The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutEagle Partners CUP 99-017D. CORRIE HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY ROBERT D. 1�tA Good Place to Live Council Members CITY OF MERIDIAN CHARLES ROUNTREE 33 EAST IDAHO GLENN BENTLEY MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 RON ANDERSON Phone (208) 888-4433 • Fax (208) 887-4813 KEITH BIRD LEGAL DEPARTMENT (208)884-4264 PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING DEPARTMENT (208)887-2211 PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT (208)884-5533 TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ` To insure that your comrrients and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendations to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: June 10, 1999 TRANSMITTAL DATE: May 24, 1999 HEARING DATE: June 17, 1999 FILE NUMBER: CUP -99-017 REQUEST: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT INCLUDES SIGNAGE FOR CHEVRON C -STORE WITH GAS PUMPS & DETACHED CAR WASH, MCDONALD'S WITH DRIVE - UP WINDOW (SAME BUILDING AS C -STORE) & IDAHO UNITED CREDIT UNION BY: EAGLE PARTNERS LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: NW CORNER EAGLE ROAD & MAGIC VIEW DR TAMMY DE WEERD P/Z MALCOLM MACCOY, P/Z THOMAS BARBEIRO, P/Z BYRON SMITH, P/Z _KEITH BORUP, P/Z _ROBERT CORRIE, MAYOR RON ANDERSON, C/C _CHARLIE ROUNTREE, C/C _KEITH BIRD, C/C _GLENN BENTLEY, C/C _WATER DEPARTMENT _SEWER DEPARTMENT _BUILDING DEPARTMENT _FIRE DEPARTMENT _POLICE DEPARTMENT _CITY ATTORNEY _CITY ENGINEER CITY PLANNER MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION (PRELIM & FINAL) IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT ADA COUNTY (ANNEXATION) YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: w.rr - NOTICE OF HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN pursuant to the Ordinances of the City of Meridian and the Laws of the State of Idaho, that the City Council of the City of Meridian will hold a public hearing at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho, at the hour of 7:30 p.m. on August 17, 1999 for the purpose of reviewing and considering the application of Eagle Partners for a conditional use permit for signage for Chevron C - Store with gas pumps and detached car wash, McDonald's with drive up window and Idaho United Credit Union, which is generally located on the northwest corner of Eagle Road and Magic View Drive. A more particular description of the above property is on file in the City Clerk's office at Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho.Street, and is available for inspection during regular business hours. A copy of the application is available upon request. Any and all interested persons shall be heard at said public hearing and the public is welcome and invited to submit testimony. DATED this 2e day of July, 1999. o fl ANG SIMS, DEPUTY CITY CLERK PUBLISH July 28 and August 11, 1999. AS�j�y1�t�C'`;fti=t'i��r��r!`r - BELL i' 16'1 • If lit t - -- -- - _--__-- T I iii Irr #� ,. � E� ` I 1 1 III � •p 3■f yc![ � �. III 111--------- ___. G.1( '.III I 1 I E•F! Z6atLk000 11I III I ---- - I 111 III 1 1 1 III _. _.. I III III -- I Ig ..... - 111 111 I11 111 I 1 I 111 111 111 111 111 111 s�}f� I- 1 111 - Fp< I I ii� Y E----------------------------- ---------------------------- I iii fit --- w-y - IIII III .� 4�-____________________________� 111 III tl I� 111 III �p �- 111 III IIdR,( 111 111 III 111 ' III 111 .............. . -. ._______ ..------ oil ..-___.-__. I11 I11 _ III III -- ill III 111 III ; 111 I11 I I11 III � I III III �" I III I11 • _ III 111 - ' X111 III I11 1 f— �111 ( O � 61—� Y -. I11 111 I111 I11 � I II III � I I II I11 _ I 11 111 re � Z- - - - - - - O� n bl m-- - - - - u ` _ ` 11 --------------------------------------y=.met,:,=W------------------------ q MM On IWINA" row, M- ei wYv. I I p EAGLE PARTNERS z Mm N IDAHO UNITED GREDI' NION ZADLZ RD. AND MAOC VIII DR M�RIDIML ID. ** TX CONFIRMAT!'N REPORT ** AS OF JUL 26 .09.44 PAGE.01 CITY OF MERIDIAN DATE TIME TO/FROM MODE MIN/SEC PGS} CMD# STATUS 09 07/26 09:43 208 888 1097 EC --S 00'31" 001 088 OK -------------------------------------------------------------------------- NOTICE OF HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN pursuant to the Ordinances of the City of Meridian and the Laws of the State of Idaho, that the City Council of the City of Meridian will hold a public hearing at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho, at the hour of 7:30 p.m. on August 17, 1999 for the purpose of reviewing and considering the application of Eagle Partners for a conditional use permit for signage for Chevron C - Store with gas pumps and detached car wash, McDonald's with drive up window and Idaho United Credit Union, which is generally located on the northwest corner of Eagle Road and Magic View Drive. A more particular description of the above property is on file in the City Clerk's office at Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, and is available for inspection during regular business hours. A copy of the application is available upon request. Any and all interested persons shall be heard at said public hearing and the public is welcome and invited to submit testimony. DATED this 26' day of July, 1999. r ANG SIMS, DEPUTY CITY CLERK PUBLISH July 28 and August 11, 1999. Ot O NOTICE OF HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN pursuant to the Ordinances of the City of Meridian and the Laws of the State of Idaho, that the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian will hold a public hearing at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho, at the hour of 6:00 p.m. on June 17, 1999 for the purpose of reviewing and considering the application of Eagle Partners for a conditional use permit for signage for Chevron C -Store with gas pumps and detached car wash, McDonald's with drive up window and Idaho United Credit Union, which is generally) ocated on, the • northwest corner -of Eagle Road and Magic View Drive -1 . -z., A more particular description'of the above property is on file`in the City Clerk's office at Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, and is available for inspection during regular business hours. A copy of the application is available upon request. Any and all interested persons shall be heard at said public hearing and the public is welcome and invited to submit testimony. DATED this 24th day of May, 1999. PUBLISH May 26 and June 9, 1999 s �,`=Of y�skftDllittt7J10 � °�' drzr�f ��.• w p %,. "gyp r �� • ,-'` ti .: ** TX CONFIRM,.-. JN REPORT ** DATE TIME TO/FROM 07 05/24 13:11 208 888 1097 1 AS OF MAY 24 9 13:12 PAGE.01 CITY OF MERIDIAN MODE MIN/SEC PGS CMD# STATUS EC --S 00'31" 001 255 OK NOTICE OF HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN pursuant to the Ordinances of the City of Meridian and the Laws of the State of Idaho, that the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian will hold a public hearing at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho, at the hour of 6:00 p.m. on June 17, 1999 for the purpose of reviewing and considering the application of Eagle Partners for a conditional use permit for signage for Chevron C -Store with gas pumps and detached car wash, McDonald's with drive up window and Idaho United Credit Union, which is generally located on the northwest corner of Eagle Road and Magic View Drive. A more particular description of the above property is on file in the City Clerk's office at Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, and is available for inspection during regular business hours. A copy of the application is available upon request. Any and all interested persons shall be heard at said public hearing and the public is welcome and invited to submit testimony. r DATED this 24' day of May, 1999. WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., I CLERK PUBLISH May 26 and June 9, 1999. `,`��`Or e»�u�r��„�r�►' CA 'i N V� 1 HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY Mayor < A Good Place to Live LEGAL DEPARTMENT ROBERT D. CORRIE (208) 884-4264 CITY OF MERIDIAN Council Members PUBLIC WORKS CHARLES ROUNTREE 33 EAST IDAHO BUILDING DEPARTMENT (208) 887-2211 GLENN BENTLEY MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 RON ANDERSON Phone (208) 888-4433 • Fax (208) 887-4813 PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT KEITH BIRD (208) 884-5533 TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR`COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS . WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendations to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: June 10, 1999 TRANSMITTAL DATE: May 24, 1999 HEARING DATE: June 17, 1999 FILE NUMBER: CUP -99-017 REQUEST: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT INCLUDES SIGNAGE FOR CHEVRON C -STORE WITH GAS PUMPS & DETACHED CAR WASH, MCDONALD'S WITH DRIVE - UP WINDOW (SAME BUILDING AS C -STORE) & IDAHO UNITED CREDIT UNION BY: EAGLE PARTNERS LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: NW CORNER EAGLE ROAD & MAGIC VIEW DR _ TAMMY DE WEERD P/Z MALCOLM MACCOY, P/Z _THOMAS BARBEIRO, P/Z" BYRON SMITH, P/Z _KEITH BORUP, P/Z _ROBERT CORRIE, MAYOR RON ANDERSON, C/C _CHARLIE ROUNTREE, C/C _KEITH BIRD, C/C _GLENN BENTLEY, C/C _WATER DEPARTMENT SEWER DEPARTMENT _BUILDING DEPARTMENT _FIRE DEPARTMENT _POLICE DEPARTMENT _CITY ATTORNEY _CITY ENGINEER CITY PLANNER MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION(PRELIM & FINAL) IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT ADA COUNTY (ANNEXATION) YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: 5 • r CITY OF MERIDIAN APPLICATION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1410im", 'V".11 MAY 2 0 1999 CITY OFm i ' NING C u P-011- OI"1 NAME: Eagle Partners LLC c/o Stephen Brown PHONE: 345-7832 Ellis, Brown, Sheils 'ADDRESS: P• 0. Box 388, Boise, ID 83701 GENERAL LOCATION: 603 S. Eagle Road (NW corner Eagle Rd. & Magic View Di Modification o inc u e DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED CONDITIONAL USE: Agvrgn for with gas pumps and detached car wash;. McDonald's with drive -up window (same building as C -Store) and Idaho United Credit Union ZONING CLASSIFICATION: I certify that the information contained he in ' true and correct. SiAVref Applicant 82-0490173 Eagle Partners LLC Tax ID Number LEGAL NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Pursuant to established procedure, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission will hold a Public Hearing in the Meridian City Hall on June 17, 1999 at 0: 00 P.m. The purpose of the Hearing is to consider a CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT submitted by Eagle Partners, LLC for the property generally described as located at NW corner of Eagle Road & Magic View Drive _, __ Amended Magic View SUBDIVISION, BLOCK , LOT 1 TO got E. i :`,�,a,•�r 4 .. i { �. 4t 1`r, C `y, '. 1a 7 y r h r^1.^ � • 4 r i t F t ) TN /'., icy Y �7. ARCHITECTS ' r• t � c J `•• ,{ Jtt,,YY., f= Ctr � r r ti- r h ..� c !L_ ry` �,f '' r a•,, t is �• a 'r' )`a �,r%� i. v it ['r[ 1�' t -'y r ,. Ly ,.{ '` �, «�1 ' r'. BRS Architects, A.I.A. T , as . c� r s'9 r +t, r - -7.. • ]. � 7 'Ir , r .:1}♦. + , 1087 West River Street, Suite 160 .!<'a a -t Y • 'J � �, f> ��`, ili ri+ ,t :r J � t -� � !t + ae,tt t I] ° ' 3 n-. .S e � y r J}.r m r t Boise, Idaho 83702 +, r r , , �. r .. r . ` i * r �. Y • ' { --ra > !r t ,: •` '' } 4`` f ri ✓ a 4r`.. ,t , ° _�] : - ,r c,c ` Telep hone 208 336-8370 a •: �:.�t '.Z afari t -, 'J••StJ> r-t]- S �.., � `-may.'i• :1: 1' '•} a ' .q 1a J ti,-� ' . / �. t � r t ♦ :C -c t._Va t(7l r:l. }r J+^ 4 J ti Fax 208 336-8380 a Z , J'r : •. +` f �+ r r > { A , r, + ' _ , i }" c1 it ,.. .� tt ,J ' � f � , tt r - ti 7 r` . t, + } t t �• r '� t +.. .rI t. {�_ 1 _� � -� r'^ a � 4l - a`., h , r _. 'tt � � ti r°t h-; ,, ,,,i ,� a� r �.. �•. t 1. - v L �tta4r PL a J.� a ��., .t_ �tj err ,.j t` �` '�,.. t`�,Y+it = �✓ .r � 1 .Nf '€� " i3-y [ _ Cit r of` Meridian 3 • x,'r' ' ' + ' _ �,.,� t. , `R, ' t , . ya. �• l-J:,�r := Y - >fr. t} _, t J J.tM�• r_7�„♦y t .y t �' v 1.'' 2 0 0r E Merldlan,`a ID ;w83642t r ft • Ifr ,l r 5�4ni a t,'rl �•:Q ni tryri ' L 5�3 - y.-i r� • yatJ r .r' C aC•r� •^,L +f ti i }.� .. f- t I ,•-•, '�- rr:�5! f .,♦ i } Gt So 1J �� [��-•r•,. r r.`�tz !C r =� ] �,' ' ]a L ;r{i -,i r•t1 t�f .•r� +r+ '�rF,. r is rr Atrz. '• ' ? _ 'r,cIfe. ti 4: re •.0 if.�. C- `' J ' 13. Re . ModJf icatori �.to �CondJtonaliY=Us'e�� Permit -�r =' Eagle Partners' LLC; 603{S Eaglei"Road;, NWS Corner :of Eaglrer ;� h Road and Magic: View Drve;r;MerdJan ID < t -�-; t` BRS +P•ro�ects '9646' and�Jt9a763tr�' �; :, ' ' �� '�. t''rt%x; 5'`; ;�:°` �6, r �_' - i�i 1.n; ♦rt4 t' t1i 3' S t Sr �r;> r2 . { i`t A < '�^•i r'' f= ♦ a. ), � t� r'Y5 tis..)•'•Y ••F '-r r , '».a rC. s ♦• v a !1 y - , 5 : �Z + - , I• , �c iJ. � -o '+1 � 1 vi ! ?}. 1 � .aa "� Dear uMs] rLStJ1eS ' v;�: - �:�, t` ''� •S c ! _ ~'F'� ;' 4..y + 1F t',, � it ;`' +•Sr:''�'S f�•' , , ,.`, J+ J - .:� a� ��. M i , t -.ti 1 }I 1 / 1 }4�I] r t `,�• N 1:r�L 1 �l"' i'}�.�1`= SrY .r •�•Y.�t ~ ..r rry,. •r ..f. r: .:L r 'in � J4✓irl� 1 � �- t7 %� r =.+ '� - r,�}� ^ 31 r tio•; l:r r ,t tr ' .P: •„ Y..,If 1 = �r-• � '! * •CY> e , ' .a t f!{ a p •r f �• - . t� T�' � r - S' * � �' r,.� r I a,YJ'I 3 fig.` , .ri. •� Z K , - )'iY ,•SJ ,, { ,,. �J, r . 'As�requJred by the Condi-tions�of<<Ap proval�,f6i ath6; re�viously ;approved;,Conditional Use permit; andthe ;development agreement' . " �;betweew,`Eagle ;Partners+,arid;the City J:oft Meridian,=.r.we Jareiij}rf ,;,�fsx submJttJng�_on behalfof.�EagTetPartners,and Idaho Power -Company '�'�7►,',;',, ;: r Credit Union, '. "anrapplJcation ;' fo'r ' ,"modJf caton'z� to t.the h •; ,, ` Condit"ional" Use rpermit=;to =request 'approval `ofr, the proposed,; , rr - J S Sr S S ,• 5 tr - i , i+ ri- I t sJgnage fOr._those, two businesses ' Ir< ] r • ' ` 5 . SN 4 s: j i Y i,:.=s ct : 3 > ,� {i i 'jam 1. t ♦ar • r= 1 :L i itt gn "g Id n ` acka+r ' r i na e ; ciesig �p 5 ge y' Js,,�a combination t Sof, sJte,�� ,',s,,,{; The s �identifkation;;;_pyloriA;- and� mo numeriti�'signi`-', and „standard Y;nt�.�J�,< tiMcDonald's/Chevron,;;building^:and ,gas, canopy�sign;package :. ti �, . t. ti! , ♦f, -. rt q�', t•identzfJedEby /Idaho* El'eetric': SigriF,Co,; rTYie sign contractor for + - xr; �,`tli'JsaJapplJcatron and pr%mary;corit'act�for, questions:relatJrig;,to,rty, L{�s�, Slgnage�r'ls Mr'Y,��Bob ,"Clinger''�of; Idaho,cElectric.,Sigri'?Company,,'�,, �,��^ �•�r�: ►.:. to 1 _a;r .; J !:, t 54r,r ♦ l-tib- �. ,. r - -♦ f 1 ll �. ♦, r- r 'i.f, '�! rr.lja�1 %J l: T t �tr.,r t f t�+ Ij � t ��, ,... ,: t , i. t. , r � �' _ a,s a C :• r't r� i •�_+ f �r� tiiti r ri >A!s�ry.• { ="r SLia= .r 7.y 4 �,. �t �. r /t •a �,� ;i�'r { "' 'c � •�. EL+eI{syy1 ,rr1 s e; apprecJatefyoura-attention ,tothJ�s ;request' and iwould' gladly 3: •r�t',forward,;;any7,,que`stons- re'gardJng it`this�'�applcatJon,;ao'the' ';' r ,appllcantl'or� sign+ contractor �+ F'r' r� ' • �t, r : Jr j' Ja, N i ., •� Y;+l� , �;,: GJ,.,+ft•, 1, 1. ..'j_.. J•'r �,.:+_ .-.[ � l�».I_.= �. �. r ...i•._ , c .-..='i. t ATTACHMENTS TO CONDITIONAL USE APPLICATION 1. Applicant': Eagle Partners, LLC c/o Stephen Brown Ellis, Brown & Sheils P. O. Box 388 Boise, ,. ID 83701 (208) 345-7832 2. Owners: Eagle Partners, LLC` c/o Stephen Brown Ellis, Brown & Sheil_s P. O. Box 388 Boise, ID 83701 (208) 345-7832 (Warranty Deed attached) Idaho United Credit Union P. O. Box 2268` Boise, ID 83701 Attn: Gary Skeen (Warranty Deed attached) 3-. Legal Description of Property (attached). 4. Proof of Ownership, i.e. Warranty Deed (attached). 5. Existing use: vacant. 6. Present Use: Not being used. 7. Proposed Use: Commercial. 8. District Zoning: CG. 9. 30 copies vicinity Map (attached). 10. Site plan, scale 1" = 30' and 8-1/2 x 11 reduction. 11. List of mailing addresses (attached). 12. See cover letter. 13. Application fee and mailing fee; check (attached). 14. Statement re: Additional fees associated with use (attached). 15. Affidavit re: accuracy of application, signed by applicant (attached). 16. Affidavit for posting, signed by appli"cant (attached). ! EXHIBIT A • DESCRIPTION OF CHEVRON PARCEL A parcel of land in the SEI/4 NEI/4 of Section 17, T.3 N., R. I E., B.M., City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, being a portion of Lot 1 of the Amended Magic View Subdivision, the official plat of which is recorded in Book 52 of Plats at page 4445 and being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the east 1/4 corner of said Section 17, marked by a brass cap monument in Eagle Road (State Highway No. 55) and located S.00'22'1 8"E., 2652.85, feet from'the brass cap monument in the intersection of said Eagle Road and West Franklin Road which marks the northeast comer of said Section 17; thence, N.00°22'18"W.,749.74 feet along the east line of said Section 17 to the point of intersection of same with the centerline of Magic View Drive; thence, S.89°3827"W., 96.45 feet along said centerline to the point of intersection of same With the westerly right of way line of said Eagle Road, as described in Deed Instrument no. 8843782.- thence, 843782;thence, Northerly, along said westerly right of way line along a curve to the right having a radius of 5799.58 feet, an arc length of 48.28 feet, a central angle of 00°28'37'.', a chord bearing of N.01°34'18"E., and a chord distance of 48.27 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence, S.45043"3 I "W.., 27.74 feet along the proposed new northerly right of way line of Magic View Drive to an angle point in same; .thence, ;m. S.89°3827"W., 279.35 feet along said new northerly right of way line (29.00 feet from -center) to a point in the west line of said Lot -1 of the Amended Magic View Subdivision; thence. N.00006'25"W., 442.31 feet along said west lot line to a point in the south right of way line of a proposed new street; thence, S.8905705"E., 45.00 feet along said south right of way line to a point; thence, S.00006'25" E., 158.00 feet along a line parallel with and 45.00 feet east of the west line of said Lot 1 of the Amended Magic View Subdivision; thence, S.89057'05"E., 268.09 feet along a line parallel with and 266.00 feet south of the north line of said Lot 1, to a point in said westerly right of way line of Eagle Road; thence, Southerly, along said westerly right of way line, along a curve to the right having a radius of 5659.58 feet, an arc length of 73.01 feet, a central angle of 00'44'21", a chord bearing of S.03"19' 13 "W., and a chord distance of 73.01 feet to a point of reverse curvature; thence, Southerly, along said right of way line, along a curve to the left having a radius of 5799.58 feet, an arc length of 190.27 feet, a central angle of 01°52'47", a chord bearing of S. 02'45'00"W-., and a chord distance of 190.26 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING, I said CHEVRON PARCEL containing 93,335 square feet or 2.143 acres, more or less. • EXHIBIT B DESCRIPTION OF CREDIT UNION PARCEL A parcel of land in the SE'/< NE1/4 of Section 17, T.3 N., R.1 E., B.M.,- City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, being a portion of Lot 1 of the Amended Magic View Subdivision, the official plat of which is recorded in Book 52 of Plats at page 4445 and being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the east 1/4 corner of said Section 17, marked by a brass cap monument in Eagle Road (State Highway No. 55) and located S.00°22'18" E., 2652.85 feet from the brass cap monument in the intersection of said Eagle Road and West Franklin Road which marks the northeast comer of said Section 17; thence, N.00°22'18' W.,749.74 feet along the east line of said Section 17 to the point of intersection of same with the centerline of Magic View Drive; thence, S.89°3827"W., 96.45 feet along said centerline to the point of intersection of same with the westerly right of way line of said Eagle Road, as described in Deed Instrument no. 8843782; thence, Northerly, along said westerly right of way line along a curve to the right having a radius of 5799.58 feet, an arc length of 238.54 feet, a central angle of 02°21'24", a chord bearing of N.02°30'41"E., and.a chord distance of 238.52 feet to a point of reverse curvature; thence, Northerly, along said westerly right of way line, along a curve to the left having a radius of 5659.58 feet, an arc length of 73.01 feet, a central angle of 00'44!21", a chord bearing of N.03°19'13"E., and a chord distance of 73.01 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence, N.89057'05"W., 268.09 feet to a point 45.00 feet east of the west line of said Lot 1 of the Amended Magic View Subdivision; thence, N.0000625"W., 158.00 feet along a line parallel, with and 45.00 feet east of said west line to a point 108.00 feet south of the north line of said Lot 1; thence, S.8905705"E., 243.55 feet along a line parallel'with and 108.00 feet south of the north line of said Lot 1, said line, being the proposed southerly right of way line of anew (as yet. unnamed)' street, to an angle point in said proposed southerly right of way line; thence, S.44008'40"E., 43.02 feet along said proposed right of way line to a point in said westerly right of way line of Eagle Road; thence, Southerly, along said westerly right of way. line, along a curve to the right having a radius of 5659.58 feet, an arc length of 127.26 feet, a central angle of 01°1718", a chord bearing of S.02°1823"W., and.a chord distance of 127.25 feet to the POES T OF BEGESNI LNG, said CREDIT UNION PARCEL containing 42,434 square feet or 0.974 acres, more or less. A �p-�w05�ito52. -�� . ° .7 i 0 6 3 ... J . ' ..� -... .'J When recorded, return to: Q i Eagle Partners, L.L.P., ALLIANCE TITLE c/o Stephen Brown: ;?� Ellis, Brown & Shiels 97 I IFI' =.� �� —. 36 P.O. Boz 388 Boise, Idaho 83701 ` WALRRA-SlY DEED This Warranty,Deed is made this day of April, 1997, between Gerald W. Marlin and Deloris B. Marlin, husband and`wife, herein referred to as "Grantors," and Eagle Partners, L.L.C., an Idaho limited liability company, herein referred to as "Grantee," witnesseth: That Grantors; for and in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars ($10:00), and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, has granted, bargained, and sold, and does, by these presents, grant bargain, sell, convey, and confirm unto Grantee and its successors and assigns forever, all of the following described real estate situated in the County of Ada, State of Idaho: A portion of the Lot 1 Amended Magic View Subdivision according io the official plat thereof filed in Book 52 of Plats at Pages 4445 and 4446, records of Ada County, Idaho., more particularly described' on Schedule I attached and incorporated herein by this reference. Together with all and singular the tenements, hereditaments, and appurtenances thereunto belonging or -in anywise appertaining; the reversion and reversions, remainder and remainders, rents, issues, and profits thereof-, and all estate, right, title, and interest in and to the property, as well in law as in equity subject to easements and encumberances appearing of record or on the ground. To have and to hold, all and singular the above-described premises together with the appurtenances unto Grantee and its successors and assigns forever. And Grantors and their heirs and assigns shall and will, subject to the terms of this instrument, warrant and by these presents forever defend the premises in the quiet and peaceable possession of Grantee, its successors and assigns against Grantors and their heirs and assigns and against all and every person or persons whomsoever, lawfully claiming the same. WARRANTY DEED - Page 1 MM&C # 5871.02 April 29, 1997 EXECUTED the day and year first above written. Gerald W Marlin Deloris B. Marlin STATE OF "l ) ss. County of ) On this day of , 1997, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said state, personally appeared Gerald W. Marlin and Deloris B. Marlin, known or identified to me to be the persons whose names are subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me, that they executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year in this certificate first above written. s ARY rP LI for ►' I"tCt� Residing at H C Lr My commission expires: OFF)C1AL SEAL KAREN KRAUTER Noory PurAle - scam of ArMs MARICOPA COUNTY my Comm. EvW85 May is, 20M 0 f yT-�yo7ozio � RECORD . ESt al: ADA COUNTY RECORD ER - j.DAY0N FE lWRRANTY DEED 1999 ,!A -7 PM 4= fl0 p 9 9 0, (� 1 9ALLIAta�E TITLE GRANTOR, Eagle Partners, L.L.C., an Idaho limited liability company, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, does hereby grant, bargain, sell, and convey unto The Idaho United Credit Union, a state chartered corporation, whose current address is P.O. Box 2268, Boise, Idaho 83701, as GRANTEE, and to grantee's' successors and assigns forever, all of the real located in Ada County, state of Idaho, described on Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein. TOGETHER with all improvements, water, water, rights, ditches, ditch rights, easements; hereditaments and appurtenances thereto. SUBJECTto such rights, easements, covenants and restrictions which appear of record or by use upon the premises. Grantor, for itself and its assigns, does hereby" covenant, warrant, and shall defend the quiet and peaceable possession of said premises by the grantee, its successors and assigns, forever, against the lawful claims of all persons. In construing this Deed, and where the context so requires, the singular includes the plural and the masculine, the feminine, and the neuter. IN WITNESS WBEREOF, Grantor has hereunto subscribed its name to this instrument this day of January, 1999. EAGLE P C. By DA-yb u • 5--otj-XC6t' , Authorized Manager WARRANTY DEED -1 STATE OF IDAHO ) ss. County of Ada ) On this `1`r'day of January, 1999; before me, the undersigned, a notary public in and for the state of Idah , personally appeared 9 J► D C.- Jobs o.J , known or identified to me to be an authorized manager of the limited liability company whose name is subscribed to'the within and foregoing instrument, and who acknowledged to me that he executed the same, for and on behalf of said limited liability company. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year in`this certificate first above written. c � s +c a.. r•i `�a R ®:. Notary P ]' f�?daho Residing at Commission Expires Z f�/ dp Fy 0 WARRANTY DEED - 2 MAY-20-1999 16 34 BRS ARCHITECTS 208 336 8360 P.02iO3 COSHO, HUMPHREY, GREENER & WELSH, COUNSELORS AND ATTORNEYS ATLAW oacIcEaoaan�srnnroR CARNE�IE HUILGING I=71NETHOMSEN 815 WEST WASHINGTON STREET BOISE, IDAHO 63702 AWPAC N LAW FMM FREMC V. SHOEMAKERASWCWTia+ TELEPHONE (lob) 3sa781 1 FACSIMILE (Z08) 338.3290 e-mail: fshoemaker@chgw.com May 20, 1999 Transmitted by fax mail 336-8380 with original to follow by regular mail BPS ,Architects Attn: Roger poster 1,087 West River Street Boise, Idaho 83702 Re: Idaho United Credit Union CHEW Pile No. 12233-01.4 Dear Roger: At Billy Ray Suite's Tequest, enclosed is the authorization and power of attorney I understand you need to submit the signed application through Eagle Partners on behalf of the Idaho United Credit Unison: FV'S/sxb Enclosure MAY 20 '99 16:36 208 336 8380 PAGE.02 PRGE-03- MRY-20-1999 16:34 BPS ARCHITECTS 208 336 8380 P.03iO3 POWER OF ATTORNEY 1, the undersigned, Fiedric V. Shoemaker, being an attorney licensed to practice law in the State of Idaho, and having full power and authority to act on behalf of the Board of Directors of Idaho United Credit Union, do hereby appoint and authorize Eagle Partners, L.L.C. to submit on behalf of the Idaho United Credit Union, a sign application and all drawings and documents pertinent thereto for the development near the intersection of Eagle Road and I-84. DATED. this 4 O day of May, 1999. SURSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this a? D day of May, 1999. "'J%A5906"44,0, oyt.ND., •.., �1 �.0, AR ,. ",.r. rn G �. pueti` a ,f Tv POWER OF ATTORNEY. FVS/srb/os/20/99(1PFCWPo6.TrAct)(12233-14) Notary Public for Idaho Residing at: rn My commission expires: - a - a o 0 o TOTAL P.03 MAY 20 '99 16:36 208 336 9380 PAGE.03 8 9 J� .. � •! % Q l R i R3 5 4- 7 5 3 <. �:, .: /� / • .... . ,moi .. � 14 �3 �12 10. 9 O� 2 15 11 8 4 3 Z 1 0 1 DRIVE 5 6 nro 16 I, O 8 7. 6 5 4 3 2�-� v FAT E Q ° I' O AUTUMN 17 It3 n� I 3 _ 16• Q% �a i0 C. . u 15 i--_ 7 Z I 20 I 12 13 14 17 P. -1/' 5 14 - , AUTUMN WA•� �G �a '3zL2, q �Z !I !0 9 8 7 6 i 4 So. 3 3 1 5 300 ft. - 4 RTA/ 2-3 _ '' '+' B!5 VICINITY MAP? 1 \ / �,scale: 1" : 300 ft.17 , f k �s j i► � ARCHITECTS { BRS Architects, A.I.A. 1087 West River Street, Suite 160 Boise, Idaho 83702 Telephone 208 336.8370 Fax 208 336-8380 a December 10. 1997 City of Meridian 33 E. Idaho Meridian, ID 83642 Re: Conditional Use Application. Lot 1, Magic View Subdivision BRS Project No. 9646 We, the applicant/ owner of said property agree to pay any additional sewer, water or trash fees or charges, if any, associated with the use. App1 �'�nt Sig a ure: Step d Brown for Eagle Partnersj,, L.L.C. l.J S, 4 'low ,Z! n V14, ARC HI -T 4� )z BRS Architects, A.I.A. V"'. 1087 West River Street, Suite 160 < Boise, Idaho 83702 Telephone 208 336-8370 Fax 208 336-8380 •—,k.t 10', jqqq v City Meridian Q 0 ." .� -,,Carl, t6filt-Ave Suitd-� 201 T V. Meridian': 3 6 4 -As Planning ? N . ..... Re Conditional ica ;Subdivision 1! x"Pos notification. i Wer the-, app 11 qaht,,-j%Z.;qd rt I f 1.1 t described �::-,-pr ogi�tf --�ones w r e' ,scheduled % ,-for 0 0 S 4' June -1 T -v i a' &d. the contents idaitldw;An&te a thb-. contents are Ftnd---,'corr=%, %.,.• ♦ ;4 0.- n .,,�Sl U e - )t;, i�i Y ..ir %7 fk,•%F"3' V C -S t "'A Ea 1e;.Partnoerq-,.-Vi�L_. / f IDAHO electric SIGNS INc. 6528 SUPPLY WAY, BOISE ID. 83716 (208) 338-9401- FAX (208) 338-9409 May 5, 1999 City of Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission RE: Requested C U. Modification fro Sim eagle Partners Gentleman: Attached please find our request to modify our existing conditional use permit in order to allow for signage at our project located on Eagle Rd. Just north of I-84. As you are aware, this will be a multi -tenant use featuring Chevron, McDonald's, and the Idaho Power Credit Union. While the credit union is on a separate wholly owned lot, we do understand that they may fall under the jurisdictions of this development agreement. Therefore, we are attaching the proposed monument display for Idaho Power Credit Union along with their site plan. We do ask that you approve the signage as presented for Chevron, McDonald's, and the Idaho Power Credit Union at this time so that we may proceed with construction of this project which has been in development for approximately four years. E While we are very much aware that this is a sensitive project, you should also be aware that the issue of signage has been very confusing for us as well. It is our understanding now that signage proposed was a requirement of the original conditional use application, yet, the application was accepted and approved without signage being specified. We have attempted to discuss signage for this project for close to two years (including one public hearing on the original application) but were advised that the project needed to be approved prior to signage being considered. A signage application was submitted and accepted over one month ago. There was a non-public hearing that we were never notified of and, apparently, a motion was carried to submit for a modification to our c.u. permit. No formal notification was ever given in regard to these findings. As a result, we find ourselves very much behind schedule in regard to these issues and would very much appreciate anything that could be done to expedite this matter. As there seems to be no concern in regard to wall signage proposed, we would simply like to address free standing signage requested. We are asking for a 100' overall height sign to address I-84 traffic in addition to a smaller pylon type sign on eagle Road at an overall height of 34'. It is important to note that both of these signs feature both Chevron and McDonald's in our attempt to minimize the number of sign structures. The signs are 470 and 344 square feet respectively. The larger sign is a very modest request and is certainly in line with other signs that have been approved along this corridor such as McDonald's 0 on Meridian, Central Valley Corporate Park, Meridian Ford, Best Western, and Texaco. Please keep in mind that these are both freeway oriented businesses and drive their clientele from same. Sign height and location was determined by a thorough survey involving a 100' boom truck. There are numerous obstructions to the sign's visibility especially proceeding west on I-84. These would include: a large stand of trees, the hospital, and the over pass. The height is crucial for the sign to be seen. At the same time it is approximately 40% less square footage in structure than the adjacent Texaco sign and does not feature a flashing message center. We understand that the Texaco sign is none too popular, however, we have done our best to minimize the impact of the sign(s) and would hope that we will not be penalized for theirs: It is important to note that, effectively, this sign will only be seen (noticed) from I-84. Our smaller sign on Eagle Road. Is virtually identical in size and height to the sign that can be found at the Locust Grove Chevron on Fairview as well as the Meridian Chevron on 1 st. With the exception of the addition of McDonald's signage. For the record, we have never proposed low profile monument signage for this project. While star has expressed concern with the overall height of the signs, they have also expressed concern in regard to illumination falling on adjacent residences. In actuality, the height of the 100' sign prevent this. Sute you can see it, but you can also see the stars in the sky. Yet, they shine no light through our windows. The sign on Eagle Road illuminates north and south and is quite distant form existing residences. Once again, no light will be shed on these residences. Neighbors will be further shielded for this sign by buildings, canopies, and landscaping. In conclusion, we are merely asking for the minimal amount of signage that we feel is necessary to ensure the success of these businesses. We ask for no more signage than that previously granted our competitors and neighboring businesses. As of this date, there appears to be nothing within city sign ordinances that would prohibit the signage requested. We would like to thank,you very much for your time and consideration of this matter. A Q cn (D > M "i M M --- 4 D C/) n C= M M 0 z 70 M '0 CA) > T> n I I CA) 0 0 M r") 0 00 > C/) cn > oc) -5 a: 0 > C::)) =i z c N�) > (7) M > M "I M > M M� 0 M > 0 W M M -n M ;v 0 M > z M .0 TO z cn M C: M 0 cn n M cn M Z M;0 z M I M << 3P z M X N X z (-- 0 K MO x 0 0, E: -- CA) n M Co q I 01 M cn OD A 0 z 0 --f On n nM q--q r- 0 cn ov M 50 0 0 0 0 C=' z K z ;0, -n z M F.M 0> cn ;u > C ► M .. I - I (D> > z M DO ;:5 u - M:3n 0 ;v > n -n (-) ;x� 0 UD ;u M d z < r Z �5 IM/) M (D M '-0 ► C) M 0 n M 0 ;0 E� > z M ;u 0 M M 4 — ?