Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAug 21, 2003 P&Z Comm MinutesMeridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting August 21, 2003 Page 43 of 113 Commission would, then, recommend approval or denial. Number three. At least two parking spaces, nine by 19, shall be provided for employee parking. Including all other staff comments. End of motion. Zaremba: Second. Borup: Motion and second. -All in favor? Any opposed? MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, TWO ABSENT Item 12. Continued Public Hearing from August 7, 2003: CUP 03-037 Request for a Conditional Use Permit to move into older home used as office space, pave portion of adjacent lot, use as dealership for used automobiles in a C-G zone for O.P.M. Enterprises by O.P.M. Enterprises, Inc. - 1065 East Fairview Avenue: Borup: Next item, Number 12, is a Continued Hearing CUP 03-037, request for a Conditional Use Permit to move into an older home used as office space, pave portion of adjacent lot, use as dealership for automobiles in a C-G zone O.P.M. Enterprises. We'd like to open this continued hearing and start with the staff report. Kirkpatrick: Chairman, Members of the Commission, this application is a Conditional Use for a used car lot. The applicant is proposing to use an existing older home on the subject property for office space for the used car lot and also for a mortgage business. The applicant is also proposing to use an existing shop for storage and for auto repair. The subject property is located at 1065 East Fairview. Some of the surrounding land uses are to the north. There is a commercial property zoned C-G. To the south, there is rural residential property. To the east, there is a rural residential property. To the west there is a property zoned C-2, which is a commercial property. I'll go through some of the major issues with this project. Staff is recommending approval of the project. Here is an aerial of the subject property. Let's see. The applicant is asking for alternative compliance on the eastern edge. Let me put up the Site Plan. Which -- let's see the orientation here. We have -Fairview is to the north. The applicant is asking for altemative compliance on the eastern edge of the property from the landscaping standards. The applicant has an existing structure, which would make it impossible to meet the landscaping standards, so staff is recommending approval of this alternative compliance on the eastern edge of the property. The applicant will be required to make several fairly significant changes to the Site Plan before the Site Plan can move onto City Council. ACHD in their staff report has stated that the applicant cannot have two access points off of Fairview. This is going to result in the applicant having to connect the two parking lots -- you can see on the Site Plan -- because they will no longer be able to access each parking lot from a single access point. The drive aisle in the eastem parking lot must be modified to meet parking standards. They are going to have to add another 14 feet to the drive aisle, because it doesn't meet today's -- it does not meet the code's dimensional standards. I also want to note that currently sewer is not available to the subject property and the applicant will be required to hook up to Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting August 21, 2003 Page 44 of 113 sewer when it's available. Water is available and the applicant must connect the water prior to any use of the property. Additionally, I want to add a couple of conditions to the staff report. Let's see. Actually, condition 13 I want to modify. Okay. Condition 13 I want modify to read -- and we are looking at the fourth sentence. It should read: The applicant shall connect to water prior to any use of the property. It currently reads shall connect to all essential city services. I want to replace that with the word water. Condition 14 will remain the same. Condition 15, which we want to add, is that any existing domestic wells shall be removed from domestic service. We want to add, as a Condition 16 only one curb cut will be allowed per the recommendation of the Ada County Highway District. Let's see, the last thing I want to address here -- the applicant -- there is a ditch on the property, which the applicant will be required to tile. Condition 17 should read applicant or property owner will be required to the ditch per Meridian City code standards. Attached to that concern over the irrigation ditch we have a neighbor who is here this evening. They let us know of a situation where currently their irrigation water drains across the property -- drains across their property onto this subject property and if this drain is obstructed, their property will flood. Actually, through this Condition 17 we are requiring them to the the ditch. That should be covered. They will be required to meet all state codes for irrigation waterways. The applicant is here and we wanted to make