HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998 07-14MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING JULY 14, 1998
The regular meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission was called to
order at 7:00 p.m. by Malcolm MacCoy.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Malcolm MacCoy, Byron Smith, Tammy de Weerd, Keith Borup.
OTHERS PRESENT: John Prior, Bruce Freckleton, Will Berg.
MacCoy: First order of business we have is the review and approval of the meeting of
June 9, which is now on our hands. Commissioners do you have any comments and so
on?
Smith: I have none.
De Weerd: I have none.
Borup: While I don’t know if this is, this is probably a typo, but there was a wrong
month for a date in which page 4 one of your quotes that you had continued the
hearing to May 17 but it was June 17. On the June 9th
Minutes.
MacCoy: So you’re looking at page 4 of the documents?
Borup: Of the minutes.
MacCoy: Halfway down the page it says Wednesday May 17
Borup: Yes.
MacCoy: That should be what?
Borup: June 17.
MacCoy: June 17.
Borup: I’m assuming because it was on June 9 when you said it.
MacCoy: Yes. Good point. Any other corrections?
Borup: I have none.
De Weerd: I move that we accept the minutes as corrected.
Smith: Second.
MacCoy: All in favor.
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 2
MOTION CARRIED: All aye.
Borup: Did we just do minutes for both meetings?
MacCoy: No we are going to do minutes for the June 17th
meeting. Okay what is your
desires on that one?
De Weerd: I have no changes.
Borup: I have none.
Smith: I have none. Mr. Chairman I would like to make a motion to approve these
minutes as written.
MacCoy: One moment I’ve got one correction I would like to make, in the minutes. On
page 2 of the documentation of… I guess I got myself crosswise and I said that, starting
with my comments, I said about 20-25 hours per-- I said week but I thought I was
saying month and I want to have that corrected to month is the way it should read. And
with that correction, I have no other corrections.
Smith: I would like to make a motion we approve these minutes as amended.
De Weerd: Second.
MacCoy: All in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
ITEM #1: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A CHURCH PARKING LOT FOR
MERIDIAN GOSPEL TABERNACLE BY BURTON ROBERTS – LOTS 3, 4, 5, & 6 OF
BLOCK 4, MERIDIAN NIDAYS 2ND
ADDITION:
Borup: Mr. Chairman.
MacCoy: Yes.
Borup: I know that the Meridian Planning and Zoning commission hereby adopts and
approves these Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law.
Smith: Second.
MacCoy: Roll call.
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 3
ROLL CALL: Borup, Aye. De Weerd, Aye. Smith, Aye. Nelson, Absent.
MOTION CARRIED: All Aye (Nelson, absent).
MacCoy: It stands approved. It will be moved on to City Council.
Borup: Mr. Chairman. I move the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby
recommends to the City Council and City of Meridian, that it approves the conditional
use permit requested by the applicant, the properties described in the application. The
applicant shall satisfy the conditions set forth in Findings of Fact and Conclusions of
Law or similar conditions as found justified and appropriate by the City Council and that
the property be required to meet the water and sewer requirements, the paving and
landscaping requirements and all of the ordinances of the City of Meridian. The
conditional use should be subject to review upon notice to the applicant by the city.
De Weerd: I would second that.
MacCoy: Thank you very much.
MacCoy: All those in favor.
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
ITEM #2: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR AN
ACCESSORY USE PERMIT FOR HOME CHILD CARE BY AMY GILLUM – 2347 E.
APRICOT DRIVE.
De Weerd: Mr. Chairman.
MacCoy: Yes.
De Weerd: I move that the Planning and Zoning commission of the City of Meridian,
hereby adopt and approve these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law.
Borup: Second.
MacCoy: We have a statement and vote of second.
ROLL CALL: Borup, aye. Smith, aye. De Weerd, aye. Nelson, absent.
MOTION CARRIED: All Ayes.
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 4
De Weerd: I move that the Planning and Zoning, hereby decides and hereby approves
the accessory use permit requested by the applicant for the property described in the
application with the conditions set forth in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law.
More particularly set forth at paragraph 12 of the Conclusions of Law and that the
property shall be required to meet the water and sewer requirements the fire and life
safety codes and the uniform building code and other ordinances of the City of
Meridian. The accessory use shall be subject to review by the City upon notice of the
applicant.
Smith: Second.
MacCoy: All in favor.
MOTION CARRIED: All aye.
ITEM #3: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR AN
ACCESSORY USE PERMIT FOR HOME CHILD CARE BY KRISTI RICHMOND –2311
MONACO WAY.
Smith: Mr. Chairman, I’d like to make a motion to Planning and Zoning Commission of
the City of Meridian hereby adopt and approve these Findings of Fact and Conclusions
of Law.
Borup: Second.
MacCoy: Very good.
ROLL CALL: Borup, aye. Smith, aye. De Weerd, aye. Nelson, absent.
MOTION CARRIED: All aye.
MacCoy: What’s the decision.
Smith: Mr. Chairman the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby decides and hereby
approves the accessory use permit requested by the applicant for the property
described in the application with the condition set forth in the Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law or particularly set forth in paragraph 12 of the Conclusions of law
and that the property be required to meet the water and sewer requirements, fire and
life safety codes uniform building codes and other city ordinances of Meridian.
Accessory use shall be subject to review upon notice of the applicant.
Borup: Second.
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 5
MacCoy: All in favor.
MOTION CARRIED: All aye.
Borup: Mr. Chairman, maybe you need to state which item that was.
MacCoy: It was item 3 on your agenda.
Borup: Right.
MacCoy: Richardson? Richmond.
De Weerd: Any the only thing, the action that we need to do is pass those findings and
now the next step is that you would go before City Council for your public hearing and
their decision.
D. Richmond: Okay that’s my question because we thought this tonight was the final
approval.
MacCoy: For us.
De Weerd: Oh, it is.
MacCoy: For us.
De Weerd: It is the final approval.
D. Richmond: Well I meant for the City Council so there is still one more step.
(Inaudible)
Berg: This is an accessory use which the P & Z commission has the ability or authority
to pass this accessory use, it doesn’t go to the City Council.
De Weerd: Okay, so this is your final step.
ITEM #4: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR
ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 1.66 ACRES (C-G ZONE) BY KANTI PATEL – I-84,
EAGLE ROAD, GENTRY WAY & ALLEN STREET.
Borup: Mr. Chairman.
MacCoy: Yes sir.
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 6
Borup: I move that Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts and
approves these provings of Findings of Fact and Conclusions.
De Weerd & Smith: Second.
MacCoy: That’s two seconds now. Okay Commissioner Borup.
ROLL CALL: Borup, aye. Smith, aye. Nelson, absent. De Weerd, aye.
MOTION CARRIED: All aye.
Borup: Mr. Chairman, I move that the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby
recommends to the City Council, City of Meridian that they approve the annexation and
zoning as stated above and the conclusions for the property described in the application
with the conditions set forth and the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and that
the applicant be specifically required to meet all of the ordinance for the City of
Meridian. Specifically including the development, time requirements, and that if the
conditions are not met, then the property will be de-annexed.
De Weerd: Second.
MacCoy: All in favor.
MOTION CARRIED: All aye.
ITEM #5: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A 3 STORY MOTEL BY KANTI PATEL – I-84,
EAGLE ROAD, GENTRY WAY & ALLEN STREET.
Borup: Mr. Chairman, I move that the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
hereby adopt and approve these Findings of Fact and Conclusions.
De Weerd: I second.
MacCoy: Thank you.
ROLL CALL: Borup, aye. De Weerd, aye. Smith, nay.
MOTION CARRIED: 2 ayes, 1nay
Borup: Mr. Chairman, I move that the Planning and Zoning commission hereby
recommends the City Council, City of Meridian approve the conditional use permit
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 7
requested by the applicant for the property described in the application with the
conditions set forth in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law or similar conditions
that justified and appropriate by the City Council. That the property be required to meet
the water and sewer requirements the, fire and life safety codes, uniform fire code,
parking requirements and the paving and landscaping requirements and all of the
ordinances for the City of Meridian. The conditionals use should be subject to review
upon notice to the applicants by the city.
De Weerd: I second that.
MacCoy: All in favor.
MOTION CARRIED: All aye.
ITEM #6: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT FOR AN ARTIFICIAL NAILS SALON BY DARLENE JEROME – 1324
MERIDIAN ROAD.
Smith: Mr. Chairman I would like to make a motion to Meridian Planing and Zoning
Commission adopt and approve these Findings of Fact and Conclusions.
De Weerd: I second.
ROLL CALL: Borup, aye. De Weerd, aye. Smith, aye. Nelson, absent.
MOTION CARRIED: All aye.
McCoy: Decision.
Smith: Mr. Chairman I would like to make a motion that the Meridian Planning and
Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council of the City of Meridian, that
they approve the conditional use permit requested by the applicant for the property
described in the application. With the conditions set forth in the Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law or similar conditions as found justified and appropriate by the City
Council and that the property be required to meet the water and sewer requirements,
the fire and life safety codes, uniform fire code, parking requirements and the paving
and landscape requirements and all ordinances of the City of Meridian. The conditional
use should be subject to review upon notice to the applicant by the city.
Borup: Second.
MacCoy: Thank you.
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 8
MOTION CARRIED: All aye.
ITEM #7: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR
ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 7. 58 ACRES (R-T ZONE) BY WESTPARK
COMPANY, INC – NORTH OF VICTORY & ¼ MILE EAST OF LOCUST GROVE.
De Weerd: Mr. Chairman.
MacCoy: Yes.
De Weerd: I’d like to move that the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts
and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions
.
Smith: Second.
ROLL CALL: Borup, aye. Smith, aye. Nelson, absent. De Weerd, aye.
MOTION CARRIED: All aye.
De Weerd: Mr. Chairman.
MacCoy: Yes.
De Weerd: I would like to move that the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
hereby recommends to the City Council of the City of Meridian that they approved the
annexation and zoning as stated above in the conclusions for the property described in
the application with the conditions set forth in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of
Law and that the applicant be specifically required to meet all of the ordinances of the
City of Meridian and the conditions of these findings and conclusions and that if the
conditions are not met at that property be de-annexed.
Smith: Second.
MOTION CARRIED: Aye.
ITEM #8: TABLED JUNE 17, 1998: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT (31 LOTS
ON 11.01 ACRES) FOR PROPPOSED SHERBROOKE VILLAGE SUBDIVISION BY
WESTPARK COMPANY, INC. –NORTH OFVICTORY & ¼ MILE EAST OF LOCUST
GROVE.
Borup: Mr. Chairman.
MacCoy: Yes. Commissioner Borup.
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 9
Borup: I move that we recommend the City Council approval of this preliminary plat.
Smith: Second.
MacCoy: Is there any discussion.
De Weerd: I have none.
ROLL CALL: Borup, aye. De Weerd, aye. Smith, aye. Nelson, absent.
MOTION CARRIED: All aye.
ITEM #9 CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND
ZONING OF 1.18 ACRES (R-2) BY WILLIAM C HUMPHREY FOR LAND LOCATED AT
939 E. PINE.
MacCoy: Is the applicant here this evening? This is still an open hearing, is there
anybody who wants to comment on this, this evening. A R-2 is a housing thing, a thing
to do with acreage. I want to give you a key piece from our staff over there. Bruce,
would you answer that for the code.
Freckleton: R-2.
MacCoy: R-2.
Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, R-2, two units per acre.
MacCoy: Residential, right?
Freckleton: Yes.
MacCoy: Does that answer your question? Is there any other comments in the
audience? Any other person who wants to stand up and make a statement?
