's. So if in fact there are to be services there would have to be a rezone of any piece of ground that would accommodate any such facility whether it is Smith's or any other potential user. I would simply conclude Mr. Chairman and members of the Commission by stating that based on comprehensive plan issues and the zoning process that the Commission while you have heard a lot of comments you cannot deal with the emotional issues you must deal with the factual issues that are quantifable, that fit the context of the comprehensive plan and I will restate that the Comprehensive plan is silent with respect to where these facilities, but not silent in the fact that they will be coming. That is the challenge this Commission has and I certainly respect that responsibility. 1 would respond to any questions Mr. Crookston might have. Crookston: Thank you, Mike on the map that you had up there, maybe it was because 1 was so far away, but, is the this is the Naler property they had a house on there on the southeast comer, there is house there, or there are two houses there, I assume that those are going to be removed? Wardle: Mr. Chairman and Mr. Crookston, those homes would be removed whether immediately or somewhere down the line. They are under option as part of this proposal. Crookston: Then on the southeast quadrant of Cherry Lane and Linder you say that is committed for something? Wardle: No that is zoned, I don't know (inaudible) Crookston: I thought you were saying that was committed. Wardle: The term commitment is the fact that it has been committed to a commercial enterprise by the designation of a C-N currently. Crookston: Thank you that is all. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 68 Oslund: Question, the proposed foot print, the square footage is 600,000 square feet, I am sorry 60,000 square feet, how does that compare to the Albertson's down the road here in Meridian? Wardle: Okay, 45,000 to 50,000 but let me ask the question, what is Albertsons current store that would go a mile to the west what are they currently building? Their later stores have been in the upper 50,000 range but Albertson's would have to speak to that. The existing store which is an older store is some 45,000 to 50,000 square feet. Oslund: So it is comparable, I am just trying to get an idea of how big a store this is. The second question, how many alternative sites were looked at, at any level in Meridian? Doug Kowallis, 6003 Overland, Suite 204, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Kowallis: We have looked at several as we (inaudible), when we initiated the search for 6 sites for Smith's in Boise and Meridian there probably isn't a comer in all this area that we haven't looked at. As in Meridian the same in Boise there is a lack of zoned designated sites that need to be 6 acres or better. In Meridian specffically we have looked at the property right adjacent to the Albertsons site at Meridian and Cherry which is not available. We made several attempts. The rest becomes somewhat academic in looking at major comers and aterials and traffic and being able to find where the roof tops are and where the needs can be served. I gather information on the Nahas site, we looked at that. So I guess in all there has been an analysis done on 3 other sites besides this one. (Inaudible) MacCoy: Question, what are the hours for this store, 24 hours? Kowallis: 24 hours MacCoy: Your parking lot accommodates how many cars approximately? Kowallis: 363 parking stalls MacCoy: And your deliveries to the store occur in the middle of the night? Kowallis: Those have been confined to the hours between 7:00 a.m. I believe it is and 10 p. m. The same if for sweeping, the only thing that is difficult to judge is snow removal which. MacCoy: On the question of lighting of that parking lot, how tall are your light poles? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 69 Kowallis: You are asking questions that are out of my area. Twenty five to a 30 foot max, we figured that those things would be specifically through design review, certain requirements imposed on how tall they could be and what sort of light. Smith's will meet those requirements. MacCoy: Put in a light that is directional (inaudible). Johnson: Anyone else? Hepper: There was some comments made that perhaps Smith's might be willing to develop the park rather than just donate the land, would you have any comment on that? Kowallis: That is my understanding that they will take a Zook at what the City will require and that is definitely a consideration. I can address one other issue that cam up if that is okay. One of the residents mentioned the problem with trash, I am aware of that too not only with the certain stores around town but in the past with Smith's. Smith's is a new store today than it was when they were here in town before. The format that you see in front of you is a state of the art store. One of the things that is significant 1 believe in what they are trying to do to be better neighbors is this front loading aspect to keeps the trucks from behind the store where they create more of an impact in the screen. One of the things that I don't think that has been brought out is there are no external dumpsters on this store. These are trash compactors that are internal. Trash that is generated is fed into that dumpster inside the store. The truck pulls in and pulls out the. entire dumpster or trash compactor so trash would be eliminated. Hepper: What about compressors and generators by the back of the store? Kowallis: My understanding is those are in wells, I think these are some questions that Terry can answer, he is the architect and be able to give you a better understanding of those. Terry Scofield, 615 8th Street, Boise, was sworn by the Gity Attorney. Scofield: Question about compressors and other types of equipment. All of the equipment and compressors for the refrigeration is included inside a penthouse with a mechanical well for the air handler sitting next to it. The only pieces of equipment that are on the roof are venting and a one varicula system which we will screen on all four sides. Hepper: When you say in a well would you describe what that is. Scofield: It is pressed down into the store so it is actually sitting at the same height as the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 70 mezzanine of the compressor well but it is open on all four sides as well as to the roof so that it escapes directly straight up as the sound does also. Any other questions I can help you with? Johnson: Any other questions? Apparently not, well Michael are you finished? Wardle: Only to restate Mr. Chairman that we are willing to work with the City and with the residents of the area to mitigate the concerns. We want to restate the fact that if this request meets the objectives and policies of the comprehensive plan and clearly it does than the Commission can recommend to the City Council approval of the requested rezone and we would make that request to you. Thank you very much. Johnson: One last shot, does anybody want one last shot? Funkhouser: The only thing I want to do is make a couple of comments on some of the statement that were made with some of the previous testimony. One of the statements was that there are an existing 3300 cars