sure that that was addressed directly. Are there any other questions of staff? Centers: Mr. Chairman, I just had one question. Item 13 where we say the designer shall furnish the Public Works Department a new Site Plan, who was the architect? Do we have a designer? Kirkpatrick: The designer is the applicant, so we can change that wording to the applicant shall furnish. Centers: Something suitable to the Public Works Department, that they will be happy with, I guess. Okay. Thank you. Zaremba: Let's see. I wasn't clear whether you said they needed to submit an altemate compliance for the landscaping or whether they have submitted it. Kirkpatrick: Let's see. Actually, the applicant has not submitted an official request for altemative compliance. I have a verbal request. Prior to City Council, they will be required to submit a formal request or memo addressing that they are requesting alternative compliance for landscaping. Zaremba: Have they described the alternate compliance to you? Kirkpatrick: They have verbally. I don't have a revised Site Plan reflecting their proposed landscape changes. Zaremba: Does it sound like they are going the right direction? Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting August 21, 2003 Page 45 of 113 Kirkpatrick: We will require that before it goes on to Council Centers: Do you have that in your conditions? Site specific? I couldn't see it real quick, but -- Zaremba: I see it under standards on page two, but not -- Centers: Okay. That would be good enough. Zaremba: So, do we need an item 18 under site specific? Kirkpatrick: Let's go ahead and add item 19, that a revised Site Plan must be submitted prior to City Council hearing or by revised Site Plan and Landscaping Plan meeting Meridian City Cade standards. Zaremba: Or alternate compliance. Kirkpatrick: Or alternate compliance. Correct. Zaremba: Okay. I had one other question -- actually, two other questions. On what looks like a handwritten note from the applicant they are indicating that they are going to run a lot of other businesses from this property also. Crestwood Construction. Precision Heating and Cooling J.R. Painting. Their point is to bring all of these businesses to one location. Kirkpatrick: The applicant -- I know which letter you're speaking of. The applicant has officially proposed just to have the mortgage business and the used car lot in this building. If he wants to modify that, he needs to make that statement tonight. Zaremba: Okay so, the application doesn't include those other -- Kirkpatrick: The application is for the mortgage company and for the used car lot. Zaremba: Okay. Because this would be a lot of construction trucks. Kirkpatrick: They do not have -- no, they are not asking permission for any construction businesses on site. Zaremba: We will ask the applicant about that. Kirkpatrick: And they are here this evening. Zaremba: Then, on the Site Plan that they do give, they indicate two future building pads. Have you addressed what those likely to be or -- can we build two buildings on one piece of property? Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting August 21, 2003 Page 46 of 113 Kirkpatrick: The applicant will be required to come back for another Conditional Use Permit for those buildings. Zaremba: Okay. We are -- that's a concept and the applicant's aware we are not approving those at this point. Kirkpatrick: Right. I think they just wanted us to have a visual of what potentially could be there, but they are applying just for the used car lot and associated parking and to use the existing home and shop for the mortgage business and the used car lot. Those are the only uses here tonight. Zaremba: Thank you. Kirkpatrick: Oh. Actually, I also want to point out, Chairman, Members of the Commission, without sewer they will not be able to do any sort of expansion on this site. Centers: Well, you know, the original application -- CUP application just states the dealership for used automobiles in the applicant's handwritten -- handwriting and it mentions nothing else. Kirkpatrick: We have the applicant here, so we will want to have him address that. That could have come up through the application meeting or -- Borup: Well, it says office space is how I read that on the application. Office space and, then, a dealership. I don't know if that means -- Kirkpatrick: Are you looking at -- are you looking at the legal notice for this CUP or are you looking at the actual -- the applicant's -- Borup: Application. Kirkpatrick: -- application? Centers: That application itself. Borup: Any other questions from the Commissioners? Would the applicant like to make their presentation? Walker: For the record. Justin Walker, 311 South Malachite Avenue, Meridian, Idaho. 