Smith: Mr. Chairman.
MacCoy: Yes Mr. Smith.
Smith: I believe the applicant at the last hearing testified that he had just discovered
that his land was in the flood plain and he wasn’t sure if he was going to develop it or
not and ask for a continuance which we did and I would like to move this along and
either give him the opportunity to be heard before the Planning and Zoning Commission
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 10
or if he wants to have it withdrawn and off the agenda for next months meeting and
have the city staff contact the applicant and continue the public hearing till next months
meeting until we know what the applicant desires to do.
Borup: I second that.
Smith: I would like to make a motion we continue this item till our August 11 meeting
and ask city staff to contact the applicant.
Borup: Second.
MOTION CARRIED: All aye.
ITEM #10: CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT FOR A CONTRACTORS’ YARD BY DOVOVAN HANSON d/b/a HANSON
EXCAVATING – LOT 2, BLOCK 1 OF PLAYGROUND SUBDIVISION.
MacCoy: Is the applicant here tonight? Is there anyone from the public who would like
to speak this evening on this condition?
Smith: Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a motion similar to what I did on the last
item, which was to ask staff to contact the applicant and continue this item until our
August 11 meeting.
De Weerd: Second.
MacCoy: Any discussion?
Borup: One comment. Yes. From what I remember, what we are waiting for is
landscaping plan, was that mainly-
MacCoy: That was one of the things yes.
Smith: I think the applicant was going to determine from a cost stand point whether
what kind of fencing was cost effective or in his budget to put around the equipment and
landscaping and just take a look at the costs associated with what we were asking him
to do.
Borup: The main two things were fencing and landscaping.
Smith: Yeah, that’s… yes.
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 11
MacCoy: I think the other item too was that ACHD had not sent anything in and we
have that in our hands too. I think Commissioner Smith is correct because it was going
to be quite costly and we recommended that he do some homework.
Borup: We do have the ACHD?
MacCoy: Yeah.
De Weerd: Do we?
MacCoy: Based on the… remember the playground we had a couple of years ago?
They reissued it. That’s all they do.
Borup: Oh, I didn’t get that in my packet.
MacCoy: Okay. All in favor of Commissioner Smiths statement.
MOTIONED CARRIED: All aye.
Borup: I’m sorry did…you did the same thing staff was going to contact.
MacCoy/De Weerd: Yes.
Borup: I have a question to whether Mr. Hanson …I wondered if he realized that he
needed to complete the rest of what he was asked or if he might of thought he…
De Weerd: No, I ..I …
Borup: I think that needed to be emphasized to him that it is still pending.
MacCoy: Our Clerk said he was called so that is all we can do.
Borup: That’s all I had, thank you.
MacCoy: Commissioner De Weerd, do you have anything else you wanted to comment
on?
De Weerd: No.
MacCoy: We will continue Item #10 until next August 11th
meeting.
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 12
ITEM #11: CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT FOR TABLES AND CHAIRS FOR OUTSIDE SEATING BY WILD WEST
BAKERY– 611 E. 1ST
STREET.
MacCoy: Is anybody here…very good, come forward. We missed you last time.
CAROLYN JANSEN, 708 SPY GLASS WAY, EAGLE 83616 WAS SWORN BY THE
ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY.
Jansen: Well, I just wanted to put my tables and chairs out. And I want to get them out
there right away. I have customers all of the time asking me when we could sit outside.
So, and I have drawn pictures and submitted them and I have talked to ACHD and got
the license agreement underway so I think we are all squared away on that. Do you
have any questions for me? Can I put them out tomorrow?
MacCoy: Just a minute. Commissioners do you have any questions for the applicant?
Smith: I don’t have any.
Borup: No I have none either. It looks like the only concern of anyone is that it doesn’t
block the sidewalk and you have already indicated that in your plan that there would be
room there.
Jansen: You guys apparently wanted 8...5 feet and the ACHD wants 8 feet and I have
9, so….
De Weerd: Good Job.
Jansen: Make everybody happy.
De Weerd: I think it’s a great idea and I’ll be sitting out there tomorrow too.
Jansen: Thank you very much.
McCoy: Is there anybody from the public who would like to make a statement at this
point. Okay, we will close the public hearing at this moment. Commissioners, what is
your desire?
Borup: Mr. Chairman, I move we… the city attorney prepares the Findings of Facts and
Conclusions of Law on this application.
Smith: Second.
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 13
MacCoy: All in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: All aye.
ITEM #12: FINDINGS OF FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR
ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 36.71 ACRES TO R-4 FOR WILKINGS RANCH AT
THE LAKES SUBDIVISION BY STEINER DEVELOPMENT LLC-EAST OF BLACK
CAT/USTICK INTERSECTION AND SOUTH OF USTICK ROAD.
Smith: I’m not so concerned about annexing and zoning this property but the applicant
has never submitted any revised plans for the subdivision. There was a number of
items discussed in the last meeting I was kind of surprised that this was on the agenda.
The preliminary plant and the conditional use permit for something we never had
received any more information on anything that had addressed looking at the comments
that had been made by staff or commission. So, personally I really don’t feel
comfortable annexing and zoning property for something that were kind of in a arm
wrestling match over how it should be developed. That’s my only comment on this.
MacCoy: That’s a very good point Commissioner Smith. Staff? Bruce?
Freckleton: Mr. Chairman and commissioners, yesterday, Shari and I met with Mr.
Campbell he showed us his revised plan there were several items on it that we still are
not happy with from staff standpoint. I kind of got the feeling from the meeting that
there was a lot of differences of opinion. We weren’t happy with the plan, he wanted to
push forward the plan he had. I’m kind of surprised they aren’t here tonight. Yesterday
was the first opportunity I had to see the revised plans well.
Smith: Were you under the impression yesterday that they were going to be here
tonight and pursue going forward with the…
Freckleton: Yes I was.
Borup: Do you think because the length of the agenda they thought they would be
further down?
Freckleton: I do.
Borup: So, they still may show up?
MacCoy: Okay, lets move it to the end of the evening and we will revisit it again. Is that
okay?
Berg: Mr. Chairman, the indication from the developer to me was a conflict with a
meeting in Eagle and I think they looked at the lengthy agenda and they were trying to
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 14
hit both meetings. My indication was they had plans to be here, both the developer and
his attorney.
(Inaudible)
Berg: If we don’t have too many hearings and Dakota Development which is the last
item on the agenda, inquired how long was the meeting going to last just before the
meeting. I said it is hard to tell how fast some of these public hearings are going to go.
So, I know they left. This may be interesting.
Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, one thing I would like to point out is I saw the plan
yesterday, you have not seen the plan at all. Even if they do show up tonight, you’re
going to get it fresh.
Smith: I know on my own standpoint, I will not be ready to move on this tonight. I have
not seen it.
Borup: I would agree with that too. I don’t know how much time we have on the time, if
it’s going to be twelve o’clock when we are finished I don’t think we want to stick this on
the end of the agenda after that. Can we defer that and decide toward the end of the
meeting whether it would still be on today’s agenda or move it to the next meeting.
MacCoy: Make a motion.
Borup: I guess the other statement I’d… I don’t have quite the same concern as
Commissioner Smith on the annexation on this particular property just because of the
location that is surrounded by …it’s adjoining other sub divisions. It’s obviously going to
be developed, but I do have the same concerns as far as the plat. I don’t see that
annexing it is going to move up their time table so I don’t have a problem with either
way, likewise, preceding with annexation wouldn’t help them any either. It doesn’t look
like it will make much difference either way. So were waiting for a motion, is that
correct?
MacCoy: Yes I am.
Borup: I would move, well he’s not here now, we’re not going to wait so either way, we
need to move on so I move we schedule this toward at the end of tonight’s agenda is
time permits.
MacCoy: That’s a good statement.
Berg: Excuse me, you may want to include the several items on the agenda.
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 15
Borup: Okay, Items #12,13,14.
Berg: Those are all Steiners.
Borup: Okay that’s true. That’s a different… 15 and 16 are different properties, but
they’re not here either. How about 12-16?
Smith: Second that.
Borup: Hey we're almost done with the agenda.
MacCoy: You did a good job there Keith. Is there any discussion before we take a…
Borup: Did we have a second on that motion?
MacCoy: We had a second. Yes. Smith did. All in favor of the motion?
MOTION CARRIED: All aye.
Borup: I do have one other observation, Mr. Chairman. I believe Mr. Hanson just came
in, however you want to handle that. That was Item #10. That we already passed.
De Weerd: Continued.
Borup: That we continued. Did he leave again.
MacCoy: The correct procedure I guess is for if you want to do this Mr. Borup, you can
make a motion and… Commissioner Borup?
Borup: Yes, I would move that we reopen the, bring up agenda Item #10.
MacCoy: Is there a second?
De Weerd: Second.
MOTION CARRIED: All aye.
ITEM #10: CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT FOR A CONTRACTORS’ YARD BY DOVOVAN HANSON d/b/a HANSON
EXCAVATING – LOT 2, BLOCK 1 OF PLAYGROUND SUBDIVISION.
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 16
MacCoy: I understand Mr. Hanson has arrived this evening. Do you want to come
forward; Is there anything you would like to add to the open hearing, yet? You have
nobody who wants to talk or for you, either way.
Hanson: Moving a little fast in that direction.
MacCoy: This is unusual for us.
Attorney: I’m sorry sir I’m being distracted.
DONOVAN HANSON, 4601 N. FIVE MILE ROAD, BOISE. SWORN IN BY ASSISTANT
ATTORNEY.
Hanson: Okay, I guess I’m applying for a conditional use permit for a contractor’s yard
on Lot 2, Block 1 of the playground subdivision. The last hearing we went over
everything and we got to bushes and fence. Um, the proposal I have is I will put an 8
foot fence across the center of the yard with the slats in it and a 6 foot to go around the
side perimeter and the berm up front, I will match the neighbor.
MacCoy: Who is….Sesko, yes.
Hanson: I’d put the trees behind the tractors, I’ll put them in front. What else do you
need to know?
MacCoy: Okay commissioners…
Borup: I think those are exactly the items we discussed earlier, other than staff may
want a written landscaping plan. Would that be right, Mr. Freckleton? Would that be
appropriate for the…come in on paper or do you want to look at it when it is done?
Freckleton: Commissioner Borup, I think it would be a good idea to put this down on
paper, have a plan to look at. I think this was discussed at the last meeting.
Borup: That was my recollection.
Hanson: How big of a piece of paper do you want?
Freckleton: Do you have a sketch, Mr. Hanson. You do have a sketch. Yeah, if you
could submit that for our Planning and Zoning administrator to look at.
Hanson: You get that?
Freckleton: Probably submit it through the City Clerk
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 17
(Inaudible)
De Weerd: Can we see that?
MacCoy: While they’re looking at that, Bruce…does he have a copy of the ACHD
report for the playground. Have you talked that over with him?
Freckleton: I have not.
MacCoy: You have not.
(Inaudible)
Borup: Mr. Hanson I think this addressed our concerns. If you could do this, do you
have a pencil with you?
Hanson: No
Smith: If you could finish off the left side of the site with your fence, indicate what that is
and indicate where your gate is.
Hanson: Okay.
Smith: Then give it to the City Clerk and I would be satisfied with it.
Hanson: Okay.
Smith: I don’t know about my other fellow commissioners…
Borup: Yes, I would too…Was that, did that just get cut off on the copy machine or was
that to have a fence along the west side.
Hanson: Yeah, there should be a fence on the west side.
Smith: If you just indicate that and give it back to the City Clerk, I’d be willing to move
this along.