at this intersection. Currently there are over 11,000 cars on Cherry lane and 7900 cars on Linder. So there are more than 3300 cars. Then there was another statement about 3300 new cars coming just to this site. My statement is that 3300 trips, a trip is either beginning or ending at this site, so in essence there are half as many cars as the 3300 it is just that one trip end is coming and starts there and it is either to home or to another site. So I just wanted to clarify those 2 issues. Johnson: t say another hand behind you there. Barkini: Waremart, you mentioned the nice zoning behind it, the wall and all. Waremart did buy houses behind them to do that. What size landscaping are they talking about, do you have somebody else on that for that other project, the eight foot entrance the four foot trees or forty foot trees. Right now, what is the difference on the traffic with the children and all, if they drive to Albertsons or to Smith's. And what is the definition of a neighborhood store. This is an acre and a half under roof approximately, is that a neighborhood store or is the Maverik or Circe K a neighborhood store. Right now they are putting in a new Fred Meyer which people are coming from Boise that get off at Eagle and go right too Fred Meyer and go right home, there is a new Waremart, I don't know where they are on that one, right behind Chevron right by t-84. What guarantee or what limits are there on the noise, the decibel rating the lights and even though they do have this inside trash. Being around a supermarket before there are carts all over the place. There is trash, there are people, they wont have the dumpsters outside but people go through dumpsters even the compactor ones. One other thing is our family purchased this house, my wife and I have had I don't know how many houses that we have remodeled, and the location is one of the main ones in real estate. But another one that I preach to people I know is that Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 71 (inaudible) go for, where we live on McGlinchy which is right behind it, we are not in the same category as Linder Falls, but there we purchased that one because of price because they were going to put an upscale behind us and that brings you up with that. So you are creating possible equity in your house by having this house next good stuff. You never want to have the most expensive house in the neighborhood. That is all. Johnson: Thank you. Well I would like to close the public hearing at this time. Wayne if you feel comfortable with the way we have been doing business the last 15 years here we will continue to do that. There was a comment made by an attorney tonight representing SmiWs that perhaps we were doing things out of sequence as the way I understood that and that we should come up with a recommendation before we do findings of fact and I don't believe we have done that in the past. Do you have a comment on that, do you feel comfortable with what we have been doing. Crookston: I feel comfortable on it tonight particularly because I think there are some things that need to still be presented. Such as the covenants, there was one other thing can't remember, one of the persons testifying said they would bring, so 1 don't feel uncomfortable with our system that we have been doing for a long time. Johnson: t will entertain a motion then to have findings of fact repaired. Shearer: I move we have findings of fact and conclusions of law prepared on this project. Oslund: Second Johnson: Moved and seconded we have the City Attorney prepare findings of fad and conclusions of law, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Johnson: This will be on our next, assuming the findings of fact are completed in time this will be on our next agenda the findings of fad will be for February 13. There will be no more testimony taken at that time but you will get an opportunity when it goes to the City probably the following week to testify again at another public hearing. It requires a notice again so you will get noticed. 1 have one more motion that I am waiting for here. Shearer: I move we adjourn. Hepper: Second Johnson: We have a motion to adjourn, all those in favor? Opposed? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission January 9, 1996 Page 72 MOTION CARRIED: All Yea MEETING ADJOURNED AT 12:07 A.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) APPROVED: Z JIM J NS ,CHAT N ATTEST: ~~ WILLIAM G. BERG, JR:, ~K • •~G~'~~ ~ ~~° ~' '' FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL I~ ~ ',,, Smith's Food and Drug Centers, Inc. P Linder Road & Cherry Lane ~~i; The request by Smith's Food and Drug Centers, Inc. (Smith's) to rezone the northwest corner of Linder Road and Cherry Lane from R-4 and L-O to C-N (Neighborhood Business District) promotes and supports the public necessity, convenience and general welfare by complying with the provisions of Meridian's Zoning Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan, as provided below. Both the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance state it is the intent and purpose of Meridian to advance the City of Meridian as aself-sufficient employment and economic center. Toward this end, the rezoning of this parcel and the development of Smith's will assist the Ciry in meeting its goals. Zoning and Development Ordinance' 1. Will the new zoning be harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and, if not, has there been an application for a comprehensive plan amendment. The new zoning will be harmonious with and in accordance with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan as more thoroughly provided beginning on page 4 below. 2. Is the area included in the zoning amendment intended to be rezoned in the future. This rezone request will allow Meridian to implement its Comprehensive Plan goals, and provide convenient neighborhood commercial services to the nearby residential areas and support the development of these areas into more complete neighborhoods. 3. Is the area included in the zoning amendment intended to be developed in the fashion that would be allowed under the new zoning [ordinance]. The Smith's site is intended to be developed in exactly the fashion allowed under the Zoning Ordinance. The purpose of the C-N zone is to establish business uses that are intended to meet the daily need of the residents of neighborhoods. Smith's at this location will help the City of Meridian to provide for the daily shopping needs of a number of its residents. Meridian encourages the siting of C-N businesses so such businesses avoid intrusion into adjoining residential districts. General Standards Applicable to Zoning Amendments, Section 11-2-416K. FINDINGS - 1 wpdocsU-z~smiths~meridianUlndings Accordingly, the Zoning Ordinance requires that this C-N district have direct access to transportation arterials or collectors (both Linder Road and Cherry Lane are arterials), be connected to municipal water and sewer (which the site will be), and not constitute strip development concept (which Smith's will not). 