83642. Commissioners, what I -- I think I have got a little chicken before the egg here. Our original application and the purpose of this hearing was just for the car dealership and for the office space to use the current building that is there. The existing building sites is probably my overzealous nature in just trying to provide what our goal is for this particular site, including all of the parking and drive -- the extra drive that is shown above. We are purchasing the property from Marshall Ogden and it's understood that from previous hearings that we are to -- and as indicated by staff that we need to hook Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting August 21, 2003 Page 47 of 113 up to city water, which we have applied for a permit from the Public Works Department. We provided them a new Site Plan for what they needed and have received approval on that and, then, do some more landscaping in front and this -- this existing area here is enough paved parking currently to provide and meeting the requirements for the Department of Transportation in having a car dealership there. So -- and that will also address another issue. The individuals here tonight that are concerned about drainage issues. I am understanding that their drainage comes from this area and goes across the property in this fashion to a drainage that runs underneath Fairview and that will not be affected at this time and will be addressed in a future meeting when we come back to get approval for our building site. Zaremba: The parking area that you indicated -- and I'm referring to Ada County Highway District's comments on their page three. The applicant is proposing to utilize an existing 25-foot driveway that intersects Fairview Avenue approximately 10 feet east of the west property line, which would be the one that you just indicated. Walker: Right. Zaremba: This driveway does not meet district policy and should not be approved with this application. They are suggesting that you only use something in the middle. Walker: Okay. Zaremba: Do you have access to this parking area from whatever entrance you have in the middle? Walker: We can. I have got another drawing where we have -- now I'm remembering that we were going to do away with this entrance here, put some more landscaping in this area and connect -- they also were requiring some radiuses for turnouts. We were going to come in here and connect across here, about parallel with this line, so that when we continue to develop this area we don't have to tear out and redo a bunch of -- abunch of asphalt at that time. Zaremba: I think you answered my other question already. You don't plan to have the painting contractor and the two or three other -- Walker: No. Zaremba: -- construction type businesses -- Walker: That was probably a letter that was stating kind of what we were planning on doing with the existing buildings, but for this purpose, no, it will just be the car dealership and the mortgage company. Zaremba: Okay. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting August 21, 2003 Page 48 of 713 Centers: Mr. Chairman. Did you submit a Landscape Plan or do we have a Landscape Plan? Kirkpatrick: Actually, the Site Plan is what we have for the Landscape Plan. The applicant will be required to submit an official Landscape Plan designed by a landscape professional prior to City Council. Centers: Okay. This may be a technicality and you were very open about it. You don't own the property. Do you have permission from Mr. Ogden to submit the application? Walker: I do. Centers: Usually I see that in my packet. Walker: It was submitted. Centers: Okay. Good. Walker: It was submitted and we do have his permission. Centers: Good. Walker: We are currently negotiating a contract with him. Kirkpatrick: Chairman, Members of the Commission, while we have the applicant up here I wanted to clarify whether he was still planning to have the parking lot to the east, on the eastern section of the site. Because, actually, in order to meet parking requirements for the number of employees he's proposing and also for the car lot, he will have to expand his parking. Actually, the lot just to the western section of the site will not have enough parking spaces to fulfill his parking requirements. Walker: Right. If we -- if we are required to put this drive in, then, we will put these parking spaces in as well and develop this area upfront. Kirkpatrick: Okay. I just wanted to clarify that both parking lots will put be in. That's still their proposal, is that correct? Walker: Well, these over here exist. Kirkpatrick: Correct. That's existing parking for what was the podiatry building. Walker: Right. Centers: So, it would have been beneficial to submit a revised plan showing all the new parking after the ACHD requirements? That would have been a good thing, wouldn't it? Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting August 21, 2003 Page 49 of 113 Walker: I think the only thing ACHD was requesting was a connection between this drive and this parking. This connection here was the only thing that they were requesting and that we do away with this second entrance. Centers: So, you're okay with the revised plan for the parking prior to City Council also, in addition to the revised Landscape Plan or alternate Landscape Plan prior to City Council? Kirkpatrick: Correct. As long as we agree this evening what will be reflected on the revised plan. You feel comfortable referring this to Council without seeing the application again. Borup: Any other questions from the Commission? Anything else you wanted to add, Mr. Walker? Walker: Thank you. Borup: Okay. Ma'am, you had a comment? Morgan: My name is Verna Dean Morgan and we live at 1187 East Fairview, which is on the south side of this parking lot. Yes. Now, we need a privacy fence across the back there, because it looks into my bedroom window and Idon't -- Centers: Where are you at, ma'am? Morgan: Right there on the south side. Yes. Centers: Right in there? Morgan: Yes. We need to have that privacy fence. Also, that drain should be put in before the parking lot and, you know, check, and see whether it goes under the driveway and the parking lot. That's got to go in first. You can't put it over the top of the concrete. Let's see, what else? Oh and the lot is covered with weeds as high as your head, and a lot of rag weed, and guess who has asthma? That really should be cleaned up, because it is a fire hazard to us, too. Centers: So, presently the lot is pretty much vacant and full of weeds? Morgan: Well, just where the house is, that's the only thing that is -- has been used for years. The rest of it has always been pasture, they caught our wastewater, and they irrigated that pasture, well, up to the last couple of years. The water still drains across there, but then, they had horses on there, they had llamas on there, they kept all the weeds down, and the drainage was clear, then. Well, now, of course, it's all overgrown, it's got to be cleaned out, and it really should be tiled now. That's most of it. Zaremba: If it's tiled it will continue to drain the way you need it to drain do you think? Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting August 21, 2003 Page 50 of 113 Morgan: Yes. It's irrigation. You know, the there and that's where we get our water and that they would have to put in there. y have it through the subdivision behind us so it's just a matter of, what, 208 feet of the Centers: Why the need for a privacy fence at this time? Morgan: My bedroom window is there. Centers: Well, what -- it's still there, but what are you looking at now? Morgan: A wire fence and horses. Centers: Horses that are beyond --okay. Morgan: Yes. We have two horses that are pastured there and, then, the wire fence, and, then, their property. It's a common fence. Centers: I think -- correct me if I'm wrong and maybe the applicant would want to come back up and address it, but most of their business activities would be out closer to Fairview, so it would be quite a distance from your bedroom window. Borup: Let's look at -- ma'am, this is your house right here? Is that correct? , Morgan: Yes. Borup: And this is the existing building up here? Morgan: Yes. Now, all the rest of that is pastureland there and, then, there is a wire fence in between us there. From the experience living next to Lithia over on the other side, a car lot -- you know, we were told that they would only put on three or four cars, you know, on the application. Borup: Lithia? Morgan: Isn't that right so it goes beyond that? Centers: Oh, this one. Yes. Not Lithia. Morgan: Yes. Oh, no. Then, by living next to Lithia there and the -- they didn't -- they were required to put in the fence and they were to be maintaining that fence. That was the agreement at the time. Minute that the wind comes up they put it on just as cheap as they could, and they didn't use screws on those. Nails. You know, just little sharp nails. We had five horses out at 2:30 in the morning on Fairview. We want a privacy fence there. It would be 207 feet is all, and for them to maintain it, and, also, that was a seven foot high fence that was put on the side of Lithia there, instead of a six. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting August 21, 2003 Page 51 of 113 Centers: What kind of fence did they use? Lithia. Did they use chain link with screening? Morgan: Lithia? Centers: Yes. Morgan: No. They have just a cedar fence there. Centers: Cedar? Okay. Morgan: Now, see, where you pointed there from our house behind is the field drain and that field drain is, oh, at least two feet or better high above the ground, because it's a high water table there. The Health Department made us put in a very large one and it's just my husband and myself. You're looking at a lot of problems. Borup: Okay. Anything else, ma'am? Morgan: I can't think of anything right now. Centers: Thank you. Borup: Do we have anyone else who would like to testify on this application? Any final comments, Mr. Walker? Walker: At current we'd probably rather not put a fence up. Number one. There has been a business there for a number of years, Boise Orthopedic -- orthopedic