Borup: I would too.
De Weerd: Would Bruce like to look at that real quick?
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 18
MacCoy: While he is doing that, Mr. Hanson, did you receive a copy of this from the
ACHD?
Hanson: ACHD. Probably not.
MacCoy: This was one that was issued to us on…the latest one was on June 24 of this
year, but the actual document is November 10, 1995 document which was made by
ACHD for the playground and they’re saying they’re standing by the same document.
MacCoy: Does that look familiar?
Hanson: I got one from the police department, from the fire department, not from the
ACHD.
MacCoy: We will give you a copy of this too.
Hanson: It would be nice to have a gate to get in and out.
(Inaudible)
Freckleton: Commissioner De Weerd, I do think the plan looks good with the changes
and gate location showing the fence on the west and am satisfied.
De Weerd: Thank you. That was exactly what we were looking for.
Hanson: Okay, is that it?
MacCoy: It is still a public hearing. Does anyone else want to come up and comment
while Mr. Hanson is here? If not, I will now close this public hearing and
commissioners?
De Weerd: Mr. Chairman? I move that we move…or ask that the Assistant City
Attorney to provide Findings of Fact and Conclusions.
Smith: Second.
MOTION CARRIED: All aye.
MacCoy: Mr. Hanson, it will be moved forward.
(RECESS TAKEN)
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 19
ITEM #17: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A
REGIONAL SHOPPING CENTER BY DAKOTA COMPANY, INC- SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF EAGLE & FAIRVIEW.
MacCoy: Is the applicant here this evening?
LARRY DURKIN, 380 E PARK CENTER BLVD, BOISE 83706. WAS SWORN IN BY
ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY.
Durkin: My name is Larry Durkin, I’m the president of Dakota Company Inc. of Boise.
I’m here tonight on behalf of Hermes Associates, asking you to approve our conditional
use application for the family center at Meridian. The project will include about 70
acres. I will turn around and show the audience the plan in just a moment, but first I will
show it to you, okay. The project as stated on the intersection of Fairview Ave and
Eagle, this is Highway 55 it’s an area we have intentions for a theatre, an
entertainment area on the far east end of the project. We are proposing a warehouse
club store in this area, similar to a Costco or Sams Club. We have development in this
area that includes an office supply superstore, a Shopko store, a general merchandise
discount department store. Apparel and linens going into this area. Then I need a road
near the Blue Cross/Blue Shield and in that area we are happy to say we have a new
retail grocery operation that is coming to the area, with a 65,000 square foot store. We
have a large sporting goods store that will be going into this end of the project. And
then on the project furthest to the south we have a consumer electronics and similar
related type of retail uses. I’m going to take a moment and show the audience, is that
okay?
MacCoy: Sure, go right ahead.
Durkin: In addition to the uses I have talked about in the retail area. We have a series
of pad uses on the perimeter of the project and they are…they include a sit down family
restaurant, some fast food, a financial institution. We have a copy printing operation,
and I guess I would just say they are the traditional types of pad uses you would see in
a development like this. Some new tenants to the area and some are expanding within
the area. The former owners of the property obtained a conditional use permit for a
shopping center use, but we are required to ask to seek a separate conditional use
permit for the actual development and that’s why we are here tonight. Every effort has
been made on our part to meet the city ordinances relating to this type of project. We
have exceeded the landscape areas required in the ordinance. We have exceeded the
set back requirements required in the ordinance. We will be applying for pylon sign
approval at a later…
(END OF TAPE)
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 20
Durkin: Completed. The conditional use application doesn’t require that information at
this time, only the location of those, which are indicated in your packages. Beginning
with my comments on the staff report my…usually the way I do it here, I go through the
staff report I have very few comments if I…we’re in full agreement and then I will take a
little more time where we would like to discuss some areas. As far as the fire
department report, we will meet and exceed all fire codes and follow their comments.
The central district health report will meet or exceed the comments of central district
health. The storm water management report, we will meet or exceed those comments
relating to storm water management. Police department report, while the police
department made no specific comments we expect to meet or exceed all of the codes in
that area. Mr. Freckleton’s report will take a little bit more time. What I normally do is,
I’d like to just go quickly through what we are in full agreement on and then I’ll take a
little bit more time in some of the other sections, but as far as his staff report the general
comments section 1-10, We are in full agreement on those. I’ll be happy at the end to
answer questions relating to those if you would like, but we are in agreement to the…
his suggestions and recommendations. In the section of the report labeled Site Specific
Comments, I’m going to hit those one by one here. Our use, the shopping center use is
listed as an allowed use in the conditional use permit obtained in 1991. I presume you
have copies of those in your packets. I did bring that along with me tonight if anyone
would like to see that. The property has always had several large signs on display
which clearly state the intended use. As part of a conditional use the city may impose
additional conditions which we agree with. In addition the city may allow changes in
certain requirements some of which I’ll ask for later. As far as the comments in section
3,4&5, we have—we are in full agreement. Comment #6 states that we are at—we are
kind of pushing the edge on the landscape ordinance. We—by our numbers we have a
10.2% coverage in the common area/open space. The ordinance does not say that the
areas in the parking lot are questionable and we feel confident that our plans meet the
standards set by the City. An area we are having a problem, it relates to his comment
#7 and that’s regarding the trees. Our plan shows 979 (3”) caliber trees, which is short
of the ordinance. Our landscape architect has had trouble finding space for an
additional 317 trees. We will provide a plan identifying the species and the size of each
tree and their specific location when we submit our detailed landscape plan. You have
the authority to improve or reduce the amount of trees and tonight we are going to
request that you do so. I do want to say that it isn’t a matter of saving money on the
trees. We would be happy to put those trees in other areas what we find is that it’s a
maintenance problem to have that many trees in a project and we are looking at the
viability of the tree being healthy and growing in some of the other areas. We can talk
about that a little bit further in a moment. As far as this comment #8 the comments
aren’t consistent with the ordinance. We may be able to add trees in some of the areas
of the parking lot, but again, we are concerned about the trees being-trees are nice,
dead trees aren’t and it’s difficult to keep them alive in some areas. Our landscape plan
far exceeds any other commercial project in the city. No other development can
compare with the overall amount of planting that we are proposing, it’s just a large
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 21
development. I admit that there is a large parking area, but the ratio of parking spaces
per square foot of development is less than the Fred Meyer, it’s less than the new
Albertson’s grocery store, the ratio is lower than any Intermountain Sports and it’s lower
than the new Home Depot. We’re putting all these types of uses into one project on a
state highway just off of I-84 and we will need a large parking area to serve the
customers of ADA and Canyon counties. Comment #9 is fine with us. #10 the
engineer encourages a wider landscape berm along Fairview Ave and Eagle Rd. We’re
showing a 20 foot berm. To give you a comparison with some other properties in
Meridian, this is 13 feet wider than the new Hollywood Video store that’s open. We are
not familiar with an ordinance requiring more than twenty feet and we are hoping with
the over all plan that 20 feet will be agreeable to you. In # 11 the comment there is that
the developer must submit detailed sign plans with the application. Well, the application
doesn’t actually require that, the application requires that we show a plan similar to this
with the sign locations marked, but as far as the detailed plans we’ll be providing those
through the signed permit process and will be back in front of you to discuss that in
detail at a later date. As far as comment #12, we have read the ordinance and I find
conflicts in what is required in different sections of the ordinance book. The off street
parking ordinance requires a four foot landscape area adjacent to residential areas.
The city engineer sites the planting strip ordinance, which escaped me in the book, but
he did cite where it is located. Our planning and development we have been relying on
the off street parking standards, however, the additional buffer zone that we are
applying for adjacent to the residential properties is ten feet and we are asking for that
approval tonight. As far as the other comments in section 12 as it related to a masonry
wall, and I’m going to walk over to the plan again. There was a suggestion that you
consider a requirement for a masonry wall running all along the project. There is a
wooden fence along here now and the engineer thought an eight foot high masonry wall
would offer more screening. That’s really not an acceptable to us for a couple of
different reasons. To my knowledge there is no other zone site that has such a wall
requirement. The back wall we find is unattractive, it’s expensive to maintain, and
frequently it looks bad, it’s a graffiti attraction. If the fence is six feet high or eight feet
high, it—from our site line studies there is not a difference in the visibility from the
adjoining residential areas. The comments that the fire—that a wooden fence and a 10
foot landscaping area might be a fire hazard, the fire department makes no comments
about it being a fire hazard in their review. In my experience in developing more than a
100 such projects throughout the west, I have no experience in that being a fire hazard.
There is no ordinance requiring a masonry fence and to my knowledge none exist
under these circumstances anywhere in Boise or Meridian. Comment #13, we’ve
provided the utility and lighting plans to the city and will be glad to work with the staff to
meet all of the codes required. I did bring those with me, again tonight if anyone has
questions. #14 we do not intend to subdivide the property the reference the engineer
refers to is for our internal planning purposes. There is no intention of subdividing
that’s all—will remain one parcel. #16 we really hope to gain approval for the overall
project tonight. We agree to come back on a building by building bases for any drive-
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 22
thru that we have on the project. The details provided for the Shopko store architectural
theme and materials/colors will flow throughout the rest of the shopping center. We
hope the staff will be given the go ahead to work with us on each building permit
application. We are okay with #17, 18, & 19. And frankly, I might just ask the city
attorney a question—I really had—I don’t understand what comment #20 is, I’m not
familiar with that, maybe you can answer that later. But, I’m not prepared to say that
comment #20 is okay, because I just don’t –Oh, I’m sorry I had the wrong—confusion
here. As far as the scale on the plan I believe it is correct, if it isn’t we will correct it.
There is another question I have later. As far as the ingress/egress for #21 will show
that on our building permit plans and #22 will provide this during the building permit
process. We’re okay with #23. A big area of concern for us is comment #24 in the staff
report for the people in the audience may not have the staff report available to them.
The comment here addresses the loading docks and the back of the project and we feel
it is a big concern to the adjacent property owners, but I would like to talk about it a little
bit. The engineer uses the example of Home Depot in Boise and I think that is an
extreme example. And that the use requires a constant use of heavy equipment
outside of their building. Home Depot had to change the zoning from office use to retail
use for a home improvement store and in that process concerns were raised and Home
Depot promised to keep it quiet, they broke their promise. From what I understand,
they have corrected the problem, but this property has been approved for retail center
long before there were adjacent residential uses. In fact, the industrial zoning that
underlies the existing conditional use would imply more noise than our intended use
ever would. All of the trash compactors are internal to the building, so they are quiet;
that will be shown in the building plan but it’s the same type of trash compaction that
you will find in the back of the Fred Meyer store it’s within their store. There will be
dumpster in back of some of the smaller shops and that will be shown on the plan but
there won’t be any compactors exposed to outside noise to the general public. I will say
that the normal operations of the loading dock area are between 7am and 3:30pm.
Shopko, the food retailer, and others post that on their dock, but I also know from my
experience that there are cases of later deliveries, depending on the season and
depending on the needs of the tenant. It’s real difficult for us to restrict the hours of
operation for the loading dock. On the other hand, we manage the shopping center, the
day to day operations of the center, the sweeping, the trash pickup, these types of
things. We have full control to restrict the trash pickup from –within certain hours and
we have control to restrict the sweeping of the shopping center to certain hours, but as
far as the operation of the retail stores, we don’t have that control. We are asking for
you to look at our design and our building permit and believe us, it is completely
different than the Home Depot operation. We are okay with # 25. We are okay with
#26. #27 is my area of confusion. I don’t know what that comment means it’s a—so
I’m not prepared to say yes or no. I just don’t know what that means. Maybe I could
ask –
Prior: You could ask.