4. Has there been a change in the area or adjacent areas which may dictate that the area should be rezoned. New residential areas in the vicinity of this site have developed rapidly over the last several years, and are continuing to develop. This ongoing change was recognized by Meridian when the City adopted its Comprehensive Plan in late 1993, which Plan provides that commercial sites should be encouraged in order to serve the needs of the Meridian public. As Meridian has approved new residential development those approvals have been made with the understanding that the Comprehensive Plan requires commercial sites to planned for -and rezoned if necessary - to serve those residential developments. 5. Will the proposed uses be designed, constructed, operated and maintained to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not change the essential character of the same area. As has been demonstrated to staff and the neighboring residents, and as provided in written and public testimony, Smith's is committed to designing, constructing, operating and maintaining its site so that it is harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the general vicinity. Smith's will not change the essential residential character of the area, and will promote the concept of residential neighborhood by providing for the daily needs of neighborhood residents. In keeping the Comprehensive Plan goals for community design (see page 73 of the Comprehensive Plan), Smith's is designed to ensure that the new development enhances rather than detracts from the visual quality of its surroundings. 6. .Will the proposed uses not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses. The existing use in the general vicinity is residential within the existing urban area of Meridian. The commercial use proposed is exactly the use planned for by the Comprehensive Plan and promoted in the Zoning Ordinance as required to meet the daily need of the residents of these residential areas. This use provides for the public necessity, convenience and general welfare, and is neither hazardous or disturbing. Further, the site plan, developed with input from existing residents, and FINDINGS - 2 wpdoesu-zlsmdhsMeridian~f'indings in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, is designed to mitigate any perceived, potential disturbances. 7. Will the area be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse .disposal, water, sewer or that the person responsible for the establishment of proposed zoning amendment shall be able to provide adequately any of such service. All essential public facilities are found in, and adequately serve, the area. Any public facilities necessary in connection with the development of this site (for example, drainage) will be provided by the applicant. For further information on services provided by highways and streets, please refer to number 10 below. 8. Will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. The rezone to C-N, and the location of Smith's on this site, will not require additional public cost for facilities and services which exist at this site. Smith's will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community as it will increase the tax dollars in the community. Further, Smith's will create a convenient shopping location thereby decreasing the time and money spent by individual residents of Meridian in traveling to and from convenience centers (perhaps outside of Meridian) for their daily needs. 9. Will the proposed uses not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. The proposed uses do not produce excessive traffic (see further information immediately below), noise, and no smoke, fumes, glare or odors. As shown on the site plan for Smith's, the orientation of the use is away from the nearby residential areas and toward the intersection of Linder Road and Cherry Lane. 10. Will the area have vehicular approaches to the property which shall be so designed as not to create an interference with traffic on surrounding public streets. The Traffic Impact Study by Bell-Walker Engineers, Inc. completed for this site analyzed Linder Road, Cherry Lane and Kastle Falls Avenue for traffic impacts on FINDINGS - 3 wpdocslt-zlsmdhslmaddiaMfindings surrounding public streets. Linder Road and Cherry Lane are minor arterials; Kastle Falls Avenue is a residential street, which intersects with both Linder Road and Cherry Lane. The intersection of Linder Road and Cherry Lane is widened to include turning lanes, and includes a traffic signal. The accepted traffic study shows the roadways will have adequate capacity to accommodate both the base traffic and the site traffic in the year 2015. The intersection of Linder Road and Cherry Lane will continue to operate at a Level of Service "C", and the intersections of Kastle Falls and Linder Road and Cherry Lane will operate at Level of Service "A." Access driveways on site will be located so as not to create interference with traffic on the surrounding public streets. 11. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of major importance. Smith's will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any natural or scenic feature of major importance. The Smith's development will assist Meridian in the provision of important commercial services to its residents. 12. Is the proposed zoning amendment in the best interest of the City of Meridian. Meridian has already made the determination, by its adoption of its Comprehensive Plan in 1993, that the provision of commercial services, especially in the form of convenience shopping center, is in the best interest of the Ciry of Meridian, and provides for the public necessity, convenience and general welfare. Smith's application for this rezoning assists Meridian in implementing the provisions of its Comprehensive Plan and carrying out its goals for its citizens. Comprehensive Plan The Meridian Comprehensive Plan clearly states that a major goal is to assist and encourage residential areas in becoming neighborhoods: Within the community there are unique neighborhoods which comprise the Meridian urbanized area. Only a few of these have traditional neighborhood characteristics. Others ... lack nearby parks, schools, churches, and commercial support services. In time, the developing districts will become neighborhoods as the community continues to expand and develop neighborhood facilities and services. (Page 6). The location of Smith's at the corner of Linder Road and Cherry Lane deftly assists Meridian in accomplishing its goal. As pointed out below, the rezoning of this parcel and FINDINGS - 4 wpdoes\t-zlsmdhs4neridian\findings C~ • the development of Smith's at this corner is also in accordance with the remaining goals of the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Economic Development Goal It is the policy of the City of Meridian to support shopping facilities which are effectively integrated into new or existing residential areas, and plan for new shopping centers as growth and development warrant. (Page 18) In keeping with Meridian's policy to plan for new shopping centers as development warrants, rezoning the corner of Linder Road and Cherry Lane as C-N will implement the policy and Plan. Land Use Goal -General Policies Encourage a balance of land uses to ensure that Meridian remains a desirable, stable and self-sufficient community. Promote the development of high-quality and environmentally compatible residential areas that contain the necessary parks, schools and