clinic or -- podiatry. Boise Podiatry. This has been the Boise Podiatry building there for a number of years and we are not going to be doing anymore business than what they had, other than right up front here we are going to have a few cars parked. Our main course of business will be in this building itself, which should not be any different than what's been there for -- I don't know how many years, in relation to the last witness. That's all I have. Borup: Thank you. Zaremba: How recent is this aerial photo? Are we identifying the right buildings? There are no additional residences there? Borup: That's still accurate, I believe. Kirkpatrick: I believe this is the correct -- actually, I don't know the -- I don't have the date on this aerial photo. I don't know if -- oh, March of 2003. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting August 21, 2003 Page 52 of 113 Borup: I believe this little building here was the cell phone place for a while and a little ceramic shop in there now. Centers: What's this one, Mr. Chairman? Borup: This is residential here, isn't it? Kirkpatrick: And Chairman, Members of the Commission, I actually wanted to make sure that we had clarified exactly which uses the applicant was applying for, if it was the car lot, and, in addition, the mortgage business, or if it was just the used car lot. Borup: Right. It was our understanding the mortgage business and a car lot. Zaremba: Yes. Kirkpatrick: Those are the only two businesses. Okay. Borup: Yes, at this time. Centers: Mr. Chairman, Mrs. Morgan raised her hand. Borup: Another comment? Morgan: This property is only 207 feet square, so by the time you figure how far back each building is set, the house that they are going to use, it's not that far from our -- you know, from our building here. I would like to have that fence put in. Also -- Borup: You're saying with a new building -- you're saying when the new buildings go Morgan: No. I mean now. Borup: Okay. Nothing's changing from what it is now. You understood that? Morgan: Nothing's changed? Borup: No. They are using the same building that's already there. Morgan: Well, yes, but, then, won't they have people come to their lot? Borup: Right. Just the same as the podiatry business has done. Morgan: Well, the podiatry was very little traffic that came in there and they have been in there three and a half years. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting August 21, 2003 Page 53 of 113 Centers: Do you have a fence, Mrs. Morgan, right here, between your other neighbor to the north? Morgan: Yes, we do. We have -- Centers: Privacy fence? Morgan: -- a shop there at that property. We have a shop and a fence, a privacy fence. We also have our landscaping very high, so that no one can see back in there. Centers: And you own all of this property? Morgan: Yes, we do. Kirkpatrick: And Chairman, Members of the Commission, I wanted to point out the applicant will be required to put in a 25 foot landscape buffer along the southern edge of the property. They are not asking for alternative compliance on that section, just on the eastern edge. There will be a 25-foot landscape buffer to the south. Morgan: Can we go ahead and put on a fence of our own? Borup: Well, of course. Centers: Question for staff. That 25-foot landscape buffer on the -- on the south, in my mind is really not necessary, because you're not -- you know, you're trying to separate uses. You know, residential to -- but could we make a requirement for the fence in lieu of the landscaping? Kirkpatrick: Actually, you can request alternative compliance. If you wanted to have that be altemative compliance, you can recommend that. Centers: We don't know the landscaping, but I think the landscaping may cost as much as the fence and it's not doing anyone any good way south there. I think everyone is nodding their head. That would -- that would be my bright idea. Borup: Would you like a response from the applicant? Centers: Yes. That would be fine. Borup: Mr. Walker, did you have any comment on that? Centers: Do you want to comment, Mr. Applicant? Borup: Did you understand what staff was saying, that as the ordinance stands now, there still would need to be -- unless requested, alternative compliance and it would be a landscaping buffer on the south side per city ordinance. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting August 21, 2003 Page 54 of 113 Walker: For our use now? Borup: Is that correct, Wendy? Walker: We were expecting that -- something like that when we eventually do the building, but it's up to use now. Kirkpatrick: No. Actually -- I mean to have this Conditional Use approved you will be required to come into compliance with current landscaping standards, meaning a 25 foot landscaping buffer to the south and there would also be a tree every 35 feet, so think about the price of those trees versus the price of a fence. Borup: Plus the maintenance. Kirkpatrick: Plus the maintenance. Centers: Yes. Yes. Borup: 50, I think Mr. Centers was saying that maybe -- it may be better for you, the cost of a fence, rather than the landscaping and maintenance, and maybe keep the neighbor happy, too. Walker: Okay. Borup: But, that would need to be -- does he need to apply for the alternative compliance prior to City Council, then, or is that -- would that be the proper procedure? Pt?well: I'll have Brad chime in if he needs to. There is an application for an official request for alternative compliance. To my knowledge we haven't been consistently requiring those, have we? No. So, we can include it as part of your recommendation going forward, that you recommend the fence in lieu of the required landscaping and I would support, especially given that both properties are shown as commercial on the Comprehensive Plan. You might want to talk -- just to have on record the neighbor's response to having the fence instead of -- Borup: Well, she requested the fence. Powell: You just might want to ask her specifically if she would prefer the fence in lieu of the landscaping. It would be nice just to have it on the record. Borup: Okay. Well, then, Mr. Walker, I guess we would be interested in your desire. Which would you rather -- which would you rather do, the landscaping, or the fence? Walker: It makes more sense for the fence at this time Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting August 21, 2003 Page 55 of 113 Borup: Okay. Walker: As long as -- will that stand through -- for the existing buildings or are we going to have to readjust that once we come in for buildings and, then, are required to put, in addition to the fence, a 25 foot landscape buffer once we come back in for -- you know, to get approval for our buildings back there. Zaremba: Isn't that what the formal application for alternative compliance would solve? If he does that now, then, he wouldn't be subject to a new set of rules when he comes back. Powell: Well, what would more -- it kind of -- I'm stuttering. I'm sorry. You can't really give permission for something that's not happening yet. When he comes in for that new use, then, just like everybody, he plays by a new set of rules. I'm not sure that the conditions would warrant having the same buffer. They may require no buffer if the property behind them, if it's five years from now, and they decided to sell and there is a commercial use back there -- I'm not trying to suggest anything, but just if that were to occur, then, there would be no required buffer. Conversely, if a housing development goes back there and you have ten residences, then, the buffer may be appropriate. Borup: That makes sense. Centers: Depending on what happens to that vacant land and if Mrs. Morgan ever sells it. Walker: Okay. Centers: One comment, though, that we had added Condition 18, site and Landscape Plan for alternative compliance submitted prior to City Council, so you still have to do that, about the other landscaping and we can add a fence to the south in lieu of a 25- foot buffer. You have it on record at this meeting today. Walker: Okay. Centers: You come back three years from now and you would have a case, let me put it that way, but as staff mentioned, there can be no guarantees in the future. Walker: Right. I understand that. Okay, and that -- in fact, that would probably be in lieu of the -- the fence. Borup: Okay. Maybe to get that on the record, Mrs. Morgan, you stated earlier that you would prefer afence -- you'd like to see a fence there. Is that still your -- Morgan: What about the tiling of the -- Centers: That's going to be a requirement. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting August 21, 2003 Page 56 of 113 Borup: That's a different issue. We were just talking about the fence right now. Morgan: Yes, I guess, the fence is what we want. Borup: Okay. Centers: And asix-foot cedar fence to closely match the Lithia fence as -- whatever. Morgan: Yes. Centers: Right. Good. Kirkpatrick: And Chairman, Members of the Commission, the fact that you want to allow the applicant to put up the fence, rather than the landscaping buffer, you can reword site specific requirement number four to reflect that change and you will want to include that in your motion. Centers: Okay. Zaremba: I guess my only question is whether we have enough issues that need to be redrawn and re-agreed to that we want to see that those are done before passing it onto City Council or are you comfortable with staff eyeballing it ten days ahead? Borup: That's what I'm thinking. I mean staff would review that and I'm assuming if the plans didn't come in in time, it would be pulled from the agenda. That would be the normal procedure. Kirkpatrick: Correct. It would be tabled. Borup: Yes. Centers: If they are okay, I'm okay. Kirkpatrick: I think if we are very clear about what changes need to be made before it goes onto Council we are in good shape. Borup: And if Mr. Walker has got any questions on that, staff would be able