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 23
Durkin: Can I ask?
MacCoy: Bruce would you enlighten him.
De Weerd: No.
MacCoy: No, what?
De Weerd: Our assistant attorney is probably more qualified to answer that.
Prior: Sir, what that basically says is that this is a recommendation from Mr. Freckleton
and he took the liberty of noting that a conditional use permit will be subject to review.
If in fact we grant you this conditional use permit it’s subject to review, we give you 10
days notice and then we bring you in and say you have done something that we don’t
agree with, either you remedy this situation or we revoke the conditional use then
precede with whatever action the city deems necessary against you to correct that
violation. That’s really what that means. That’s something that is subsequent that will
be included if in fact this commission decides to approve this conditional use permit,
that will be a term of condition that you will be understood that there is—that’s how—
just to notify you of the action that we may take if there was some type of problem.
That is all that applies to.
Durkin: Mr. Prior is that part of the city ordinance procedure.
Prior: Well, that doesn’t –and that brings up, that is a typical city standard. That brings
up another---
Durkin: Is this a standard city deal? Is it unique to this project.
Prior: No, no and in fact, some of these conditional use permits we passed today I
didn’t include that provision, I included the provision that we will—just notifying the
applicant that their conditional use is going to be reviewed is all that is necessary.
Sometimes the 10 days, sometimes I don’t, a lot of times it depends on the commission,
a lot of times it’s whatever I include in that. I should point something else out to you. I
noted that you did mention that---is that something in the ordinance, you have said that
a number of times tonight and just for a clarification for you, on a conditional use permit
we are not necessarily required to follow the ordinance in every single instance, in fact,
we can go above and beyond the ordinance and every single one of these items you
have said and because this is a conditional use permit we have the authority to do that
sir. As far as the sign ordinance is concerned, if we decide to impose something stricter
than the ordinance we can in fact do that, because this is a conditional use permit we
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 24
can impose any restrictions the commission deems necessary. Just for clarification, it
doesn’t mean they are going to, it’s just for clarification.
Durkin: As a point of clarification and I have taken more than 20 conditional uses
through the city. I acknowledge that right in my opening that you have that right. I am
familiar with that procedure.
Prior: Yeah. Alright.
Durkin: #28 the agencies have had adequate time to review our application. The
engineer require ---recommends a delay on this in order to here comments back from
ACHD, but we have to gain separate approval from ACHD. In addition, ACHD now has
the approval rights for Eagle road. Rather than continue the hearing since we are
hoping to get started on our building design and our site engineering, I would hope that
you would incorporate the future requirements of ACHD as part of your approval
tonight. We have had an informal meeting with ACHD. We have delivered a traffic
study to them. We have had ---there aren’t any problems that I’m aware of with ACHD.
We are scheduled to have a hearing with them on the 24th
of this month. That is my
presentation as it relates to the comments in the staff report. I would like to just …I
have mounted on the board, I have a elevation drawing of the Shopko store for this
project. A couple things, I’m pleased with the store design. I have traveled to three of
the stores and looked at them, so I can tell you, I know what they look like and they look
nice. This elevation doesn’t tell me I can’t display this to you tonight in a way that truly
represents. We have submitted a color rendering and the color sample chips to the city,
but as far as my ability to show you something tonight, this is the only thing I was able
to gather. I can talk you through this a little bit and I’ll turn it around and show the
audience in a minute. The exterior—we have a front elevation drawing here. Let me
step back a moment. The Shopko store that is located at Fairview and Milwaukee
Street in Boise was built in 1983. That vintage changes and changes and changes, in
fact if any of you have been to the east side of Boise and seen the one on Broadway,
you’ll see that it’s a little different than the one at Fairview and Milwaukee. Shopko is a
30 some year old company and they’ve been evolving and trying to improve and
upgrade their stores as the years go by. This store is what they call their series 2000
this is a nicer looking—I think the nicest looking Shopko store that they have ever come
up with, but it’s a upscale store with brick, split faced block, and tile. The colors are
blue and gray with blue metal trim. Signage I think minimal on the building. There is a
little bit more glass, it’s a far fancier design than the one on Fairview and Milwaukee.
The interior of the store is completely different, a lot more like a department store with
wood floors broken up differently and it’s a higher end general merchandise discount
department store and I think you would agree. The side elevations are really not
relevant since they will have buildings next to them, although this plan shows a typical
side elevation. I think what is important is the rear elevation that will be facing some
residential areas. The rear elevation of the store—there are three loading docks in the
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 25
back of the building. My experience with this tenant is that one of the loading docks is
used on a regular bases. The others are used during seasonal times of the year,
special deliveries. The docks are recessed. The colors and materials of the entire
back of the building are similar to the front, the same types of colors---the same colors
and the same types of materials that I used in the front of the building. Those are really
my comments on the Shopko store and I will happily answer any more questions that
you may have.
Borup: Sir, just a quick one on the Shopko. Location, did you point out the location or
did I miss that.
Durkin: I will. The Shopko store is 96,900 square feet and it’s located on Fairview Ave.
I have a scale with me somewhere tonight or ruler, but it’s off of the Eagle Road I would
guess about 400 feet.
Borup: Thank You.
Durkin: The docks on the back of the Shopko store are about 135 feet from the rear
property line.
Borup: And that’s parking between the docks and the subdivision. Employee parking
or something?
Durkin: Yeah, it’s intended. Anything else?
Borup: Well, I’ve got a list of things.
MacCoy: Why don’t you start off then.
Borup: Okay, Maybe I’ll save---you went through quite a list of tenants and are most of
those firm at this point, or some of those conceptual or---it looks like you probably
named every anchor store almost. Is that pretty much the status your at?
Durkin: Actually, I only named one anchor store. I will rely on the tenants to make their
announcements but we have…
Borup: Well that is what normally happens, that’s why I was wondering.
Durkin: We have a number of firm transactions. I’m speaking Shopko’s name with their
permission tonight. They wanted to do a press release today, they were unable to get it
together and they call and asked me to freely use their name.
Borup: Okay, but it sounded like most of the others are fairly firm at this point.
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 26
Durkin: Mr. Commissioner, I want to be clear on that fairly firm is a very good
description, we have some that are firm and many that are fairly firm.
Borup: Well, I understand how it goes in these situations. We did not receive a copy of
the original conditional use permit. At least I didn’t in my packet.
Smith: I didn’t.
Borup: So that—You had mentioned earlier saying we were familiar with that. So, I
guess we are going to have to say we are not. It may be appropriate if you would, I
think rather than use trying to read it now, is there anything in that you think would be
pertinent to point out.
Durkin: Sure.
Borup: One of the questions I guess I would have was transferability.
Durkin: It’s transferable. I’ll provide it to the... Have you read it?
Borup: I have not. I think this was the one, was this one that was back to 1991; did you
say?
Durkin: Yes. There was an ordinance.
Borup: That was before the time of everyone here. All the commissioners, rather.
Prior: Mr. Chairman, may I make an inquiry?
MacCoy: Yes sir.
Prior: Sir, it does say in that conditional use permit, obviously I wasn’t here in 1991
either; does it say in that conditional use permit specifically that it is transferable to
another applicant, sir?
Durkin: If it does not say that clearly in here we have gotten an opinion from Cumer
Green, who has talked to your city attorney, Wayne Crookston, and gotten an opinion to
that effect. I believe it says it in here but in addition to covering that base prior to
purchasing the property, we got an opinion from Wayne Crookston to that effect. Is he
still the city attorney? He was at that time.
Borup: Yes, that would be correct. Was there anything in there that you felt that would
be pertinent to point out?
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 27
Durkin: Well, I think it is pertinent to point out that it was passed unanimously. It’s a
planned general development conditional use permit. It’s specifically states that the
uses would be harmonious with and accordance with the comprehensive plan as
amended, that the zoning ordinance has amended, but it does require a conditional
use to allow the intended use that we have. It does state that it has to have utilities,
which it now has. The possible proposed uses would not create excessive additional
requirements at public costs for public facilities and services. They don’t.
Borup: It sounds like most standard items.
Durkin: It specifically allows for a shopping center. The approval of Findings of Facts
and Conclusions of Law were approved unanimously and signed by the Mayor.
Borup: A shopping center was mentioned specifically?
Durkin: Yes.
Borup: Is it your understanding that the reason for the conditional use is because
looking at retail usage rather than industrial.
Durkin: Yes.
Borup: Which is what the original zoning was.
Durkin: Yes. The original plan for the area was done by Gemtone, a Boise based
corporation. They developed the industrial park across the street with the
BlueCross/BlueShield. They came in for a conditional use permit for that plan unit
development as an office industrial park. They identified this L shaped property as a
commercial shopping center and identified the residential area as a residential
subdivision. They then sold that land to Raymon Yorgason for a residential
construction. They’ve sold parts of the land across the street to different industrial and
office users. They have sold the L shaped property to us for a shopping center.
Borup: I think you have covered a good part of the other thing I was maybe going to
request. More so for the benefit of the people in the audience is a little bit of the history
of this property. Thank you, you have covered that from 1991 on. Is there any
comment you care to make on—This was originally annexed in 1984, I believe.
Durkin: I don’t have that information.
Borup: Okay, well my comments are from what I gained from staff comments, it was
annexed in 1984 as the industrial property. I think intended for some commercial type
of use at that time.
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 28
Durkin: It’s clearly—
Borup: Apparently the residential part came in 1991 at the same time was the PUD
from—
Durkin: The residential development occurred after 1992, 1993 or 1994, in phases.
Borup: Okay, the other couple of quick comments. Loading areas, you said typically
they are going to be during the morning and through the afternoon hours. The plan
that we have are—How much of this is conceptual? Or is any of it? Or are most of
those buildings these specific designs that you are anticipating at this point.
Durkin: Most of these buildings are specific designs for specific tenants.
Borup: Okay, so those that are showing the loading docks now are intended to have
loading docks in those areas.
Durkin: That’s correct. I’m having a hard time I’m getting distracted with when I turn
this way I hear people out in the hall but I can’t … The loading docks, there could be
some non material changes. For example, if they are facing south right now, and we
come in with a building permit and they face north, there could be some minor
modifications to the outlines of the buildings, in accordance with conditional use
standards.
Borup: But at this point it is anticipated that the loading docks are going to be
necessary for whatever business or anticipated for that use.
Durkin: I can say that the loading docks here, there has been two different areas and
these are fairly well set, they would be here and here. This type of loading dock could
be here or could be here, but there will be one on the back. Shopko’s are specific to
that area. The grocery stores are specific going this way. The two areas with the most
active loading docks that you should expect in a center like this would be the grocery
store and the activity is in the morning. I don’t know if you have been to a grocery store
in the early morning, but you see a lot of vendor trucks coming in early in the morning.
Eddies Bakery, Miller beer, you know a lot of them are fifth wheel trailer type of
operations. There are a lot of activities in the early morning at a grocery store. On a
general merchandise store like this, you generally get trucks a day, so it isn’t 18-20
trucks a day, it isn’t anything like a home improvement lumber type of operation. It’s
about two trucks a day, five days a week, but if it’s April and they are running a special
on Huffy Bikes and they sell out of them, they put an emergency flash to the distribution
center which is on the other side of Boise out at Gowin Road and the freeway. They
throw a load of Huffy bikes on a truck and they zip it over and if it’s 7:30 at night, they
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 29
respond that way. If you go to a loading dock in front--back of a Shopko or Kmart or
Fred Meyer, you’ll see signs posting that they are closed after 3:30. Frankly, they do
make exceptions for emergency deliveries. It happens most often between
Thanksgiving and Christmas.