< M r- 0 z 0 z 00 > 7� f: M M �I < cn M zOD I M M 0 n 0 0 :5 cz 0 (n M M cz ui UO 0 M (n > z 0 0 n 7n Fn ;5 0 6 3 u 30 >0 0 n 0 0 z > Ou Wool 00 > zz ILI Mc, M c C_ - Z > "o MZ OZ MO (4 z -0 M rr. 0; 81 z 3, z z c 0 z shy , C= 99* (Ma tc! OM z C ZT 0 w > (-J) m02 2 0 M.0 0 2: oco ,MMM 0 Mz C: z --4 , - 5T20 -zI 101 M >MM M 00 M -0 -n0 M a�nmZ M M M> NO -Z2 �In meM Mzz M mo Do, (n om�;5 2c> z M Wgiz plow -4 -n M M > 0 > o, n MCM 0 jMc 0- G) M x M M ago z W c ozM 10 %%10 u. 6'-0" O.A.H. rju 21-811 A .............. ..................... CCD 0 ....... . .... A M03og >lz 0 COOD Om i43 CCD 0 Mz z A 7 µF1r r •;d .� - At, t 2�yw--x. rf b{ h ix i't r t 3n r tc it �t .5 !t_ r �t �. {�s < t x;f2�` x Sfi ;t -}' I 2 = r.k, S _ 1 2 I tj }R-; t s 1-5, r:x:it� '� ' F . F z _ x,128-4 1i r7' zt �z t _ r�•. r 1KEYBA�ATtONALASSOCIATION� y; 4 hr S t 7 it Y t 't1 ,71 i t j a+ ' B ISE IDAHOi 83701 BRS ARCHITECTS 3� , 1 s2 ass i2a1 K a t ,,x T4 i ; -I -I t 4t 2 _, } ;T ,� a ' 11''F 1999�tir I1087 W RIVERST STE. 160 PH. 208 336-8370 ' t 1 2 CHECK DATE M y } r L' 2 } -"BOISE, 83702 T, . ' z f'L 1 t, .a t , t ly � • ;I ` • pqy: ****THREE HUNDRED. SIXTY. ONE- DOLLARS. &„'59%100****_, **361 50*** ' - AMOUNT TO Ci ty, of Meridian- L'4_4� C� L 11'01284411' ':124101SSS1:01 107S 2S 811' BRS ARCHITECTS Chevron - Eagle Road Z C) > 2 ui 2L � Wo 72`a a) ° -_a m LL ►— W M00 O o M c°D A a) N U 1284 Conditional Use Modification -Signs Project No. 9646. �� N t Cr (D n O rt C CL Cr K m For Accountable Mail r mCn 4�- W -+ O 0 CO v O) (n W �+ .&Z '�.. •C7 3 CL Z CD CD J (D w N N N N N N w N N N w w w W W �.� W 0y � .A •P .A 0� O� � . Oo 00 a O . • — .-.. •r w,• - m <' Z W 00 w: _ _, (h N O1 w N -+ W .1 th �O — Lft 00 A tt-,,O N (A 00 - W °P m C wa �o > , > > y COI'd Y �. 01 - a Y Z. mm N- Oo -j __� _ _ -_ _ CD _ n a s� i a 9 g a R s^"c N 0 CD r -c y -c SD r. o t d Q a a d a d d d •- d d a a a a 0 N Z' Z• y hW-•1 +w�•I !W•• -I YW•-1 �. 0`O d 00 ��..yy -- O0 OO OO 0OW 200 ON W all 00 00 W W 00 04N 01, ON ON 01 a N N (ON W N W W 00 w N N N N N 43 O� Q� N A N � A N N .4 N � N � O� O� O� N 0i N �' ��a N N w N. N + N O1 + + ON + CN + ,N N N N + w w w N w N � 0 m (:)Z • m J• (h N w N N w N N w. N w Q\ w 00 � N �O w �O OU O +° m o .p 1� --4 \O O\ Na Q m CDO CD rT SL m .00 03 � + N NS1�C N 7 (p W Nm to 00 n 0-0 7 N CD a ■� lY7`rn - -n C �(D N0.g—t»`(DID - ID (ice oQcCj 0:13 n 0 ID ID cc3 a3°dv; sr C7 m� 0 w 7 CD0-0 S N Q 'O CN OCD 7 �� Z• => �°� N K O O �7 CNS �m�wQcw _ CD 7 w ow �- 77 CD °+ c In ID j �O+ ui C (D m `m (D 0'D�N OO N C 7 N N 0 - ON SEA p1 N n n CD T - o fDa c 0 cD CD C- rn m z -. a m S w w wD�i"n3iom- n-fix- a yo�3G oo3On O amg C N v3ac^ C p Q =°m y X oma+^ -�o- 7�m� w O N n 0, 603�ca Ow � 7ma O� v wm3 �CI- x noo .� -4 z 3m o-4m�a c wv n n� Q w w.m o wm� T 0.0'3�7 - 50 W, N NN 3 N N ?,-N -17 (n QO d CD 7 �. N x. CD O - N �gcn30_a n. c 3.o Q' -nCn A. .c CD CD 0 '-CDZ . 7 dOa�7 p IJ N apc .ntpwN OC 910N —07� w 7N - 7C - �7JXCN CD (Tp CL �n13 (OO For Accountable Mail 0 3 " w a- �.. g3j CD CO v M M W N Z CD ami 14 oDo CL -� CD CD i A, � O� ►d Clj d d N N N sJ N C W W W W W C '"0 C) _ _ _. 15 W CD 3 O O m O O CtJ [s7... �jm Cil y 9 ; X o� i y G�R°G�CO R° ...rn 01D vri o°,o �� °2 � ° ° ID 3 v_ tT �r mor �z o 3 Z cx O __ z z m d o d d d d y Z P� 0 d 00 C700 00 00 C7: m w ., m CD IQ 41... `L- oot�qq W 00 w N N N N t71 o (�\ (D G� qi? w 00 00 00 00 a a m CL �;� Qo -C m DO ❑a3, f m s� Ka p -n CD °'.m Q,m Cl y Om D- CD =r= yO°—'m Om= v�o�pO� 3j �'a �'*(g.CD G �m.m a m �/ mco o (D W �. O �rno'm�mwov°�ao / O~`° w'm m o y'x CYii • �^ .moi y d J N C O C jw mm.O.0 m CD C j iS a O m N O O y o n�i C7 vj w m m m O � n c -ON c HN 3.3�' m -m mN CD T. O .yd OT w �� s, as �C mC1 7 N m-. w m wow= No.3o03 0c)m D ami c c —m3vc • c -CD Ow Oaa. m --X OCJn oom0-- p: 7 w m m mm3 3 c a I j m a m - cap x o O� C1 O CD O.3 m -nM m' wvn 3 0 w m Rim mQL - 07�' m w --iv o CD ^cc N 50 (A grn�mm'w j N3� CD Q O L2 CD O 0. m o -~ w >J y 3wo�33 momm CD oa°CD wy.�3� 3°v70 d.amam3 m awe% CD Ma -(D C � m . 3 =0 30CD D wCD S,y �':CD MW O w 9 3 x c T m m ac �w3 CO CL=0 N-7 U) 0 3 G1 V V TI (D 6 C w C7 A For Accountable Mail ° w cn � w o co Co.�I rn (n W N -� m a 3 pa E o V \ `.S .� �S `� 1 �i �,► Z c D 3n r(D/1 � �Oi �e•N(Q! (Wlz oW CV ra C/ �" w 00 rdWos �m a3 y x con � O rn � �0vk r� o � z o3 y 03 Om Z VJ n G� O Y C/� r LC1nx� nCr1n�-7-7 O m mn ty Ci aC� azdo d dzr, z d oo y rd� r a �' d n o w zoo00 � N d DO � p � C/1 O T m con M d oo W w J v 1 00 w � 0 .z D yOytT7a Cr1 CON Q. R �a p0 ~3 d Nw y �] Cii w 00 w Y N co onN w tn�D N ?O$`°m Q 1 �Q N00 V7r o. O00 ❑w 1 I�r.yl ON00 O l Q y ' C N j CII _� ,. .A0 O (D �-yN V qy N (D w. J N =O- ate. N m_ SJ'00 wao�c�, z ❑m rwn0mmorDE v�o-p0'D v 3 w o ad.u_a�D(D m W, o w o Sm v `JG fnN 0 N'C�D o .D -DN_ CL o <D N y o 7 ►e ff =7 � (D cn N "O D� N Al Q(�NR a C 72 N� (»fD L/�'O O C J Q_ 0.00 O O a 0 0 I( N O yo3. �w�€' omm a �� y� c CD MDQ O �0 w�' '0 E. 20 O� 3 0. 0 0� -w3vc� 0 337�`Dmi �CD O(D to °max -Z3 mma0Jw ° $O w o m Oa :0, 57 ;Z oa c c N(iiJ�J� 0 ogm m o v OOH 3 Zl� O W� 0 " 3 o w m m m O. N Lb.N m °'a �Ww Sao m9 O (n00 V0i w 0 NV'3y N a wo NoID C OQ = mow 71 CD o j� J NxN my � w �ocn3Qm 3 -ow 3 3. o. p cD _ c ww X33 7 o O C w CD CD .OJi D1 N� j ID w 0 m v 0 0 .' � N N c » 3 CD 3 w(D�D3o�3 O �O J ?J.0 mw O. w 0 W T N J x c m ac"'II.N0w3 CD »g?. ro CL CD-- J _ � a For Accountable Mail �� s �_ C O Z U7 � W 1 O Cfl OD -I O CT W N -+ CD W a 3 a N C, 3 Gt .<� (D CLCD pT✓, V, �fp0 O O V m (D � 7W A ®.� 77 0 w �7 ° w (D C CL 3 _ r rCy •p�' 91 (D n O T � u wry l J M' OC) CD [/1�]7 ju A m N N M z� � @ to `<> r _3 ti aCD > v C1 O 0 ZCrIll '- H m D w 3 0_ a m KD❑❑Q Cb o . amF5 v 3 CD n (DFD m 0 m C O CD CD 0' O m ❑❑ ❑3 T 1 � X.0..0 W 0. E;3 O 3 (D • �. (D N 00 0 w N Nv N - a D N CD 0110 n w El El ]] o CD n. a3Nw� 0 �m n m D m -- (o = = 9 >r m w fnN m�.m o `<(D ��0 �� T (ons Q� rte: GCS _DCD 'O N (D< W a El D.20 ci w w wD n=- tb w NC c N N (U � _ _� O.0 O...CCD N O O N (D C > Q. w N O 0 30= �5 0�No3.�CD D<� m 77 o 0 N ^� Q (D N N 0 T � m �(u w & , O- _ o (D Q m N x'00.0 O.(D> 0(0jg -m 3� 3 m 3 c CCD nm y aMx o� om n vp_ d w .0 (0 �03� n w � o3 C.) oy�o2mo^ �3m 3 T 37 A 0 Q t'DD L. N z 0 Q 3 0 �N fD.y SD 7 0 N N C �i _ CD N N w � D O �. ' 0 O�NxwN ,. LO CD w 0 I' C 0- N n _ b` -n U) ID' �3o3c° a m D , ww X33 ?ooCDjw m'`ID 3��$(D wocon-ow 70 - O N03 w!a3 CD (nm D d m c e .N» 3v m=o3 N 0 - m O N 7 w>? K c mLM N nm c w 3 fOca wmz EYBANK NAAL ASSOCIATION �- 12844 BOIS O 83701 BRS ARCHITEC# s -1241 1087 W. RIVER ST., STE. 160 PH. 208-336-8370 CHECK DATE May 11, 1999 BOISE, ID 83702: PAY ****THREE HUNDRED SIXTY ONE DOLLARS & 59/100**** I AMOUNT **361.50*** TO City of Meridian = a -----` -- - ��-►�� ice/ C��""� 11'012844101SSSI:01 107525 811' 1 BRS ARCHITECTS 12844 Chevron -Eagle Road Conditional Use Modification -Signs Project No. 9646 z >` N FC / M ;v O co ca co LL e co cr 00 0 .5 �L _ s � U 9 DELUXE BUSINESS FORMS 1+800-328-0304 N u) .9 - i,.. � m Z 0 0 O F - C: o w I U a VT v Q Z I � n V) , u 0 U 1 u C I s U 0 H J o o L) yL I o a' m v V1 uD T N z N v C/ Q) N Q) Y m ^ y CD O 9 DELUXE BUSINESS FORMS 1+800-328-0304 BEFORE -THE MERIDIAN CITY.COUNCIL IN THE MATTER OF THE ) Case No. CUP -99-017 APPLICATION OF EAGLE )iP `PARTNERS, FOR A ) FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ) CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND' FOR SIGNAGE FOR CHEVRON ) DECISION AND ORDER C -STORE WITH GAS PUMPS & ) GRANTING IN PART AND DETACHED CAR WASH, ` ) DENYING IN PART MCDONALD'S WITH DRIVE -UP ) APPLICATION FOR - WINDOW (SAME BUILDING AS ) MODIFICATION OF C -STORE) & IDAHO UNITED ) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT _ CREDIT UNION The above entitled conditional use permit modification application for the request of a 100 foot Pylon sign, and a 34 foot sign, and a 6 foot monument sign, having come before the City Council on the 17th, day of August; 1999, for public hearing I pursuant to City Council action requesting public hearing, and Brad Hawkins -Clark, s Assistant Planner for the Planning and Zoning Department, having presented'the record, the comments and report of thf e staff, and the Recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission, and JoAnn Butler, attorney for the Applicant, appeared and testified, and also appearing and testi .9on behalf of the Applicant were: Craig Jameson of Idaho Electric Signs, George Kyler of McDonald's restaurants of Lake Oswego, Oregon, and Steve R � M FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -- PAGE 1 OF 16 AND DECISION AND ORDERGRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART APPLICATION FOR MODIFICATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT / EAGLE PARTNERS. FOR'SIGNAGE - E ,r M , Eddy the Chevron proprietor of the, Eagle Road location, and appearing in opposition of .h application were: Richard �illia'ms, Chuck Horrel, Kent Brown Ann Bowent e app o, and Debbie Brown, and the City Council having received the staff report, being fully advised t in the premises, the Council finds and concludes as follows: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. A notice of a public hearing on the conditional use permit was } published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to the said public hearing scheduled for o August 17 1999, before the City Council, the first publication appearing and written notice having been mailed to.p+roperty owners or purchaser's of record within three I hundred (300'). feet of the external boundaries. of the property under consideration 1 more than fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing and with the notice of public hearings J having been posted upon the property under consideration more than one week before I r said hearing and the copies of all notices were made available to newspaper,, radio and television stations as,public service announcements; and the matter having been`duly a. considered by the City Council at the said August 17, 1999, public hearing; and the Applicant, affected property owners, and government subdivisions providing services within the planning jurisdiction of the City of Meridian, having been given full opportunity ortunit to express comments and submit evidence. . } FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -- PAGE 2 OF 16 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING IN -PART AND DENYING IN PART APPLICATION FOR MODIFICATION OF fiCONDITIONAL USE PERMIT / EAGLE PARTNERS FOR SIGNAGE i F 1 2. There has been -compliance with all -notice and hearing " forth in Idaho Code' 7-650 and 67-6512 • and 11-2-416E and requirementsset §§6 9 §§ '11-2-418E as evidenced by the'Affidavit of Mailing, and the Affidavit of Publication y and Proof of Postingg fled withLe staff report. I 3. `Council takes judicial notice of its Zoning, Subdivision and Development -Ordinances codified at Title 1`1 Municipal Code of the City of Meridian 9 i and all current zoning maps thereof and the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian adopted December 21, 1993 Ordinance #629 - January 4, 1994 and Maps, andlhe Ordinance establishing the Impact Area Boundary Ordinance and Map. 3. A list of mailing addresses of all property owners who own property } located within the`three hundred (300'i feet of -the external boundaries of the land being considered and all property owners included within the property being considered as evidenced from the official .tax records of Ada County was supplied by the Applicant. 4.. The Applicant is Eagle Partners, L.L.C. c/o Stephen Brown, P.O. Box 388, Boise, Idaho 83701, whose telephone number is' (208) 345-7832. f , 5. The legal descriptions of the property are attached as Exhibit "A" r and Exhibit "B" and incorporated herein as if set forth in full hereat. I n i FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -- PAGE 3 OF 16 AND"DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART APPLICATION FOR MODIFICATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT / EAGLE PARTNERS FOR SIGNAGE s 6. The present,land use -of the subject property is vacant unused land. � aQ 7. The present zoning district of the subject property is (GG) General Retail and Service Commercial. 8. The Applicant paid the fee established by the City Council for the application herein submitted. 9. The proposed development and use is allowed in the requested j zone as a conditional use with no additional permit requirements. 10. A develop m� ent agreement was entered into as a condition of the { annexation and zoning designation. 11. The sub'ectl realro eft is subject to that certain "Findings of Fact P p Y su) g and Conclusions of. Law and O' filer of Decision In the Matter of the Application of t Eagle Partners, LLC, 603 Soutl Eagle Road, the Application For Conditional Use Permit, Northwest Corner of Eagle Road and Magic View Drive, Meridian Idaho", consisting of 29 pages hereinader referred to as "Original Findings" and this application seeks an amendment to- section, 4.24 thereof, which is a condition of development of { the Order of Decision which provides: "No signage details were submitted. Detailed 7 signage plans must be included as part of this application for review and approval", and an need for amendment to section 4.45 of the conditions of development bf the Order y P s of Decision which provides: t ? t r FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -- PAGE 4 OF 16 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART APPLICATION FOR MODIFICATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT / EAGLE PARTNERS FOR SIGNAGE _ x "All signs must meet therequirementsof the .Uniform Sign Code and the r ,Meridian City Ordinance', in addition, flashing signs and temporary signs will not be permitted All signs are subject to review. In addition to the Meridian Sign Ordinance, all signage of any type.must be approved by the Meridian City Council. - Sign permits` are to be obtained prior to construction. Upon three days notice to any tenant, the City of Meridian will remove any unauthorized signage:" Specifically, applicant requests amendment of these two conditions to include as a specific condition of development the 'approval of a monument sign for Idaho United Credit Union, as depicted in Sketch #7377 dated 4/7/99 by Idaho Electric Signs, and a Chevron and McDonald's double face, internally illuminated pylon, display, as depicted in Sketch # 7317 dated 2/18/99 by Idaho Electric Signs, and a 100' hall double face internally illuminated pylon display, as depicted in Sketch #73,17 dated 2/18/99 at the locations as depicted on the Site Plan, which is denoted as "Site Signage Locations as prepared for Idaho Electric Signs Co." dated 5/11/99. 12. The owners of the subject ro ert are as follows: Eagle Partners 1 P p. Y g L.L.C. of the McDonald's and Chevron parcels, as depicted on the }Site Plan", and the Idaho -United Credit Union, a- State Chartered Corporation, P.O. Box 2268, Boise, v Idaho 83701, of the Credit Union Parcel,�as depicted -on the "Site Plan". t 13. The -reasons for the requested amendment of the conditional use permit are as.follows:'a 100' ov erall height sign is to address 1-84 traffic as well as the P � g � . smaller lon type sign Eagle e Road at an overall -height of 34'. The fact,that the .PY Yl� � ona g g proposed signs feature both Chevron and McDonald's is an attempt to minimize the number of sign structures. The .'signs are 470 and 344 square -feet respectively. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF -LAW -- PAGE 5 OF 16, AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART APPLICATION FOR MODIFICATION OF CONDITIONAL USE' PERMIT / EAGLE PARTNERS FOR SIGNAGE _i Sign height and location were determined by Applicant's thorough survey involving a 100 boom truck. Applicant reports there were numerous obstructions to the sign's visibility especially pi oceeding west`on I-84, which included a large stand of trees, the hospital, and the over pass. Applicant doing a 100' sign will only be seen (noticed) from I-84. The proposed smaller sign on Eagle Road is virtually identical ina size and height to the sign at Locust Grove Chevron on Fairview and the Meridian Chevron on. Pt. i Y To address'staff'Joncern with the overall height and -illumination of the signs on adjacent residences, Applicant claims the height of the 1'00' sign will prevent this. 14. The development in the surrounding area is, as, was found in the n "Original` Findings", particularly Findings '13 and Y4, which are herein referred to by reference and'which Findings the Commission takes judicial notice hereof. 15. No variance or other additional requirements are required. 16. Those opposing the application were concerned with -the aesthetics of the entrance to Meridian, and the proximity of the proposed pylon signs, along with F the rest of the development and existing illuminated signs in the area`that they will further illuminate and be visible to and within -the residential area, which appearance " FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW --'PAGE 6 OF.,,16t AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND ' DENYING IN PART' APPLICATION. FOR MODIFICATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT / EAGLE PARTNERS FOR SIGNAGE 4 f a ,Y f ` they claim will be inconsistent, with their' enjoyment and use of their residential properties. ` 17. No one -.testified in opposition to the monument sign for the Idaho United Credit Union. { X18. It is proposed°that the McDonald's sign Will not be illuminated [. I. from 12:00 midnight to 6:00 a.m. 19. The higher the sign the less compatible it is to the adjacent ,. residential neighborhood properties to the north in"its appearance. 20. . There is an. existing 77'pylon sign, with reader board, located u PY � on P neighboring property for the Jackson's Texaco gas station, which lies to the south of the subject properties. 21. The City Council in this matter has previously made its Findings of I s the compatibility of the original conditional use which the City Council takes notice as I r set forth in Finding 35 of the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for the original t Conditional Use Permit herein sought to be modified. 22. The proposed 100' pylon sign is not compatible with the Comprehensive Plan of .the City of Meridian but the 6' monument sign,and the 34' 1 sign double face internally illuminated pylon display are consistent with the Meridian - f FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -- PAGE 7 OF 16 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART APPLICATION FOR MODIFICATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT leEAGLE PARTNERS FOR SIGNAGE' f, s i Comprehensive Plan which relevant and controlling provisions the 'Council finds, are as I follows: r Land Use Goal Statement- Page -23 1.1OUPromote the design of attractive roadway entryway areas into Meridian which will clearly identify the community. Protect and maintain residential neighborhood property values, improve each neighborhood's 4 physical condition- and enhance its quality of life for a residents. y Franklin, Overland/I-84 Mixed Use Policies`- Page 28 5.8 t Development in these areas should be based on functional plans and proposals in,order to.ensure that the proposed uses conform to the Comprehensive Plan policies and are compatible with the r { surrounding neighborhoods. 5.9 The integrity and0.identity of any adjoining residential neighborhood should be preserved through the use of buffering techniques, including screen plantings, open fi space and other landscaping techniques. 5.11The character, site' im ` rovements, and type of { P yP development should be harmonized with previously t developed land in the area, and where located u adjacent to -or near any existing residence or residential area, shall be harmonized with residential uses, and all reasonable efforts shall be made to reduce the environmental impact on residential areas, including those and traffic reduction. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -- PAGE 8 OF 16 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND . DENYING IN PART APPLICATION FOR MODIFICATION`OF ' CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT / EAGLE PARTNERS FOR SIGNAGE 4 4 .E 5.14U Because these areas, are near 1-84, Franklin and Overland Roads, high-quality visual appearance isIessential., All development proposals in this area willbe subject to development review guidelines and conditional use u permitting, procedures. r. Community Identification Goal Statement - Page ,71 11 1.4- i Major entrances to the City should be enhanced and emphasized. Unattractive land uses along these entrances should be screened from view. Special Community Design Areas Goal Statement - Page. 72 f 2.2U Encourage area beautification through uniform sign ' design that enhances the community. Quality of Environment Goal Statement - Page 73 5.1U Preserve the aesthetic natural, resources of the Meridian area. r 5.2U I Ensure that all new development enhances rather than detracts from the visual quality of its surroundings, especially in areas of prominent visibility. ft 23. If approved, the 100' pylon sign would be intrusive -upon heighboring residential propertiles and`would be visible as a high point on the horizon in the area. 24. Signs along.Fairview Avenue, another entryway corridor, have been ti e 3 I. 9 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -- PAGE 9 OF 16 AND DECISION AND ORDER- GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART APPLICATION FOR MODIFICATION `OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT / EAGLE PARTNERS FOR SIGNAGE . ro a � w !_ . ` e f . limited.to-a maximum height times width of 72`square,feet. The Chevron/McDonald s sign on Eagle Road, if approved, would have a height times width of nearly 670 square feet. The Idaho United CreditI slightly square would sli htl exceed 72 uare.feet. - ._ 25 Due to the i fact that the applicant,proposes the 00' pylon sign in t the southwest corner°of the.property, and has shown facts that. its purpose is only to F ! - attract freeway traffic, and that; in order to have visibility from points from the on and off ramps of the Eagle`Road Interchange on I-84, and given the fact that the proposal and these Findings, DecisioIL and Order provide for two other signs for the subject Property, it is found that a lowering of the subject pylon sign request would not be consistent with the Council Findings herein, and the stated intentions and needs of the applicant. p CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Idalo-Code § 67-6512 provides in part that: A As art of zoning ordinance the Cit Council may provide for the () p I_ g Y Y processing of applications for special or conditional use permits; and 6 (B) That a, special use permit may be granted to an applicant if the proposed use is otherwise prohibited by the terms of the zoning ordinance, but may be allowed with conditions .under specific provisions of the zoning ordinance, subject to the ability of political, subdivisions, including school districts, to provide services FINDINGSOFFACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -- PAGE 10 OF 16 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART APPLICATION FOR MODIFICATION DF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT /-EAGLE PARTNERS FOR SIGNAGE k - 4 6171 I . for the proposed use, and when it is not in conflict with the plan; and ,(C) That upon1the granting of a special use -permit, conditions may be attached to a special use permit, including, but not limited to,, those: r 1) Minimizing adverse impact on other development; 2) Controlling the sequence and timing of development; 3 ` Cololling the duration of development; 4) Assuring that development is maintained properly; f 5) Designating the exact location and nature of development; Vequiring the provision for on-site or off-site public facilities or services; requiring more restrictive standards than those generally required in an ordinance; requiring mitigation of effects of the proposed development upon service delivery by any political subdivision, including school districts, ` `pro jading services within the planning jurisdiction. - 2. The City of Meridian has exercised its authority toprovide "for the processing of applications for Conditional Use Permits by the enactment of § 11-2-41:8 Municipal Code. } 43. Idaho Code § 67-6504 provides that the City Council may,exercise all of the powers required and authorized by Chapter 65 of Title 67 Idaho Code which Act is known as the "Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975." I .4. The City of 'Meridian has enacted the Comprehensive -Plan City of `FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -- PAGE 11 OF F 16 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTINGIN'PART AND DENYING IN PART APPLICATION FOR MODIFICATION OF ` CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT / EAGLE PARTNERS FOR SIGNAGE . r t Meridian. adopted December 211, Is 1993, Ordinance No.. 629, January 411994, which x i - provides in part: Land'Use Goal Statement - Page 23 1. l OU Promote the'design of attractive roadway entryway areas into Meridian which will clearly identify the,community. I 2.3U Protect and maintain residential neighborhood property values, improve each neighborhood's physical condition and !enhance its quality of life for residents. ,a Franldin, Overland/1-84 Mixed Use Policies - Page 28 5.8 Development in these areas should be based on functional plans and proposals in order to ensure that the proposed uses! conform to the Comprehensive Plan policies and are compatible with the surrounding neighborhoods. 5.9 Thelintegrity and identity of any adjoining residential s , neighborhood should be preserved through the use of F. buffering techniques, including screen plantings, open space and ' ther landscaping techniques., x 5.11 The character, site improvements, and type of development should be Harmonized with previously. developed land in the areal and where -located adjacent to or near any existing residence or residential area, shall be harmonized with residential uses, and all reasonable efforts shall be made to `reduce the environmental impact on residential areas, including those and traffic reduction. I - 5.14U Because these areas are near I-84, Franldin and`Overland Roads, high-quality visual appearance is essential. All development proposals in this area will be subject to development review guidelines and conditional use permitting procedures. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -- PAGE 12 OF 16 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART APPLICATION FOR MODIFICATION OF CONDITIONAL"USE PERMIT / EAGLE PARTNERS FOR SIGNAGE 4' t. w Community Identification Goal Statement - Page;71 1.4 Major entrances to the City should be enhanced and emphasized. Unattractive land uses along.these entrances _should be screened from view. --Special Community Design Areas Goal Statement - Page 72 2.2U Encourage area beautification through uniform sign design that` enhances the community. Quality of Environment Goal Statement - Page 73 5.1U } m Preserve the aesthetic natural resources of the Meridian area 5.2U Ensure that all new development enhances rather than detracts from the visual quality of, its surroundings, especially in areas of prominent.visibility. 5. That the illumination. of the third sign, the 100' pylon sign, and the allowance of the modification of, the conditional use` permit to provide for the 6' monument sign, and the 34' double face internally, illuminated pylon display sign, is found to facilitate and minimize adverse impact on other development in the vicinity, designate the exact location and nature of the development and require more restrictive "standards g than those' enerall required. ._ Y l. y FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -- PAGE 13 OF 16 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING IN. PART AND DENYING IN PART APPLICATION FOR MODIFICATION OF CONDITIONAL.USE PERMIT / EAGLE PARTNERS FOR SIGNAGE c. � a � n DECISION AND ORDERI GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART APPLICATION FOR MODIFICATION OF 1 - - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NOW, THEREFORE, BASED UPON THE ABOVE AND FOREGOING FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, the City Council does hereby ORDER and this does Order that: - 1. That the Finding S of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order of Decision" "In the Matter.-ofI the Application of Eagle Partners, L.L.C., 603, South Eagle Road, The Application For Conditions Use Permit, Northwest Corner of Eagle Road and Magic View Drive, Meridian, Idaho", consisting of 29 pages be amended at 4.24 and at 4.45 of the conditions of development of the Order of Decision to provide as a specific condition of development the approval .of the construction and use of a monument sign for Idaho United Credit Union as depicted in Sketch #7377 dated 4/7/99 by Idaho Electric Signs. and a Chevron and McDonald's double face internally, illuminated pylon display as depicted in Sketch #7317 dated 2/18/99 by Idaho'Electric Signs. y I - 2. The Council hereby denies the application to amend the conditional use permit for the construction and use of -a 100'. tall double face internally' illuminated .pylon�display as depicted in Sketch # 7317 dated 2/18/99 at the locations,as`depicted on the site plan which is denoted as "Site Signage Locations as.prepared for Idaho Electric Signs Co., dated 5/11/99" Y a i d FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -- PAGE 14 OF 16 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART APPLICATIONFOR MODIFICATION OF .CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/ EAGLE PARTNERS FOR SIGNAGE p P v q NOTICE OF FINAL ACTION i .Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which -may be adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the conditional use permit may within twenty-eight (28), days after the date ` I of this decision and order seek ' judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, I Idaho Code.. B action of the Cit C juncil at its-regular meeting held do the �`� da of Y Y .,.e �. � g Y ��" l�Z'�✓- , 1999.1. I I ROLL CALL i COUNCILMAN ANDERSON VOTED i COUNCILMAN BENTLEY VOTED I COUNCILMAN BIRD k VOTED COUNCILMAN ROUNTREE VOTED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -- PAGE 15 OF 16 AND DECISION-AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART APPLICATION FOR MODIFICATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT / EAGLE PARTNERS FOR SIGNAGE i } x MAYOR ROBERT D. CORRIE, (TIE BREAKER) VOTED DATED:- MOTION:- APPROV DISAPPROVED: Copy served -upon Applicant, the Planning.and Zoning Department, Public Works Department, and the City Attorney. By: ' Dated: Ity Clerk msg/ZAWor1-VV1\ leridian 15360M\EAGLE PARTNERS CUP, v SIGNAGE\FFCIsDecOrdGrantInPartDenyInPartAppforModiffCUP C$' M, , i. k F a � FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW ,-- PAGE 16 OF 16 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART APPLICATION FOR MODIFICATION OF ' CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT / EAGLE PARTNERS FOR SIGNAGE ~ i r I t BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL ` "i IN THE MATTER OF THE ) CUP -99-017 APPLICATION OF EAGLE PARTNERS, FOR ) A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR ) DECISION AND ORDER SIGNAGE�FOR CHEVRON_C-STORE WITH ) GRANTING IN PART AND GAS PUMPS & DETACHED -CAR WASH, ) DENYING IN'PART' MCDONALD'S WITH H DRIVE -UP WINDOW ) APPLICATION FOR (SAME BUILDING AS C -STORE) & IDAHO ) MODIFICATION OF UNITED CREDIT UNION, MERIDIAN, IDAHO ) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT This matter coming' before' the City Council on the , C day of C '1999 , for final action on the modification of the conditional use permit application and the Council having received the recommendation of the Planning i -and Zoning ,Commission, and having received the record and testimony in the matter, the Council takes the following,.actiofn: I 1. That the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order of Decision "In the Matter of the,Application of Eagle Partners, L.L.C., 603 South Eagle Road, The Application For Conditions Use Permit; Northwest Corner•of Eagle Road and Magic View Drive; Meridian, Idaho", consisting'of 29 pages be `amended at 4.24 end at 4.45 of the conditions of development of the Order of Decision to provide as a specific condition of development the approval of the construction and use of a monument sign for Idaho,United Credit Union as depicted in Sketch #7377 dated 4/7/99 by Idaho Electric Signs, and a Chevron and McDonald's double face internally illuminated pylon display as depicted in Sketch #7317 dated 2/18/99 by Idaho Electric Signs. denies 2. The Council Hereby the application to amend the conditional use permit for the construction and use of a 100' tall double -face internally illuminated. pylon display as depicted in Sketch # 7317 dated 2/18/99 at the F DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND 1 DENYING IN PART APPLICATIONFOR MODIFICATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT /,EAGLE PARTNERS`FOR SIGNAGE a h v p Y locations as`depicted on the site plan which is denoted as "Site Signage Locations as'prepared for Idaho Electric Signs Co., dated 5/11/99". By action of the City Council at, its regular meeting held on'the day,ofSe.,Q 1999. By: t ' T D. CORRIE Mayor, City of Meridian 3 ' Copy served upon Applicant, the Planning and Zoning Department, Public Works Department and the City Attorney: g F f_ s 4 BY Dated:-l'7r/[/%J/ t r City Clerk or - 04, msg/Z:\Work\M\Meridian 15360M\EAGLE PARTNERS CUP SIGNAGE\CUPOrderDENIAL BEAL u c ft _ t DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING IN`PART AND 2 `DENYING IN PART APPLICATION FOR MODIFICATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT / EAGLE PARTNERS FOR SIGNAGE 9 e a 1 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: SEPTEMBER 7.1999 APPLICANT: EAGLE PARTNERS' AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 16 REQUEST: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR SIGNAGE FOR CHEVRON ETC. AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: i MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: i ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: I' ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: SEE ATTACHED FINDINGS f o& U� , l� IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. I I • • 4 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 17, 1999 PAGE 53 when people are going a lot!faster than 25. 1 think we're going to play on people's nerves a little bit when they're trying to get in line. They're trying to pay attention, they're trying to read the reader board or a menu board and what they're going to be ordering and there's someone else crossing across the same path even though.the percentages are 75% you still got 25% of the people that there's a possible conflict there. So my personal feeling is that this is just not a good option and I sympathize with you and maybe a different location or a different configuration, but I would not be in favor of having two drive ups that cross one another in this kind of situation. That's my thoughts. Corrie: Anyone else? Rountree: After that I don't have anything more to say. Bentley: I just say I would agree with Councilman Anderson. We turned this project down before for some of the same reasons, and even though they've made a concerted effort to try and improve it, l just don't think it's going to fly. Thank you. Corrie: Any other comments? Okay, I'll entertain a motion on the request for conditional use permit. Bentley: Mr. Mayor, I move we instruct the City Attorney to prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and have that decision reflect denial of the application for a drive through for Moxie Java. Anderson: Second that. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley second by Mr. Anderson to have the attorney draw up the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for denial of the conditional use permit for the drive through at Moxie Java. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. } MOTION CARRIED: 3 AYES, 1 NAY. Corrie: Mr. Attorney if you will draw up the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for the denial of the conditional ui e permit. Gigray: Yes, Mr. Mayor and as I understand we do this, we submit it at the very next meeting for your consideration. 20. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT INCLUDES SIGNAGE FOR CHEVRON C -STORE WITH GAS PUMPS & DETACHED CAR WASH, MCDONALD'S�WITH DRIVE -UP WINDOW (SAME BUILDING AS C - STORE) & IDAHO UNITED CREDIT UNION BY EAGLE PARTNERS—NW CORNER EAGLE ROAD & MAGIC VIEW DR: (ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS) 4 Corrie: At this time I will open the public hearing on item number – f. MERIDIAN CITY COUNCILVEETING AUGUST 17, 1999 PAGE 54 Bird: Mr. Mayor I am going to excuse myself as 1 did in the last one for the same reason. I Corrie: Okay, I'll open the public hearing then with the one excused Council member, Mr. Bird. Anderson: Mr. Mayor,=and as this issue has come up before and I would also declare and submit to the Council and let them decide if there's a possible conflict. My wife does work for this particular sign company. She is not the sales agent, and I would not benefit from this in any way. 'But I will let the Council decide whether that's a conflict or not. Rountree: I state the same thing as I stated, previously that I don't believe that I have an issue with that. i Bentley: Ditto. Corrie: Mr. Bentley. Bentley: I feel the same way no issue. Corrie: All right, I'll open the public hearing and,invite staff comments first. Hawkins -Clark: Mayor and members of the Council, my understanding of this is that there's a, history you as the Council requested that this item be tabled at your July 20 meeting, I'm'sorry not tabled but continued. There was an appeal of the Planning and Zoning Commission decision. !Again this application is a result of what staff viewed as a significant modification to the original conditional use permit. Due to the three separate signs that were submitted as a! part and again this is three signs. You have the Planning and Zoning Commission recommendations before you. If you would like, I believe you've seen them before, we do have overheads that show the 100 foot pylon sign as well as the 35 foot sign along Eagle. Staff recommendations dated June 14, 1999 which do recommend denial of the 100 foot continue to stand, no changes from staff in that manner. I Corrie: Thank you. This is a public hearing. We would like to hear from the applicant `or their representative tonight. Butler: Good evening Mayor and Council members, JoAnn Butler, 607 N. 8th Street representing the applicant Eagle Partners. I have copies of my notes that I'm going to; pass out for the Council just so they them to follow along and I won't read them verbatim. In this application that has been now before the Council several times in connection with the conditional use and once as you deferred this until tonight on the sign, you've asked us to address the conditional use elements of your zoning ordinance in connection with these signs a'nd we're happy to do this because I think with a review of the facts an°d the circumstances of this particular sign proposal with the testimony that the Planning and Zoning Commission heard and that, you'll hear tonight and with the staff work that has been done, we'll show how these sign proposals do meet with your conditional use modification standards, so we are asking the City tonight to do a couple I I • i MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 17, 1999 PAGE 55 of things. Adopt the recommendation of the P & Z Commission to approve the Idaho Credit sign, adopt the recommendation of the P & Z Commission to approve the Chevron, McDonald sign on Eagle Road with the understanding that the Chevron sign will not be turned off during the late night hours, but the McDonald's sign will between the hours of 12:00 and 6:00 a.m. We think there was looking at the testimony although I wasn't at the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing. My partner was and I did read the minutes and I think therewas some confusion at the end of the hearing in which there was a lot of discussion about turning off the pylon sign during certain hours, and I think that got confused with what was happening on the Eagle Road side at a press when one of the commissioners was leaving and trying to get a vote done, but we'll address that in a little bit more detail in a minute so basically adopt the findings of the P & Z with regard to the Chevron, McDonald sign on Eagle Road, but the McDonald sign would be turned off during the late night hours between 12:00 and 6:00, asking you to reject the recommendation ofPe P & Z Commission with regard to the sign that is in close proximity to 1-84. But adopt a condition of approval that was discussed that night but not made part of the recommendation to have the sign that is in close proximity to I- 84 to be turned off between tfe hours of 11:00 p.m. and 4:00 a.m. With me tonight is Craig Jameson from the sign company that will address the Council, George Kyler from McDonald's and Steve Eddy. IMr. Eddy will address the Council. He may reserve his time for rebuttal along with myself unless you have some specific questions for him. So just briefly running through the conditional use criteria of your ordinance. You asked us to find out whether or not this conditional use is determined to be appropriate under city policy. Meridian has annexed and zoned this property as C -G or general retail and service commercial and thep r'o'ect is designated in a community activity area. The purpose of that C -G zone is and I'm going to quote from your ordinance to provide for a commercial uses, which are auto and service oriented and are located in close proximity to major highway or arterial streets, and you are to fulfill the needs of the travel related services as well as retail sales` for the transient and the permanent motoring public. The whole goal and purpose of your ordinance is -to serve the motoring public in this particular zone. Services in close proximity, not necessarily directly adjacent to the freeway, but in close proximity to major highways and arterials which we are on the intersection of Eagle Road and 1-84. My understanding is that is the most heavily trafficked intersection in the State of Idaho. So we are attempting with this sign application to identify the business that serves the motoring public that you the City are trying to get served and do so in a manner that ensures the conditional use goals of your ordinances and your plan! Your ordinance requires us to be in harmony and in accordance with your Comprehensive Plan. The general retail and service commercial zone and the specific conditional use request is consistent with your goals and policies. Those that have stated their opposition to the project have never been able to point out to the Council or to the Commission in what way we don't meet your goals and ordinances in your policy and Comprehensive Plan. As one of the Planning and Zoning Commissioners stated it was always assumed that a freeway oriented sign would be part of this freeway oriented project, and the City understands and requires that r 1' MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 17,.1999 t PAGE 56 commercial development to serve the traveling public needs to provide attractive, well signed gateway to Meridian. JAs Mr. Kyler likes to say that he's told me that a business without a sign is a sign of no business, and I think that's what we would have here without proper identification. 'kThis mixed use area in the vicinity of Eagle and 1-84 interchange is a priority development for Meridian under your ordinance and your plan. The location of this project and I quote from your commercial policy encourages commercial uses to locate high intensity activity areas such as freeway interchanges. Your Comprehensive Plan also says that Eagle Road is designated as an entryway corridor in the City of Meridian. You talk about the fact that entryway corridors are a community's front door and it's acknowledged that the corridors, trees, commercial signage and site character often provide the first and the lasting impression for Meridian. The conditional use process states the Comprehensive Plan states that the conditional use process afford the City the opportunity to address special features of each property and their facilities including this one and that's why we're here before you tonight. We understand that this is the most heavily trafficked intersection that it is an area that you want to make sure is heavily landscaped, signed well and creates a good image for the City and as wellidoes not intrude on the neighboring properties. This is a well designed and well construction project. You've been through this as well as the Planning and Zoning Commission for many years setting many conditions of approval to make sure that this project is well designed and well identified. There are over 33 trees on Eagle Road alone of three inch caliper that you required. I think over 68 or 70 trees on this project as a whole. There's a very distinct difference between the design of this project and the project located immediately south of this. There was an awful lot of testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission from neighbors and you're likely to hear that again tonight. Neighbors that are nervous and scared that what we are proposing for this project somehow will be like the Texaco sign and the reader board that's directly south of this. People talked to the Commission and talked about the flashing light that is in their backyards from that existing sign. It's a travesty as far as we're concerned, and we're sorry that we in essence bear the brunt of having to come before you when people are worried that this will be like that. This project will be designed like that, and nothing could be further from the truth and I ask you to give due weight to the professional testimony that's going to be provided to you by Mr. Jameson and others tonight. We will explain the illumination of the signs. We have again offered to completely turn off the freeway oriented sign between 11:00 and 4:00. There would be no blinking bald lights in theivicinity of the neighborhood. (End of Tape) Butler: ...wealth of informationi not necessarily on this issue to the Council and we thank you and we know it's late. It was a long hearing at the Planning and Zoning Commission and I hope you've had a chance to read the transcript. But we're here tonight to answer questions, to discuss with you possible conditions of approval to ensure that the design of this site is compatible as we believe it is and we'll do a great deal for Meridian at this entrance way, and with that I'm going to turn the podium over Mr. Jameson, reserve some time for rebuttal unless there are some questions by the Council. MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 17, 1999 PAGE 57 Bentley: JoAnn you said that there's no blinking bulb lights on this sign._ Are you leaving open that there's blinking bulb lights somewhere else? Butler: There are presently found on the Texaco reader board, and that's what I was referring to. Bentley: On your project. Butler: No, no, not at all. 4 Bentley: Thank you. Butler: Thank you. Jameson: Good evening Mayor and members of the Council, my name is Craig Jameson, I'm with Idaho Electric Signs 6528 Supply Way. I appreciate the opportunity to speak with you tonight. It's' been suggested that maybe 1 might give you a little bit of my background within the industry and my qualifications. I've been with Idaho Electric Signs for approximately seven years serving as a sales manager for that company. One of my major responsibilities is dealing with sign ordinances not only within the southern Idaho -area, but in fact I deal with cities all across the west in Washington, Oregon, Utah, Colorado, Missoula, a number of different cities, so I've had quite a bit of experience in that particular area. When Boise went through their most recent revision to their sign ordinance, I represented the sign industry on that committee that developed a new ordinance. I certainly applaud the fact that I understand that you folks have developed a committee now that you're putting together to address putting together an ordinance for the City of Meridian. Additionally I'm under contract a separate contract with Home Depot to represen6hem at various different cities in Colorado, Utah, Idaho and also in Montana, so I'd hope that my experience might carry a little weight with the Council. Certainly I am here to provide you with whatever information that I can and to answer to any questions that I 'can for you and as JoAnn had mentioned there's certainly a lot of questions involving signs in this particular issue. I'm here to basically address the issues that we'd like to discuss in terms of the signage itself in terms of how we chose a particular place to place the signs. I know there's questions regarding lighting and a lot of concerns, and I*would like to explain to you perhaps how the signage that we're proposing is much different from the other sign as JoAnn had mentioned that was originally to the south of us and just discuss some other issues here: I have prepared a little packet here for each of you if I could bring that up and we can kind of refer to that as we go along if that would be okay. Basically gentlemen on the front pages there are the two signs that are in question. I might take this opportunity to perhaps make some differentiation between our calculations in terms of the square footage involved in this signage and what staffs calculations might be, Typically we find that when dealing with cities they calculate the square footage of the sign face themselves so the signage that 'Iwe're proposing for the interstate oriented sign and that's to address the interstate traffic is 470 square foot, and the smaller sign to be on Eagle Road we're showing is 334 square foot. I do understand that on Fairview you have adopted a policy for a monument type sign where you've got basically a base I 4 k MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 17, 1999 PAGE 58 �. I. width that would be equal tolthe sign face itself. That's why I believe staff came up with a 670 square foot for the sign that's shown on Eagle Road. However I think it's important to distinguish between mass and sign area and I think in a lot of cases especially when there's certain concerns that are involved in the overall impact of a sign on a community. I think when you're dealing with a pole structure like this, certainly we're not dealing with that kind of mass so I think it's two different types of issues here. One of the first things I would like to address if I can step over here to the stand, I'm not sure is this microphone working? This would basically be a site plan showing the location of the large pylon sign. Are you able to see that from where you're sitting? I'm kind of used to north going this way, but this would be the southwest corner of the property. What we've done here is we've tried to place the sign actually as far away as possible from the neighborhood, which is oriented up this section here. We're actually from this point up to the end of the property line we're close to two football fields away, so we've done everything wel can to place the sign as far as possible. In actuality I understand there's going to bye a buffer zone between where the property line ends and where the residential area actually starts, so in actuality we're talking about more than six hundred foot from the sign placement to the residential area. I think another critical issue that we want to talk about here is the orientation of the sign. Once again this sign is oriented not to address traffic that's going north / south on Eagle Road, but it's oriented to address traffic going east and west on 1-84 and because of that, the sign lighting is also headed in that�direction. The sign lights out along the east and it also lights out on the west. What the neighbors are actually seeing from the sign is the side of the sign, which is actually a metal case. There's no illumination. In other words we're not getting a 360 degree illumination from the sign itself. So this sign right here once again is directed for 1-841 traffic and frankly that's the type of traffic that we're trying to capture with this sign. Despite the fact that we may not have actual interstate frontage, I want to make sure that it's clear that this is an interstate oriented business or businesses. I mean part of large a very large part of the business that we want to capture with this sign are people who are traveling through the Treasure Valley area and they're looking for gas or they're looking for something to eat or whatever, and certainly there's a lot of traffic that's going by there and that's what this sign is directed to do. As a matter of fact I think it was Commissioner Borup that mentioned in the Planning and Zoning meeting that when he drives along 1St where you've got a McDonald's sign there, it's the same height that we're talking about here. It's the same sign and it's at 100 foot. The only difference would be that the Chevron is not featured on that sign. He doesn't necessarily see it when he's traveling up and down the streets of Meridian. He sees it when lie's along 1-84. That is what this sign is designed to do. The smaller sign located on Eagle Road would be located at this intersection here. In terms of the height, I want you oto know that we just didn't pick this out haphazardly and decide that we want to place a 1100 foot sign because that's like a standard sign package that we put together. lWe actually took a boom truck out off to the site and we positioned it at several different places on the site, at several different heights with a target and our people drove the interstate. I myself was not there, although the MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 17, 1999 4 PAGE 59 i McDonald's representative was to look for the optimum visibility where we could have this sign because it's not really a very easy site to see here. I also have here an aerial of the site and within your package, you've got photographs that were taken from this area over here headed west�along the interstate and then also from this area over here headed east along the interstate. Going east along the interstate presents its own _problems. We got a lot of trees that are over in this area and then actually the off ramp is quite a ways back there. So in order to able to get people safely along the interstate to the off ramp so they -can come down and come up to the Chevron and McDonalds, that sign height was necessary. You can see there's actually quite a distance for traveling here. The other sign photographs that I took were from this area here and once again over here and you can actually see the line of sight here. We do have I believe this is an older aerial; but the St. AI's building was also a concern in that particular nature, but our goal with a sign of this nature is not only to capture that traffic that's going there and let them know that people are — that the Chevron and the McDonald§ are there to service their needs but then also we need to let them know far enough ahead of time so that they can get to the off ramp in a safe manner. So that's basically how we chose the position and the orientation and the height of the sign. Please if you have any questions, as I'm going along, please feel free to ask me. There has been some concern about the lighting. Frankly at the Planning and Zoning meeting we spent a great deal of timein discussing that and I had the feeling overall that the Planning and Zoning Commission was fairly well satisfied that this isn't the same type of sign that you're going to see to the south. First of all; we're not featuring the flashing light message center. Now the bulbs in that sign are my guess like 50 watt bulbs that turn off and turn on based on the computer directions for it and clear bulbs and probably maybe with a reflector behind them and certainly they do project a lot of light. We're dealing with signs that are first of all with colored faces and I do have some statistics for you which I'd be glad to pass up and it gets a little bit complicated when we deal with colored Plexiglas the amount of light that actually passes through the sign is reduced. It makes sense. If you've got a clear piece of plastic or glass more light is going to pass through that than if you have a color that's based on over it. So for example if I have something clear then basically, you know close to 100% of that light is going to pass through. On the other hand if 1I have even a white face, actually only approximately 37% of the overall light actually passes through that particular sign. Red ranges anywhere from 3% to 12% is passed through depending on the color of the red. Naturally the darker color would allow less light to pass through than the lighter color would. Yellow which is another color that used will actually pass anywhere from 19 to 36% and the other color that we finally use is blue and that passes anywhere from 1 % to 19% depending on the color, so the, colors are certainly muted down a tremendous amount from what you would see with the message center that's on that other sign and frankly I think that any kind of light that's really upsetting the neighbors is coming from that. There's a difference actually being able to see the sign and actually the light passing through. So that certainly wouid shed a lot of light. We've done our best, you know we had discussed that that might be a possibility but have decided not to do that basically MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING r AUGUST 17, 1999 PAGE 60 for that reason. I guess what I'm trying to get down here is a combination of the light being muted and the distance that we're talking about once again over 600 foot plus the orientation of the sign. We don't expect the light to be a problem. I,know in Boise, a sign needs to be 300 foot from a residential area is considered to be the standard for a lighted sign. There was talk about how can you measure the actual light? People talk about things like foot candles, very complicated formula, but the problem is it's actually designed for directional and flood lighting, direct lighting and it's not really applicable within the sign industry. I should say it's nearly impossible to calculate. What we'd have to do is we'd have to have the sign sitting there in a controlled area and take the foot candles on the white section on the blue section on the red section on the yellow section and calculate it from there, and it's still something that once again is based on direct lighting rather than the type of lighting we're talking about. I do have pictures of other signs in the area. Some of them do have interstate frontage. Those you have in front of you there. Some do not. The signs like the existing McDonald sign does not have interstate frontage. In fact the Texaco sign that we're talking about does not have an interstate frontage. There's a hotel that's going to be built in front of that. There's a few other signs that are in the same basic area there. My understanding in speaking with staff is that the basically if this particular project had direct interstate frontage, this sign would not be a problem. But in fact we're so close to the interstate, we are an interstate oriented business. It's absolutely necessary and it's been discussed from day one that we require this type of sign as I can tell you that I personally made a presentation to the Planning and Zoning Commission I think it was over two years ago in regard to the fact that we needed an interstate sign on this project. At the time the project had not been approved and we weren't allowed to present that sign for formal approval, but it's been very clear from the start. There seems to be a feeling that we'd always discussed low slung monument type signage. I think staff even mentioned that signage like Hubble Engineering is asking for. First of all that never occurred and second of all we're talking about two different types of businesses. It is very rare that I drive through a strange city and want to pull over and grab a blueprint for lunch. I mean it's not that type of a business. This is certainly an interstate oriented business. I might also mention that there's talk of we can get signage along the interstate in terms of an interstate services sign that's provided by the transportation department and that's fine and they serve a purpose. The problem being that first of all they're very, very low in height and if people are going along and they're in a strange city and they're looking for that type of service and there's a semi truck or even a Bronco next to them, they are probably not going to see them and being able to make a quick exit to the off ramp. The other problem is that you know quite often the reason I don't use them is that they don't tell you where that service might be. You know I myself have gotten off in Yakima looking for a McDonalds and I never did find it. I think I'm the type of person I think a lot of people are the type of people that are looking for one a brand or a particular service that they're familiar with and if you're me and I'm not sure where I am in this particular city, I'm looking for easy on/off. That's what it is all about and I think even the highway department understands the importance of having signs at a certain heightr because if MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 17, 1999 PAGE 61 you look at exit coming up for Meridian Road or Eagle or whatever, you find that most often those are placed at a height above the traffic. They're either placed on an overpass or they're placed in some other manner at a higher level so that people could see them from a distance and have plenty of time to do that. Even as far as the interstate services signs go, quite often they say interstate business and once again that's the type of business we are. I guess I would just like to basically conclude by a couple of quick comments. I, know there's always a concern when a city grants signage that may not be the normal signage that they're used to seeing that all of a sudden everybody is going to want one. I can tell you that this type of signage is very much self policing. First of all everybody doesn't want one. Hubble Engineering doesn't want one. The Idaho Power Credit Union doesn't want one. It's not that type of business. if they don't want them, they don't need them. Quite frankly a lot of businesses can't afford them. I mean you're talking this sign itself would probably be close to $100,000 by the time it's installed and not everybody without the need or want is going to be able to justify that type of signage so I really feel that's a concern that really is unfounded. Then finally please keep in mind that we're not dealing with a lot of mass here. We're dealing with a sign that is substantially smaller than its neighbor sign. If we want to talk about mass for that matter we can look at St. AI's and we could look at the light across on the building. That sign is probably — excuse me St. Luke's, that sign is probably a 50-60 foot up there. So in terms of the height and we've got the mass of the building but of course it's a hospital. So with that if there are any questions, I'd certainly be more than happy to answer them. Bentley: Mr. Mayor, I got a question on your other sign that's in here. The one that's on Eagle Road. Why couldn't you use a monument sign for that? Jameson: I'm not the person to make the decision on the monument sign or not, I'd rather have Mr. Eddy and Mr. Kyler address that. I think when we discussed that in front of the Planning and Zoning Commission, what was pointed out was the fact that we do have very extensive landscaping, a number of trees and tree obscure a sign and so we were making an attempt to raise the sign above the trees. In order to make it effective as a monument sign,'the trees would have to be thinned out in that particular area. Bentley: Okay thank you. Corrie: Anyone else from the public who wants to issue testimony at this point? I would suggest that you keep your comments to five minutes and no more. The hour is getting late and it isn't helping the cause any if you keep going and going and going. Anybody else from the public? Mr. Williams. i Williams: My name is Richard Williams, I live at 3133 Autumn Way, Meridian. Just a couple of things. This 100 foot1pylon sign goes, now we have the entrances to Meridian off the freeway both exits, now'a goal post of two McDonalds signs. I think Ms. Butler went through a gyration to say they're in compliance and this whole project is in compliance. It may or may not �be. We'll find that out later. But they're just ugly. T MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 17, 1999 j PAGE 62 They're just flat ugly. When!you look at what you want to have an entrance to the City of Meridian it has to be somewhat reasonable, it has to be attractive and it has to make people want to stop there. If you go east on 1-84 through Meridian, there are three McDonalds along the interstate. Not one of them has a sign like this. The one on Overland Road doesn't, the 'one at Vista doesn't, the one at the outlet mall doesn't. If you go into Eagle, you drivelup Eagle Road, do you know where the McDonalds is there? Albertson's? They have a very low monument sign. Now the monument sign they're proposing is three and a half times taller than a basket ball hoop. That's not a monument, that's a tree. l just ask that this Councii use some common sense and address how you want the entrance to the City of Meridian to look. And I don't think this is the way you really want it to look. P & Z denied this pylon sign for a reason. I would ask that you support your Planning and Zoning Commission. They done a lot of work on it. They've looked at things and they made a good recommendation. Thank you. Corrie: Any questions? Anyone else who would like to issue testimony at this time? Horrel: My name is Chuck Horrel. I live at 3043 Autumn Way in Meridian. Good evening gentlemen. I'm gong to try not to use up more than my five minutes°here. I guess I've got a question for, everybody here. I would like to know why we're here tonight. Planning and Zoning denied this and yet it came before you all and now we're back here discussing the same thing that they had over 40 pages of documentation of why they denied this. It puzzles me, it really does. I don't know how this bureaucracy works. We are a government for the people, not for business. Rountree: That's why we're here. Horrel: For the people. Rountree: Correct. Horrel: That's right. Rountree: That's why this hearing is being held. Horrel: That's right. But it seems that out of consideration to the business that this is why we're here tonight not for the consideration of the people. If they are denied, they have the opportunity to reapply and reapply and reapply. Once they are okayed we the people have no recourse. We cannot come back and reapply, and say wait a minute, time out. They won, but we don't agree with that. Agree? Oh, we can come back and with another application for denial? Rountree: This is taking away from your testimony time. If you want to debate that issue, we can. Horrel: Okay. I guess what I would like to know, is there any residential property in Meridian bounded by 100 foot signs? I think the answer to that is no. Ms. Butler said the ordinances in the Comprehensive Plan is to protect, but it's to protect the residents and everything has to be done in a balance, in a harmony. We keep on going to the Texaco sign which to me is a moot point. Because that has nothing to do with this • I • MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 17, 1999 PAGE 63 project. We're here to dispute the fact that the application for 100 foot sign that falls within the immediate impact area of our residences, and that's what we're doing. We're not here to dispute the fact that the Texaco station has a sign that's objective. Some statements about signage for Home Depot and again what relevance does this all have to do with McDonalds and Chevron and this project. All I can say is gentlemen I love living here in Meridian. We've got a great city. I've said this before. Part of the motto of the city is it's a great place to live and I think we should keep it that way and really feel that these types of signs are l ery inappropriate. Thank you. Corrie: Thank you. Anyone else would like to testify? Brown: Kent Brown, 3161 Springwood. Listening to the testimony of the experts, I was curious about the sign. When I look at the site, it seems like St. Luke's is in the site path of where that sign is going to be showing to the east. If the site distance is coming at the location that they're talking about, that's right at the off ramp for the westbound traffic. Do they have enoughtime for them to react and for them to be able to do that? This is a comment that we brought up at Planning and Zoning. Is the overpass for Cloverdale obstructing that site that when the westbound — can they really see that sign? We're arguing over this sign because it's obtrusive to us as residents, but it's obtrusive. Is really going to work? Is it going to do the purpose and obviously the experts have convinced McDonalds and Chevron that it is. But when I look at the site and their own graphics and where those site distances are, even for the eastbound traffic where the site distance his, is right there where the off ramp is. Traveling at 65 miles an hour, what's the reaction time for them to be able to pull off. With the other developments that are going on in this corridor, this potentially in the Comp Plan with the other businesses, the Holiday Express that's suppose to go in, is this sign going to be able to be seen over the top of those new structures and the new proposed buildings that would be in the industrial 'area or are we the only ones that are going to see it? That's some of the concerns that I had as I look at this sign. My testimony in the Planning and Zoning hearing also spoke to Chevron there on Milwaukee when we talked about monuments signs, Billy Ray Strite had on his drawing he showed a monument sign. We talked about is this really a sign that you're going to want to have and then today we have a lot larger sign and a lot taller sign. Yet the Chevron I believe at Milwaukee and — I'm trying to think of what that intersection is, Emerald. To me it seems like that sign is a lowerlsign. It's closer to the ground. People are traveling in congested traffic there and they have the ability to get off. Eagle Road has that same ability with the lights and so forth