to go over that again with you. Okay. Centers: Then I would move we close the Public Hearing. Zaremba: Second. Borup: Motion and second to close the Public Hearing. All in favor? Meddian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting August 21, 2003 Page 57 of 113 MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, TWO ABSENT Zaremba: Mr. Chairman, (recommend -- I mean I move that we forward to the City Council recommending approval of Item 12 on our agenda, CUP 03-037, request for a Conditional Use Permit to move into older home used as office space, pave portion of adjacent lot, use as dealership for used automobiles in a C-G zone for O.P.M. Enterprises by O.P.M. Enterprises, Inc., 1065 East Fairview Avenue. To include all staff comments of their memo for the original hearing date of August 7, 2003, received by the City Clerk July 31, 2003, with the following changes site specific requirements, beginning on Page 4 -- Kirkpatrick: Oh. Actually, Chairman and Members of the Commission, can I interject on another site-specific requirement that we did not modify? I'm sorry. We discussed this. At site-specific requirement Number 1 they will need to modify the parking plan, because they don't meet current standards. Centers: Prior to City Council. Kirkpatrick: Prior to City Council. We could go ahead and at the very end of that sentence it can read: Shall be installed and striped in accordance with the revised parking -- the revised Site Plan, meeting the standards of the Meridian city code, something to that effect. We need to address that it's not currently meeting standards. Sorry. Borup: Okay. Ready for a motion? Zaremba: Then, we will modify site-specific Number 1. This is on Page 4 that they need to modify their parking plan -- this is in addition to the sentence that's there. Modify the parking park to comply with Meridian city code and the driveway entrances to comply with ACHD's request to a single driveway in the center of the property. Modify Paragraph 4 on Page 4, a 25-foot landscape buffer must be installed on the northern edge of the subject property and depicted on the revised Site Plan. A six-foot cedar fence shall be installed along the southern edge of the property and also depicted on the revised Site Plan. On Page 5, Paragraph 13, the second sentence, the word designer is changed to applicant. Centers: Change the -- Zaremba: That's the fourth sentence. Centers: Excuse me. Zaremba: Second sentence. Designer is changed to applicant. That sentence should read: The applicant shall furnish the Public Works Department a new Site Plan showing existing proposed utility mains and service connections that satisfy the Public Works Department. The next sentence sanitary sewer stays the same. What is now the fourth Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting August 21, 2003 Page 58 of 113 sentence: The applicant shall connect to water services prior to any use on the property. We will add a Paragraph 15, which says any well on the property must be abandoned. Sixteen, if I remember correctly, was that the driveway shall be the center aisle. Was that what the center aisle was about? Clarify on that. Kirkpatrick: And, actually, I think that we addressed that in site-specific requirement Number 1. Zaremba: Okay. Kirkpatrick: When you said it would be in compliance with ACHD's recommendation. Zaremba: All right. Kirkpatrick: So, we can leave out number 16. Zaremba: So, we have a new 16 that says the applicant will the the ditch that provides drainage to the adjoining property. A 17 that says revise Site Plan with all the required revisions to the Site Plan and also a Landscape Plan and an application for alternative compliance to that landscape shall be submitted ten days prior to the City Council hearing. End of motion. Centers: Second. Borup: Motion and second. All in favor. Any opposed? All right. Thank you MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, TWO ABSENT Item 13. Public Hearing: AZ 03-015 Request for annexation and zoning of 9.8 acres from RUT to R-8 zones for proposed Sageland Planned Development by Quasar Development, LLC -northeast corner of South Locust Grove Road and East Victory Road: Item 14. Public Hearing: PP 03-020 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 39 building lots and 9 other lots on 10.64 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for proposed Sageland Planned Development by Quasar Development, LLC -northeast corner of South Locust Grove Road and East Victory Road: Item 15. Public Hearing: CUP 03-036 Request for Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development with a private neighborhood park in an R-8 zone for proposed Sageland Planned Development by Quasar Development - northeast corner of South Locust Grove Road and East Victory Road: Borup: The next project is Items 13, 14, and 15, Public Hearing AZ 03-015, request for annexation and zoning of 9.8 acres from RUT to R-8 zones for proposed Sageland