Borup: That would seem logical. We had one last question and maybe clarification on
your comment on masonry fencing. You made the comment that none exist, and I
wasn’t sure were you referring to there is no reference in an ordinance to a fence or that
the city is not requiring any masonry fencing. I wasn’t sure what your comment was
referring to.
Durkin: I’m not familiar with a large shopping center where masonry fence has been a
requirement, for example, I was the developer for the Fred Meyer project, there is no
masonry fence required on that project. That is a combination of wood or storage
buildings, I’m not familiar with it being required in Boise anywhere with the exception of
when Boise square—
Borup: Home Depot.
Durkin: Let me maybe I should be more clear on what I’m talking about as similar use.
If I were coming in tonight and saying this is zoned residential for an apartment building
or office building and I want to build a shopping center, I would—and the people who
were living there bought their houses, built their houses with the believe that there was
going to be additional residential or office building there and I came in and said I wanted
to build a shopping center. I would do lots of different things differently. I would build to
meet their—to satisfy their needs. So, Home Depot is a rezone, but the masonry wall
for this type of development we don’t feel it is a good idea. I’ve seen it done behind the
Waremart store at Fairview and Milwaukee Street. There were existing residential
homes, they came in and rezoned took down some residences and built that store. You
know what happens you go behind that store and you leave a semi running and you
unload that semi and that goes through the whole neighborhood. It’s a cave back there.
I personally don’t think it’s a good idea and it’s a good design standard. The
additional—when you have a none heated masonry wall, they don’t hold up and they
look shabby, quickly. If you look around, go back and drive around the Waremart at
Fairview and Milwaukee, take a look at it and you’ll that to be the case right now.
Borup: Okay, I think that clarifies that. What do you feel is the best buffering for that
situation, rather than a masonry wall?
Durkin: I like the idea of landscaping of trees. One of the things—we are having a hard
time figuring out what to do with all of these trees. We have extra trees I can’t fit them
on this plan. I’m aware that they are about 38 or 40 residences that back up to our
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 30
project. If the residences were interested, we would provide some trees for them to
plant on their side. We have our trees planted to the maximum density.
Borup: Okay, it looks to me that you have got trees lined right up—I mean it’s a
continuous line of trees right now.
Durkin: They are every 12 feet. So I can’t get—if I plant them closer than that, they will
die. So, we have the density along the back is maximum. If you are trying to screen
the shopping center, I would be kidding you tonight to tell you that we can do very
much. The people that live in the houses adjacent—if they are in their second story,
they will be able to look out and they are going to see the shopping center. I can’t
plant anything or build anything to screen that, so that’s just a fact. As far as additional
buffering from noise the landscaping has been our—feel the most successful tool. A
combination of Pines and other trees, is best. In addition, I was going to say is a
condition of approval if there were adjacent property owners that were desirous of trees,
we would provide them trees on their side. Since we can’t fit anymore on our side. I’m
happy to make that offer, but I don’t know how—I can’t force them to plant a tree in their
backyard.
Borup: Is it your understanding that the existing fence is continuous, at this point.
Durkin: It is.
Borup: That was all the questions I had at this point, Mr. Chairman, at this point.
MacCoy: Commissioner De Weerd.
De Weerd: At this point, I don’t have any questions.
MacCoy: Commissioner Smith.
Smith: I might have one or two. You stated when you were going through this site
specific comments initially—I don’t want to beat this masonry fence to death. You said
you felt that this masonry was unattractive. So, the Shopko Masonry is not unattractive.
Durkin: Well, it is a different thing. Commissioner, are you familiar with a masonry
wall? Can you think of one around the city that you can be familiar with?
Smith: I am very familiar with masonry walls. I’m not so sure that the masonry wall is
the right solution here. I think probably what I would rather see is a some adequate
landscaping back there. I think when the vegetation matures that it will provide a better
barrier. The only thing I’m concerned about with the cedar fence just is durability and
ability to hold up over time. Of course, that is both property owners' responsibility to
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 31
maintain that fence. Let’s move pass that. I’m more concerned about the front—I’m
very concerned about the buffering to the neighborhood, but I’m also concerned about
the landscaping. I look at this site plan and I see a sea of asphalt here with very little
relief from landscaping. I think one of the problems why you are having trouble getting
the extra 317 trees planted is because you don’t have enough landscaping, landscaped
areas out here. There is a minimal separation between Eagle Road, Fairview and your
development. There is minimal breaking up of the parking lot across the whole frontage
on the streets with some landscaped areas and I think both of those things need to be
looked at and addressed.
Durkin: I’d like to just go back to the masonry fence real quick. I think we left that a
little bit untied. There is a difference between the masonry building that’s heated and
maintained and not covered by landscaping and a non heated masonry wall. In my
experience in building 79 Shopko stores throughout the United States and quite a few
other types of developments that about a three year old, free standing masonry wall
that’s covered by asphalt, it starts to—the motar deteriates, the color, it’s difficult to
maintain. A wood fence is easy to maintain, so it last longer and the maintenance is
easier on a wood fence than on an unheated masonry wall. It’s a conditional use, the
city has the ability to step in and say fix it, maintain it, that’s a tremendous burden on a
mile long masonry wall and it’s one that is difficult for me stand here tonight and say
“Sure, no problem, I’ll do that.” I’m telling you right now that’s a difficult—
Smith: Well, I don’t agree with you, but I don’t want to get stuck on this fence.
Durkin: As far as the seperation between Eagle and Fairview, there is one project in the
City of Meridian that I’m aware of that has that seperation and that’s Fred Meyer. There
is no other project in the city that has that seperation, that I’m aware of. My awareness
is from driving all of the streets. I’m aware of you giving, the city giving a wide range of
approvals, I’m aware of time when the city requires sidewalks and sometimes, they
don’t. That’s past, as we are going forward today, there is no project of this scope in
the City of Meridian with a 20 foot berm, of heavily landscaped berm along the gateway
streets of the community. I think what we are proposing far exceeds the ordinance,
which I understand you have the right to require that, but it also far exceeds any other
type of development in the city. I think it is attractive and I’m very proud of it, I’m very
happy with it. As far as the sea of asphalt, it’s a challenge the City of Boise has areas
that they want to reduce and reduce and reduce the asphalt area. It’s a balancing act
that we find trying to accommodate the shoppers and having them have a place to park
and trying to get enough landscaping and this is a larger tree than you have required in
the past and these are—this is a three inch caliber tree. If we put landscaping areas in
the parking lot and if you go and look at those and in this valley that we have trees
planted within the parking lot on larger scale like this they get hit by snow plows, they’re
broken, they’re cracked and they die. They are replaced and repaired constantly. You
have got an expense there but it’s not sitely. They don’t mature with the rest of the
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 32
landscaping and it’s very difficult to get them to work. If you take out a lot of parking
area you can get it to work. Then I go below that parking ratio that I need to have a
successful shopping center. So we feel we are trying to do our best.
Smith: I think citing bad examples is unnecessarily justification for doing something a
certain way and I think that some of these problem areas are design problems. They
are just poorly designed and not adequate. As far as what has been done here in the
city in the past, I would be lying to you if I sat up here and told you I was happy with a
lot of the projects that I have seen approved by the city in the past and that is one of the
reasons why I express an interest in filling a vacancy on the commission here. I think
with good design that these things can be addressed and we can end up with a good
design. As far as your amount of parking, I see how many spaces you have and
everything, but I don’t see anywhere where you’ve tabulated the amount of required
amount of parking based on the square footage you are proposing.
Durkin: The required amount of parking for the City of Meridian I believe is four cars
per thousand square feet of development. We are at…
Smith: 6.11?
Durkin: That’s correct, 6.11.
Smith: By ordinance, not necessarily what your tenants require to have adequate
parking but by ordinance, you are two cars over per thousand square feet. So you have
exceeded the parking requirement.
Durkin: We have far exceeded the City of Meridian’s parking requirement, that’s very
common. When we built the Fred Meyer store and that shopping center, we had a
similar parking ratio to this. Your Home Depots are going to have a far, far greater
parking ratio. There is a balance, it’s a difficult balance, but I have to provide—if I
design it and built it with three cars per thousand or four cars per thousand, businesses
would fail. We would have a failure of a center, which isn’t…
Smith: Sure. I guess I’m looking for what that right number is.
Durkin: Boise Townsquare is a good example. Boise Townsquare is a 1,100,000
square feet and have a 4.9 parking ratio. It has certainly been a success there is no
doubt about it, but it’s a nightmare as far as finding a place to park. They bust people
from—they rent vacant lots down the streets and it’s been a real challenge for the
parking in that area. That’s a different kind of shopping, that’s were you go and park
and sit all day and this is more of a turn over type of a shopping center.
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 33
Smith: Do you anticipate any kind of business by—consumers come in by mass
transit?
Durkin: Not that I’m aware of. I have no…
Smith: I mean buses and specifically buses.
Durkin: I would be really surprised, Mr. Commissioner.
Smith: Okay.
Durkin: However, if your question was going to the participating or cooperating with a
bus, as far as coming in to the project, we have always been willing to do that.
Smith: I don’t see any place on here that looks like it was designed for—with that in
mind, that’s why I ask.
Durkin: I’m not familiar with the bus system that would service this site from the City of
Boise, but I don’t believe that it’s available.
Smith: I don’t think it comes out that far. As far as phasing goes, how was the phasing
going to evolve here.
Durkin: We would expect to begin construction around December of this portion of the
project. It may be this portion of the project, in December in this immediate spring. We
do not have a construction schedule for this overall parcel but we do have a
construction schedule for some of the uses out in front. I do not have a construction
schedule right now for this portion of the development.
Smith: Okay. That’s all I have right now.
MacCoy: Is there any other questions from the commissioners that have popped up
since we have started this.
De Weerd: Well, I might have a comment. You had mentioned that this indeed will be a
gateway to Meridian and we have not had a project of this size so it is very hard to
compare it to anything in Meridian, because we don’t have anything. So, you will be
setting a trend and it is very important to this part of Meridian that it is attractive. Also to
the residents, I’m sure, behind it. On your comment about the masonry wall, if you
wanted to increase the size of that buffer area and add some more of the trees in that,
that might serve as a compromise. What kind of fencing is there—so you are going
with the existing fencing that is there right now.
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 34
Durkin: Mrs. Commissioner, let me ask you, what is your desire with—what would you
like to see the fence wall or buffer accomplish. Because if you gave me some direction
there, if you are looking for a block out of the shopping center—these aren’t going to
accomplish that.
De Weerd: I don’t think the masonry wall…
(END OF TAPE #1/SIDE #2)
(TAPE #3/SIDE #5)
Durkin: …I could see from my experience of—the there isn’t a traffic concern for this
project.
De Weerd: Will your next meeting with them be public?
Durkin: I’m not sure how they do the tech review. They have a tech review meeting—
their tech review meetings are on Friday mornings. It is scheduled for the 24th
on
Friday morning. As a result of that meeting, they have a staff report that is developed
from the tech review that goes to the commissioners for their public hearing and that will
be public and that is an unscheduled date. I don’t know when that will be; it will
certainly be before we can continue with any permits or approvals with the City of
Meridian. It’s a requirement—it’s a county requirement that before we can put a
driveway cut we have to have a public hearing, so.
MacCoy: Anything else? Mr. Borup?
Borup: Not to Mr. Durkin.
MacCoy: Okay. Mr. Durkin, do you have anything else you want to add.