commercial facilities to maintain and form identifiable neighborhoods. (Page 23) Land Use Goal -Commercial Policies As the City of Meridian continues to develop, small Neighborhood Convenience Shopping Centers will be required to serve the day-today living needs of area residents.... Locate new planned Neighborhood Commercial Centers (3-8 acres) on arterials or collectors near residential areas in such a way as to complement but not conflict with adjoining residential uses. (Page 26) In rezoning this site to implement this and other goals of the Comprehensive Plan, Meridian will promote the development of residential areas into identifiable neighborhoods that contain the necessary commercial facilities to serve daily needs. The Smith's development is encouraged by the Comprehensive Plan (see page 25), which promotes the development of a neighborhood shopping center instead of a strip commercial area. This parcel is 7.24 acres in size, bordered by two minor arterials, and adjacent and near residential areas. Smith's will compliment the existing and planned residential areas, and Smith's has been designed not to conflict with adjoining residential uses. As further provided in the Zoning Ordinance, it is Meridian's intent and purpose to "encourage the proper distribution and compatible FINDINGS - 5 wpdocs\t-z\smithslmeridian\findings integration of neighborhood commercial into residential areas of the City" (see section 11-2-A-11). Transportation Encourage clustering of uses and controlled access points along arterial, collector and section line roads. Require Traffic Studies evaluating the impact of generated traffic volumes (internal and external circulation) on adjacent streets and to preserve the integrity of residential neighborhoods, as requested by the city. (Page 54) The Traffic Impact Study by Bell-Walker Engineers, Inc., completed for this site analyzed Linder Road, Cherry Lane and Kastle Falls Avenue for traffic impacts. Smith's will contain controlled access points, and is located along the minor arterials of Linder Road and Cherry Lane. The nearby Kastle. Falls Avenue is a residential street, which intersects with both Linder Road and Cherry Lane. The intersection of Linder Road and Cherry Lane is widened to include turning lanes, and includes a traffic signal. The accepted traffic study shows the roadways will have adequate capacity to accommodate both the base traffic and the site traffic in the year 2015. The intersections of Linder Road and Cherry Lane will continue to operate at a Level of Service "C", and the intersection of Kastle Falls and Linder Road and Cherry Lane will operate at Level of Service "A." Access driveways on site will be located so as not to create interference with traffic on the surrounding public streets, and to preserve the integrity of the nearby neighborhoods. Implementation Update the zoning and development ordinance to be in conformance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan as required by state law. (Page 80) Clearly, the Smith's application for rezoning provides the City with the opportunity to do what is required by state law - to amend its Zoning Ordinance to implement the Goals of the Comprehensive Plan. FINDINGS - 6 wpdocs\t-z\smkhsMeddian\findings ~~ ~ o y c • o U U ~~ m v C Y ~~ ~ ~ ~+1 O O. y ~ 0 ~ a ~~ ~° ~~~ x ~~ ~ ~ ~ o m ~y ~// l ~ ~ M ~ ~ A/ 00 O _ ~~ ap N_ G 1-~T^y1 z ~ Ga o X u P ~°o ~ w -. ~ Q r RANDALL M. AND JULIE A. PIPAL 2350 E. Apricot Dr. Meridian, Idaho 83642 208/887-1764 January 9, 1996 Dear Commissioners, ~~~ L// ~ , t'' ~~`'~ We respectfully submit this written testimony with regard to the application of Dave Leader for a preliminary plat for land located in the S 1/2 of Section 5, T.3N, R.lE, Boise, Meridian, Ada Courrty, Idaho. The developer, Dave Leader, is responsible for the landscaping of Dove Meadows Subdivision No. 1, pursuant to the Declaration of Covenants, Article V, Section 5.4. We have occupied the home at 2350 E. Apricot Drive since the end of February 1995. During that time we have received nothing but excuses from the developer as to why the landscaping could not be completed. We feel that Mr. Leader has not maintained a good faith relationship with us, and we request that he be required to fulfill his obligations to Dove Meadows Subdivision No. 1 prior to beginning any work on Dove Meadows Subdivision No. 2. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, l -~-~. V Randall M. Pip lie A. Pipal DATE: January 9, 1996 TO: MERIDIAN CITY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: Michael D. War RE: SMITH'S REZONE The following Ciry of Meridian Comprehensive Plan citations (in bold) aze offered in support of Smith's request for a change of zone from R-0 to C-N at the northwest comer of Cherry Lane and Linder Road. page 6 Within the community there are unique neighborhoods which comprise the Meridian urbanized area. Only a few of these areas have tradkional neighborhood characteristics. Others are essentially developing distriMs and contain some elements of traditional neighborhoods, but at present they lack nearby parks, schools, churches, and commerical support services. In time, the developing districts will become neighborhoods as the community continues to expand and develop neighborhood facilities and services. Comment -The Cherry /Cinder neighborhood has schools, churches and park space related to [he schools, but is cleazly deficient in neighborhood commercial support services. Smith's will help to remedy that problem for existing residents. page I S ~ It is the policy of the City of Meridian to support shopping facilities which are effectively integrated into new or existing residential areas, and plan for new shopping centers as growth and development warrant. page 23 j,$1~ Promote the development of high-quality and environmentally compatible residential areas that contain the necessary parks, schools and commercial facilities to maintain and form identifiable neighborhoods. Comment - As noted above, this neighborhood lacks the commercial facilities necessary to form and sustain an identifiable neighborhood. page 25 Neighborhood Shopping Center. As the smallest of the three shopping areas, its main purpose is to provide convenience shopping to the neighborhood residents. The Comprehensive Plan encourages the development and location of neighborhood shopping centers instead of strip commercial areas. Comment -Location of Smith's at this intersection will focus commercial activity at a transporta- tion node where there is already a developing commercial center with C-N zoning on two of the other three comers. Clearly this is "nodal", not strip development. page 26 ~ Neighborhood Shopping Centers, rather than strip commercial development, shall be provided for convenience shopping services. Comment -Same as above. • i • • 4.41 Locate new planned Neighborhood Commercial Centers (3-8 acres) on arterials or collectors near residential areas in such a way as to complement but not conflict with adjoining residential areas. Comment - While Smith's proposal does not constitute a "planned" center, with their typical multiple uses, i[ does meet locational criteria (on arterials) and the site plan does respond to existing resident's concerns for buffering by the addition of new lots or park land between them and the store. page 60 Park Acquisition Goals Create new public recreation opportunities by acquiring new parkland and expanding existing facilities [hat respond to the needs of the community. 