that are there, and I don't believe that that sign is also needed. Are there any questions? Corrie: Thank you Kent. Anyone else issue testimony? Kyler: Good evening, Mr. Mayor and Councilmen. My name is George Kyler, I work for McDonalds restaurants in Lake Oswego, Oregon. A couple of things. I was in the car driving around when we were looking for the best place to put a high rise sign that would be visible from the interstate. In reality if you go to the northern most point of the l 4 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 17, 1999 PAGE 64 Eagle Partners' property, which is closest to the neighborhoods, then the vantage point was seen north of the hospital and was a little more.visible and we were compromising by putting it further to the south. In our opinion is adequate reaction time to get oft the interstate. I don't think it was something that the sign company sold us, because they want to make money or anything like that. We were actually in the car and viewed the entire site from both east and west. This is pretty typical to the signage that we have throughout the interstate system. Whether you're in Mountain Home, which is about 100 foot sign with K Mart on�a combined sign like this. Or you're in Jerome or Ontario, we have residential I believe to -the west of us here on 1St Street in Meridian. I don't recall ever having any complaints from anybody about the visibility of that sign or disturbing them. When you're on an interstate highway, the need for a high rise sign and the draw from the highway is substantial and can't be really related to something like the outlet mall which not!"even a full menu and has hours of operation where they are only open when the businesses are open. You can't compare it to a store on Broadway or something elselthat's not geared to the interstate, so I just wanted to clarify the difference in some of these issues, so I would be glad to answer any questions you might have, but I just wanted to bring up a couple of the points. I Rountree: Any questions? Anyone else wish to testify? Eddy: My name is Steve Eddy. I'm the Chevron proprietor for this location. I would just like to clarify a couple of things and then get to Mr. Bentley's comment on the monument sign. We just really feel that signage on Eagle Road is needed at that height for the landscaping to see. (think all you people have been in the vicinity of the airport station and we're basically proposing the same type of signage as airport, which the Chevron / McDonalds sign thle high rise is a lot larger airport than this one. Both signs in case but the street sign is basically the same one. The other thing is the only sign I've ever talked about in front of this Council or the P & Z is a sign comparable to the station on E. 1St in Meridian or the Locust Grove Chevron, which this sign on Eagle Road is exactly the same sign. There's no difference. One other point of clarification is these signs we buy. I buy from Chevron supplier. McDonalds buys from their supplier. Idaho Electric does not benefit other than just the installation of these signs, so we've done the studies in seeing that these signs are important for our business and our type of use to survive. The freeway signs, you know, they help, but they help guide the people off the interstate and then the people look because they're not familiar with the area for the high rise sign of tow close it is to the interstate. We think it's a key to have both for our business to be successful. One thing I really feel strongly. I went and looked at all the high rise signs in the area. I don't think this sign will intrude in the neighbors' backyards in any way the way it's placed. We agreed fully that this sign would be shut off at 11:00 p.m. back on 4 to 5:00 a.m. We could live with 5:00 a.m. We agreed, we don't want those type of people in the area at that time of night. That's who we would be catering to. Butiwhen our business is busy, it's between 6:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. and we need that freeway exposure for those people to come trade with us. Another thing is this project started so long ago, we have always thought we would get •i t MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 17, 1999 PAGE 65 a high rise sign approved at this facility with the other high rises in the area. I know this thing started three years ago. We tried to submit signs at one time. I know it's been said a couple of times, but we've always felt that this is very critical for us at that facility and that's all 1 really have unless any of you have any questions. Corrie: Thank you. Anybody else would like to testify? Bowen: My name is Ann Bowen and I live at 3067 Autumn Way. I have a couple thoughts. First of -all I think the human race is much smarter than this sign man is giving us credit for. I can drive down the freeway and see a sign that's big that says these services are available at the (next exit. My three year old can point that out and tell us which way to go. I don't think they need to be 100 feet high in order for people to see those and understand them.. We took a trip down to tUtah last weekend and all the signs are about this big off to the side and it was very easy and it doesn't block the beauty of the landscape. The other thing is there was a little comment in the Statesman last week that somebody wrote about the RC Willey sign and it started out bigger is not always better, and I won't read it all but the end is signs are meant to identify a business, not to be used for advertisement. Identifying a business isn't 100 feet up in the air. It's an advertisement and the other thing that I'm, concerned about is I would like to be proud to live in Meridian and if we h=pe all over Eagle Road, it's not going to be a pretty entrance to our city. And I that you care about that too and we can make it look like a nice place. h Corrie: Thank you. I 4 Brown: My name is Debbie Brown. I live at 3161 Springwood. I appreciate the hour is late. I appreciate you being *e Mayor and Council members. I hope to make this short. For your information, I have been appointed to be on the new committee that is coming up with a sign proposals and the new sign ordinances and in the few meetings that we have had we had to discuss signs such as this sign. The consensus has been this is something that we don't want to have. This is something that we want to try to avoid and more than once the idea of a quote monument sign has come up, and we're going to come up with some guidelines and some specifications as to what a monument sign is. The guidelines as to the height, the width and such and so we have used this sign as something that we in general were all discouraged about having because it produces a negative effect as someone enters the city, and I agree with Ann Bowen that just spoke that we can have smaller signs as guidance signs along the freeway where they can see one sign saying" x' businesses coming up, a sign a little bit further down the road that would say turn off at'this exit. That would be something under another jurisdiction other than Meridian City, but it's something that we could propose and look into. This business has been'considered as an interstate business. In my opinion it is not an interstate business. This is a business that is directly affecting my neighborhood and the area that my childrenlare being raised in and they said that this sign that's going to be proposed has a metal barricade that goes around which would be the area that faces my bedroom window. lm currently affected by the same type of metal case that MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 17, 1999 PAGE 66 goes around. If I choose to sleep with my blinds open, I cannot sleep with the light that reflects around that metal barricade and comes into my window, so it is personally affecting me. If you notice where they have the sign placed, they're only discussing the homes that are directly to the side of this sign. If you go down further into our neighborhood, you can see the frontage of that sign not just the side components so that's something that we would be affected by. The time slot they have deemed it would be turned off and turned on, I sleep later than 4:00 a.m. That's my goal at least. If the sign comes on at 4:00 a.m. I think that that's not the type of alarm clock that I want to have. Another point that I want to point out is they've pointed out here where the line is showing where the view of the light is shown on to the freeway. St. Luke's is only in a beginning portion of its phases. There are yet many phases to be developed and I believe that some of those phases could intrude on their projected sign. In other words, it wont' be able to show on tolthe freeway like they're proposing so I don't see that the need that they have to have it that tall will be defeated once that hospital is completed. That's all I have to say. Any questions? Thank you gentlemen. Corrie: Any questions? Anyone else to testify? Hearing none, one of you can rebuttal and that's — I Butler: Thank you Mr. Mayor,1 Council members. I hope I'm not too disjointed, but just try to answer some of the questions that have been raised. A good question raised by a gentleman in the audience is why are we here tonight? We are governed by the ordinances and in fact on the date of our application your sign ordinance would not prohibit this signs that we proposed so like the gentleman in the audience, quite frankly we raise the questions of whether we legally even need to be before the city, but we area trying to work with the city to work within your conditional use requirements and looking for reasonable regulations imposed on the sign to ensure compatibility. Signs are commercial speech. Our constitution protects it. It allow municipalities to impose reasonable regulations. Signs are not only for identification of business, they are for speech and that does include advertisement. This is a conditional use that's before you and we are granting that will allow the city to look at reasonable regulations. Although we question that under the sign ordinance, but under a conditional use this is not a prohibited use. It's a use that the city has acknowledged it's permitted, but could affect nearby properties and so you reserve the right to hold public hearings like tonight for the benefit of the people, 'both the businesses and the neighbors to try to impose reasonable regulations to ensure compatibility. This sign is over 600 feet away from the existing residential area. So we're asking you tonight to weigh the testimony and give due weight to the professionals that have given you that testimony. It's due the weight that our courts have said it is due. We are asking you to incorporate into the record all of your sign approvals in your files in Meridian in close proximity to the major highways and in close proximity to majorlarterials and major highways and arterial streets. If you do deny the application in whole or in part, we are asking you to tell us what we need to gain approval and to tell us in detail why the application would be in any way denied. With that I just want to repeat what the Planning and Zoning Commission and if you look 1 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 17, 1999 PAGE 67 at the testimony of the Planning and Zoning Commission, they gave no reason for denial. A couple of the commissioners, especially Ms. De Weerd, who is in the audience tonight talked about the fact that she wanted more information about illumination and reflection and I think the sign people have responded to that tonight and also responded by this owner going through great detail to show you how they tried to locate`this to be as unobtrusive as possible and still maintain the business identification and advertising that it requires for any business of this sort and offering conditions of approval that this!Council could apply. To be off the McDonalds on Eagle Road between 12:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m. and for the pylon sign to be off between'1`1:00 and 4:00 and as you heard Mr. Eddy has said that a 5:00'timeframe would be all right., Incorporating the. Planning acid Zoning Commission's testimohy, yoLPhave-heard that there area number of signs in the general vicinity along the freeway or inclose' proximity that are perhaps 80 feet, 77 feet, 85 feet, 60 feet. 'My client has said that because the Texaco'sign is at 77 feet that they would offer as a condition'of approval to be at that height. At that point I think that the -conditions of approval that -we are that the P & Z Commission would have imposed and that the`Council,would-have imposed would be reasonable regulations that this applicant can live with and we hope that our neighbors can too, "and I hope that our neighbors have seen our willingness to be here for many years trying to work this through with them. So with that I'll stand for any questions.,, Mr. Mayor I also wanted to say that I'm assuming�that you will beIredrafting the findings and conclusions based on the testimony here tonight and your'deliberations rather than go back and review the findings that were provided to you by the P & Z. - There were a few minor issues in there that we would take issu=e with, but I think that's probably by the wayside because you'll probably be redoing this and I just want, Ito; clarify to see if that's correct. Corrie: Thank you. Any questions? Butler: And is that correct? Okay. You will be redrafting your findings? Corrie: I'm sure we probably will unless we adopt what's already there. Council any other questions of staff or people? Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion to close the public hearing on item number 20. Bentley: So moved. Anderson: Second. Corrie: Motion is made and second to close the public hearing on item 20. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. 21t Corrie: Staff any comments? IHearing none, I will entertain a motion for the request for conditional use permit on signage. Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, just a point of procedure here and information. How you deliberate on this and what your ultimate motion would be, I k9 I, - f { i • MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 17, 1999 PAGE 68 } would recommend that we would do new findings on this and proposed order depending on what your decision is and that proposed order would address the two questions. One would be the appeal that' has been (End of Tape) Gigray: ...from the applicant as well as whether or not you would affirm or otherwise change any of the decisions and recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission which are before you. The appeal is limited to the issue of the Planning and Zoning Commission's denial of the request for modification of conditional use permit for the 100 foot sign and the Planning and Zoning Commission then granted the application for modification of'conditional use permit for the other two proposed signs, the monument sign and I believe the other sign that is along Eagle Road submit to some conditions that were stated in that action, but I think we could in one document one set of findings and one order address all of those questions, but we would separately address them in a proposed order back to you so that it's clear that you have a ruling with regards to each of these pending matters. Corrie: Okay. Take it whichever way you want to go. The appeal and then the changes of the conditions of Planning and Zoning, so how do you want to state it? Rountree: I'm not sure I'm awake enough to do it, but Mr. Mayor, I move that we have the City Attorney prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order as it relates to the conditional use permit for signage of Eagle Partners, that the findings and order reflect and include the recommendation from Planning and Zoning and that the,findings and conditions further include denial of the appeal. Corrie: Do I have a second to'that motion? Anderson: I second it. Corrie: Motion is made and second to have the attorney draw up the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order denying the appeal and to use the conditions of the Planning and Zoning Findings 4of Fact and Conclusions of Law as well. Is that correct? Rountree: Close enough. Corrie: Any discussion? Gigray: Just for purposes of information and 'record we prepare those findings for the next meeting and they're in your packet prior to the meeting so you can review those as you see them and you can make changes and you know it's not until you adopt them that they become final. So that gives you another shot at it. Corrie: We have a motion on the floor. All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: 3 AYES, �1 ABSTAIN. Butler: Mr. Mayor may I ask for a clarification. Our understanding at the Planning and Zoning Commission was is that there is no appeal. That we were told by staff that we were to file an appeal although your ordinance would have it be a recommendation only to this Council and that as you know that on your agenda tonight the appeal is not listed, I t i MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 17, 1999 PAGE 69 and I believe the Planning and Zoning Commission with our acquiescence we withdrew that appeal with the understanding that we would be taking before you only the recommendations of the P & Z. Corrie: Now we're getting into —. Gigray: I'm not sure I understood what that was. Corrie: I don't think I did either. One more time JoAnn. Butler: Okay, Planning andliZoning Commission had an application before it for three signs. The Planning and Zoning Commission made a recommendation of two approvals and one denial. Staff members told our client that they were to file an appeal on the recommendation. -Of course it wasn't a final decision from which to appeal because only a recommendation was coming up to this Council. So I think there was a miscommunication between staff members and us and that in effect there should not have been an appeal filed because there was no final decision. And maybe you would like to — Corrie: We can consider it, but I still think that the motion also included that recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission be followed by the Council as well. Butler: It's just a clarification. Corrie: Okay, thank you. Butler: There is no appeal. j 21. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR VARIANCE TO REDUCE SETBACK BY GENE KLEFMAN AT LOT 10 BLOCK 3 OF LAKES AT CHERRY LANE NO. 2: ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL) i Corrie: I'll open the public hearing for this variance for the Lake at Cherry Lane No. 2 and invite staff comments firsit. Do you have any comments on this one? Siddoway: Staff has no comments on this application. Gigray: Is there a record of this particular matter because there's going to need to be some kind of record before the Council of the application. That an application has been completed and 'I'm not sure —1was that handed out? Corrie: Do we have an application? Gigray: I mean there has to be I would think some record that we've got something that's properly before you. Rountree: I have a hearing notice. Gigray: But I mean if I'm directed to make findings, I'm going to want to make sure there's a record that I can rely, upon that — i , i me r o f f -i c e SEP21999 WE M 0 R,A,N DU NACITY ME MIDLAN To: Willia'm G. Berg Jr. From: Wm. F. Gigray, III Subject: EAGLE PARTNERS FOR SIGNAGE FILE NO. CUP -99-017 Date: September 2, 1999 f Will: Pursuant to City Council's action at their August 17, 1999, meeting pertaining to the Conditional Use Permit application by Eagle Partners for the proposed..signage, and Council's denial thereof, please find attached the original FINDINGS OF FACT ANDS CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER -GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART APPLICATION FOR MODIFICATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT and the DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART APPLICATION FOR MODIFICATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. This maybe pr,esented for the upcoming City Council meeting for Tuesday, September 7, 1999. The DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART APPLICATION FOR MODIFICATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT may be presented to the Mayor to obtain his signature only after the City� I Council takes action adopting the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Application for Modification of Conditional Use Permit. Please provide conformed copies of both the Findings and the Ord& to the Applicant, Planning and Zoning, Public Works and the City Attorney. If -you have any questions please advise. msg/ZAW6r1-\M\Meridian 15360M\EAGLE PARTNERS CUP SIGNAGE\BergDenia1090299.Ltr J 0 I i MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETI APPLICANT: EAGLE PARTNER: REQUEST: CONDITIONAL U; AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: • AUGUS717,1999 AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 20 I ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: All Materials presented at public COMMENTS SEE ATTACHED MINUTES meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. 3 Meridian City Council Meeting July 20, 1999 Page45 Bentley: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Anderson second by Mr. Bentley to have the appeal recommendation for denial a public hearing on August 17th of 1999. Rutherford: Mayor, members of the Council, we should be clear that the public hearing that we're setting on August 17th again is noticed as well as the public hearing with specific regards to the original application and has nothing to do with any appeal. We dispose of essentially, the whole appeal vehicle here tonight by taking this action. Corrie: All right thank you. 'Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: 2 AYES, 1 NAY. 15. REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT INCLUDES SIGNAGE FOR CHEVRON} C -STORE WITH GAS PUMPS & DETACHED CAR WASH, MCDONALD'S WITH DRIVE -UP WINDOW (SAME BUILDING AS C -STORE) & IDAHO UNITED CREDIT UNION BY EAGLE PARTNERS—NW CORNER EAGLE ROAD & MAGIC VIEW DR: Corrie: Staff, Shari kind of give us an idea where we're going here with this conditional use request? Bentley: Don't we need Mr. Bird? Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council this is the same project. Bentley: I was wondering if he doesn't have to make the same disclosure again or whether – Corrie: Mr. Attorney, does he need to do it again on this one? On the record, we need to have him do the same thing he did on the last one. Bird: Okay I'll have to abstain from this and excuse myself. Anderson: Mr. Mayor I would again state that my wife still works for that sign company and my position has not changed over the previous one. Bentley: Mr. Mayor my position hasn't changed either. He can stay. Corrie: Do you still wish to stay Mr. Anderson? All right, -- Meridian City Council Meeting July 20, 1999 Page46 Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, this is the request for modification of the original conditional use permit to include the signage that was never submitted as part of the original conditional use permit. We did consider the proposed signage to have a significant impact on the neighborhood and asked that they come through with a modification to their conditional use permit to include the signage package. Corrie: Shari, what's the difference between this and the one we just — the 100 foot sign still there? Stiles: Yes. Corrie: Point of clarification Counsel. This conditional use permit, we're.going to be talking about the signage of that 100 foot pole. What is our options here? I'm a bit confused. Do we need to table this until after that? Can we do that or do we need to — we have to hear from the developer from this as well, but — Rutherford: Mayor and members of the Council, as I went through the recommendations drawn up by Mr. Gigray, I believe this findings and recommendations deals with all three signs. If in fact it does deal with all three signs, yes this matter would be better tabled to accompany item number 14. I'm trying to find whether it deals with the 100 foot sign or not. Corrie: It does. Rutherford: Then that would seem to be the appropriate course of action. Corrie: Any other comments from Council? Rountree: None Corrie: I'll entertain a motion on item number 15 then to be tabled until the August 17th item 14th on the agenda. Rountree' So moved. Anderson: Second. Corrie: Motion made and second that we table item number 15 to August 17th to follow item 14 after the public hearing. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. MERIDIAN ( APPLICANT REQUEST: CUP FOR SIG AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DIST ADA COUNTY STREET NAME CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MITTEE: NDA ITEM NUMBER: 15 COMMENTS SEE ATTACHED MINUTES FROM P & Z SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SEE ATTACHED RECOMMENDATION REVIEWED SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS i�' /i , tq -,-hA wj i BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: I OTHER: SEE ATTACHED INFORMATION SUBMITTED AT PUBLIC HEARING All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Meridian Planning and*ping Commission June 17, 1999 Page 47 Borup: Again it was continued to July 29th 6:00 p.m. meeting. Commissioners, would we like to take about a five minute break? Barbeiro: Please. Smith: Yes. Borup: We will take a five minute break at this time and come back and address item number seven. (FIVE MINUTE RECESS) 7. P_UBLIC.HEARING: REQUEST FOR jCONDITIONAL USE PERMIT,INCLUDES SIGNAGE FOR CHEVRON C -STORE WITH GAS PUMPS & DETACHED CAR WASH, MCDONALD'S WITH DRIVE -UP WINDOW (SAME BUILDING AS C - STORE) & IDAHO UNITED CREDIT UNION BY EAGL'E'P F;ffi ER NW CORNER EAGLE ROAD & MAGIC VIEW DR: Borup: Shari, do we have any staff comments on this? We got your staff comments in our packet. Stiles: Other than the comments in our memo dated June 14, 1999, 1 have nothing in addition to that. Borup: Okay thank you. Any questions from any of the commissioners for staff before we open this hearing? De Weerd: I have none. Borup: We'd like to open the public hearing and invite the applicant up at this time. Again this public hearing is pertaining to the matter of signage. Spink: Commissioner Borup and Commissioners, my name is Mike Spink 607 N. 8th Street in Boise. I am Counsel for the applicant and am here only to introduce the people who will be making the presentation to you tonight. In the Comprehensive Plan, this is a mixed use area and we believe that as a result, there will be a mixture of types of signs that ultimately are developed and installed throughout this area, this mixed use area. Your action tonight is to approve or disapprove the sign request based upon your sign ordinance. The applicant needs to understand the standards that are being applied as the commission takes a look at this. Craig Jamieson of Idaho Electric Sign Company will be making the presentation as will George Kyler of McDonald's, and I'll turn this over to Mr. Jamieson. Thank you. Meridian Planning anAkning Commission 0 June 17, 1999 Page 48 Jamieson: Thank you Chairman Borup and members of the Commission. My name is Craig Jamieson. I'm with Idaho Electric Signs, 6528 Supply Way located in Boise. What I wanted to do with you folks tonight is kind of review the packet that I presented to you that I think might answer some questions that are posed by the staff report. Additionally we are giving you some examples of different signage that can currently be found along the corridor and I think we'll bring up some items that hopefully you might consider when making your decision here. The first page that you see right there would be the proposed high rise sign, which I think is probably generating the most controversy here. I would like to point out and I think it must have been a typo. The staff report shows this sign as being 670 square foot in size when actuality it's 470 square foot. So there's about 200 square foot difference there. The way I calculated that square footage was basically drawing a box around the McDonald's sign and then also drawing a box around the Chevron sign. So we did want to clarify that if we could. I think it's also important to note that we need to take into consideration the type of business that we are dealing with here. This is a freeway oriented business. When you go up and down the interstate and certainly Meridian is no exception, you find that the taller signs are there for places like hotels, places like gas stations and places like restaurant food services, so it's not really fair I think to make the comparison with something like the credit union. You know the credit union is going to be a destination Place for the members that are going there. So typically they are going to ask for a smaller sign. The engineering firm, Hubble Engineer, I understand that they are limiting their sign to 10 foot, but once again it's not a retail oriented establishment. We're seeking quite frankly with this type of business, there's a lot of people that are going to travel through the 1-84 corridor that may not even be familiar with Meridian or the area itself and they're looking for a place to get a bite to eat. They're looking for perhaps a particular kind of gas. I happen to buy Chevron gas and I've been doing it for 20 years and we've been working with Chevron for five, but that happens to be my gas preference and I think most people seem to have a preference on the type of gas that they get so it's very important for our clients to be able to pull people off the interstate so that they can come and utilize their services. I've also brought in a site plan here that demonstrates the position of the sign, and I think this is also fairly important. If I could step over here. At the same time I'd like to tell you how we did manage to choose the position of the sign. The sign in question, the tall signjs located here. This being north on the site plan. It's located on the back corner of the property here. There were a few different reasons that this was done. One is it does present the farthest distance that we could get basically from the residential areas to the north and we've got actually a little over 600. So you've got like two football fields up to we've got a frontage here of about 576 feet. 577 foot frontage to the centerline up here and I understand there's additional area back there. Another thing that I would like you to consider is this actually shows the orientation of the sign. It's not to scale, but it shows that the sign is oriented to the east and to the west as opposed to the north and the south. So any light that's emitted from the sign is going to go east and is going to go west, not back up north into the neighbors. Now depending on where the neighbors are located up here, I'm not going to deny that they won't be able to you know from the angle the face won't be visible, but it's not like it's being oriented directly here so you're looking directly at the Meridian Planning andOning Commission June 17, 1999 Page 49 face. You do have kind of a little bit of a drawing inside your packet there that also - illustrates this. Finally we needed to be able to look at the sign positioning from the standpoint of where it was going to be visible. You do have a couple of photographs there within your packet that I tool today from the interstate. I'd identified here on an aria) map and this is an old map, so I don't think it shows all the structure that has apparently gone up in the meantime, but this would indicate the approximate location of the sign in question. There was a picture taken here from just about getting off the off ramp headed west on 1-84 and of course the farther back we get, the more we conflict with St. Luke's Hospital and blocking out the sign visibility. This on the other hand going from the east presents its own interesting `problems in that the off ramp starts so far back and you've got a pretty large set of trees that are in the way that once again obstructs the sign., The problem is that if I'm looking for a Chevron station or if I'm looking for a McDonald's here, and I get off at Eagle Road, but I've got to go all the way down to Cole Road and come back. Well I'm probably not going to do that. Frankly there's another Chevron at Cole and Overland, but at the same time our client here has missed out that potential business. There's also another McDonald's here, but it's quite a distance to travel. Of course they might not realize there's something down there if they're not familiar with the area and that puts a burden on that. I have taken these pictures you see here where I'm actually physically moving towards the off ramp at that time. The other thing that 1 would hope that you folks might want to consider is that when I'm having 65-70 miles per hour and I'm in the fast lane, you know I don't want to have to make a real, real quick move over to the exit you knowsand creating a traffic hazard here. So obviously from the standpoint of safety and from the standpoint of moving traffic the farther away I can identify where I do wish to get off, the safer it actually is. There were some other comments made in the staff report in regard to the blue highway district signs the locate services and certainly they do serve a purpose. I think that the unfortunate part where they do fall down is they're pretty well low in height and -that does create a problem if I'm in the fast lane once again and I've got a semi going beside me, they are once again totally obscured. I think the other problem that sometimes happens is they don't indicate distance as to where you know how far you're going to have to go to reach that particular destination and I could be wrong, but I don't believe there's any indication of direction either, so they're a welcome addition, but certainly they don't solve all the problems. I remember once when I was in Yakima and I saw an information sign for a McDonald's as a matter of fact and after I drove five miles down into town, I never did find it, so it did manage to pull me off the interstate but it didn't get me much further than that. We actually in determining the placement of these signs, we actually took out a truck, a boom truck, we raised a target up in the air, we moved it around at different heights and at different locations in order to determine what the best visibility was for this particular sign. Now I was not there at the (inaudible). The representative from McDonald's was so he would be better able to address those issues but that was another method by which it was decided as far as the placement of that particular sign. If I could continue on here through the packet, there's also an example of the sign that we're asking for on Eagle Road itself, the lower height sign. With the exception of the addition of the McDonald's sign, this is actually on the second page. With the exception of that addition, this would be the same sign that you Meridian Planning andaing Commission June 17, 1999 Page 50 would find at the Chevron station that is located at Locust Grove and Fairview if you wanted to put that into perspective something that you might be able to relate to a little bit better. So we've got the pictures of the on and off — there was also some question I think that was posed by staff as to you know there won't be a sign along — well actually it was mentioned I think from Boise through Meridian that will approach the height of this sign and certainly it will be one of the taller signs. 