Durkin: No.
MacCoy: Okay, Thank you for your comments.
Borup: Well, I just would like to have some discussion among the commissioners
before we close the public hearing.
MacCoy: One moment, okay we have a public open house still here forum. Anybody
have any additional comments they thought about since we gone through this much or
make a statement?
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 35
Rogers: Is there anything that—can I just ask the commission and Mr. Durkin, is there
gonna—could we find—is there any information that we could get our hands on to tell
us what is the better buffer, either the wall or the landscaping. Is there anything out
there, because I haven’t found a lot of books in the library about that sort of thing. It’s
just not something that the general person would know where to look for.
De Weerd: Does Mr. Freckleton have any comment on that?
Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner De Weerd, I don’t. To be quite honest with
you the masonry wall was my suggestion. It looked like Mr. Durkin did have some
response to her question.
Durkin: And there is information on that. I’ve done some research on freeway noise
and residential.
Rogers: Well, where is it?
Freckleton: I might say commissioners, the ADA Planning Association in downtown
Boise, on Idaho Street. They have a library that has planning information in it.
KEN SANSOUCIE, 3526 E LAWRENCE, MERIDIAN, 83642. WAS SWORN IN BY
THE ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY.
Sansoucie: My question refers to snow removal. I would like to know what are
appropriate hours for snow removal. I know people in the industry; they remove snow
for the businesses that they contract to whenever it snows and if that happens to be 2
o’clock in the morning, then that is when it is. I would like to be comfortable in that
that’s not going to apply in this situation. Just a general comment, this shopping center
is a profit center for Mr. Durkin and I can appreciate that, but just south and east of the
Shopko is my sanctuary from the world. That’s why this is emotional for a lot of us. I
want that disturbed as little as possible, regardless of public records. That is all I have
to say. If there are any questions, I would be happy to answer.
MacCoy: Are there any questions commissioners? None, okay. Anyone else, some
thoughts here.
Anderson: I just had a couple of questions for you. Where exactly would the trucks—
doe you have planned, where exactly will they be entering and exiting? Are they going
to be on this—are they going to be coming in through here?
Borup: Mr. Anderson, you may want to direct that to the Chairman and then he can ask
the applicant that.
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 36
Anderson: I was just wondering where the trucks will be entering and exiting into the
mall area. If it was—if they were going to be doing it or if the main traffic was going to
be through the areas that are currently developed for our subdivision—or not. Right
now it looks as if that is where most of the traffic will be entering and exiting, at least to
my view.
MacCoy: Okay we will take other people and then we will ask him back up here to
answer your question.
Sansoucie: I also wanted to mention there was a development that has these islands of
tress in Boise. To me it is quite attractive, it’s right next to the original Albertsons, I think
it’s like State and 16th
, to me that’s a very attractive use of trees and islands. I don’t see
why they couldn’t use something like that idea to fit here. It would be quite appropriate,
to me at least. That’s about it, except I was going to mention the traffic study that was
done; did he say June 22 or… I was just, that again was still before the completion of
this Eagle widening that they have. Ever since in the last two weeks it has been quite a
difference in the traffic, I have noticed just getting in and out of our subdivision so it
might be wise to possibly even do another study once the Eagle Road widening has
been completed, just to get a more accurate view of the traffic.
MacCoy: Brings up a good point. Anyone else have something to say?
Martin: Here again, the traffic. I can sit here and filibuster all night, but honestly, the
traffic. Currently right now, honestly, at about 5 o’clock-ish—yeah three minutes or
less—but Mr. Durkin got longer than three minutes, trust me. Around 5 o’clock-ish your
major traffic hour times, no kidding, the traffic comes back to about here, currently right
now, with out the mall there, right, our subdivision main entrance that I always come out
of and exit, 90% of the time is right here. You add a mall with people coming in, it’s
going to be a zoo. A light back here is not going help. There going to have this extra
lane that—de-acceleration lane, that people can come in. We will never be able to
leave our subdivision. You know? It will be a major fight to get in and out. All I’m
saying is, does Meridian truly need something this huge? Do we need it? You know? I
get the feeling from looking at the commissioners and stuff, like over here these two, it’s
a done deal in their mind. It makes me wonder why we the citizens even came. You
know, it’s like—and especially for Mr. Borup, buddy you didn’t do your homework and
you’re screwed, that’s the honest feeling I get from Mr. Borup with his questions about,
didn’t you notice the signs, didn’t you do all this, and all I’m saying is be considerate of
the people that live here. That’s all we are asking. Be considerate. All he is out for is
money, and here again, that’s the American way. Like the one gentleman brought us,
that is our sanctuary, that’s where we go to get away and no our sanctuary has become
the hub of Meridian. Where everybody and their flea bitten dog is going to be. You can
guarentee you that at night trucks will be idling. No body wants to wake up at 7:30 in
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 37
the morning and here a truck backing up beep, beep, beep, beep, beep. Any
questions?
De Weerd: Yes, I have a comment for you Mr. Martin. We have a certain set of
guidelines that we can only respond to your testimony is being heard and hopefully the
developer of the project is going to be working with you. We have a specific set of
guidelines that we can only adhere to. I stood up exactly where you are, I know the
emotion that you are feeling, because I felt the same. What I didn’t know is—the only,
the limits that we up here can make decisions on. I understand how your quality of life
get effected. I have an empty field behind my house. Fortunately, or unfortunately, it’s
residential. So I will be looking at more who my backyard neighbors are going to be.
Sometimes that can be even worse. This was here before that subdivision. We’re
going to be making a decision based on something that was already zoned, that was
already determined before you moved in. I’m really sorry that you did not know that. I
didn’t know it either. I saw the signs, I knew a shopping mall, I thought it was a strip
mall, you know, I had no idea what it was. The only thing we can do is try and make
decisions that will help ease it for you. Mr. Borup, or Commissioner Borup, has made
some good points along the way we can only deal with the things that are set before us
and the decisions that have already been made and the plan for the city. We want to
make it as nicely planned as we can, but we have our limits too. Because those
property owners have their rights as well.
Martin: So, can I ask the question? The commission, do you guys have the power or
no, to say he can do it or not? You guys have the power, right. Regardless that it’s his
land, right? No.
Prior: Theses folks may make, may I Mr. Chairman?
MacCoy: Yeah, go ahead. I was going to do it, but you go ahead.
Prior: Merely sir, this is going to be a recommendation to the City Council, one way or
the other. What they do have the authority to do is tell this developer, after hearing all
of this testimony and I assume directing me to prepare Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law. The recommendation can be for a denial of this project or can be
for an approval of this project, but it is merely a recommendation that is sent on to the
City Council sir. Once again, you will be given another opportunity when this project
goes on to the City Council to submit further testimony to that group of folks, then offer
testimony at that hearing as well. So, yes, this commission can have a
recommendation to deny this project or approve the project, depending on how they
feel about it. It is merely a recommendation to the City Council and our City Council
has the final recommendation.
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 38
Borup: I might add also that the recommendations that come from here need to be in
compliance with the city ordinances, the comprehensive plan and in this case a pre-
conditional use that was granted. So, the decision we make need to be in line with
those rules and regulations and city ordinances. The flexibility, one of the reasons we
are looking for testimony from all of you, because there are some areas where we can
influence. The commissioner already mentioned the rights of both property owners, I
don’t think you would be happy if we came and said you can’t plant a tree in your
backyard or put up a swing set or whatever else you want to do. Those are rights you
had when buying that property, these people bought this property with existing zoning
and existing usage, and they assumed they would be able to develop it in line with what
the zoning when they bought it. Now, the area that there is some flexibility is what they
put on it and how they put on it. I for one feel that there’s some obligation on proper
buffering and things like that. So, that is one of the reasons we are looking for the
testimony and input, as far as…
Smith: If we outright turned it down our attorney can address that but there has to be
some strong legal bases for us to do that. The City Council has a little more flexibility
there, they can change the ordinance. They can make a new one. We can not do that.
Martin: The last question I had was—can—apparently you commissioners can’t, but
can the City Council determine how big this will be, or no? Store wises and stuff like
that. Do they have that power.
Borup: I don’t know if I can answer, other than the size of the property normally
determines that. The building can be so much percentage, the parking so much
percentage, in this case, the landscaping area needs to be so much for percentage. So
those are what will limit you as to size and what can be done, the overall acreage of the
project.
MacCoy: Mr. Martin, will you…
Smith: I’m not done.
MacCoy: Go ahead Commissioner Smith.
Smith: I think I better calm down a minute. I don’t appreciate being told because of my
body language or the particular questions that I have asked, being accused of having
some project being presented in front of this commission as being a done deal. In fact,
I have been accused of projects being done deals, in other words, out the door, I’m not
going to approve them before the person up here presenting not the other way around.
I think any one of my fellow commissioners will tell you, I am as critical or more so of the
applicants that come up here in front of this commission. I’m a licensed architect and I
do this kind of thing for a living everyday, so I know what to look for in a project and I
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 39
know what to look for in planning and ask for. Quite frankly, I resent the fact that you
make us out to be the bad guys up here, because we are going to approve a project
that has been zoned and approved five, six years ago because your realtors told you
whatever they had to tell you to close the deal. I’m not the bad guy, I listen to this
month after month, people coming up, testifying against a project going on a piece of
property adjacent to them because their realtor told them it was going to be office
building. We just went through this with Eagle Partners, doing a Chevron across from
St. Lukes. Same stories, I hear it month after month after month. You peoples issues
isn’t with this commission approving or disapproving this project, your issue is with your
realtors lying to you. That’s where it is. That is all I’m going to say about that.
Martin: Just my rebuttal back to you is. You answered my question, you guys are going
to approve it. That’s what I needed to know.
Smith: Nobody has—we haven’t voted on this. I have no idea how Mr. Borup is going
to vote. I have no idea how commissioner De Weerd is going to vote. I don’t even
know what I’m going to do yet. I think this parcel of land has been planned for retail
development, I’ve know about it for three, four years. This is in complete compliance
with what was approved there in 1991. The thing that boggles my mind is how we can
get a residential development in the middle of an industrial area. To me that is bad
planning and zoning.
Martin: I agree, but you guys have…
Smith: But, this didn’t happen and evolve around a residential area, this residential
area was plunked in the middle of industrial. In fact, your home is zoned light industrial.
The property that your home sits on is zoned light industrial. Did you know that?
Martin: I did not.
Smith: Well, I was shocked when the first in home day care came through in your sub
division and it was zoned light industrial. What are we doing with residential in light
industrial for.
Martin: Honestly, that’s what I thought somebody brought up is, yes that’s been zoned
that way, but now we possibly have a chance to maybee hold up and reconsider this,
right? Because like you said you have commercial, right smack dab with the residential
in the center of it. That is lousy planning and that’s all I’m saying. You know.
Smith: Fairview and Eagle are going to grow commercially. That’s the nature of the
streets, the development is going to go that way. It’s conducive to the area.
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 40
Martin: Yeah, but what about across the street where the feed lots at, there’s no homes
over there. See what I’m getting at. But they put it by the homes. The other lots just
feed lot, and I know they don’t own the land, hey—
Smith: What we do up here is listen to your concerns and what the issues you have
with the development. We try to work something out that is fair to the developer, it’s fair
to the home owners. Sure this is adversely going to effect your neighborhood, I know it
is. Would you rather see this come in piece meal developed. Personally, this has
access from one side of the site all the way to the other one. This isn’t these little strip
centers like you see down Fairview, one right after the other, right after the other.