2_1 Provide places for neighborhood outdoor recreation within walking distances. 2_2 Provide "change-of-pace" recreation in intensively used areas where open space is scarce and standard-size parks are difficult to obtain. 2.SU ...all changes of land use will be considered as opportunities to: b. negotiate for the acquisition of park sites. Comment - Smiths has two options on the table for the proposed buffering of "Linder Fa!!s" residents--another culdesac with dwellings, or a 2.7 acre park which provides the opportunity to meet the above-stated objectives page 67 1_4 The development of housing for all income groups close to employment and shopping centers shall be encouraged. Comment - Conversely, shopping centers should be close to housing when such can be provided and meet the objectives of the Plan. Clearly, this location achieves that objective. page 7! 1_l All commercial and industrial developments should be reviewed by the City for adequate site planning. Comment - Smith's will work with Meridian City staff and area residents to resolve site concems and to provide appropriate screening, landscaping and lighting/signage control. page 73 4.3~ Use the Comp Plan, subdivision regulations, and zoning to discourage strip devel- opmentand encourage clustered, landscaped business or residential development on entrance corridors. 4.4U Encourage landscaped setbacks for new development on entrance corridors. The City shall require, as a condition of development approval, landscaping along all entrance corridors. 5 2 1 Ensure that all new development enhances rather than detracts from the visual quality of is surroundings, especially in areas of prominent visibility. Comment - the Smith's site plan proposes extensive landscape butters not only along enhance corcidors but also for residential buffers. 9'96 v. ~ ~ ~~ STATEMENT OF SUPPORT I ~yy" a~~~ for SMITH'S FOOD AND DRUG CENTER STORE at CHERRY LANE AND CINDER ROAD, MERIDIAN As residents of the neighborhood surrounding the proposed Smith's store site, we express our support for the project. / 17' ,~ -~ ,g Petition ~~~~ ~, ~/, Regarding ~ ~'' `,~~5 Proposed Cherry LanelLinder Road Commercial Rezone for Smith's Food Store We, the undersigned, are not in favor of and do not suR o~rt Smith's proposal to rezone property located at the northwest comer of the intersection of Linder Road and Cherry Lane from residential to commercial for the purpose of constructing a 60,000 square foot food store with optional pad space for additional commercial businesses. Address---------------"~.OC1C. ~~ ---- r~ rY ~d_N~ s0. ~~ __~~_ _ :?-~~ C Petition Regarding Proposed Cherry Lane/Cinder Road Commercial Rezone for Smith's Food Store We, the undersigned, are not in favor of and do not s~poort Smith's proposal to rezone property located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Linder Road and Cherry Lane from resideMlal to commercial for the purpose of constructing a 60,000 square foot food store with optional pad space for additional commercial businesses. ---1 Tod-- N;-- ~ 7-,°--------- ~o i ate,----------- _. °_153 ~~:-_v~?}'.'!=~^"!»~- ~`'=""~--------------- ,, ~, ,~ -------------------------------------------------------------- ----Address------------------------ Petition Regarding Proposed Cherry LanB/Linder Road Commercial Rezone for Smith's Food Store We, the undersigned, are not in favor•of and do not suR o~rt Smith's proposal to rezone property located at the northwest comer of the intersection of ~Llnder Road and Cherry Lane from residential to commercial for the purpose of constructing a 60,000 square foot food store with optional pad space for additional commercial businesses. ----Address----------------------- 11 _Y t --- ~'=--- ~~~--------------------- ,.. --~~~~---~ --- 7~-~-~=--------------- ~` ' ~' ---~-a-~-u-`-'= ~ ~- - /9-s~ _ ~ ~.9i.~iris ~~~ y------------ '%OOY, ~(l it 5~/~l G''Ii~~'C Petition Regarding Proposed Cherry Lane/Cinder Road Commercial Rezone for Smith's Food Store We, the undersigned, are not in favor of and do not suDg_ort Smith's proposal to rezone property located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Linder Road and Cherry Lane from residential to commercial for the purpose of constructing a 60,000 square foot food store with optional pad space for additional commercial businesses. Nam ----Address--------------------~~~ .1t.~9~L_.~_.rx~c~~~1~~ = -~- -----------_7 ~~~ 1 -D ~/ ~ ~Cpn~ .. ~~~1~~ MSG/i 13 9y ~r _~~Z~ _x[88 $~g _~yZ 2 _8_g7 =78~j ~~7_~7~! )`~~b-1e.2.1~'1CClt~i -- -«-g`~--L_l.1_ ~l`_~. ~- ---- ----- ~4.~1 __Gs1_:_~i~rz~___-- Petition Regarding Proposed Cherry Lane/Cinder Road Commerdiai Rezone for Smith's Food Store We, the undersigned, are not in favor of and do hot suq o~rt Smith's proposal to rezone property located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Linder Road and Cherry Lane from residential to commercial for the purpose of constructing a 60,000 square foot food store with optional pad space for additional commercial businesses. _ Address__________ ~51__~44~~.I~~.ea..~.~___1..,~ra.~,..r ----- _r7~_s--~ ~~„ems _-s~------ ~.3a2_~L~~r~7r~~i~113 r-i Petition Regarding Proposed Cherry Lane/Cinder Road Commercial Rezone for Smith's Food Store We, the undersigned, are not in favor of and do not suq~ort Smith's proposal to rezone property located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Linder Road and Cherry Lane from residential to commercial for the purpose of constructing a 60,000 square foot food store with optional pad space for additional commercial businesses. -----Name----------------- ____Address _________________ ~~s~__ILl/_~__-~~nc~~~o~ri!---f~'.er~cEx-to---- ,. „ ,, --fib f~-u~-=--~a~cL~L!-~c~ ~?---Pnn~>~ --17_y~1__l~_ ~91a1.~~u_!o~----[!~_'1~ fit]-- --=-ccfrnmrT__ ~j_4'f-12-------------------- ~~r-- - ------------------ Petition Regarding Proposed Cherry Lane/Linder Road Commercial Rezone for Smith's Food Store We, the undersigned, are not in favor of and do not suDDOrt Smith's proposal to rezone property located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Linder Road and Cherry Lane from residential to commercial for the purpose of constructing a 60,000 square foot food store with optional pad space for additional commercial businesses. Nam __--Address------------------------~/e~ Di~- 1i rj ~r 1. Petition Regarding Proposed Cherry Lane/Linder Road Commercial Rezone for Smith's Food Store We, the undersigned, are not in favor of and do not suDDOrt Smith's proposal to rezone property located at the northwest comer of the intersection of Linder Road and Cherry Lane from residential to commercial for the purpose of constructing a 60,000 square foot food store with optional pad space for additional commercial businesses. __--Address---------------~~0.0C1C_~ 1_.160---!]1~_~k~__~~-_---~~~--y[~-r - LZtczl?..,N_.~,~~_l~e?idr~~~i~_~x 7 ~30~ ,[ ~}-~~ _%/_~~~ %~~P_1~f~!G~..~:P___&?~ ~ -6306 1_~~_`_'J, __~o.wq /yc+C.J,-d-` ~ X0'7-~'%~>;'o- _11~~5.J~ ~~ ~~ !~1.1a.C~.