100 foot, I think that there's probably one other 100 foot within the general area and that would be the McDonald's sign that is located at the Meridian off ramp and I know that to be 100 foot because we installed that years ago, but there's sure an awful lot of signs in the area that would in my mind approach that particular height and in terms of square footage would substantially exceed it. The first sign'that you see, one of the Texaco signs and frankly I don't have a problem with any of these signs. I'm just showing some examples here is located on Meridian south of 1-84. 1 calculate that sign probably to be 60-70 foot in overall height. I didn't build it. So I'm giving a best guestimate from being in the industry and it's also important to point out that this sign does not have freeway frontage either. My understanding is there's some concern that if we have a sign or if we have a business that does have freeway frontage then we're willing to go that extra mile and give them that extra height. We do not have that freeway frontage, yet we're a freeway oriented business. I think as I look through the signs that I see along the interstate, it's kind of funny the people that are right on the interstate where they have the better visibility and they don't have the things obstructing them have the taller signs. Now we're back and we're still a freeway oriented business but we need the taller sign, but because we're not located directly on to the interstate we're being disallowed that. Next item, Roaring Springs Water Park, that just went up. That is 60 foot in overall height and approximately 335 square foot of signage, and I know that to be a fact because we did it. The Best Western sign, this is kind of interesting when I went over there as you can see there's a crane in the background here. One of our other people on the roof here happened to stop by and talk with the sign company and apparently that's currently at about 60 foot overall height. It's being moved closer to the interstate and raised another 20 foot was what we were told so that will be at 80 foot overall height. The next sign would the Central Valley Corporate Park sign. The blank panel right below that will be the WinCo. I did not build this sign, however, I was asked to submit a drawings for a proposed sign and was given some pretty specific information as the sizes that were required so I will say that that sign is probably around 55 foot in overall height. And somewhere between 600 and 700 square foot in sign space. I think this sign also gives you a pretty good example of the difference between sign face and mass. When I calculate out the square footage of a sign, I calculate out the sign space itself only. So I'm counting the Home Depot's square which is 14 by 14. I'm not counting any of the cladding around it. I'm counting the entire upper panel for WinCo and I'm counting the Central Valley identification there, but you know you've got a lot of mass. It's a good looking sign mind you. You know I think it's a very good looking sign, but you do have a lot of mass and I think that's something else that perhaps you would want to consider. Where you've got a sign that is basically going to be a straight pull that will be at the bottom of the sign and it will kind of like step up. The smaller sizes will be probably in the three to four foot range at the bottom. At the top of the sign if I'm looking at the side Meridian Planning and Wing Commission June 17, 1999 Page 51 I of the sign, it's probably going to be about four foot wide. So if I'm looking straight on it I'm seeing the pole so we're not dealing with a lot of mass that's going to obstruct also. Meridian Ford sign, that's a pretty big sign. I would guess that sign is in the 75-85 foot range, best guess., Shari's sign probably a little bit smaller, probably in the 45-50 foot although I've been maybe 50760. There's your Meridian Road McDonald's sign at 100 overall and finally the Texaco sign located next to the development we're talking about here. We were asked to bid'on that sign, so taking from what I was told that we were to bid, we've got an overall height of I show 77. 1 can't swear that's what it was built at, but it looks pretty close to me and over 800 square foot of signage, so basically folks I think the reason that I brought this up is I don't think that the signage that we're asking for when you take into consideration the height, the square footage, the overall mass is anything that's unusual for the area. There's other signs that are going up outside of the 1-84 corridor that are still'substantial signs. The RC Willey sign will be going up next week. That sign is set actually to be RC Willey is kind of sunk down in as you know, but the top of the sign will come to about 35 foot above the road and the square footage on the sign is just a little under 300 square foot. Certainly there's comparable signage within the area. That pretty much concludes my presentation. Of course I'm more than happy to answer any questions for you if I may. Borup: Any questions from the Commission? Smith: Not at this time. i Borup: Thank you. Kyler: Good evening, Chairman Borup, Commissioners, my name is George Kyler. I work for McDonald's restaurants at Lake Elswego, Oregon, and I wanted to talk to some of the comments in the staff, report. I will try not to repeat too many of the things that Craig said. In item number three of the staff report when they were talking about no pylon signs were observed approaching this height as Craig said, that's true. I look at signage as the need for visibility more than I do a sheer number. One size does not fit all. If you are trying to get over a building of if your property has topographical issues that you have to deal with or trees that are in the area, you need to work around those to get visibility for your project and therefore I don't know if you want to call it a hardship or just situations that are different than every single time you build a sign. I think that there's no need to have signs taller than they need to be to be visible and if you're looking at something like the mass that Craig was talking about, mass makes a big difference. I was talking to Bob Nahas and I said how did you get to the height of your sign for the Home Depot and he said well that's what we needed to have for Home Depot to be visible off the interstate in their opinion and that's the sign I requested. I was the person who stopped in to see the sign company with the torches working on the pole at the Best Western just this evening coming over here, and I stopped and talked to the sign gentleman who was working on it and I said what are you moving the sign for? He says well things have been built and we wanted to move it over to the interstate because we can see it fro i way down the road over here and it's much more visible Meridian Planning andfting Commission June 17, 1999 J Page 52 and we're going to go to 80 feet with it and I says well, did you have much opposition on it? Oh, no we just applied for a permit and that's what we got and that was the same kind of response I got from Bob Nahas on the Home Depot. I have to say the majority of the things that I see I just drove here from Idaho Falls and sometimes people that don't live here are more observant because everything is new to them. A lot of times when you are going on your normal commute or do your normal things, there are a lot of things that you just don't observe that are in the market but when you look up and down the whole. corridor what you really see is restaurants, motels, service stations as the predominant signage. Even sometimes like a Shilo Inn that's over here on Broadway and 1-84, that building is so massive, they don't need to have more than the Shilo sign on their building and they are very visible or the Sleep Inn or some of these other motels that are well located on the interstate. They're already up 30-40 feet in the air or the hospital. They don't need to have high rise signs. But something like a Wal-Mart, something like a Home Depot, those are traveler services, they have adequate signage on their building face usually' that are visible. Something like Hubble Engineering that is a destination is not oriented to the traveler services. The other signs I saw had to do with maybe RV's or campgrounds or some kind of a service industry for automotive off the interstate. So I think ours use is appropriate. When we were talking about this project in public meetings, we always talked about the appropriateness of this development at the comer of a state and federal highway with the necessity to be here and even though we're not oriented to the — I mean I shouldn't say oriented, we are not bordered by the interstate. It's definitely an influence. This project was developed for I would say at least a year right here at this level simply because of its close proximity to the interchange on and off ramps and the potential of relocating the traffic light and ITD saying no, it's too close to the ramps. Well if we're that close to the ramps, we obviously are heavily influenced by the interstate activity that's there. So I would like to stress the signage that we're asking for goes over the (inaudible) and at some point comes over the hospital for visibility both east and west bound and if we go less than what we're requesting, we really don't have the visibility certainly going westbound at all until you're on the exit ramp land going eastbound it's pretty spotty among some very tall trees. Allow me to comment about the logo boards that I wanted to make a comment on further. Our statistics and studies have shown that when you can see the pylon sign for a business, you are much more apt to get off the highway to use because a logo boards are very deceiving. When I first got this territory seven years ago from McDonald's to develop further, I went to Mountain Home and there was a sign, "McDonald's" you know to the left so I drive down there and the road turns and twists and I got totally lost. I had no idea you had to go, under the railroad tracks to Air Base Road and there we are. So',people have learned through different experiences that if you don't see that pylon sign, you just don't get off for that use because you have no idea where it is to Craig's point, you get to the end of the exit ramp you look left and right and you can't see it. You have no idea where to go what you do. This building is unique that we're building. It's probably the first in Idaho and Oregon and possibly Washington that is a new architecture and a new type of development for McDonald's where it is going to be jointly used with another business, the Chevron gas station and that's similar -to what we have at the airport except this is a full services, full menu, full Meridian Planning andning Commission June 17, 1999 Page 53 seating capacity building for McDonald's and it's not at the airport. When we did the sign tests', we went around with the franchising, Dick Darbedy and with Steve Eddy from Chevron who each are going to own those businesses and it was determined that this is what we need to get adequate signage from the highway for their businesses to further succeed in this market. So I wanted to request that we take a look and not get hung up over the footage of the sign, but more the visibility of the sign. It isn't overkill and I would say to you that it certainly is not. Just because somebody has a 60 foot sign, it can certainly be a lot more visible than somebody who has a 100 foot sign. So I would be gladtoanswer any questions for you now or later. Borup: Commissioners? Smith: Mr. Chairman, Mr. Kyler, how is your story referring to your wild goose chase in Mountain Home and the preceding gentleman's statement about I believe it was Yakima going on a wild goose chase for a Chevron relevant when you're right just a few hundred yards off the freeway? Why would a roadside sign not benefit you in that situation? Kyler: Well if you're coming from the west, you're getting off pretty far south of the interchange. Smith: But we're not talking about a proximity as your stories — I think your stories are totally irrelevant to this project here and the benefit of the roadside signs. It doesn't apply. Kyler: Okay I may have not stated my point and I apologize if I didn't, but the issue really is without a visible pylon sign from the building, the facility would not get the same business as just having a logo board serving the interstate was the point I was trying to make. Borup: Thank you. Any other questions from the Commission? I can't remember from the introduction, was there one other from the applicant? Okay, again this is a public hearing. Do we have anyone from the audience who would like to speak to this application? Is so come forward please. Williams: Good evening, my name is Richard Williams. I live at 3133 Autumn Way behind these signs. If you would like to come over at 3:00 in the morning some night and readthe newspaper with me, my front yard, my back yard please feel free, i don't need lights. I have signs. I'll try to keep it short. Most of you know me I've been here up and down this thing for the last three years. I served on the city council for six years and helped develop the Comprehensive Plan so I know what you're going through. Two major items I would like to say. Number one, I'm sure you're all familiar with the term aethestics and what that means, and what it means to you and what it means to me as a resident of Meridian. What does my city, your city, what do you want it to look like? Do you want it to look like a fast food franchise haven? What do you want the people, Meridian Planning andfking Commission June 17, 1999 Page 54 who come to Meridian to stop at Meridian, what do you want them to think of this city? The first thingthey are going; to think about is what are all those signs doing there? They consistently about their, presentations not about the freeway and then they'll talk about that they're on a state highway and a federal highway. They're on a state highway on a collector street. They are a quarter of a mile from the interstate. If they want to be on the interstate, as you well know, the land south of the interstate which abuts the interstate between the interstate and Overland Road is for sale. So if you want to be on the freeway, fine, get on the freeway but don't let them tell you that they're a freeway oriented business when they are a quarter of a mile away. That's ridiculous. The previous testimonies over the last few years did not address these types of signs. They addressed the smaller signs. The developer on the onset when this was approved was to give signage requirements with a development agreement. That was almost a year ago. Where was that signage -- where was that in the development agreement? It wasn't even a part of it. Now they're coming? Why now? Borup: That's precisely why; because it,wasn't then. Williams: It should have been in. That was one of your requirements. That was specifically your requirement that it was part of the development agreement. Borup: And if that would have happened, then we wouldn't be having this meeting. Williams: Why didn't it happen? That's my question. Another thing, I guess you all realize that this whole issue is being litigated anyway and when that happens, we may all be old and gray. If you talk to Mr. Jackson, he's not real happy with his sign. He doesn't think it works. He thinks it's too big. He thinks that it was a mistake that he put it there. There on Eagle Road a monument sign on Eagle Road is going to see 30,000 cars a day and now they want to get greedy and grab everybody off the interstate with a 100 foot sign. I just find this' ridiculous, absolutely ridiculous. Again what do you want the entrance to Meridian to look like? You've got a nice hospital over there. It's going to be a great facility when it's built. It's going to generate a lot of business and then you want a big monument sign like this across the street from it. I don't think this is what the City of Meridian wants by any stretch of the imagination. Thank you. Borup: Any questions for Mr. Williams? Thank you. Next, yes sir. Hurl: Charles Hurl, 3043 Autumn Way in Meridian. Commissioners, thank you for your time here. Two comments, the gentlemen keep in referring to the signs that are existing right now as some quite large signs. 80 foot, 65 foot and whatever, none of them are close to residential subdivisions. They're all set back in front of businesses right along the interstate and like Mr. Williams said what we're trying to create here now is another type of signage that's away from the interstate doesn't fly with the Comprehensive Plan. Another comment made that if you're doing 65 or 70 miles an hour as you come across this interchange, the only way to see that is if the sign is up at 100 feet in the air. If Meridian Planning and1ning:Commission June 17, 1999 Page 55 you're doing 70 miles an hour, you're violating -the law. That's my comments. Thank you. Borup: Thank you. Any questions? Go ahead just come right on up. Foley: My name is Howard Foley- and I reside at 2875 Autumn Way in Meridian. This has been a long and arduous process for lots of us. But one of the things that I hear the applicant arguing or saying to you is that they selected a piece of property in a particular development and at the time that I've been at these meetings before what I heard were monument signs and I expected a monument sign much like the Chevron monument sign that exists now on Fairview Avenue. That's what I thought they were talking about. As a matter of fact this is a continued hearing. At the last hearing there was some discussion by the representative of the applicant who would have you believe that a monument sign is expandable, that there's really no distinction between a monument sign that's maybe five feet in the air and one that's 100 feet in the air and the distinction between pylon signs and monument signs really is blurred. That's what 1 heard last time. When I was here before and also before the City Council, I heard that the McDonald's was going to be a limited McDonald's and not a full service sit down McDonald's and I hear now that that is something different. Given all the continuing changes and I appreciate Commissioner Borup's question about should have been part of the development agreement and why are we back here now and those sort of things. I guess some of the sense from the neighborhood is we thought that was covered in the beginning. We thought that;was part of the conditional use permit process. We heard from the applicant and the developer this was going to be a monument sign. We all understood what a monument sign was. We know the difference between a Thoroughbred and a Shetland pony and that's what we thought we were dealing with and now what I think we're here is well gosh, now that we got the site and now we got the approval from the city, we've now discovered guess what? That there's actually a hospital that's pretty good size across from us and we didn't think about that in the beginning so now we want you to save our bacon and give us a sign that goes 100 feet in the air and that was never discussed and it's inappropriate backing on to a neighborhood. It's just totally inappropriate, and the fact that there's some poplar trees that makes their business where they selected it to go difficult to see when you're traveling at 65 miles an hour down a freeway, it really in my opinion it isn't Planning and Zoning's problem. They selected this property. They told you when they came here before that all they wanted was some monument signage. Some low monument signage. They were going to get a lot of traffic up and down Eagle Road that was going to service their businesses and that's what they told you. Now they've come back and say well gosh we want something different. Now what they want is a monstrosity sign for those of us who happen�to live there. We all share in the blessing of the Texaco sign, which truly does illuminate us about 1000 feet away and it's comprehensible to me. I'm just when I hear people tell you well the sign only really goes east and west and it won't shed much light sort of down into the neighborhood. That's nonsense folks and it's absolute nonsense and it's just simply not true. The examples that the applicant gives you in terms of Roaring Springs, Best Western and Central Valley and those types Meridian Planning and wing Commission June 17, 1999 Page 56 I of developments are in commercial developments. They don't back on a neighborhood. You did not hear from Mr. Kyler one word about a neighborhood. He never said one word about a neighborhood in terms of all the things that you should consider. What he said is and what the applicant has said is this will suit my need. I picked the wrong site. It doesn't have visible signage because of St. Luke's which was already pre-existing at the time I picked the site and now I want you to cut me some slack and allow me a sign that is gosh 100 feet in the air, 470 square feet mass. It's just going to illuminate (End of Tape) i I Foley: Where do we stop? Where do we stop being grotesque? Where do we have some esthetics to the gateways to our city? Where do you come and help us as neighbor? We were there first, before this development came. We are the ones that should be given that initial consideration we think. The fact that they chose the site with preexisting hospitals and poplar trees and set back a quarter of a mile from the freeway is what they chose. I don't think you ought to allow them, obviously I don't, but you shouldn't allow this kind'of signage. I am sure none of them would like that in their backyard. I can assure you that we don't want another one in our back yard. I heard the goofy argument from them in the past that the higher it gets, the less offensive it is. I can assure you that this is not the case either. We would strongly urge you to deny this application. Borup: Thank you. Any questions for Mr. Foley? Barbeiro: Mr. Foley. I find it interesting you brought up the R.C. Willey sign and you were aware that R.C. Willey�did approach us in this same manner, seeking to have their sign freeway visible. I Foley: I heard that yes. I am glad you didn't. I hope you don't with this one. I'mean everybody can't have freeway visibility. You know the people who are going to build on Ustick, can't have freeway signage. They just can't . You know we've got a huge development going on Fairview. I mean there has to be some reasonable limitations. You want to build on a freeway ay and be a freeway business, good for you. Borup: Yes, next. Nelson: Joan Nelson, 3019 Autumn Way. I am about 4 or 5 houses down, but I am a resident of Meridian. I like the feel of Meridian. I'd like to see us do something with real serious planning to give us a feel of Meridian. I know a place like Eagle that's done some real restrictive things, ;makes some businesses unhappy. I would like to see us develop a real sense of Meridian as a nice place to live and not a truck stop. Borup: Anyone else? Would the applicant like to summarize or any other rebuttal comments? Meridian Planning and Ring Commission June 17, 1999 { Page 57 Spink: I would just say in summary and in response to the comments to the neighbors, that in reviewing this application, the signs that have been proposed are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the zone that exists on the property where the signs are going to be located. What your being asked to do tonight is to apply your sign ordinance. So you need to look at your sign ordinance and apply it and do what it tells that you can do. I think that it is appropriate for you to address the concerns of the neighbors and to do that in the context of the planning that has all ready occurred on this site. That's all I have to say. Borup: Any questions from the Commission? Barbeiro: I'm sorry your name again was... Spink: Mike Spink. Barbeiro: Mr. Spink the residents have (inaudible) me with an unspoken proposition walking in their shoes. Mr. Spink, if you were a neighbor, and someone else were to put a sign there, would you also; be out here in this audience requesting that the sign be in some matter restricted so that its not interrupting your daily living in your home. Spink: I would ask, if I were in that position, and in fact in the course of getting ready for this preceding, I did put myself in their position. I would absolutely, always feel free to exercise my rights as these neighbors did when they opposed portions of this project through its earlier stages when they filed the lawsuit against the City of Meridian. I think that they are exercising their rights. I both respect that, and I respect the comments and I think that anyone in an appointed position, such as yourself, who put yourself in the awkward position of having to do things every time you sit down and meet as a board, that you know your not going to please everybody. Then I think what you have to do is to apply the standards. Look at the Comprehensive Plan that your bound by. Look at the zone of the property. Look at the proximity of the neighborhood. Listen to the comments made by the neighbors. Understand that the difference between the Texaco, which is making a lot of light, and I don't doubt that for a second—it has a reader board. You've also been --you've heard testimony from a representative from the sign company saying, it's going to be incandescent light. It's light that is going to have a flat space that faces the neighborhood and then in fact it's not going to be oriented the same way as the Texaco. So you are looking at a different circumstance. I think that you have to consider, as yo;u look at the commercial zone and say, gee this sign is next to a neighborhood. Well, this commercial zone is next to a neighborhood in your Comprehensive Plan and in' your zoning map, and you should consider the comments of both -the applicant and the neighbors. You should consider the proximity of the sign. We've been talking about the sign and the comments of the neighbors as if we're a huge distance away from the freeway. It is not a huge distance. I mean we all have taken that exit. When you go down the exit, what you see is, is that this property is right there at the left edge of the' hospital. I mean it's right there. It's a long time to answer your question, but you asked me a loaded question so I'm giving you a full answer. I Meridian Planning and Wng Commission r June 17, 1999 Page 58 I Yes, I think the neighbors should be here. Yes, I think the applicant should be here. And yes, I think the Planning and Zoning Commission should listen to both of the comments, look at the zoning ordinance, which I think creates a problem for the City of Meridian, because it isn't very specific frankly. Makes your job harder. I wish that wasn't the case, but it is the case. Because of that, I would ask that you go ahead and make the decision on the application as it is submitted tonight. Thank you. De Weerd: Mr. Chairman. 0o have a couple of questions or comments. The signs along Eagle Road top at 75 feet and that's Jackson's or Texaco's. One mistake does not mean we have to make more. Other heights you stated from the freeway are, like what was mentioned in testimony, not along a residential. In your mind, one that can be seen so -well from the freeway at the distances that you choosing, do you think that's compatible with the residentiI al area right next to it? Spink:: I think that it's consistent with your Comprehensive Plan and unfortunately for you, it's up to you to make that ---I can't tell you whether I think it is consistent or not. Yes, I do. I think that is howlthe City of Meridian has planned for area. De Weerd: So do you believe our Comprehensive Plan states in there that the city is responsible for signage to be seen from certain distances or certain locations that that is what our job is to give a business? Spink: No. Not at all. I didn't say that, I don't believe. De Weerd: Okay. You don't think or -some of your testimony, it sounded like the information signs on the freeway are not helpful in bringing businesses to your type of business. And you don't see those as being more effective than your sign highlighting our skyline? j Spink: I did not make the comment, but I think I can respond to your question. I think that every sign, from the perspective of a person who builds and operates a retail business, in a retail zone, by any municipality wants to have the best signage for them. And to the extent that the blue highway signs enhance their visibility. I am sure that they appreciate it to the extent that their experience tells them that having these higher signs, I don't even know the !name for them, is what actually what brings people off the freeway and to the zoned location. It seems like if that's been their historical business experience, I can understand that, but only from the perspective of when I am driving in an area that I am not familiar with if I am looking for a McDonalds or a Burger King or an Exxon or a Texaco, if I am alspecifically—driven by a particular brand then I'm looking for as much information as I scan get. I am not telling you that the Meridian Comprehensive Plan or zoning ordinance or sign ordinance says that it is up to the City of Meridian to enhance or maximum that situation. I am only suggesting that you need to act practically --I think you need to balance the needs of both the surrounding property, which may be in a different, and the needs of different people who are doing what are appropriately zoned uses in this commercial zone. You have to look at both of Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission June 17, 1999 Page 59 that and come to some kind of determination that is authorized by your zoning ordinance --your sign ordinance, excuse me. De Weerd: And how many of those sign examples, and probably you may not be the one to ask, but are businesses located off the freeway—I mean not a freeway business. Spink: Before he gets up here, I would say that from my prospective as an attorney, there's probably, not a legal definition for a freeway business, and I would say that somebody that's got a business at the end of an off ramp is clearly a freeway business and somebody who's 3/ of a mile away on another arterial like R.C. Willey, probably is not a freeway business, and somebody who's not very far off the end of a freeway exit like this particular applicant, I don't know you would call them but I ---did not answer your questions and I'm waiting— Borup: Was your question answered Commissioner? I De Weerd: No. But he's directed for someone else have questions for him before the other gentleman comes up. Did you Mr. Chairman. Borup: I do. Both of you might stay here for a little bit then. Just real quickly on her question. I Jameson: Craig Jameson, Idaho Electric Signs. I am looking at your packet here— signs that would not have freeway frontage if I understood your question correctly. The Texaco store at the Meridian 'exit south of 1-84. There is a hotel in between the gas station and the interstate. De Weerd: How high is that?, Jameson: I did not build that sign. I am guessing it to be 60-70 foot in overall height. That is just a guess --an educated guess. Shari's Restaurant on Meridian Road that is also not freeway frontage. That's probably somewhere between 45-50 foot overall height I guess. The McDonaids on Meridian Road not freeway frontage. That is 100 foot overall height. In actually, the Texaco sign does not have freeway frontage. At Eagle and 1-84 there is a hotel being built in front of it. I think it's a Holiday Inn Express. De Weerd: And how high is that? Jameson: Based on the fact that we were asked to bid on the sign, I showed our specification as being 77 food I didn't put it up. I hope that answers your question. That would be the extent of the sign examples that we have there. Borup: Maybe Mr. Jameson you may be the best one for a couple questions I had. The McDonalds on East First, is that a comparable size for the proposed sign here? Meridian Planning andening Commission June 17, 1999 Page 60 Jameson: On East First. I believe that is the same size sign, same height. Borup: I am talking about just the McDonalds logo itself. Jameson: Yes. Borup: Okay. Then the proposed one is also open between the arches? I Jameson: Yes it is. 1 Borup: I did not hear any discussion about what was felt would be a minimum size to have any type of freeway relcognition. Would you can to comment on that? Jameson: Speaking strictlylfrom the standpoint of a sign person... Borup: I said minimum size as opposed to nothing at all. Jameson: Well that's although I appreciate your question Chairman Borup, that's a decision to be made by my clients and not by me. You know, I think that with the distances that7we are talking about—looking at from what I* understand they identified in the flagging, we need that type of'height and we are dealing with an extensive distance. Those are not what I consider very large signs particularly for that height of a sign to be honest with you. You know; your talking a total of 2 businesses being identified with a total of 470 square foot of signage, which is certainly not a lot especially when your looking at single businesses who are also seeking to get that identification and they are right next to the Interstate that have square footage that might be in access of that. Signs do shrink as they go up, and they do shrink with distance. We are fortunate enough where McDonalds and Chevron have identifiable logos but — Borup: That's my point. You really don't answer my question. Jameson: That's probably tIrue. Borup: Thank you. Jameson: I would like an opportunity to be back up later if — i Borup: Well, if we have any other questions, we certainly will. I Jameson: Well could I address the issues I wanted to bring up as part of the rebuttal now? Borup: Yes. Did anyone have any other questions before he does that? I Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission June 17, 1999 Page 61 { i De Weerd: I did have a question as far as -=-I don't know it is the candlelight or the illuminated, foot candles? Jameson: I am always asked that question. That's extremely difficult to determine. The signs are illuminated typically with 800 millilamps which would be the same lamp size that you would find along Fairview or what ever. It pretty much is a standard in the industry. The unfortunate part about measuring the foot candles is that it's a function of from what distance am I going to measure it, what's the daylight conditions. It's also a function of what the condition of the sign is. Like anything else, I am not a lighting expert, but I can tell you that Florissant lamps diminish in output with age. I honestly wish Commissioner that I could answer that question for you, but I can tell you that we're not using lamps anymore powerful than you would find on the road sides up and down Fairview, for example. De Weerd: One thing we did with R.C. Willey is because it does border a residential area, quite similar to your circumstance, is they had a time frame that they turned those lights off That was between' 11 and 4 or something like that. Jameson: I appreciate your question. I think that would have to be answered by the applicant themselves --either the McDonalds or the Chevron people. I believe the Chevron is going to be 24 hours, whereas R.C. Willey would not be, but Barbeiro: Commission De Weerd, as I recall it wasn't required to be turned off but we did require them to put a regulator on it that added about half power. During the evening hours when business was not operational. Jameson: That I could not tell you. De Weerd: Do you remember Commissioner Borup? As far as the lighting of R.C. Willey. We had a night time,! time restriction or lighting issue. Borup: That was my recollection. They said they could have a step down transformer to reduce –1 don't remember the specifics on that. I don't know if they game specifics. They said they could reduce the luminance. Barbeiro: I'd like to ask Shari if she recalls. Oh your going to hide from this one. Good. Jameson: Our company is doing the sign. I was not the representative on that. I do recall talk in the office about ,some sort of lighting restriction. I was under the impression it was on a timer, but it could ,have been a step down system. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. 1 Barbeiro: If you could bring that map up—you were the one that was going over the map. If you could bring that up I wanted to ask a few questions. As you exit from the i Meridian Planning and Ring Commission June 17, 1999 Page 62 east bound lanes to the south, from the intersection here of Eagle where Interstate 84 breaks off, could you see this McDonalds/Chevron sign— Jameson: No that would be the Texaco sign. That would be the approximate position of the sign that we are requesting. Barbeiro: You have requested a 34 foot double phase internally luminous— Jameson: Okay right there on the roadside. Could I see it from down there? Barbeiro: Could you see that from here. Jameson: Well it isn't there now, so -1 doubt it because now your going up and you've got quite a crown going over the top of the interstate. I don't see how you could. I Barbeiro: At about what height would the sign be necessary? And I realize this is putting you in an awkward spot. Would you be able to see the Chevron and McDonalds sign from this point? This point appears to be the least visible and the most prominent point where you would want your sign to be seen once you've made a stop. I am kind of setting you up here. It is my contention that a freeway sign, which says McDonalds, Chevron, along with the Texaco Taco Bell sign, which will sit back at least one and one half miles prior to the exit, would give you sufficient time to move to the right lane and exit to find your Chevron and McDonalds. The contention the other gentleman made with regards to Mountain Home and Yakima were that, once you exited the freeway you could not find the restaurant. � I would like to know that once you exit the freeway, obviously from this point you will be able to see it off the west bound lanes exit. From the south point, what would it take, and I think I would defeat their argument with regard to Yakima and Mountain Home, if one to one and a half miles from the exit, you have the freeway reader board and -at this point, you could turn to the left and you could see where McDonalds/Chevron is, how high would the sign be necessary to'reach from this point? i Jameson: Commission, at this point I could not tell you. What we would need to do is we would need to go out there and physically flag the site. It is the only way, especially when you dealing with that type of topography. The only way we can actually identify the necessary heights is the way we identify the heights for the signs that we have requested, and that's why running a truck out there and raising up a target and being at the south end at that exit and' being to look over—so I honestly—I am not trying to avoid your question, but I just have'no idea. I guess since you brought up the issue coming back to the information signs,, I think there is a little bit. of confusion as to what George Kyler from McDonalds is saying here. It's his experience and I think it's my experience also that 1 look for an actual sign. If I am looking for McDonalds or if I am looking for a Chevron I looking for that actual sign. I mean sometimes I might see the freeway information signs, sometimes I don't. Frankly, I don't pay much attention to them. That's me personally. But I think that there is also because they are relatively low, I'd . Meridian Planning and Wing Commission 0 June 17, 1999 Page 63 say the over all height of those is probably about 15 foot. You know there is also the fact that they can be obscured by traffic that's going by. So certainly I do think they serve a purpose but speaking for myself and I am not speaking for anybody else, I look for the sign. So you know.) do understand your question in regard to the height of that and I wish I could answer that question for you and I'd be glad to look at it. Barbeiro: Would it be fair to say that you could probably Out a sign lower than 100 feet and still have that visibility. -I)magine that when you did the study to figure out the height you would like to have that somebody went over to the south side here – Jameson: I was not there. Barbeiro: Pretend. Jameson: Pretend!! I think the assumption that is being made here is that I am getting off the freeway so I can get to the bottom of the exit and I can look left and 1 can look right and see the sign. On the other hand, if I don't make the move to get off the freeway and I've gone past iti without seeing,.then it doesn't work. Barbeiro: With regards to you and Mr. Kilar's argument, it is apparent that the road sign alone did entice them to get off the road in Yakima and get off the road in Mountain Home without the need for th'e 100 foot sign. So we now have their own testimony that these signs on the freeway are effective. So what we are trying to determine is, once you've exited the freeway, how quickly and easily can you find the destination that they have established as an effective time to find it? Kyler: Can I answer that? This is George Kyler from McDonalds. I turned off the road twice. The first time and the last time because if you can't find it conveniently, your not going. True story. Driving here today, I was running low on gas in the car, I passed by Glenns Ferry and there was Pogo sign there, I looked around—there was no high rise visible for where a gas station was and 1 went by Glenns Ferry. And then I went by Hammit, which had a blue sign and had no visible sign for a gas station either. I got so nervous I turned off the aid conditioner to make it to Mountain Home where I ran into the Chevron station the first place I could find. Seriously, It will bring some people off the road if they know where they are going anyway, but if it's not convenient and it's not visible, it's just—if your in a motorhome or your in a car or your going down the road and you have no idea where this exit is..how easy the on off is or anything else, but if you can see it, it's used. So that was the point I was trying to make with the Mountain Home - example and that's an honest answer. I think we are asking what's typical signage for our industry and that would be visibility from the highway. We never looked, and I was there for the sign flagging and Craig wasn't, so I'll answer the question about the south interchange. Obviously, we exited there because we drove both directions to get some facts on how high we needed the sign. We never could see it from the south because we were looking at the end of the sign cause it oriented to the freeway. If we were to Meridian Planning and Vning Commission June 17, 1999 j Page 64 change that sign, it's oriented to the neighbors. That sign has the same illumination, correct me if I'm wrong, is the other sign in Meridian on Fairview—it's the same sign. Jameson: I believe what the1 Commissioner is referring to thought, if I understood your question correctly sir, is he's wondering about the smaller sign. I Kilar: Oh the smaller sign couldn't be. Jameson: On Eagle Road. How tall would that sign have to be to be visible from the exit. Did I understand you correctly? ,Barbeiro: It was a question in regards to both signs, but know that — Kilar: If I was a neighbor I would want the sign to be 300 feet in the air because they would never see it. The illumination is the same, so the further away that sign is, both up in the air and away from their homes, the less light they could possibly see. I Smith: Well if the neighbors can't see it than either can your freeway customers I guess. If you drove all the way from Glenns Ferry to Mountain Home you weren't that low on gas. Borup: The last person speaking was George Kyler. Did you have any other rebuttal comments? Kilar: I did have one other comment. We always had a full service sit down McDonalds proposed for here in terms of our site plan that was submitted. We never had a limited menu, smaller facility ever requested. 1 know that Steve Eddy on several occasions made comments about signage and he was talking about airport/Chevron/McDonalds type signage. And that's in public records and that's on the tape someplace. It was never discussed as short little monument signs and Craig can discuss what a monument,is versus a pylon! that's his business. But I remember quite distinctly talking about Chevron/McDonalds sign at Airport Way. It would by that type of signage in term -a- a1 kemuav nr*pnted -visible.-signage., i De Weerd: Just a moment Mr. Chairman. Just a comment. I am a consumer and my kids are and we do look for the highway information signs and maybe we are one of those who blindly turn when ;we see that thing on the information sign, but that's always been good enough for me. I don't know. Maybe I am unusual, but I fit in the same category as these other two or even yourself, so I do look at those. I think a lot of people do otherwise those signs wouldn't be littering our freeways and highways, if they did not serve a purpose. Borup: I'd say, I'd look for those too. We watch them. The other thing when I see an exit I want to see that there's some businesses close to the freeway, not 2 miles away.- So way:So if I see one of those I see there is some business there. I don't worry about what the Meridian Planning and foonin Commission • 9 a June 17, 1999 Page 65 signs are or whatever is on the blue signs,is going to be in that general area, as long as there is some business visible. Mr. Jameson, do you have some conclusion comments you want to make? Jameson: Yes Mr. Chairman. I just had a couple of real brief comments. I've heard this come up time and time again how these signs were never discussed until this time. For the record, this was well over a year ago. Maybe closer to two years ago. I believe it was in front of the Planning and Zoning Commission. I did make a presentation on freeway signage. I can't give you a date but l do have witnesses that were here. So I can't speak to any other meeting that you may have had where quote unquote monument type signage has;been discussed. I can tell you this was back when the hotel was part of the project as opposed to the credit union. We brought in a sign that was —1 can't tell you for sure the height. I think the height may have been a little bit less. I think it may have been 75 to 80 foot. The sign configuration was what I would call a over under, where you got the Chevron/McDonalds on top and the other one below instead of side by side. 1 was here. I made the presentation, so you know, I'd just like you to know that as far as I've know when I've been working with Chevron and McDonalds, that has always been the type of signage that they wanted. What ever happened at other meetings,! that was the only meeting I have ever been to in regard to this particular issue. Borup: Mr. Jameson. You said that was back when (inaudible) hotel in the discussion. That would be (inaudible). Jameson: I can't tell you what—I looked through my calendar for a date. Frankly, I never though this project would come together. I guess the last think that I would like to say is that I would really, really, really encourage you folks to develop what I would call a true sign ordinance. I have written to the Mayor. I've made offers to Shari to assist. I was on the committee that helped design Boise sign ordinance, but because you have no sign ordinance per say, you have problems like this and it creates problems for everybody in that I have clients that come to me and say Craig what kind of signage can I get in Meridian? I look at the sign code and say well it doesn't specify height, it doesn't specify square footage, it doesn't specify how you calculate out any of this. Gee, sometimes you get this and sometimes you get that... De Weerd: Sir, if it makes you feel better, Item number 8, which we added at the beginning of the meeting, is to discuss ordinances and sign and landscape are those two ordinances. Jameson: It would make everyone's life a little easier. Borup: The other situation that we have here is a little different. This was a condition use on the whole project. The sign probably would have been reviewed even with a sign ordinance. Thank you. I Meridian Planning and fooning Commission June 17, 1999 Page 66 Smith: Before you step down Mr. Jameson, I have a letter here on your letterhead, dated May 5. It is not signed. Is that your letter? May 5th RE: Request a CU Modification. Jameson: That was a draft letter. Smith: It is the only one we had in our packets. That was my question. Jameson: Just looking at it I can see it's been scratched on. I do have a copy of that. didn't realize it had been submitted. I didn't submit the application. Smith: Since it was part of our packet, there are a couple statements in here that I do want bring up here in public hearing. It is a statement --there was a non public hearing that we were never notified of and apparently a motion was carried to submit for modification to our CU permit. I believe prior testimony stated and that is what happened was that signage was supposed to be reviewed as part of the original development agreement and it was the applicant who failed to supply that information to this Commission. There was never a non public hearing held on this project or any other project. Our lawyer's would lynch us if we ever did anything like that. I just wanted to clarify that issue. , Jameson: I hope you'll give me an opportunity to respond. Smith: this is just a statement. Second of all, going on to the next paragraph it states, as it seems to be no concern in regard to wall sidings proposed, we would simply like to address free standing signage requested. Mr. Jameson, can you tell me maybe who or whom may have indicated to you or the applicant there is no concern as to the wall signage proposed. Jameson: Commission Smith. That is an assumption on my part based on all the issues that have been brought up. I've never heard any issues regarding wall signage Smith: I can tell you that personally I am concerned about the wall signage and I would expect it to be submitted as a part of this signage package and it was sometime back but I don't believe—do other Commissioner's still have that information? Borup: Wasn't that part of the elevation — Smith: It was part of the original signage package that was submitted a few months ago. Borup: I thought wall signage was on the elevations on the building. Jameson: You folks should have all that. We have submitted it completely. Meridian, Planning and #nit ig Commission June 17, 1999 Page 67 I Smith: I have it, but I don't know—because we have not addressed it at all. Borup: Commissioner's did you have any concerns on the way it was submitted. Or just a statement that there was no concern. Smith: this is all needs to be evaluated holistically and not (inaudible). I guess I don't know if any member of this Commission was on Planning and Zoning when that Texaco sign went through. I know I was not. I think it was very unfortunate that sign was built. Borup: No one was. Smith: I don't think that we should be using as a measuring stick to approve new projects here. I think a monument type signage along Eagle would be very appropriate. I have seen absolutely no reason that you would need a 100 high sign and another 37 foot high sign with 370 square foot signage face to draw business into Chevron and McDonalds there off of Eagle Road. There has been a number of references to our Comprehensive Plan which really doesn't address signage specifically but it does address entry way corridors of which this Eagle Road is a entry way corridor. Quote, "Entry way corridors are communities front door. It is acknowledged that the corridors trees or lack there of, commercial signage and site care to provide the first and often time most lasting impression 'of the entire community." Then there was some reference to signage ordinance. And really it is pretty vague and pretty poor, but there is one specific requirement in her regarding signs -Section 2-415, Section B. Any sign or sign structure located on a commercially zoned lot which is adjacent to a residentially zoned lot, shall be set back so as toy meet the side, rear, and front yard set back requirements of said adjoining residential district. If such residential set back requirements exceed those of the commercial district. This freeway sign is right on the property line and it doesn't meet any set back requirements. As far as the one thing is in our signage ordinance that is proposal doesn't satisfy that, unless I am misinterpreting our ordinance. Jameson: Well, it's your ordinance. I rather respond to comments that have been made in regard to process (audible) so are there any other questions? Thank you. Borup: Commissions. Discussion? Barbeiro: Mr. Chairman. I do not remember the name of the man who invited me over to his house at 3 o'clock in the morning to read a newspaper. Is he still here with us. The next door neighbor would work really, really well. Would you come up. I wanted to ask a question. Any of the neighbors. Christensen: S.G. Christensen, 3157 Autumn Way. I live in the first house. It's my house that their lights when they come in to gas up will shine in my bedroom window and it' my window they will loI ok out and see a 100 foot sign. 1 Meridian Planning and Rin'g Commission June 17, 1999 Page 68 Barbeiro: And your so happy. Christensen: It thrills me to death. Barbeiro: Mr. Christensen. I'd like to get a feel for the problems you have in your yard specifically with the lights. There 3 different lights going on at Texaco right now. We have the 80 foot illuminated sign. A part from that we have the reader board, which is infinitely brighter that the illuminated sign along with flashing lights, and we have the lights from the Texaco itself under the awning and for the business. I enjoyed the story about the 3 am reading my newspaper there in New York. I'd like to get an idea of— there are times the reader board Texaco is not working, which I am sure makes you all very happy. Can you tell me the differences in the lighting in your property at night when the reader board is not operable versus times when it is operable. i Christensen: To answer your question, I have a bunch of trees that the developer refers to as junk, between my property and theirs. They are (inaudible). I have let them grow wild. They are quite tall. As, a result of that, I do not see the reader board from any place except right at my patio door. The lights I see are the ---at lights my backyard. Reflections from that and the hospital lights, but if they put 100 foot sign, it will be above my trees and I'll certainly see their light. Barbeiro: Okay, you don't see the sign itself, but the reader board as it flashes on and off. Can you tell me how that effects the back of your—especially in winter when there is no leaves on your trees. Christensen: Yeah. It lights' it up. Barbeiro: When the light is not on. When.it is not operable, the reader board operable compared to when the reader board is operable. Christensen: I have not compared that. I can not answer that. Barbeiro: Having driven down the freeway, that reader board hurts my eyes at times. The illuminated Texaco/Taco Bell light does not hurt my eyes. 1 am put in a position here where I don't know that a 100 foot florescent sign on the McDonalds side is going to add to the illumination when we have this reader board that again hurts my eyes when I drive past it. Given the option I am sure that all of you would rather have two McDonalds signs and no reader board than the reader board at all. I am still having a hard time since you live so close, getting a vision of how much additional light a 100 foot sign will add to your property. I Christensen: I don't know. But 1 do know that when I look out my bedroom window I do not see the reader board at X12 o'clock at night. When I look out of my bedroom window, I will certainly see a 100 foot McDonalds sign at night. Meridian Planning . and Itning Commission June 17; 1999 Page 69 Barbeiro: Okay. Thank you., Borup: Any other questions Barbeiro: I would welcome more input from the neighbors. Please do. Foley: Howard Foley. From Mr. Christensen's property I am probably 8 or 10 houses away to the west. i Barbeiro: Do you -understand what I am trying to do with the comparison's of the reader board on and off? We still have the illuminated Texaco sign whether the reader board is on or off. 1 want to get a vision on the assumption the reader board is off, how much additional light would come from a McDonalds/Chevron sign. Which as it appears to me here is still considerable less in math than is the combination Texaco/Taco Bell sign. Foley: The reader board in my property is always off because I have a separate stand alone garage or shed that given the angle or whatever interrupts the reader board which is lower than the Texaco sign. What I see is the Texaco sign, which is bright and the think that occurred to me is you asked a question particularly in the winter when you get a little snow and it illuminate'everything. It gets extremely bright in my backyard 8-10 houses away. I can't help but think that when you add more light to the area that is all ready well lit that it is just going to be more intrusive. Barbeiro: With regards to perhaps an exaggeration that I think it was Mr. Williams said, could you go into your yard now at 3 o'clock in the morning and read a newspaper. Foley: No. I could in the winter. Barbeiro: When the leaves Ire gone and the snow is out. Thank you. Borup: Mr. Foley. I've got some general questions that—I'm not going to do this, but I'd be interested in comments from every neighbor here—I think I'd like to address these to you. Some of that—we are looking at three separate signs here in this application. One is the freeway 100 foot pylon sign. The other is a sign on Eagle Road of about 34 feet and the third is a monument sign at the credit union. I don't know that anyone's addresses the pylon sign on Eagle Road. Would you care to comment on that? END OF SIDE 5 Foley: If I had to choose between one or the other? Borup: Which one you'd rather see gone and which one there. And then another comment just to think about land I've of course I've been thinking about this since we've know it's coming up but my observation of the McDonalds sign on East First and Meridian Road which ever you call it—driving down the road you see it. It definitely is a Meridian Planning and onin" g Commission June 17, 1999 Page 70 i freeway sign. That's where 1� notice it from when I'm driving down that whole half mile section. Unless you make a conscious effort to look up there, it is up high enough that it's not really noticeable. Back to the comment maybe between the two signs or if as a general concession that this business does not require any type of freeway signage at all or something smaller than what's proposed or maybe a feel—I don't think you can speak for the whole neighborhood, but I think you would be a good representation. Foley: A concern about lynching came up a little earlier, so I am about that. I don't think anybody has a concern about the credit union monument sign as I understand monument signs. At least my personal opinion is and I don't think anybody has concern about that. My understanding and what I recollect the discussion was as this process when along and the example that was used was Mr. Eddie's Chevron on Fairview Avenue. That's what I recall and that's the signage that I recall which is also a low monument type of sign. That's what I think what we all were expecting. Our experience has been and maybe really the answer to the question is, goes back to the candle power or whatever the issue' is. How much intensity and light are these signs going to generate. That's maybe the Ireal issue. I can certainly tell you that the experience that I got with the Texaco sign when that baby went off and we're not within 300 feet of it so we were never advised of it. l It just kind of went on one winter. It was it just illuminated everything. It's intense. That's our biggest concern. Borup: I think we all agree with you on that. Foley: Yeah. And if we are about to duplicate that in any manor at all, that's the biggest concern to us. I can't, I am not an expert, I don't know but a 37 foot sign is really going to put more illumination on Mr. Christensen backyard. Obviously, we are opposed to it. If a 300 foot sign as opposed to a 100 foot sign put less illumination, we're for a 300 foot sign. We'd like a 500 foot sign. Whatever we could get. But that is our concern. I am not an expert. I don't know. I know what the Texaco sign does., without the reader board 10 houses away and all our lots are half acre lots. They are good size lots. We're not, this isn't one right after the other. So.l am some distance from him. That's my concern. Borup: Okay. Anything for Mr. Foley? 1 Smith: You know the taller you go the bigger you got to be. The higher up you are the less you see it. j Foley: It seems to,methat one of the issues, and I appreciate none of you asking me, but I'll just charge on here ; maybe I've got an open door. One of the issues is that when your driving down the freeway you want to see some sort of an information sign and in fact there will be some goods or services there if you get off the freeway. We all have had that experience. 11 understand that augment. You can get off and wander around—I've done that in Oregon and end up in Antelope, OR. I never did find a gas station and I've not been back to Antelope, but I can tell you right now that the real issue Meridian Planning andlning Commission • June 17, 1999 Page 71 1 is, without this sign as proposed, nobody will know that there are good and services there. That's not true. I can'tell you that they will know that there is Texaco services and there is Taco Bell services there. That's not going to dissuade any body from getting off that freeway and knowing there are services there. Whether they are going to the south or the north. Once they get off, they will have a choice, which is Chevron or Texaco. That is really the biggest concern. That concern is alleviated by that Texaco sign and the Taco Bell sign. I don't understand why it is then if you know, I don't know, I'm'not, I don't just only buy one brand of gas. I sorta think gas is gas. I thin the real effort here is to have a sign that's as big, and tall, and bright and well lit as the Texaco sign. It is a competition issue which affects us adversely. Thanks. Borup: Thank you. Yes. We've got somebody new here. Eddie: Somebody new... My, name is Steve Eddie. I am the owner/operator of the Chevron partners facility and I would like to say a few things. This has been going on for 3 years and we feel we have tried to work with the subdivision. We've tried to build a first class facility. We've tried to buffer them very well for the type of uses that we think will be along Eagle Road. Our other facility is -in Meridian. We own both of them. We think we landscape them well. We try to portray a good image to the city. The other facilities we have in Boise, we do the same thing. The sign that we have always proposed on Eagle Road is just like the one on East First Street or Locust Grove and Fairview, which is not a monument sign. They are both pylon signs. They are both between 30-34 feet high. I think Howard is right. That is what we have always proposed, but they are not a monument sign. The only difference would be is McDonalds would be added to the other side of the pole. The other thing that I think we would propose is McDonalds would not be open all night. We would be the ones open all night. We would live with is timer situation with a 100 foot high rise between the hours of 11 and 4 which R.G. Willey did the same thing. That would not bother me at all because between 11 and 4 your maybe driving the less desirables off the freeways anyway and that doesn't detour me at all that is something I think would make them feel better-. We try to run a first class facility and always keep a clean, nice, well lit place. We want nice people there. The only other thing I'd like to say. Chevron..there is a difference in gas. Our business is 50 per cent driven by Chevron credit card holders. They are very loyal to our brand. They look for our brand and they look for the nice places. Thank you very much. That's it unless you -have any questions. Borup: Commissioner's. Smith: Yeah I do. There's a! ... outside of the car wash sign and fueling canopy signage there is no other signage included in the proposal other than the stuff that we've been talking about tonight —the pylon signs? So am I to assume that your not proposing any signage on the building? l Meridian Planning and thing Commission June 17, 1999 Page 72 I Eddie: No I think we are proposing signage on the building and I believe that the signage on the building is ail'on the prints that are subinitted to Meridian that are and would be part of the development agreement. I Borup: It does make mention of them on this. I doesn't show them, but— Smith: Yeah, I just didn't see ---right. Eddie:, Another thing I'd like to say about the signs is those sign would have totally been submitted with the package. There was some confusion and we were told that the signs were to be handled separately. We don't want to bring damage any more than you people do or the subdivision does. We would just preferred to have it all on one development agreement, but' we were told, maybe we were mistaken, it was to be a separate sign application. 5 Smith: Well, we're here nowlso... Eddie: Right. Smith: You know one sign on this proposal that nobody's talked about is"the credit union sign and that is because it is a well designed sign. I'd like to -see-1 don't know -1 am torn on your freeway sign. I don't think that we are responsible making sure you have visibility over trees and ;the hospital. I don't know what the right size and height is. I would be inclined to look at,something on the height of the Jackson store. And again, I hate to use that example because it's such a poor solution to drawing in business. I really can see a monument on Eaglebeing plenty adequate. People that drive that Eagle Road corridor there, and I use to be one of them, drove it every single day where all the goods and services are there and if your objective is to pull people in that don't know where your at, your going to be pulling those people in off the freeway, for the most part. That's all I am going to say. Eddie: One thing on that is our business is one of the only businesses in the world where we have to post our prices on the, street everyday. Except interstate people, they maybe don't shop as much, but we don't price to gouge interstate traffic. We have to be competitive. The monument sign limits the size of the number and they are hard to see. Smith: Understand. Borup: Mr. Eddie, do you feel the sign has been a detriment to you on your other stone on Eagle Road? Eddie: We don't have another one on.Eagle Road. On East First and Meridian ... Yes it has. It's been very detrimental. Borup: That's not yours then. I'm sorry. There is another Chevron on Eagle Road. Meridian Planning and Wing Commission June 17, 1999 Page 73 Eddie: Downtown Eagle. Again -we are talking freeway versus— Borup: That's not yours? Eddie: No. I Borup: I am talking about the sign on Eagle Road. Barbeiro: Eagle Road and State Street? Eddie: Eagle Road and the new bypass. That's not our facility. Borup: No, but that's a freeway sign. It's a monument sign, it not a pylon sign. r Smith: And as Mr. Eddie testified, Chevron customers are loyal. 