Granted maybe the scope of it may be, you know, huge, it’s a big project, it’s huge. I
didn’t really grasp it, right away myself. It is a hugemongous development and there is
going to be development here, unless you want to buy the land…
Martin: I don’t have a couple of billion left hanging around.
Smith: I don’t either, but…
(Inaudible)
Smith: I sympathize with you and I’m really sorry, but—we just hear the same thing
every month, with the same reasons coming up. I don’t know what to say, but if I was
going to get upset about it, I know who I’d be getting upset with. It wouldn’t be the
developer.
Martin: Well, it’s not his fault. It’s not his fault. Hey, thanks.
MacCoy: Before you leave, I would like you—have you know, there are people here in
this room that are your neighbors and friends that this is—as you know, we’re a new
commission as of this past year. We were not here in 1991. There is quite a bit of
difference, I just want you to understand that all the people up here are qualified these
days. We didn’t have that back in 1991, so things were done which we have no control
over, but we are professional people, we deal day in and day out with the same things
we have been talking about tonight. This is our lifestyle and we’ve been around for a
long number of years. Commissioner Smith is right, we hear this quite a bit and what
we do, this for your own information, we are very critical of ourselves, we try to balance
out what the commercial side is for our city and what the people need. That’s where we
think we sit. We are in the balance, we have a hard time with this, we go home and
think about this, we worry about this, you may not think so, but we do. We hear about
you and everybody else here. I go home and I can picture you and I can picture other
people here many weeks away and what you had to say. These people do that, they
take this very personally and to the heart. This is going to be a hard decision for us.
We want to do the most we can for you within the law and give you what you have
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 41
because you have already bought the home. You’re not going to pick up and leave like
you would a tent. So we want to be as best we can in the decisions we make so that
you people can come off with the best deal we can make for you. So we are going to
stand on the buffer zone for you. We appreciate hearing how you view this. You give
us ideas that we can work with and so on. So, don’t feel this was in vain and what you
heard from our council down below here on the other end of this table, do be sure to go
and keep track of this thing and at that time you can have your say again. I stress for
you to do the same thing you did for us tonight. You have a good chance of doing what
you want to do. We will do what we can for you before that happens. Thank you very
much.
Martin: Thank you.
De Weerd: You are certainly invited to also—they will updating our comprehensive plan
if you want to put some input on where things should be and where they shouldn’t be.
We’d invite you to attend. Because that is what we need, we need citizens input.
Fortunately, or unfortunately if you get too involved you might be sitting up here too.
MacCoy: She does raise a real good point, there is a visionary plan and program that is
now working within our city for the year 2000, 2010,2015 and the one beyond and that
comes from just you people coming out to those meetings. What hurts us is the fact we
work on these commissions and we ask the public to tell us what they want and we get
one, two, three people period. Then you expect us to have the real brain power to
design everything and you’re going to like it. You ought to come out to these meetings.
They are going on and advertised in the newspaper. We have done everything we can
do to get people to come out and it’s difficult. It’s very disappointing to us when we
don’t hear from you people. Okay, we need to move on to another subject. At this time,
is there—oh by the way, excuse me, I’m glad you raised your hand. Come back and
make your comments, because we have some questions.
Durkin: I’m going to respond to some questions that were directed to you, for me. Is
that okay. I encourage anyone to contact the land group, it is a local company, we have
hired them to make recommendations to us for landscaping, berming, widening the
area. They are on the application and anyone is welcome to call them, they do have
books in the library on proper buffering. My response to the snow removal question, we
can control the hours of sweeping, we are obligated under state—city ordinance to keep
the parking lots safe at all times. So when it snows, we have to plow. If it snows at two
in the morning, we plow at two in the morning, if it snows at two in the afternoon, we
plow at two in the after noon. Snow removal can be a 24 hour operation, sweeping
isn’t. As far as the truck entries, they will enter around the perimeter of the building,
from a variety of—there will be two way truck traffic in the back. We have different
docks facing different ways, so that—our plan is to have the trucks go either directions,
but they will go around the buildings around the back of the store and out—I can’t
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 42
perceive the circumstances that there would be traffic through the sub division. For
trucks, I don’t know if it’s signed prohibiting trucks or not. The trucks service will be
going out on Highway 55 or Fairview, I would imagine. The traffic study question, does
it take into consideration Eagle Road, it does. This man is an Engineer and Scientist
that prepared the study and they take into consideration, not only the completion of
Eagle Road, but the completion of other road projects in the coming years and how they
will effect this property or this traffic in this area. Real quick reference to Albertson’s
Market Place, I just want you to know that Albertson’s Market Place is divided in half. If
you are facing north the Albertson’s store is owned by Albertsons the shopping center
to the left is owned by others. The trees in front of the Albertson’s store are lovely. It’s
their flagship store #101 and I have no idea how they do it, but they are lovely. The
trees and landscaping in front of the shopping center are not. That is a very good
example, so I frankly don’t know how Albertsons does it. It’s a good example looking to
the left or the west side of that development.
De Weerd: I’ll tell you what they are the most popular parking spots too.
Durkin: Under the trees, I bet. That’s just my quick answer to the questions that were
directed to me, I think. I continue to be available for questions.
Maccoy: Okay, thank you very much. With that…
MARGUERITE BEAR, 3576 E PRESIDENTIAL, MERIDIAN, ID 83642, WAS SWORN
IN BY ASSITANT ATTORNEY.
Bear: I just wanted to know how you determine who you notified for this hearing. I live
in this neighborhood, I don’t live on the perimeter, thank goodness, but I do live in the
neighborhood, it effects me. The traffic particularly and the noise are going to effect
me. I can hear the Meridian Speedway from my house, so I know the noise is going to
effect me. We weren’t notified of this hearing, except someone called us about it. I was
wondering when this comes up to City Council, are they going to notify our whole
neighborhood or just select a few to be notified.
MacCoy: Council, do you want to make a statement?
Berg: According to state statute we notify people within 300 feet of the adjacent land.
Now, we do notice it in the Valley News, which is our city paper, which according to
state statute is what the paper we advertise in. We hope with Homeowners
Associations and groups, that they would get together and notify other people. It’s just
like day cares are obligated to notify within a certain perimeter of the day cares that go
in or child care or home care. We are just governed by that thing. Where we put the
limits if we start notifying people, I don’t know we could be sending out hundreds of
notices to certain people, but we are obligated by state statute. That’s what we do.
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 43
Bear: But this is in a closed area that’s effected our egress and ingress.
Berg: I understand what you are saying and it’s not any different than any other type of
development, but hopefully with Homeowners Association and friends and neighbors, in
your group you can notify people.
Bear: Well, the problem is the development is not complete yet so our Homeowners
Association is still in the hands of the developer. I don’t have a complete list of names
and address of people to go to. My limited knowledge of my neighbors is jus my
immediate neighbors, I don’t know anybody who lives on the other streets and they
don’t know me. So, it’s hard to get the word out, there have probably been four times
as many people here if we had been notified, is what I’m getting at. It effects us all.
Berg: Things that are built on the other side of town effects me. I don’t argue that it
doesn’t impact you one way or another. Developments can impact schools, my son
goes to this school, there is a lot of different things. What I guess I’m saying is that you
have to adhere to you neighbors, read the Valley News, you can come and pick up an
agenda for Planning and Zoning or City Council meetings, we have them at City Hall.
Call down here, ask about particular projects.
Bear: Is that 300 feet still pertain to when the City Council has their hearing.
Berg: Yes, that is according to state statute.
Bear: So, we won’t be notified for that either.
Berg: If you are not…
Bear: We don’t get the Valley News, so there you go.
De Weerd: But you could call the city and ask when it’s going to be scheduled and…
Bear: Now we know that it is coming up.
De Weerd: City Council meets the 1st
and 3rd
Tuesday of every month, so you could
call before this next Tuesday or more realistic probably the 3rd
Tuesday of August and
see if it is on the agenda. That’s probably your best bet. Unless you can get one of
these that were noticed to give them you phone number and say please let me know.
Bear: Okay, thank you.
MacCoy: One other thing too, in an active neighborhood, I lived in one that we didn’t
have a Homeowners Association, so we felt that we needed to know what was going on
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 44
in our community and it wasn’t 300 feet it was miles away. We have a commission of a
number of people neighbor wise, that as soon as we find out from the city they go out
and put handout flyers and also knock on doors. Last time we had to come together,
we had over hundreds to show up just because it was door to door, neighbor to
neighbor, because we thought it would concern us, which it did or at the time we though
it did.
De Weerd: It is posted on the property as well.
MacCoy: Yes, it has to be posted on the property, these signs. So you can just look as
you go around.
Bear: Thank you.
MacCoy: Anybody else before we close this? Okay I’m going to…
Borup: Mr. Chairman, before you close the public hearing, I would like to have a little bit
of discussion maybe among the commissioners.
MacCoy: Alright, go ahead.
Borup: I think maybe it’s appropriate for us to discuss some concerns or comments or
whatever. For one thing I think our attorney would like to have that for his findings.
From what I can gather, other than the project not going in, the biggest concerns seem
to be traffic, buffering and what traffic and noise.
Durkin: Traffic and noise, I agree.
Borup: Before maybe get into that, I had a question on the parking, the volume of that
area and the view. I guess, Commissioner Smith you had mentioned that several times
and the question I have is from what angle and what direction is the concern. Looking
at it from the birds eye view there is a lot of asphalt there. No doubt. I’m trying to
picture it, the view, from Eagle Road and we’re looking through two walls of trees. From
Eagle and Fairview there are the trees all along the perimeter plus the trees on the
perimeter of the parking. Especially once those are matured, so the view from the
corridors from Eagle and Fairview—to me it looks like many of you will be seeing a
forest. Looking from the stores and driving around the parking lot, it’s a sea of asphalt
and cars. I’m not sure which one is the biggest concern, probably both.
Smith: Probably both.
Borup: From what perspective were you looking at it from. From looking at the outside
of the project or from…
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 45
Smith: Outside the project.
Borup: Do you have a concern from outside the project.
Smith: Yeah, I do.
Borup: As far as seeing nothing but asphalt.
Smith: For some time, before this landscaping matures and it’s going to be years.
Borup: I agree. You can’t go in with mature landscaping.
Smith: I guess the screening from the street will, it will get less and less obtrusive over
time, but I think it’s still going to be there and I think you still are going to—there is a lot
of deciduous trees that—well you’ve got deciduous tress in the parking lot, you’re going
to see it anyways during the winter, but I guess I just would like to see the scale of
these lots get broken up with some more landscaping.
Borup: That‘s in line with the PUD, I believe. The staff has already stated the
percentage that the percentage isn’t there. As far as the perimeter, you’ve got a solid
wall of trees. You can’t put anymore in. I don’t remember—well, for one thing as it has
been stated, we haven’t seen a project of this size, but even some of the smaller ones, I
don’t remember any with this many trees around the perimeter this close together. The
size of the project dictates that. To me there seems to be a pretty nice visual buffering
from the two major streets.
Smith: I wish I had my scale with me. Do you have an engineer scale?
Borup: The applicant say that 12 feet on the trees, so is that what you wanted to check,
to see if that’s—
Smith: Yeah, some of them are—I just wanted to see what size they were drawn at.
Sometimes, you can draw them out of scale a little bit. I’m not saying that they are I just
would like to know what—
Borup: No, I don’t believe that they are 12 feet.
Smith: It says 1:100.
Borup: Well, I’m just looking at the parking spacing and they’re, I’m assuming they’re
nine feet or ten.