~4r~-a_I_~~~____ ~t~_~ ~-~.5~ Petition Regarding Proposed Cherry Lane/Cinder Road Commercial Rezone for Smith's Food Store We, the undersigned, are not 1n favor of and do not suQ~ Smith's proposal to rezone property tocated at the northwest corner of the intersection of Linder Road and Cherry Lane from restdentlal to commerclal for the purpose of constructing a 8Q000 square foot food store with optional pad space for additional commercial businesses. -----Name----------------- ----Addrass_----------------------- _ ~ Yl ~ 1~--- --- - ------- Qt ~ f/US ~Le:-~~~Gti :.------------- --------------------- - ----------- Petition Regarding Proposed Cherry Lane/Cinder Road Commercial Rezone for Smith's Food Store We, the undersigned, are not in faKor of and do riot suooort Smith's proposal to rezone property located at the nortfiwest corner of the intersestiion of Linder Road 9nd Cherry iane from residAOtial to commercial for the purpose of constructing a 60,000 Square foot food store with optional pad space for additiandl commerdal businesses. l- f5 `f ~ ~ __ _1_~1t::1---~-=---~~~'~-a=te ~~---~`~ =~53 ~ 1~"~__~L' _~'~ZtZ--------------------------- ____dddreas__ _ P~1o»e. Petition Regarding Proposed Cherry Lane/Cinder Road Commercial Rezone for Smith's Food Store We, the undersigned, are n9t in favor of and do not suooort Smith's proposal to rezone property located at the northwest comer of the intersection of Linder Road and Cherry Lane from residential to commercial for the purpose of constructing a 60,000 square foot food store Wsth optional pad space for additional commercial tsusinessas. ----Address-/----------/------------- p 1 ?G?~-------L~Ctt/Z!?~.--~'11'----~~.L~c,d/_9J~y?rI . 7- ---~.~_~5L__S_ta[~~cfryL45z~~s?~---ll~sl-,~-'-~- ~ kJ T~ ~e M~r~~d~4~~d ----------------------- ~~ Petition Regarding Proposed Cherry Lane/Cinder Road Commercial Rezone for Smith's Food Store We, the undersigned, are not in favor of and do not support Smith's proposal to rezone property located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Linder Road and Cherry Lane from residential to commercial for the purpose of constructing a 60,000 square foot food store with optional pad space for additional commercial businesses. ____ ame ____ __ ___ ____Address_________ ___ -~ ~~Qc~~ve~ /- ~ ~~ ~~~~ ~~?~~L~.. Rte:, M~IDIAIV CITY-12URAL t'~ ~ VOFUNT~12 FIRE Df~,~RTiNFNT `~ 716M1~1N_1~IAN,IDAHO 88612 \~ ° . • ° FHW~(IOQ-88A-171q FAE (I06~d1~81~ JAN. 04, 1996 JAP! ~ ~ 1996 MEEiL'}iAi~ GARY SMITH =-~N ~c~ RE: HAVEN COVE #5 SUBDIPISICN Meri3ian Fire Dept, will have a problem witka getting our Emergency vehicles down the narrowed streets because, it never fails +,hat somebody will not park the right way or they will park away from the curb. Parking on only one side of the narrowed street creates problems to enforce. The distance to the Hydrants concern es me. The Emergency vehicles carry hose's ranging from 20`to 25 feet long that hooks up to the hydrants. If there is a vehicle parker: in the area of the hydrants we will not be able to lay straight across to the hydrant. We can not drive our Emergency vehicles any closer to the hydrant because of the Swale either being wet and muddy or the Swale might have snow covering it. I am concerned about the saftey of our firefighters having to cross this Swale in bad weather or in the night to get to the hydrant, Will we lose water pressure from the hydrant if the hose goes down and then back up in the Swale?? How long will the pipe under the driveway last?? Will it hold i-he weight of the trucks?? How wide will it be, and who has the final say if it is approved or not? j p~J C~ ~~°w"`z Ken W. Bowers Fire Chief ' MERIDI~T POLICE DE~RTMENT 201 E. Idaho • Meridian, Idaho 83642 W. L. "BILL" GORDON Phone (208) 888-6678 Chief of Police TELEX 1DOOI0300 ~ECEIf/~r January 4, 1996 ~~ ~ ~ i99E Ir1ERiJ1Aty :ITY Etd(,NEEF TO: Gary D. Smith, P.E. City Engineer , - FROM: W. L. "Bill" Gordon, Chief of Poliip ~~~ RE: Haven Cove fk5 Subdivision, narrow streets I see the parking as a problem for us, with the number of homes and limited parking or worse yet no parking. Where are friends and relatives going to park? I view this as creating work for my Department. We are like all city employees, over worked and constantly playinglcatch up. I think iYwould be to our advantage to not build in extra work.::: Narrow streets would create extra work for the Meridian Police Department. 1. Parking .complaints 2. Vehicler.accidents - A. Elderly B Teenagers C. Intoxicated drivers D. Inattentive drivers 3. Road blockage A. Parties B. Garage sales, etc. I strongly oppose narrowing any streets in Meridian and would ask that we have the section in the Code Book that allows for this to be removed to prevent any further request. ~ SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS Ca EXCEL +~ ~ Bob L. Haley Q !~. ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT 2 ~~~~ y yn DIRECTORS Donnell, Personnel 8lnstrucdon ~ ; ~ ~` ~ Sheryl Belknap, Elementary Q Bev Bredtoro, Secondary ~ Aoug Rufan, Special Services JOINT SCHOOL DISTRICT N0.2 911 MERIDIAN STREET • MERIDIAN, IDAH083642 • PHONEl20~888$701 MEMORANDUM: TO: Gary D.Smith, PE City Engineer NE~~IVEG1 FROM: ~ Jim Cazberry, Director of Support Programs DEC Z 7 1995 MER~lAdv~ DATE: December 22, 1995 ''!n ENGIttEr~`` RE: Haven Cove No. 5 Subdivision ~~/OLLf The Meridian School District would like to express concern about the width of the right of way on W. Wave Place. The school district feels that 50 feet. is necessary to provide a safe right of way for our school buses to transport and load and unload children. Less than 50 feet constitutes a serious concern for our drivers. Thank you for your consideration. to - ~ ~ ~ a_ a_ ~ '~ ~ ~' ~, tc1 ~ ~ ~ ~~ :~ ti w ~ ~~ ~. o ~ ~ to % w x ~. 0 ~ & ~ ~ ~ w ~I z~ ~ z 111 ~ ~' c0 eN ^a Z "" Y ~ a P'. 4'+ P ~ a+ 1 ~ y ~ ^ til -_ \ -__ ~ c -----1- ~~._~.~,.,~,~__ -_-----------------~ ~~~ ~°: ao ~~~~ z ~ ~ Q ~. ~ w ~ a V O Avx Ho[ooa •x 1 A 0 t a S m R l~~ Q ° ~.~~J O 1 0 m i 1 Atlµ anooa •x :dfl N:aAtl .LN~'~Ntl.L 'N m R v D r-~ HMI&1V ZN30NYZ 'N / AVY HIHOa 'N O -- - -- - -- ~~' iR~ - O ~ I I -- ' t a p .ltlY 81HOa 'x /\ • .. ~~ , ~ ri _1 ~ pSHO i ~p. a<. ~~t 7 A s~ i H ~9 ~„Ai~ tiff dA -i aim and R, e i f+ n v 6Y g ~ o'm Ya°,on '~k ~ clj~ ~6 y JO1 x~n ~xoa ~ ~ 6Y1 ~ aJ_~ W _n O'm ° •~~ yy ~ ~. ~. (~ ~ . y.m•~ ~ ~'wg ¢mw y zo Ll °f 2~~-e A ~ ~~^m~ ~°o° g f 3 ~ P~- ~` _ ~ ~ ' eeHH ~• a ~o~ ~ v ~~:~ ~ Y Y w a f & d ~ i F[ ao d 1L7 A ~ee f pf"pf ff ; E1 °, F j e a ; ¢ # i ~j) "E! [x B's i{s °+yy ~i~di i~~ji~~'S esc i{{i ~e~l 43 E':~8 t3ae -i ~ F? i I' Y F F i~ d s 3 8: y e s i z ~ ~ z 8 z w $t!3s3t!3is~td:~~:s€€ tz!~i;~,€s,:•~9i ~s~i it i i ~ l l IQI~a ~ ~_ =f#~~t~i°_t >'i fi=g; e<z t t ¥ j i' A. d° a. a (3 I I I I I I~ I B N ~ff ~Yf; F. *fyE ~~f ~p ;~yF€ige i ~ ~ ~ I E 8 33 77 ~ Ab i~.i 3~~ xi xi Add xa5 S ar_ __-__~ay-.-____ -__-.-a---___. ~_ ~__ __, _~s _ ~ ~ i z e- ~ A J •II ___ ___ ! A ¢ ! 1 1I 'O ' _ •I - ~ _^ . „. ~ IJr~ -• ' h $ I _ _ • g ~~ _ . ~.s I . ". t - `~ ' z - ~ S ¢~ I r u 9 y I r e i ~ ~ {~{ ~k 9 l i 3 •Ov I3 , , I ~~ V _ ~,- °i d. A .o , ,~ ' a ~~l ' A s .a - it - 4 ooy al!W ual u°r~^+ z.zuun. m..~ z.rvw. O U\~ O w\r ~\U t 0~O a d~ a St o' j ~a 3 ~ J Y ~~ Y _T '- : 2 z ~ U ~ S .f d"r S oooa ~o~ yoo~g s BEFORE THE FLANNIN(i AND ZONING • ORIGINAL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN REZONE R-4 RESIDENTIAL TO L-O LIMITED OFFICE MERIDIAN FREE LIBRARY DISTRICT NORTH OF CHERRY LANE, 8A8T OF NW 13TH AVENUE MERIDIAN, IDAHO FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS The above entitled matter having come on for public hearing December 12, 1995, at the hour of 7:30 o'clock p.m., the Petitioner's representative, Tom Ensley, appearing, the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian having duly considered the evidence and the matter makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. That a notice of a public hearing on the Rezone Application was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to the said public hearing scheduled for December 12, 1995, the first publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly considered at the December 12, 1995, hearing; that the public was given full opportunity to express comments and submit evidence; and that copies of all notices were available to newspaper, radio and television stations; 2. That this property, contains approximately 2.47 acres and is located within the City of Meridian and which property is described in the application which description is incorporated FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW- THE MERIDIAN FREE LIBRARY DISTRICT Page 1 herein; the Applicant is not the owner of record of the property, but the owner of record is Anna Roskela; that the property is now zoned R-4; that Applicant is requesting a rezone to L-O Limited Office; that the property is within close proximity to existing homes and schools; that the proposed design is residential in style, approximately a 30,000 square foot structure on West Cherry Lane, which, it is asserted, makes for easy access. 3. That the owner, Anna Koskela has submitted her permission for the rezone. 4. That the owner had earlier requested approval to allow a manufactured home to be erected and remain on the site as a life estate, but submitted an Addendum to the Purchase Agreement stating that the owner withdraws the request for a life estate on a portion of the subject property as well as the withdrawal of locating a modular home on the property. 4. That the proposed land use would be to build a public library, together with parking facilities. 5. That the proposed zoning amendment is consistent with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. 6. That a public library is permitted use in the L-O District; the Limited Office Zone requires a conditional use permit for the operation of a library, which is the use the application requests; that such use requires a conditional use permit in any zone where allowed. 7. That the L-O District is described in the Zoning Ordinance, 11-2-408 B. 5 as follows: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW- THE MERIDIAN FREE LIBRARY DISTRICT Page 2 (L-O) LIMITED OFFICE DISTRICT: The purpose of the (L-O) District is to permit the establishment of groupings of professional, research, executive, administrative, accounting, clerical, stenographic, public service and similar uses. Research uses shall not involve heavy testing operations of any kind or product manufacturing of such a nature to create noise, vibration or emissions of a nature offensive to the overall purpose of this district. The L-O District is designed to act as a buffer between other more intense non- residential uses and high density residential uses, and is thus a transitional use. Connection to the Municipal Water and Sewer System of the City of Meridian is a requirement in this district. 8. The City Planning and Zoning Administrator submitted comments regarding the rezone request which are incorporated herein as if set forth in full herein; that the comments by the City Planning and Zoning Administrator, Shari Stiles, are that the proposed site plan includes only 62 parking spaces; that a minimum of 75 spaces is required by City Ordinance and are required to be 19 feet deep with a 25 foot driveway; that parking spaces for the handicapped in accordance with the Americans Disabilities Act must be provided; that a detailed, scaled site plan showing all parking and loading areas, traffic access and traffic circulation, open spaces, landscaping, refuse and service areas, utilities, signs and yard should be submitted for review by and approval of the Planning and Zoning Commission prior to applying for a building permit; that all construction shall comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act; that Cherry Lane is identified as an entrance corridor in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and careful attention must be paid to the landscaping of this corridor; that one (1) three-inch (3") caliper tree is required for each 1,500 square feet of paving per FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW- THE MERIDIAN FREE LIBRARY DISTRICT Page 3 City Ordinance; that buffering of adjacent residential properties is required (fencing and landscaping). 9. That the Assistant to the City Engineer, Bruce Freckleton, submitted comments; that any existing irrigation/drainage ditches crossing the property shall be tiled; that any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service per City Ordinance, but wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation; that a drainage plan designed by an architect or an engineer shall be submitted for all off-street parking areas; that outside lighting shall be designed and placed so as to not direct illumination on any nearby residences; that all signage shall be in accordance with Meridian City Ordinances; that S-fj-i~/ih off-street parking, paving and s~~r a drainage plan, and sidewalks, shall all be provided in accordance with City Ordinances; that the paving and striping shall be in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act; that sanitary sewer and water services are existing at the proposed site; that the Uniform plumbing Code requires that separate services be installed for the Library and the mobile home and that the Applicant will be responsible to supply the Public Works Department with information as to the additional impact the new proposed use will have on water and sewer usage; that additional Assessment fees may be charged to cover the impact. 10. That comments from the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District, the Meridian City Police and Fire Departments, and FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW- page 4 THE MERIDIAN FREE LIBRARY DISTRICT Central District Health Department were submitted and they are incorporated herein as if set forth in full; that the Nampa ~ Meridian Irrigation District stated that all laterals and waste ways must be protected; that municipal surface drainage must be retained on site; that the District requires that a Land Use Change/Site Development application be filed for review prior to final platting. 