Smith: Nine wide and probably 18-20 feet—
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 46
Borup: Nine is a minimum, looking at some of those trees along the perimeter they’re
three parking spaces between them. That is more than 12, maybe there needs to be—
and maybe that is part of why—they are designed for 12 feet and the trees aren’t on
there, maybe that’s why, because they have spread them out more than that.
Smith: Well, if you look at the depth of that berm too, and on the plan the trees are all
pretty much in line and they are not really staggered in and out. That’s where you start
to get some blockage of your visual through that.
Borup: My bigger concern I think is the buffering from the residential. That is why I
thought maybe—we’re looking at ten feet, ten feet right now. I think Mr. Durkin had
mentioned…some mention of a 20 foot (Inaudible) with some staggered trees, which
would definitely have a lot more appeal to me. I think that is probably the biggest—from
what I have gathered, the greater concern from homeowners from homeowners is the
buffering from—besides the traffic—is the buffering against their neighborhoods. I don’t
know if we need more information from a noise engineer, but a few years ago I looked
in on some freeway buffering and the trees had a, from what I remember, had a lot
higher effect than a fencing did.
Smith: Well, I’m not measuring every tree. Most of these are drawn about 25 feet
apart, on the drawing and, you know, granted this is a 1:100 scale and it’s difficult to
show this kind of thing accurately at this scale. That is what they scale out at.
Borup: Actually that is probably right for a shade tree.
Smith: Yeah, I don’t know what the right (Inaudible)…
Borup: You don’t want them growing into each other.
Smith: Well, I have some Maples that are that far apart and they are growing into each
other, but it has been 20 years.
Borup: Given the fact that this—you know what is identified as gateways to the city.
That’s one of the reasons I would like to see a nicer wider landscape area along the
street, also have the parking lot broke up a little bit. I’m very concerned about the
screening with the residential along the back and proxemity of some of the buildings on
the west side of the—along Eagle seem to be fairly close there.
Smith: Close to the buildings…
Borup: Yes, Eagle is a lot closer than the ones on Fairview. Maybe that is what Mr.
Durkin might have been referring to is a variable buffering along there. I didn’t ask him
that question, but I was assuming he would…
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 47
Smith: Can I borrow your scale again?
Borup: …some deeper buffering where areas may be a little bit noisier and a little less
buffering on some of the stores where that wouldn’t be a factor. That is going to take a
lot of coordination to maybe work on that, guess that is one of the reasons we have a
staff, huh?
Smith: The building 2F is around 35 feet off the property.
Borup: What was 35?
Smith: 2F. Same thing with 1A. Those are the two closest ones. Then on the north
the 4C is 50 feet. There are some—the distance between the trees varies but there is
some in the back here that are center to center, 20 feet. The grocery store, oh yeah,
that’s got a little pop up that’s 35 feet—maybe a little over 35 feet, little bit more. It’s
hard to tell at this scale what it is exactly.
Borup: Well then, what are we looking at to be the best way to address the buffering?
Twenty foot definitely seems like a better situation than ten feet.
Smith: I would like to see the neighbors be able to get involved, there seemed to be a
couple of them that had an interest expressed in finding out about noise barriers and
what the different ones were.
De Weerd: Well, the applicant had mentioned that if we wanted to make it a condition,
that he would work with staff and the homeowners. I feel comfortable with that, is that a
logical or realistic conviction to place on that Bruce?
Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner De Weerd, I think it probably is reasonable.
We would probably want to consult with people who had a better understanding of the
noise issue. If we need to call in certain people that have more expertise in this issue
then that would probably be appropriate. I think it would be a very good idea to involve
the residents.
De Weerd: Can we do that through Mr. Yorgenson or since you’re the Homeowners
president.
Yorgenson: Whether we call it a national formal association meeting the convenance of
the subdivision does allow for special meetings, which the association would handle
notifying every homeowner in the subdivision, inviting them to attend, we would find a
venue be large enough to handle sufficient. Our last homeowners meeting was in the
fall of last year and we have a lot of interest. As you can see, there is a lot of
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 48
concerned citizens here. So percentage wise, back at the last homeowners meeting
was 40%, I would dare say we would have close to 90% attendance at this meeting.
Currently, there is about 150 homes built and residing in the subdivision. As far as
handling the timing of schedule, we could do that, whatever you ask we—the
association, representing the homeowners also, I know they would like to do that and
we can accommodate that.
De Weerd: Bruce would staff be able to, and Mr. Durkin, meet with the Homeowners
Association perhaps on the buffer issue, if this were made a condition.
MacCoy: Would you like to step up and answer that in the mic?
Freckleton: I don’t know what is appropriate here, sir.
De Weerd: I don’t even know if I can ask these questions. I’ve been told not to
whisper…
Freckleton: Could you ask again.
De Weerd: Is it a possibility if we make this a condition to work with staff and the
Homeowners Association on the buffer issue, the 50 foot buffer maximum, I mean 20.
Oops! I showed my true colors.
Durkin: As my suggestion earlier, if there was a—I encourage you to come up with a
motion that gives flexibility to the staff after taking further input from the neighbors. If
there was a motion saying the landscape buffer shall not be not less than 20 feet,
unless it is approved by staff as a result of the neighbors input and the developers
input. I think that gives the staff the full authority, obligates me to do a minimum of 20
feet. I personally feel there is some variations and we can have some further
discussions in a more appropriate environment.
De Weerd: Perhaps you can bring facts for the homeowners to feel more comfortable
too.
Borup: I have a question for Mr. Durkin while he is up here. He made a reference
earlier providing trees to some of the homeowners bordering the property. I guess that
had a lot of interest to me, but I don’t know to what extent, I mean you’ve got—
Durkin: I’ll commit right now.
Borup: You are probably aware of how many lots you have along there and…The other
problem we may have is, I don’t know if we can require off site improvements or
buffering or anything to that extent. To accomplish that, to me it could be a way for
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 49
neighbors to gain some buffering and also beautify their yard at the same time.
(Inaudible)
Durkin: The plan that we submitted has 979 3-inch caliber trees, that’s 317 trees shy of
the ordinance according to the engineer and according to my interpretation of the
ordinance. I don’t think there is any dispute that we are short of the ordinance. With
the amount of modifications that we are talking about tonight I suspect we will have
more trees in this project so I think that 317 number will shrink. I offer tonight, I don’t
know how…
(END OF TAPE)
Durkin: …the project, I commit to on record tonight, but we will provide that number of
trees either for this project or the adjacent property owners.
De Weerd: You know, it might be appropriate when you are working with the
homeowners, that you make that offer I’m sure there will be homeowners that would
take you up on that, so they do indeed have that buffer. I guess in interest of moving
this along, it looks like it is getting kind of late. I don’t know. I’m the newest member on
this commission, so bear with me. I think that I would prefer to see this continued until
our next meeting and in the intern maybe staff and Mr. Durkin can meet with the
homeowners to clear up the buffering issue and that way we will have the ACHD report
by then and we can take action at our next meeting. I know that’s not what you wanted
to hear but I think the homeowners will feel better about it and being able to know
exactly what that buffer is going to be. I know personally, I feel better after seeing the
ACHD report.
Smith: Is that a motion?
De Weerd: If that sounded like one I would make it.
Smith: Second. I think we need to carry it to a date certain.
De Weerd: I do move that we, oh…
Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, members of the commission, we did have a lot of comments
from staff as Mr. Durkin mentioned. These comments were from myself and also from
our Planning and Zoning Administrator, Shari Stiles. Shari is not here this evening.
One thing I’d, Mr. Durkin did have some objections to some of the items, one thing I
think might be helpful for staff as well as for yourself is if we could get him to submit a
written response to just reiderate some of his objections.
De Weerd: Could we get that off of the minutes?
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 50
Freckleton: Can we have that public record.
Prior: I’m sorry, I was dozing off.
Freckleton: If we have the applicant submit just a written response basically to staff
comments, just reiterating what he—the objections.
Prior: To continue this public hearing, if that is your intention, we can submit further
evidence at the next meeting. If it is your intention to close the public hearing then the
record is set and it is closed. It is your call.
(Inaudible)
MacCoy: We haven’t closed it yet.
Prior: But that motion hasn’t been acted on.
MacCoy: No.
Prior: That is basically where it stands Bruce. If they want to continue this public
hearing the gentleman can submit comments and—to you and we can have those
entered as part of the public record and considered in the conditional use permit. If you
are going to close this public hearing then we will not accept any further comments and
this conditional use permit will be judged on what has been stated on the record as of
today, sir.
MacCoy: Not yet, we haven’t closed it yet.
De Weerd: We just ended with so we could talk before it was closed and…
Borup: He was trying to close it.
De Weerd: He was trying, but we didn’t let him.
MacCoy: Okay, back to the commissioners now, what is your desire.
De Weerd: Well, I don’t know are you done Bruce or…
Freckleton: Yes, thank you.
De Weerd: Okay, we can get his responses from the minutes or do you need an official
response to your items?
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 51
Freckleton: I think an item by item would be nice. Seems like we kind of glazed over a
few of the items. There were some that were—from our perspective we figured that we
were going to get some…
De Weerd: Perhaps, if we continue this and you and Mr. Durkin and the homeowners
get together or, and/or you and Mr. Durkin get together perhaps those are issues that
you can address before the next meeting. Is that feasible?
Freckleton: I guess it depends on what you plan on doing tonight. If you continue this..,
De Weerd: It is probably my intention, personally I can say for me, I would like to see
this continued so these issues can be worked out and we can see ACHD’s report
before we ask the assistant city attorney to drawn up findings.
Smith: Make a motion, I’ll second it.
Freckleton: I’ll put it this way then, if it is your desire and it is your motion to continue
this, I would like to have that entered into record, the written response.
Borup: That’s consistant with other projects we’ve…
MacCoy: Is it required? We always said that it has to be…
Freckleton: We typically do this with a plat, but there is quite a few issues on this one
that seem to be going back and forth on.
MacCoy: I think it’s required.
Borup: I think he addressed it and it’s in the minutes. He went through number by
number and I think addressed—and we are probably down to a handful that there was
different opinions on.
MacCoy: It is asked for written return on that comment sheet. That’s what we use it for.
Freckleton: It was not a specific requirement of the—in this staff report, Mr. Chairman,
I’m just saying that it would be nice to have that if possible.
Borup: I might just…
De Weerd: Well, I don’t want to require it. Again, that is my personal opinion. I think
that you can get it off the minutes and you have some time to work with these peoples
before our next public hearing and also the homeowners. I would like to just make my
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 52
motion and move on. I would like to continue this public hearing for the conditional use
permit until our August 11th
meeting.
MacCoy: Okay, will you hold it one moment here, we had a motion I thought and…
De Weerd: I didn’t officially make it. I was just making a…
MacCoy: Well, commissioner Smith seconded it.
Smith: That was unofficially though.
MacCoy: Okay, thank you. Alright, start again now. Who is going to make the motion?
De Weerd: I will just restate whatever I have been saying, I’d like to continue this public
hearing for the conditional use permit for a regional shopping center by Dakota
Company Inc. until our next Planning and Zoning meeting which is August 11.
Smith: Second.
MacCoy: Any discussion?
De Weerd: Can I make maybe a condition on my motion.
MacCoy: It has to be seconded if you do.
Smith: You want to revise your motion?
De Weerd: I would like to revise that.
MacCoy: Alright.
De Weerd: Do you want to withdraw your second. So I can revise my motion. Well, I
would just like to make it a condition that Mr. Durkin, staff and the homeowners get
together before August 11th
to discuss the buffering.
Smith: And…
De Weerd: And that we have ACHD’s study.
Smith:
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
JULY 14, 1998
PAGE 53