11. Tom Ensley testified before the Commission that the seller does not now request the life estate; that the structure will be a single story and within the 35 foot requirement for this particular zone; that the lighting will be carefully considered because of the fact it is in a residential area; that the driveway now will be along the east boundary and will have 76 parking spaces; that the comments from the City can be complied with; that there will be two (2) entrances off Cherry Lane and that boundary fencing and landscaping will be complied with; that as many trees that can be incorporated will be retained and used in the landscaping; that there will be clock-wise traffic around the structure, entrance to the east of the building and exiting to the west of the building; that there will be a book drop-off box and that the hours of operation to be from 9:00 a.m. to 7:30 p.m. Monday thru Thursday, 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Fridays, and Saturday, from 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Mr. Ensley stated that it would be possible that the roadway to the back of the property, which he believes to be the minimum of 22 feet, could be narrowed in order to give additional buffer at FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW- THE MERIDIAN FREE LIBRARY DISTRICT Page 5 that end, creating a greater sound barrier for the residents to the north. 12. That there was testimony from Edna McDaniels, who owns the adjacent property; that she objects to this application if it is going to be a two-story structure; that she wants the library to maintain the fence; that she is concerned that the parking lot is an invitation to kids and loitering and questions whether this will devalue her property. 13. John Powell testified that he generally approves of the application but questions how much buffer will be provided for the adjacent properties and the affect the lighting may have on his residence. 1. That all the procedural requirements of the Local Planning Act and of the Ordinances of the City of Meridian have been met including the mailing of notice to owners of property within 300 feet of the external boundaries of the Applicants' property. 2. That the City has the authority to take judicial notice of its own ordinances, other governmental statutes and ordinances, and of actual conditions existing within the City and State. 3. That the City of Meridian has authority to place conditions upon granting a zoning amendment. 4. That the City has judged this Application for a zoning amendment upon the basis of guidelines contained in Section 11-2- FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW- TBE MERIDIAN FREE LIBRARY DISTRICT Page 6 416 of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian and upon the basis of the Local Planning Act of 1975, Title 67 Chapter 65, Idaho Code, the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, and the record submitted to it and the things of which it can take judicial notice. 5. That Section 11-2-416 A. states in part as follows: "When the public necessity, convenience, general welfare or zoning and development practice require, the Council may amend, supplement, change, or repeal the regulations, restrictions, and boundaries or classification of property as well as the regulations and provisions of this Ordinance." 6. That 11-2-416 (K) of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian sets forth standards under which the City shall review applications for zoning amendments; that upon a review of those requirements and a review of the facts presented and conditions of the area, the City Council specifically concludes as follows: (a) The L-O zoning would be harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. (b) The area included in the proposed zoning amendment is intended to be developed in the fashion that would be allowed under the proposed new zoning. (c) That the property, if designed and used as allowed in the L-O District and as it presently exists, would be designed and constructed to be harmonious with the surrounding area, which is developed in the R-4 fashion. (d) The L-O use would not be hazardous to the existing or future uses of the neighborhood. (e) L-O development would not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and would not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW- TBE MERIDIAN FREE LIBRARY DISTRICT Page 7 (f) The proposed use would not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment or conditions of operation that would be detrimental to any person, property or the general welfare of the area, however the traffic would be increased more than it would be under R- 4 development. (g) Development in the L-O district, and particularly as planned by the Applicant, would produce the heaviest traffic increase during the week with only the minimum seen on Saturdays and Sundays. (h) That a rezone would not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any natural or scenic feature of major importance. (i) The proposed zoning amendment is in the best interest of City of Meridian. 7. That the City has judged this Application for a zoning amendment upon the basis of guidelines contained in Section 11-2- 416 of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian and upon the basis of the Local Planning Act of 1975, Title 67 Chapter 65, Idaho Code, the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, and the record submitted to it and the things of which it can take judicial notice. 8. It is further concluded that the comments, recommendation and requirements of the Assistant to the City Engineer will have to be met and complied with. 9. That the comments and requirements of the Planning and Zoning Administrator shall be met and complied with, particularly submitting a detailed, scaled site plan showing all parking and loading areas, traffic access and traffic circulation, open spaces, landscaping, refuse and service areas, utilities, signs and yard FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW- THE MERIDIAN FREE LIBRARY DISTRICT Page 8 for review by and approval of the Planning and Zoning Commission prior to applying for a building permit. 10. That the requirements of the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District, shall be met. VOTED 11. That all ditches, canals, and waterways shall be tiled as a condition of rezone and if not so tiled, the property shall be subject to de-annexation. 12. That proper and adequate access to the property is available and will have to be maintained, with appropriate buffering to residential properties and traffic on Cherry Lane. APPROVAL OF FINDINCiB OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of the City -ter of Meridian hereby adopts and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONER HEPPER COMMISSIONER OSLUND COMMISSIONER SHEARER COMMISSIONER MacCOY CHAIRMAN JOHNSON (TIE BREAKER) FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW- TBE MERIDIAN FREE LIBRARY DISTRICT VOTED '~~ VOTED ~~96 VOTED VOTED Page 9 DECISION The Meridian City Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends approval of this Rezone requested by the Applicant for the property described in the application with the conditions set forth in these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and that the property be required to meet the water and sewer requirements, the fire and life safety codes, the Uniform Building Code, and other Ordinances of the City of Meridian, including that all parking areas shall be paved and the fence Ordinance shall be met. MOTION: APPROVE '~g19~ DISAPPROVED: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW- TBE MERIDIAN FREE LIBRARY DISTRICT Page 10