1 use to buy a lot of gas from Chevron and I still do. I go in because I believe there is a difference in gas and I don't care if it's a cent or two more than the one next door. I am not shopping price when I go to Chevron. Eddie: We appreciate that and a lot of our customers are that way. We can't rely on only that customer all the time, we have to entice new ones. Borup: Some one like me, when I pull off for gas I pull up there and there is 2 gas stations. l go to the one that there's room to pull in at the pump, rather than waiting in line. Barbeiro: Mr. Eddie I want toy express—first off the great deal of respect I have for you and I want to hold this up so you can give me the same respect that I give you. First let's comment on the stores I !have seen. I've worked on some of the blueprints of some of your stores. They are clean, well lit. They are very, very safety conscience for the customer and especially for your employees. I do want to acknowledge that and compliment you on that. When you decided on this lot, could you tell me what your study said your combination of local traffic dollars versus freeway traffic dollars. Eddie: We did not do a study on that., Barbeiro: Okay. It would be safe for me to assume that you did a combination thinking that it would be in your best interest to be on the north side of the freeway versus the south side of the freeway. Eddie: Yes. Barbeiro: The north side of the freeway being that is where the vast majority of the traffic is going. You are right 'next to an established gas station and very similar to what Meridian Planning and9ning Commission • June 17, 1999 1 Page 74 Shopko and Target does, they look where WalMart goes and they put one real close to a WalMart. So it is` fortunate that you kind of feed off of that. That in combination with the medical office and the hospital, the influx of children that go in there. You did think this out very well in your placement, except for the placement of how you would set up the signs and get the vision off of the freeway. I know that you sympathize and empathize the concerns of the residents and I would image if the position were opposite you would probably be one of them standing here going, goodness I really don't want to read my newspaper at 3 a.m. in my back yard. I am looking for an opportunity here to give you the freeway exposure without the added illumination in these folks yards. You have asked for the sign to be on the west side of the property, which would be the southwest side of the property, is that correct? Eddie: Yes, the southwest. {Which we felt was the furthest from the neighbors. The people to the west of us, that property has been sold -5 acres—I don't know if there has been a plan for development yet, and that comer is the furthest from the neighbors. Barbeiro: I'm having_ a hard time visualizing the hole here. Would there be any advantage to moving the sign right on to Eagle Road? Eddie: If that was allowed. If we moved it to the front corner, there would not be an advantage, I don't think or a big disadvantage to move to the front corner. Our only problem would be the high rise type sign—we need the high rise type sign to address the freeway and to address our customer. We still have to have some kind of sign to address the price of fuel and, like what we have on East First Street and Locust Grove. We still need if your going to address both you need still to have 2 signs. You can't put the price 100 feet in the air i70 feet in the air and be able to change the price. Barbeiro: Oh no. Your not going to put the price sign 100 feet in the air. But it is the 100 foot pylon sign -1 would like to know if there would be any advantage from your vision of the neighborhood moving that sign toward Eagle Road and away from the lot line here in the back. And again it comes down to not knowing where the neighbors are. Tell me are there—there homes that sit back here. Eddie: There is a home right here that has been sold and he is not in protest of this situation. Borup: Commissioner. Looking at the distance on the map from the homes moving it a couple 100 feet looks like it would not make a difference. Barbeiro: That was an error on my part thinking that the residents were to the west and they are not they are to the north of the gas station. Eddie: With the sign that wei have proposed with just (inaudible) illuminated light, they will not read the newspaper off of our sign and again we do agree if we get that height, we will shut the sign off between the hours between 11 to 4. j Meridian Planning and thing Commission June 17, 1999 Page 75 i Barbeiro: You would shut off the McDonalds sign? Eddie: The Chevron sign. The McDonalds in the Chevron. McDonalds will be closed. The McDonalds will run its typical hours of a typical McDonalds in town. The Chevron will more than likely be open! all night. Borup: So,your talking about shutting off the whole sign? Eddie: The whole sign, if we could be the 100 foot height we would shut the sign off between 11 p.m. and 4 a.m. Borup: Have you thought of anything higher then that or is that practical. Eddie: I don't think any higher is really practical. Borup: I mean practical from a construction standpoint? Can they do it? Eddie: You'd have'to ask the� sign man. Borup: Were you finished Commissioner Barbeiro? You had stated that your intentions on some of the previous applications was to always have a freeway sign. i Eddie: It was always the intent. When we met prior at least 2 or 3 times, we have always referred to a sign like the Airport Chevron, which has a Chevron/McDonaids stacked on top of each other. Borup: That was a 100, 80,I 75 foot— Eddie: ootEddie: 65 to 70 feet I believe. Then it has a sign out on the frontage street like this one is proposed to post the price of gasoline. Borup: Thank you. Any other questions before Mr. Eddie sits down? Smith: Is there a reason why your not looking at a stacked sign again, as opposed to a side by side. Eddie: When we did the flagging it took that to visibly see it with St. Lukes addition. When we started this projedt, St. Lukes had made their addition plans. With the addition plans it took that to be able to see it from. -heading westbound from both sides. That's why we changed it. 11 Smith: Okay. Meridian Planning and ning Commission June 17, 1999 Page 76 Borup: Any discussion? I think there are a couple neighbors that maybe would like to add some final things. I still would be interested in some comments especially after some statements of having the sign off. I think the other thing may be a concern is or a interest anyway is -we are not going to get that answer, buts that's the illumination that would generate from this sign. I don't know if we can do much better than going down the street here and looking at the existing McDonalds one. Do you have comments sir? i Horal: Chuck Horal. Commissioner Borup. Your comment about coming down 1St Street and looking up and not seeing the McDonalds sign any more —I think that's a familiarity of not seeing the forest through the trees. Borup: That may be. I am trying to look--- Horal: Your not paying attention to looking at the signs when your driving. When your stationery, i.e: in our backyards, whatever, I think you would become ultimately much more aware of that, simply because your not paying attention to the rules of the road. As far as the illumination goes, that's really a hard question to answer. The hours, 11 to 4, these are very arbitrary -why not 5—what's wrong -4 is pretty early. i don't know but I think the reader board at Jackson's is off for a specified amount of time. They shut their reader board off. I know Meridian Ford shuts their reader board off. I don't know the times. Borup: I think we're talking two vastly different signs between reader board. You recognize that? Horal: Right, right. But I mean illumination is illumination. I mean, granted I know Illumination from the reader board is one thing, so many candle power generated from that as far as the incandescent light goes, but again, this is an unanswered question. We don't know how much illumination there is. The time frame, again is very arbitrary. You don't notice these things again when you riding. Your paying more attention looking for specific things when you driving as compared to when you living underneath the light. Anyway, the—I guess that is about all I have to say. Borup: Any comment on the comparison between the two signs? Maybe not comparison, but so far the testimony seems to be on the 100 foot freeway sign. We haven't heard any comments on the Meridian rather Eagle road. Horal: Where we live if you triangulate this whole thing out and one of the reasons Mr. Christensen can't see the reader board is because he lives to parallel with it. We were removed down like five watts from the end of the street and so when that reader board is on the way that the sign is faced east/west that becomes much more apparent. The same thing probably would apply with the McDonalds/Chevron sign. If your right in line with it, you cant see it. But once.you start being removed from it, then all of a sudden it becomes much more than aprofile. So the 100 foot sign as far as I'm concerned is kind Meridian Planning and Wing Commission June 17, 1999 Page 77 of unacceptable. I am sorry they put up St. • Lukes there, but that's not my problem and you know— Borup: So would you be saying a taller sign, lower sign or no sign at all? Horal: Well, I know from the'get-go we had talked about monument signs and my interpretation of that was a lower sign. Borup: Yes, on Eagle Road, I think that was in discussion. But as far as a freeway sign you – Your saying you'd like to see no sign at all. Horal: No freeway sign. Right. No 100 foot sign. l think they are pretty atrocious looking even as we come into Meridian and we look around and you drive up and there it is. I always thought the directions to get to Meridian was look for the yellow water tower and that was a pretty neat deal. Now it's – Borup: Thank you. That's what our kids always use to look for coming home from a trip was the water tower. Smith: Mr. Chairman. We've been on this item an incredibly long time and I'm—well just wait a minute. On this site plan that was submitted, there is a note that says an additional standard sign package by McDonalds Corp—There are all kinds of signs noted on the building that we don't have elevations of. We don't have a complete package here to review all the signage on this. We are reviewing it piecemeal and I am inclined to say we need a complete package here before we can make a vote on this thing. Otherwise, we're just not doing what we're supposed to be doing here. I mean, we are supposed to look at all the signage not just pieces and parts and what the applicant thinks is appropriate for us to see and them making their own judgement on what we don't need to see. 1 Borup: I think maybe we need to get a comment from staff on that. Sounds like that all was submitted and I assumed that the free standing signs was—Sheri would you like to comment on that? Stiles: As far as I recall, I think with the elevations of the buildings they did show the signage and that you have seen those. Borup: And did signs stay consistent –1 mean is what proposed now say consistent with what was submitted at that time. i Stiles: With what they submitted now? Borup: Yeah, the signage on the buildings. Did that stay consistent between the— we've had a good period of time between the two. 1 Meridian Planning and0ning Commission • June 17, 1999 Page 78 Smith: We have two new Commissioners who weren't here when we went over this before. De Weerd: But they were approved with the site plan, right? Stiles: I believe they were shown with the elevations of the buildings they showed it. De Weerd: Okay. So they were approved at that time—the signs on the building. Borup: what I am trying to get is was that why just the 3 signs was included in the packet. You felt the others had been previously approved and that was what we were to concern ourselves with. That's why I asked that. Stiles: Yes. Smith: Well, I'll—it's getting late. Borup: What was your question? Kyler: George Kyler. I just wanted to make the statement that the illumination for these signs would not exceed the illumination of our existing signs that we have on the 100 foot high rise sign in Meridian. There was some questions on what the candle power is, etc. It's the same sign and I can make the statement that the illumination certainly would not exceed that existing sign there. Just to clarify. Borup: Do you have any idea—you stated that there is a 800 mililamp bulbs going in? Kyler: I have no idea. All I know is that it's the same. Borup: The same. Thank you. Kyler: What you see there is,what we are proposing. Trex: Rod Trex. 3091 Autumnway. I just wanted to address your questions about some of the different choices ion the lower elevation. I live right next door to Mr. Williams so I think I can answer the questions. As far as the monument type signs, I don't thing there is going to be, from our point of view, there's no interference and no problem with that. All of us have put up shrubs and trees and fences and so on to block that off. With the proposed, there was also the agreement for some brims and the fact that the credit union is between us and the Chevron station. I don't think a monument sign is going to pose any problem except for Sharon. He's going to be out in the direct hit of that. For a board on Eagle Road, there would be a visible on Eagle Road from the north or the south. With the Texaco station we do get considerable glare from the top of it. I made comment at one of the previous hearings about using our pool and having it lit by the Texaco star. I see a little blue light coming into effect with it now. It's too bad 1 Meridian Planning and Ming Commission June 17, 1999 , Page 79 that the reader board is on the Texaco and that's kind of —1 would consider that an unfair advantage for the freeway part of the traffic, although living there and wanting to read the sign I can't see what the current price of tacos are off that reader board anyway, so I'm not sure,what good it does. It is nothing but a bother to us and you definitely can read quite easily from our deck anytime at night when that sign is on. I was unaware that that sign was turned off. I think it kind of burns into your retina after a while and hangs in there. But a board on the—addressing Eagle Road — of 35 feet, I don't think it is going to be any worse than'what the Texaco has presented. I don't know that it is going to be any better either, but with the birm and some of that, the lower white light which is what's going to be the most piercing, will be somewhat sheltered. The blue sign, the yellow may come through more intensely, but the blue and red aren't going to cause any problems or not as� many problems. Let's put it that way. I do want to digress just one bed and point toward the planning and zoning part of it in the future. St. Lukes still has phase three ready to come online, which is,going to add another building. The next business that puts in may require even a larger sign to reach over the top of it. They to back up 'you have requests before you I think that are in pending mode at the moment, for another 80 forty acre housing developments off to the west. There going to be impacted by this as well from a freeway sign. So, I think those ought to be considered as well. I would encourage you to go back and listen to the testimony that was present on what we understood or what we heard presented in terms of monuments and pylons and towers. Although, being a ham radio operator.1 wouldn't mind having an antenna hooked to the top of that. Any questions? De Weerd: Did you address t�he issue if they turn the sign off from 11 to 4? I Trex: Well, 1 am probably thewrong guy to,ask that question. My wife is a rather night owl, so it would probably help, her, but I'm—lights are out for me at 10 so it don't help me at all Borup: Thank you. Kyler: McDonalds signs will be off when we are not open for business, whether it's a building sign, a sign on Eagle. Road, the high rise sign. We shut down all the yellow signs —all the McDonalds oriented signs just for clarification. I don't know what time it is. Typically it's 11 during the winter months and midnight on the summer months on weekends and I think it's mostly 10 or 11 o'clock. 10 o'clock on weekdays in the winter and 11 in the summer—but I'm not sure —I'm not the operator' of the restaurant. They know what their hours are, but we don" have all night service. Typically I think we shut down around 10 during the week nights and 11 on weekends. I don't want to commit to you that's the number because I don't operate it. I am just telling when we are open our signs are lit, when we're closed at night they'll be shut down. Borup: Thank you. Commissioners. Any comments. I think this is warranted to some discussion from the Commissioners. Question be wanting to keep the public hearing open or ---Yes Mr. Gigray. I Meridian Planning andWing Commission 10 June 17, 1999 Page 80 Gigray: Just a point of information Mr. Chairman and members of the Commission. One of the things I would encourage you to do is stay focused with regard to the issues on this and what we're seeking is a modification of a conditional use permit in regards to the 3 signs that I believe that they have proposed. I believe that this brings your decision making in this as a condition use permit as you would under an original conditional use permit. One, you want to consider whether or not the application is consistent with your Comprehensive Plan so that's relevant, and I think you've heard testimony about that this evening. There is some information and I believe that the fact that is was received from staff on the Comprehensive Plan provisions and secondly, you have to determine whether or not this conditional use permit effect upon neighboring properties and other development and then you can impose conditions on this to minimize the impact on the development on neighboring properties and control it's development and so on—the usual kinds of criteria you Piave with conditional use permit applications and if you feel that there is a need to provide more information, studies or whatever, you can continue it to get more information if you feel like you don't have enough to make a decision. If you find that portions of it are uncontested, you might make partial decisions and keep others open, but I think those are all options available to you in this matter. Borup: Okay. Thank you. De Weerd: Does staff have any further comments? Borup: I wouldn't mind hearing generally from the Commissioners on --maybe feelings up for discussion at least. Barbeiro: If you want to start off on the idea of discussion want to start from a business standpoint and Mr. Eddie. He has (inaudible) to put a business in a place where a business would be operable and to his advantage in many, many ways. With regards to St, Lukes hospital. St. Lukes hospital phase 2 and phase 3 were all a part of and were planned when the original building was put up. So, a little iffy on the we kind of did not know about phase 2. It's not unreasonable for Mr. Eddie to presume that he could put up such a sign in this position, but keeping in mind, the Texaco sign was there. Let's make no mistake, the Texaco sign is a disaster. I really don't want to be in my pool lit by the star of the Texaco sign. Because the Texaco sign went up and I tend to acknowledge that that was an error, there is the concern that it presents some sort of precedent, and again because the Texaco sign was there, Mr. Eddie has every reason to believe that he could have a sign, knowing that you could not have a reader board of course, a sign that would be comparable. Yet again, we are in a position that we have residents there and that all the other signs along the freeway, for instance Roaring Springs and Meridian Ford and the other McDonalds signs, do not have a detrimental effect to a residential neighborhood. If I had my druthers, I would require that Texaco turn off their reader board at a reasonable hour during the night and that they do something similar to what we requested of R.C. Willey that they do a step down—where Meridian Planning and ming Commission 0 June 17, 1999 Page 81 they tone down the lights at certain hours. You could, since you plan on turning off the McDonalds sign, I assume probably turning off the Chevron light later in the evening also. There would be the option of doing a step down and then a turn off or a step down during the evenings or late or night. Once you get to about 10 o'clock at night, the place is dark enough to where I think a step down or a super bright light your still going to see it. Your stili going to acknowledge it. Certainly your going to have a reader board flashing you in the face, to the right your going to say OH, there is the Chevron. There's the McDonalds. What i am left to ask, and I think Mr. Jameson would be the best one to answer this is, could we do a step down, and would the owner be willing to do a step down from maybe 10 o'clock at night till 6 o'clock in the morning, or sun rise if it were earlier than that. And would the addition of some sort of a I don't want to say a plate, but maybe a 4 foot on either side of that, some sort of a block 4 foot on either side of the Chevron and 4 foot on either side of the McDonalds sign would be of any assistance to the neighbors in the illumination of it. If 1 could ask Mr. Jameson to come up and respond to those two things. De Weerd: Excuse me. Before we ask anyone to come up, are you saying that you agree with the 100 foot sign then. Barbeiro: I'd like to know what options are available within that 100 foot sign so that I can have another option in front of me for a condition in the case that we should -- De Weerd: Your not concerned that this would set a precedent for any future development in that same area. Barbeiro: Oh, I agree that is it going to set a precedent, but I want to get a vision of what we can do first to help the neighbors in not adding more light to them. --- De Weerd: But if we have ten 100 foot signs that all dim down at a certain time, there is still going to be a lot of light if you add that many signs in there. That's my point. Borup: °My feeling is that someday there is going to be a development further to the west, but I don't think that is going to be freeway oriented businesses. The further you get down Magic View, the more -less practical it gets. De Weerd: That's an assumption though. Is that an assumption that we want to set. Borup: It has been set. It was probably set when the project was originally approved. When you approve a gas station, it is logical to assume that they are going to have signage. De Weerd: So when you approved it, did you have that assumption—since I wasn't here. Meridian Planning and z ing Commission June 17, 1999 , Page 82 Borup: I did. We did not have specific details, but I assumed that there was going to be some type of signage. I mean, freeway visible signage. Barbeiro: When we talk about the freeway visible sign, I want to know a couple of things here Commissioner De Weerd. We have the option of not approving, Mr. Gigray, correct me if I am wrong. We have the option of not approving a freeway sign at all? We have the option of approving a freeway sign that is lower than 100 foot. We have the option of requiring them to turn it off or do a step down and--- Borup: We can make any conditions we want, but then it would be up to the applicant to say yeah that works for me or no it doesn't. De Weerd: Whatever we do, it has to be specifics so they know what we want. Borup: Yes. Barbeiro: What I am trying to get at is, on the assumption that a freeway sign is going to go up, the very best option for the residents if a freeway sign were to go up, would be The foot sign 0 fo. a step down sign and then turned off at certain hours, and then a 10 I fo left t .wonder lower the sign is, the closer the illumination will be to your property. if that 30 foot difference is 70 foot versus 100 foot is really going to make the difference whether you can read the fine print or not. Going back, I don't think it is unreasonable for Mr. Eddie to assume that he can do that. I don't think it is unreasonable for the residents to have never in their wildest dreams assume that were going to have a highly illuminated sign right out of our backyard. If your looking for a solution, I don't have it here. Borup: Okay. I think you have raised some good points that we need to consider. Road sign needs to Smith: I am only definitive on one point and that is, I think the Eagle Rocause I don't. I be a monument sign and the freeway sign —I'm not going to say I like it, don't know that it needs to be 100 foot, but I think there are some things that can be taken that 1 could live with the consciousness f death like as the e1-ghbors. I don't l don't know how have anything to add. This things been getting beat to d much more we can talk about the same thing. Borup: Any comment on Thomas's comment on the screening. Smith: I think the screening would make it even more visible. Borup: To the neighborhood? Smith: To everybody. Not to say that is wouldn't help maybe deflect the light at night, but during the day, I think it would be pretty unsightly. Meridian Planning and tning Commission June 17, 1999 Page 83 Borup: We never did get an answer as far the size of the overall sign either. I don't know if that's an option. Perhaps we need to — Smith: It's 470.square feet now. Borup: Well yeah. The McDonalds sign is over 16 feet wide and Chevron is almost 12 on the width. 15 and 12 on the height. The question I had earlier is can a smaller size sign accomplish the same thing as far as recognition. In my mind it would depend on the sign. These are two highly recognizable logos. You don't have to read the letters to know what they are. Smith: No. Especially not the golden arches. Borup: Yeah. And the Chevron too. Smith: The Chevron building are very distinct and colorful. Borup: So both of them people, can glance at them and know what they are with out having to read. I think reduced illumination would accomplish the same thing. In my mind at least. Commissioner De Weerd: Did you have any comments or anything to add? De Weerd: You want me to summarize or --I don't have anything new to say. Borup: Okay. Then what you've already said. Any comments on the other 2 Commissioners? Specifically, so far, it's been mentioned a step down lighting and a monument sign on Eagle Road. De Weerd: I didn't have a problem with their sign on Eagle Road. Borup: Even the 34 foot as a gateway sign—gateway to our city type sign. De Weerd: Next to Jackson's? Smith: Use Jackson's as a guideline as to what these signs should look like. Look at St. Lukes sign. Look at good signage not just gross, ugly— De Weerd: l did not find it gross or ugly: Borup: Okay, Counselor did you have comment? Gigray: Just a point of procedure Mr. Chairman. I think the first thing you'll need to decide right now is whether or not you want to keep this public hearing open or whether you want to close it and go on to deliberation. I think that the discussion as to whether Meridian Planning and ming Commission 0 June 17, 1999 Page 84 any of the Commissioners might need more information is certainly relevant and that's probably what you doing here. Borup: Well that's why I have kept the public hearing open incase we wanted to get anymore information and at this point is there anything else that any of the Commissioners would like from any of the previous testimony? De Weerd: Only regarding illumination and reflection. If it really goes higher does it really mean it's less light that effects the residential neighborhood. Borup: That real technical stuff as far as distance, but I would like Mr. Eddie to respond to maybe some of Commissioner Barbeiro's comments and would you like also. Specifically on the idea —you already said that you would have a timer and have it shut off. The other thing we talked about was step down lighting, maybe a comment on size also. Eddie: Okay. I'll comment on all three. The step down lighting would not be a problem. We could do that. The shielding is a good idea on the one side of the neighbor's, but I agree with Byron. I would be an eyesore because if you have a sign that's maybe 2 foot wide or 3 foot wide up there, then you add (inaudible) then you have a 10 foot eyesore up there that looks like it doesn't belong. I agreed with you that it wouldn't maybe work and then I agree with him that it won't. What was the other question you had. Borup: Size. Can we accomplish the same thing ---with a smaller size END OF SIDE 6 Eddie: As far as the size is concerned, we've already stepped the size down one size. Chevron makes their signs with the emblem embossed in. There is one sign company in the U.S. that makes them. There is a C200 which is what they are port has, that's what they call it. Its about 250 square feet. We've already stepped this down to a C140, which they say (inaudible) to see at the right levels it should take a C200, but we have stepped it down all ready. I think McDonalds was stepped down accordingly to ours. Borup: Okay. That answers that. Any other questions for Mr. Eddie? I do have one and I apologize. It's not related to the signs but there has been a lot of testimony on lighting from the neighbors, and that is the canopy lighting. Did you chance the lighting on the Fairview, from what it originally was? Eddie: Yes. Fairview and Locust Grove. We were one of the early ones to adopt this new fixture. We put too many of them up. I've said that under oath before. It's too bright, but we did put baskets in every one. We have agreed on'this canopy to use Meridian Planning and4king Commission June 17, 1999 Page 85 recessed lights which are mounted up inside the canopy. They don't have the side light you see at Locust Grove. Borup: Okay. I think that was –maybe enough trees and screening it wouldn't effect them but the lighting off the canopy off of Locust Grove is much more than the Jackson sign. Eddie: Right and the reason we really want a pylon sign on Eagle Road is with the amount of trees we are planting and I think Sheri can vouch, Jackson might have 4 or 5, 6 trees planted along Eagle Road. I think we are putting up about 30 trees along Eagle Road and a pylon sign will not be seen with the amount of landscaping we are doing. Or monument sign will not be seen. Borup: Okay. Thank you. De Weerd: If I may continue, I don't have a problem with the two signs. The pylon, especially if we have to have that in order to have more attractive landscaping. I am all for it. I do have concerns about if we need a freeway sign and I guess the answers I would like to see if it can't been directly responded to tonight would be more on the illumination, how reflects off into the neighbors. The benefits of softer lighting ---if it can still be seen from the targets they are trying to be used for but less direct on the neighbors themselves. I think there is a lot of questions still left unanswered as far as on the foot candles, how high that needs to be. What it needs to be stepped down to. When it could be turned off and those kind of issues. I am a Chevron customer. I look for those on the freeway. I think if someone is pulling up just to get gas, they are going to see Jackson's and if they are Chevron, they will see Chevron once they get off. I just—is there really an added benefit to the tall signs that's going to have a great impact on the neighboring residential areas around there. I guess the question I would like to have' answered is all on illumination and how high it's going to be and what effect that means to the residents --even if you step it down or turn it off, there is still going to be darkness their going to have to deal with the light in their backyards. Borup: What was that last statement? I did not understand that you said even if they turn it off there is going to light in their backyard. Because of Jackson's? Is that what you meant? De Weerd: No. 1 mean there is different periods in the seasons. In the winter it is longer and you have more reflection and in the summer it's not really going to matter. At 11 you have light from the sign for an hour and it's on before the sun comes up anyway. Eddie: We have 2 high-rise signs at 2 locations today and you can stand under them, and we have done it ourselves, there is no light. When you get 100 feet in the air, and that sign is going out, there is no light hitting directly below those signs. Meridian Planning and fining Commission June 17, 1999 Page 86 De Weerd: But that's under it. Eddie: right. I don't think—if you go up to the airport today and look across the street cause it's sitting at an angle, there is a dark parking lot there along the interstate. There is no light on that. The canopy lights like at Locust Grove we have those at airport too. They -are throwing light over that way, but the sign. 100 foot in the air with just tube lighting inside it, you can see the light up there, you don't have a lot of overflow from the light. De Weerd: But Jackson's is 75 and they can see— Eddie: That's the (inaudible) and tubes that are exposed. Those tubes are out there exposed where —like your bulbs right there. They are not behind a face plate of a Chevron emblem or a McDonalds emblem and they are blinking all night long. Barbeiro: Mr. Eddie, I don't know if you were here when we had this discussion. That was the one thing that I presented to the neighbors and wanted to get a feel for was that when the reader board is turned off, they still have a tremendous amount of light in their backyard and that was one of the things we tried to establish here. So regardless of the Eddie: The only thing with that is, I've never seen that reader board turned off and.l think one of the neighborhood people said the same thing. I am out a lot late at night. We go to our store—I have never seen that reader board off. Barbeiro: I watched it once when it was just the one light it just kept going across. That happened for a couple days. Eddie: I think another thing that has been over looked on one part is the landscaping along Eagle Road and then the landscaping along the birm behind the neighbors homes that are at least adjacent of our property—it is a forest of trees. The credit union building between us that we have another landscaped strip between the Chevron and the McDonalds and the credit union that is a forest of trees. Those will help. Barbeiro: When I think of Mr. Christensen who lives 8 houses back..l'm sorry, who was the gentleman ---Mr. Foley lives 8 houses back. Certainly he has a number of houses and trees and all and he's still bathing at the pool by the Texaco star. Eddie: Well I would agree with you, but that the beacon light. That's the flashing reader board all night long. I don't think it is the Texaco sign itself. He's got the canopy lights like we've got at Locust Grove. De Weerd: Does the color of the signs have any — Eddie:. Oh sure. Red and yellow especially yellow. Like one of you guys said is going to throw more light blue and red —the Chevron blue and red is a lot darker. We can all Meridian Planning and thing Commission so June 17, 1999 Page 87 go look at the airport station and look at the sign there, which is larger, but that is a demonstration of what the light will look like. I think all the neighborhood will see with our high rise sign, if you look 100 feet in the air your going to see the sign up there but I don't think you'll see any overflow from the sign in anybody's backyard. Smith: Maybe we need a motion to continue this until we have time to do some more search and maybe the applicant can pull together some more information for you on illumination. Borup: That's what I was going to say. I think we need to give some specific questions and maybe one I would have is how many bulbs are in the Texaco sign? If they all are 800 mililamp..how many'are there, how many is going to be in this. There is a real comparison or a foot kennel measurement 600 feet away... I don't know. In my mind I don't think ---not enough to measure on a sign like this. You can go to another site and turn the sign off and do another measurement. If the instruments are that accurate, which I don't know. Yes Counselor. Gigray. Mr. Chairman, if you feel, or the Commission feels that is has insufficient information for which is could approve on of the signs or any of them, I think you can and you do the authority to request the applicant to come forward with additional evidence with regards to specific questions on illumination. I can imagine there are experts who have general knowledge about illumination principals and the existance of that illumination and certain conditions and what standard test results have been. They are not going to be able to test this particular site, but they provide you with that kind of information or they could come back at another time and say we can't fine this type of evidence—it doesn't exist. I would'`not recommend that you go out and do site visits without announcing a head of time where your going to do it, who's going to be present. What the circumstance are and that you record the information that goes on there because we have Idaho Supreme Court cases on that and I would not recommend that you do that without setting those guidelines a head of time as a group. Borup: Well I know they do have—they have the information on noise reduction the further it gets away from the source. That's in manuals. I don't know why the same thing would not be available on lighting. Barbeiro: Mr. Chairman. What I am kinda amused with is this Chevron, Steve Eddie mutual admiration society that we have here. We all like Chevron gas. Borup: I have not stated my opinion on Chevron gas. Barbeiro: And for the record you will remain neutral on the chance the Texaco guy comes in tomorrow. I do not believe that with the turning off the sign and step down signage at hours to be discussed, that there is going to be a great deal of additional light that is going to go into the neighbor's yards. I am left with now the concern of, do 1 want my town, Meridian, to have a number of 100 foot signs now that we sit here having Meridian Planning andOning Commission 0 June 17, 1999 Page 88 never been presented with the Texaco sign, we are now presented with a sign and as a group will make a precedent. I really don't know that 1 want a 100 foot sign, and another one, and another one in Meridian. That, right now is, I am satisfied the idea of turning off and step down of the lights and the amount of light may not add a great deal more to what the Texaco is. I am now left with the decision or the belief that I have enough information regard (inaudible) to decide on that. The question is do we want 100 foot signs in Meridian? Borup: Do any other Commissioner's feel we need more information? De Weerd: No. I would agree with Commissioner Barbeiro. That the step down or the turn off would certainly help the neighbors and you've pin pointed my concern. The 100 foot sign and does that and is that what we want in our gateway and we can only look forward and at the present and we can' t look at what's' been done in the past. And that's the same question I would have. Smith: I also don't feel that we need anymore information. I will go a step farther to say that not only do not want a 100 foot sign in our gateway, we don't want a 34 foot high sign in our gateway. That one is more offensive to me than the 100 foot sign. I think we need to do something here. In a few minutes here I'm going to have to excuse myself because I have to go to work tomorrow and I have an early meeting. I'm not going to be here when you guys get to vote on it, if we don't vote on it pretty dam quick. Borup: Commissioner Smith do you have any concern on the and that was my feeling too, a monument sign would be appropriate for there until the comment about landscaping came up. Smith: I think you could still heavily landscape that area if it is well designed and that's the key point. Good design, not just plunking the trees down, I think you can place those trees out there and still have a visible monument sign. A good landscape designer architect could do it. De Weerd: I think he has already shown that he has good landscape design on his two other Chevron stores. I don't think that is a issue at all. I would be willing to give him that sign because of that. Borup: There is an option of a taller monument sign. Something -1 don't know what the maximum size the monument sign becomes something else—maximum height. I don't know. The Home Depot sign isn't too far away from a monument sign. De Weerd: Yeah and how tall is that? Borup: when you get a solid monument sign there's got to be a height limit to where your defeating what your trying to accomplish. It's got some open space under it but it's massive. There is nothing—it is all by itself. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Is June 17, 1999 Page 89 De Weerd: It's right there in the gateway to (inaudible). Smith: it is a well designed sign. It's very well proportioned. It may be massive but it's also right next to a freeway off ramp not next to a residential neighborhood. De Weerd: I did not hear the residents talk about this sign though. Smith: I am. I have a vote. Borup: I don't want to completely overlook staff comments. Are we ready to close this hearing. We decided that we don't feel that additional information is beneficial, I think. Smith: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion we close this public hearing. De Weerd: I'd second that. Borup: We have a motion and second. All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Borup: The ayes have it. Now we need to say where to go from here. De Weerd: Well, do we want to vote per sign? Borup: I think Counsel said that was one of our options. Smith: Let's start with a no-brainer and do the credit union sign so I can at least feel like we are making some headway here. De Weerd: I would move that we approve the Idaho United Credit Union sign as proposed. Smith: Second. Borup: All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Borup: That was the easy one. We need to clarify that motion. Any one want to take a stab at one of the others? De Weerd: I would move that we recommend approval for the 34 foot Chevron pylon sign and McDonalds sign. Meridian Planning and *ing Commission June 17, 1999 a Page 90 Barbeiro: Mr. Chairman, I would like to add an amendment to Commissioner De Weerd that the 34 foot sign also be subject to a step down lighting between the hours of 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. if the sign is not completed turned off after discretion of the owner. If that is acceptable to Commissioner De Weerd. De Weerd: Well we already heard that the McDonalds signs are turned off when they're not in operation, but I think the Chevron is 24 hours. I can't see why they would want their street sign turned off. Barbeiro: In that case, then I request that you add to your approval to the City Council that the Chevron sign be a step down voltage from 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. De Weerd: Okay, what he said. Barbeiro: In addition to staff comments. be Weerd: Well, in addition to most staff comments because (inaudible). Borup: We have a motion, no second yet. Barbeiro: Second. Borup: Any discussion. Barbeiro: Commission Smith I imagine you have something to say on this? Smith: I have already said it. Let's go. Borup: All in favor? Borup: Opposed? Smith: Nay MOTION CARRIED: 2 AYES 1 NAY Borup: Okay. The recommendation to approve the pylon sign on Eagle Road has passed 2 to 1. One more. De Weerd: Mr. Chairman. I recommend denial of the 100 foot highway sign as proposed. Barbeiro: I second the motion. Meridian Planning and gingCommission June 17, 1999 Page 91 Borup: Okay, we have a motion and a second to recommend (inaudible) 100 foot freeway sign. All in favor. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Borup: Three ayes. Okay. Barbeiro Mr. Chairman, I move we close our meeting for today. Borup: We have a couple more agenda items, we are completed with Item 7. (Inaudible discussion) Smith: Commissioner De Weerd just to be up front as far as signage and landscape ordinance. I do have the material on the signage other jurisdiction signage ordinances. I have not had a chance to review it. 1 have also not had a change to review the landscape information that has come across so if those are the—if that is the subject matter you wish to talk to, I am not going to be able to add to the conversation and— De Weerd: No. the only thing that 1 wanted to bring up is we really need to get the feed back on the landscape ordinance so we can start getting it out to the people we have identified to review the draft. We certainly would like your comments and feedback before we do that if there's anything glaring, we really need to address that before we send that out. Borup: Was there still a discussion to do a preliminary draft? That's redundant. De Weerd: We have done the drafts. Borup: To do —as a total? We received it one section at a time. De Weerd: That's how it is. We need to start going through it and seeing where there is redundancy and over lap. It is more the concept and more the idea that we would like your feed back on. If we are on target, off target, that sort of thing. Borup: I think that is the main thing we wanted to, just as a reminder, De Weerd: Regarding the sign ordinance I would like to have some kind of commitment as far as a workshop or some date specific that we can start work on the sign ordinance, because I really do not want to spend my nights on R.C. Willey and Chevron and McDonalds sign for the next while either. Smith: It took 2 Y2 hours. De Weerd: Well I don't want to spend 2'/ hours on a sign. k Meridian Planning and ning Commission June 17, 1999 Page 92 Smith: Well Malcolm has gathered a great deal of information on signage ordinance from other jurisdictions. Unfortunately, I have been extremely busy and have not had a chance to look at it. De Weerd: We could have spend 2 Y2 hours looking at that instead of this. Borup: I glanced at it again. There is a lot of information there. It looks really boring. There is another alternative. I don't know that we need to sit down and write the ordinance. That is something staff can do—write up a draft ordinance and I know from past similar type things that it is more productive for staff to put something together and then have the Commission or whatever group to review that and make revisions. It is a lot easier to have something that is already written and revise it than start from scratch. Or even take these other cities and try to put it together. De Weerd: Then that's what we need to direct staff to do. Stiles: It would be nice if we had a little bit of direction first before --with the other fiasco that we had when we tried to get a zoning amendment and it's just dead. Still nothing has been done on that. Borup: Maybe narrow it down to a couple of cities that we thought looked like their practical and go from there. Counselor has a suggestion, hopefully. Gigray: I agree with the Planning and Zoning Administrator. I think she's going to need --staff will need some direction in which your view is as in the best interest of the City. I heard some comments to night I mean that I think are relevant. Do you want 100 foot signs popping up all over the place cause you've got a lot of this City that is going to butt against the freeway and your going to have a lot of interest in that. You've got Fairview and you've got other places that are going to be high demand for signage and you know do you want to look more for monument type situations and landscape or do you want las Vegas glitter or you know I think you can do what you think what is in the best interest of the City and it makes a difference in how you kinda put the ordinance together as to you know I don't think you want to get down to the detail, I agree. But it's just kinda overview. Borup: That makes sense. Shari so your recommendation would be we maybe need to have a workshop to get some general directions first and then— Stiles: That would be nice. What I envision is probably a little almost different overlays, one for actual freeway frontage and maybe another one for areas like Fairview something else maybe for Old Town. Borup: I'd like to see a workshop then with you starting out giving an overview of what you'd like to see and then we can do some comments that we need to--- Meridian Planning and folning Commission June 17, 1999 Page 93 De Weerd: If we are all ready setting a 6 o'clock meeting on the 29th, perhaps we can dove tail this with that and have a workshop immediately afterwards. I guess 1--- Borup: Assuming it doesn't last this late. De Weerd: I am really optimistic that it's not going to be this late. Smith: That was one of the reasons why I put that contingency on it so we --- De Weed: Yeah, and we won't. We already know what we have and you know 1 rather just get started on it. 1 really don't want this to happen. Borup: I don't think—we've been talking about this for how long. We can't keep putting it off. Smith: Shari, did Malcolm share with you the signage ordinances that he shared with the rest of the Commission? Stiles: Yes he did. De Weerd: Have you read them? Stiles: No. Borup: They are long and boring. Smith: Go through them ---really seriously. Just the outline. Does this include all the things that I think --don't get knit picky and all the specific language. Just look at the outline of what they do talk about like your talking about the freeway overlay zones, so forth. There maybe some that don't have things that you think we need to have and there may be some that have things that you didn't even think about. That would be a good place to start. We need to put an outline together. Stiles: I probably have another 20 ordinances besides what he gave you. De Weerd: Perhaps Shari if you could put together on feedback specifically or general that you want to have at this workshop. If you can give us an outline of the questions your going to want to have answered. That way we can come prepared with our own thoughts. We can do some readings. We can pull out things that we like and maybe be able to do some really good work at that workshop: Stiles: I am not sure how much I am able to get done by next month. With the work load we've got now. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission June 17, 1999 Page 94 De Weerd: Well, what ever you, can. What ever you can. it's a great start. Borup: And if anyone here has time I think that would be a good way to start with an outline. Just as we've done here, with the sections and that is enough to start with. De Weerd: The last issue I have is last year at a work shop we did talk about having an annual one year term for the chairmanship and I don't remember if it was for a year or 2 years. If there was— Smith: What I recall Tammy was Malcolm presented some written information. I don't remember what the source of the information was other than Malcolm, but it discussed the terms of the Chair and then Chairmanships of different—or responsibilities of each of the Planning and Zoning Commission members to what that the bylaws were never voted on and never adopted, but the discussion that I remember have was myself I know and 1 think you as well and Commissioner Nelson—I don't remember what Commissioner Borup had expressed an interest in, but we had indicated a preference for a one year term—that was as far as it got. Nothing was ever voted on, so that as far as I can see it is still hanging out there and this Commission needs to make a decision on it. Bordp: My recollection was an annual vote. Smith: That's was what I thought the preference was but I don't remember that we ever came to a vote. Borup: I thought we did, but it also stated that the terms didn't have to rotate, but that there would be --that was the intention to give everyone a chance, but we did not want to impose something on future Commissioners where they felt the necessity to rotate and the same person could be voted in again. De Weerd: Could l propose that we put this on the agenda next month when Chairman Mac Coy is here so that we could discuss it and then we can further recommend something at the workshop but just get something firm and vote on it and— Borup: I don't know if we need to discuss it unless we feel it wasn't adequately handled a year ago. Was it a year ago, does anybody know. Smith: That's what I was just going to ask was when-- Borup: Was it last June, May? De Weerd: I believe it was right after I started because they wanted me to vote on a chairman the very first meeting and I did not feel comfortable about that. Borup: When was your first meeting? Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission June 17, 1999 Page 95 De Weerd: It was the first meeting in June. Smith: We are at a year. Borup: And we can check the minutes real easy on that. I've got them all. I'm not very organized, but I've got them all on a shelf. De Weerd: So if we can have that on the agenda in July. Borup: Okay. De Weerd I would move that we adjourn. Smith: Second. Borup: All in favor?' MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES MEETING ADJOURNED AT 11:40 (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) APPROVED: KEITH BORUP, ACTING CHAIRMAN Date ATTEST: WILLIAM G. BERG, JR. CITY CLERK F MEMORANDUM: June 14, 1999 To: Planning & Zoning Commission, Mayor and City Council RECEIVED From: Shari Stiles, P&Z Administrator 223 JUN 14 1999 City of Meridian Re: Request for Modification to Conditional Use Permit to Include 100 -foot %W Sign Office and 34 -foot -high Sign on Eagle Road, and Six -foot -high Monument Sign on Eagle Road by Eagle Partners LLC We have reviewed this submittal and offer the following comments, as conditions of the applicant. These conditions shall be considered in full, unless expressly modified or deleted by motion of the Meridian City Council: GENERAL COMMENTS: 1. The property is designated in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan as Mixed/Planned Use Development. 2. As part of a conditional use permit, the City of Meridian may impose additional restrictions/conditions. 3. There are many gas stations/fast food franchises along I-84. No pylon signs have been observed, from Boise to Meridian, approaching this height. 4. If approved, the pylon sign would be observed as the high point on the horizon upon entering Meridian. 5. Signs along Fairview Avenue, another entryway corridor, have been limited to a maximum height times width of 72 square feet. The Chevron/ 4cDonald's , sign on Eagle • Road, if approved, would have a height times width of nearly 670 square feet. The Idaho United Credit Union would slightly exceed 72 square feet. 6. Applicant asserts this type of signage is necessary for visibility to the traveling public. The Applicant has also stated that a 100 -foot -high pylon sign is needed because the hospital to be built by St. Luke's will conceal the sign from westbound traffic. It is not the City's responsibility or desire to ensure visibility of signs over all structures, built and unbuilt. With over 30,000 vehicle trips per day passing the site, it is unlikely this type of advertising is necessary to promote customer visits. This site does not have freeway frontage and is CUP99-017 EaglePartnersSign.CUP f _�i AWL HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY Mayor ROBERT D. CORRIE A Good Place to Live LEGAL DEPARTMENT (208) 884-4264 CITY OF MERIDIAN Council Members PUBLIC WORKS CHARLES ROUNTREE 33 EAST IDAHO BUILDING DEPARTMENT (208) 887-2211 GLENN BENTLEY MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 RON ANDERSON Phone (208) 888-4433 • Fax (208) 887-4813 PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT KEITH BIRD (208) 884-5533 MEMORANDUM: June 14, 1999 To: Planning & Zoning Commission, Mayor and City Council RECEIVED From: Shari Stiles, P&Z Administrator 223 JUN 14 1999 City of Meridian Re: Request for Modification to Conditional Use Permit to Include 100 -foot %W Sign Office and 34 -foot -high Sign on Eagle Road, and Six -foot -high Monument Sign on Eagle Road by Eagle Partners LLC We have reviewed this submittal and offer the following comments, as conditions of the applicant. These conditions shall be considered in full, unless expressly modified or deleted by motion of the Meridian City Council: GENERAL COMMENTS: 1. The property is designated in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan as Mixed/Planned Use Development. 2. As part of a conditional use permit, the City of Meridian may impose additional restrictions/conditions. 3. There are many gas stations/fast food franchises along I-84. No pylon signs have been observed, from Boise to Meridian, approaching this height. 4. If approved, the pylon sign would be observed as the high point on the horizon upon entering Meridian. 5. Signs along Fairview Avenue, another entryway corridor, have been limited to a maximum height times width of 72 square feet. The Chevron/ 4cDonald's , sign on Eagle • Road, if approved, would have a height times width of nearly 670 square feet. The Idaho United Credit Union would slightly exceed 72 square feet. 6. Applicant asserts this type of signage is necessary for visibility to the traveling public. The Applicant has also stated that a 100 -foot -high pylon sign is needed because the hospital to be built by St. Luke's will conceal the sign from westbound traffic. It is not the City's responsibility or desire to ensure visibility of signs over all structures, built and unbuilt. With over 30,000 vehicle trips per day passing the site, it is unlikely this type of advertising is necessary to promote customer visits. This site does not have freeway frontage and is CUP99-017 EaglePartnersSign.CUP 9 0 P&Z Commission/Mayor & Council June 14, 1999 Page 2 adjacent to residential uses. The blue informational signs on I-84 are intended for businesses of this type. 7. Applicant's narrative also includes the statement, "Sure you can see it, but you can also see the stars in the sky. Yet, they shine no light through our windows." The adjacent neighbors would undoubtedly argue they have no problem with seeing stars and would prefer them to a massive Chevron/McDonald's beacon. MERIDIAN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES: Land Use Goal Statement — Page 23 1.10U Promote the design of attractive roadway entryway areas into Meridian which will clearly identify the community. 2.3U Protect and maintain residential neighborhood property values, improve each neighborhood's physical condition and enhance its quality of life for residents. Franklin, Overland/I-84 Mixed Use Policies — Page 28 5.8 Development in these areas should be based on functional plans and proposals in order to ensure that the proposed uses conform to the Comprehensive Plan policies and are compatible with the surrounding neighborhoods. 5.9 The integrity and identity of any adjoining residential neighborhood should be preserved through the use of buffering techniques, including screen plantings, open space and other landscaping techniques. 5.11 The character, site improvements, and type of development should be harmonized with previously developed land in the area, and where located adjacent to or near any existing residence or residential area, shall be harmonized with residential uses, and all reasonable efforts shall be made to reduce the environmental impact on residential areas, including noise and traffic reduction. 5.14U Because these areas are near I-84, Franklin and Overland Roads, high-quality visual appearance is essential. All developoment proposals in this area will be subject to development review guidelines and conditional use permitting procedures. Community Identification Goal Statement — Page 71 1.4 Major entrances to the City should be enhanced and emphasized. Unattractive land uses along these entrances should be screened from view. CUP -99-017 EaglePartnerssign.CUP 0 P&Z Commission/Mayor & Council June 14, 1999 Page 3 Special Community Design Areas Goal Statement — Page 72 2.2U Encourage area beautification through uniform sign design that enhances the community. Quality of Environment Goal Statement — Page 73 5.1U Preserve the aesthetic natural resources of the Meridian area. 5.2U Ensure that all new development enhances rather than detracts from the visual quality of its surroundings, especially in areas of prominent visibility. Staff recommends that the Idaho United Credit Union monument sign be approved as submitted. Staff recommends denial of the pylon sign and the Chevron/McDonald's sign on Eagle Road, that the P&Z Commission give the applicant direction as to what they would lice to see, and that the public hearing be continued until appropriate signage is proposed. There are many lots remaining to be developed in this subdivision, with uses that may want to have visibility from the freeway even though they have no frontage on the freeway. Approval of applications such as this will set the tone for the area and lead to a proliferation of signage. Is this the identity Meridian wants to project? Hubble Engineers, in their development agreement, is limited to detached signage with a height of no more than'ten feet. Staff feels this restriction should be placed on this and all future development within the Magic View Subdivision (with the exception of properties having actual frontage on I-84), and that the development agreement be amended to reflect signage restrictions. Applicant uses the existence of the Texaco sign as an example of what they should be allowed to do. Past mistakes should not doom the City to poor aesthetics forevermore. CUP -99-017 EaglePartnersSig.CUP 4 BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION IN THE MATTER OF THE, ) CASE NO. CUP -99-017 APPLICATION OF EAGLE PARTNERS, ) fi FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ) FINDINGS AND FOR SIGNAGE FOR CHEVRON ) RECOMMENDATION FOR C -STORE WITH GAS PUMPS & ) CONDITIONAL APPROVAL DETACHED CAR WASH, ) OF AMENDMENT TO MCDONALD'SWITH DRIVE -UP ) CONDITIONAL USE WINDOW (SAME BUILDING AS ) PERMIT C=STORE) & IDAHO UNITED CREDIT UNION The above entitled conditional use permit application having come before the Planning and Zoning Commission on the 17th day of June, 1999, and Shari Stiles, Planning and. Zoning Administrator, appeared and testified, and appearing on behalf of the Applicant was Michael Spink, Applicant's attorney, Craig Jamieson, George I_yler and Steve -Eddy, all appeared and testified for the Applicant, and those appearing and offering testimony in opposition of the two proposed Pylon Display Signs were: Richard Williams, Charles-Horel, Howard Foley, Joan Nelson, S.G. Christensen and Rod Trex, and the Commission having received the staff report, and being fully -advised in the premises, the Commission finds and concludes as follows: s f fi FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR — PAGE 1 - CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT" FINDINGS 1. The Commission takes .judicial notice of its zoning, subdivisions, and development ordinances codified at Title 11, Municipal Code of the City of Meridian, and all current zoning maps thereof, and the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian adopted December 21, 1993, Ordinance No. 629, January 4, 1994, and Maps and the Ordinances establishing the Impact Area Boundary Ordinance and Map. 2. Staff has complied with the requirements of I.C. §§ 67-6509 and 67- 6512 and §§ 11-2-416E and 11-2-418E. 3. A list of mailing addresses of all property owners who own property located within the three hundred (300') feet of the external boundaries of the land being considered and all property owners included within the property being considered as evidenced from the official tax records of Ada County was supplied by { the Applicant. 4. The Applicant is Eagle Partners, L.L.C. c/o Stephen Brown, P.O. Box 388, Boise, Idaho 83701, whose telephone number is (208),345-7832. 5. The legal descriptions of the property are attached as Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "B" and incorporated herein as if set forth in full hereat. 6. The present land use of the subject property is vacant unused land. ` FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION FOR — PAGE 2 CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT t 7: "The present zoning district of the subject property is (GG) General Retail and Service Commercial. 8. The Applicant paid the fee established by the City Council for the application herein submitted. 9. The proposed development and use is allowed in the requested zone as a conditional use with no additional permit requirements. 10. A development agreement was entered into as a condition of the annexation and zoning designation. 11. The subject real property is subject to that certain "Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order of Decision In the Matter of the Application of Eagle Partners LLC, 603 South Eagle Road, The Application For Conditional Use Permit, Northwest Corner of Eagle Road and Magic View Drive, Meridian, Idaho", consisting of 29 pages hereinafter referred to as "Original Findings" and this application seeks an amendment to 4.24, a condition of development of the Order of Decision,which provides "No signage details were submitted. -Detailed signage plans must be included as part of this application for review"and approval," and any need for amendment to 4.45 of the conditions of development of the Order of Decision which provides "All signs must meet the requirements of the Uniform Sign Code and the 5. Meridian City Ordinance, in addition, flashing signs and temporary signs will not be FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION FOR — PAGE 3 CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT permitted. All signs are subject to review. In addition to the Meridian Sign Ordinance, all signage of any type must be approved by the Meridian City Council. Sign -permits are to be obtained prior to construction. Upon three days notice to any tenant, the'City of Meridian will remove any unauthorized signage." Specifically, applicant requests amendment of these two conditions to include as a specific condition of development the approval of ' a monument ;sign for Idaho United Credit Union, as depicted in Sketch #7377 dated 4/7/99 by Idaho Electric Signs, and a Chevron and McDonald's double face, internally illuminated pylon display, as depicted in Sketch #7317 dated 2/18/99 by Idaho Electric Signs, and a 100' tall double face internally illuminated pylon display, as depicted in Sketch #7317 dated 2/18/99 at the locations as depicted on the Site Plan, which is denoted as*"Site Signage Locations as prepared for Idaho Electric Signs Co." dated 5/11/99. 12. The owners of the -subject property are as follows: Eagle Partners, L.L.C. of the McDonald's and Chevron parcels, as depicted on the "Site Plan", and the Idaho United Credit Union, a State Charted Corporation, P.O. Box 2268, Boise; 4 Idaho 83701, -of the Credit Union Parcel, as depicted on the "Site Plan". 13. The reasons for the requested amendment of the conditional use permit are as:follows: a 100' overall height sign is.to address I-84 traffic as well as the smaller pylon type sign on Eagle Road at an overall height of 34'. The fact that the FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION FOR — PAGE 4 CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT R TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT t proposed signs feature both Chevron and McDonald's is an attempt to minimize the number of sign structures. The signs are 470 and 344 square feet respectively. Sign height and location were determined by Applicant's thorough survey involving a 100' boom truck. Applicant reports there were numerous obstructions to the sign's visibility especially proceeding west on I-84, which included a large stand of trees, the hospital, and the over pass. Applicant doing a 100' sign will only be seen (noticed) from I-84. The proposed smaller sign on Eagle Road is virtually identical in size and height to the sign at Locust Grove Chevron on Fairview and the Meridian Chevron on 1 st To address staff's concern with the overall height and illumination of the signs on adjacent residences, Applicant claims the height of the 100' sign prevent this. With the sign on Eagle Road illuminating north and south it is quite distant from'existing residences. 14. The development in the surrounding area is; as, was found in the "Original Findings", particularly Findings 13 and 14, which are herein referred to by reference and which Findings the' Commission takes judicial notice hereof. w 15. No variance or other additionaf requirements are required. 16. Those opposing the application were concerned with the aesthetics of the entrance to Meridian, and the proximity of the proposed pylon signs and along FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION FOR — PAGE 5 CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT TO COND'ITIONAL USE PERMIT with the rest of the development and existing illuminated signs in the area will further illuminate the residential area, which they claim are inconsistent with their enjoyment and use of their residential properties. • 17. No one testified in opposition to the monument sign for the Idaho United Credit Union. - 18. The McDonald's sign will not be illuminated from 11:00 p.m. to 4:00 a.m. 19. The higher the sign the less compatible it is with the adjacent residential neighborhood and.it is more visible for a greater distance in all directions. 20. There is an existing 77' pylon sign, with reader"board, located upon neighbbring. property for the Jackson's Texaco gas station, which lies to the south of the subject properties. 21. The City Council in this matter has previously made its Findings of the compatibility of the conditional use to the City's Comprehensive Plan, which the - Zoning Commission takes notice as set forth in'Finding 35 of the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Conditional Use Permit and subject to the denial of the application for the 100' sign` 22. Recommendations of this Commission and are consistent with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan: FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION FOR — PAGE 6 CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Land Use Goal Statement - Page 23 1.10U Promote the design of attractive roadway entryway areas into Meridian which will clearly identify the community. 2.3U Protect and maintain residential neighborhood property k values, improve each neighborhood's physical condition and enhance its quality of life for residents. Franklin, Overland/I-84 Mixed Use Policies - Page 28 5.8 Development in these areas should be based on functional plans and proposals in•order to ensure that the proposed uses conform to the Comprehensive Plan policies and are compatible with the surrounding neighborhoods. 5.9 The`integrity and identity of any adjoining residential neighborhood should,be preserved through the use of buffering techniques, including screen plantings, open space and other landscaping techniques. 5.11, The character, site, improvements, and type of development should be harmonized with previously developed land in the area, and where located adjacent to or near any existing residence or residential area, shall be harmonized with residential uses, and all reasonable efforts shall be made to reduce the environmental impact on residential areas, including those and traffic reduction. 5.14U Because these areas are near I-84, Franklin and Overland Roads, high-quality visual appearance is essential. All development proposals in this area will be subject to development review guidelines and conditional use permitting procedures. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION FOR — PAGE 7 CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT i Community Identification Goal Statement - Page 71 1.4 Major entrances'fo the City should be enhanced and emphasized. Unattractive land uses along these entrances should be screened from view. Special Community Design Areas Goal Statement - Page 72 2.2U Encourage area beautification through uniform sign design that enhances the community.. t Quality of Environment Goal Statement - Page 73 5.1 U Preserve the aesthetic natural resources of the Meridian area. 5.20 Ensure that all new development enhances rather than detracts from the visual quality of its `surroundings, especially in areas of prominent visibility. 23. If approved, the 100' pylon sign would be observed as the high point on the horizon upon entering Meridian. 24. Signs along Fairview, Avenue, another entryway corridor, have been limited to a maximum height times width of 72 square feet. The Chevron/McDonald's sign on Eagle Road, if approved, would have a height times width of nearly 670 square feet. The Idaho United Credit Union would slightly exceed 72 square feet. 25. Considerations for conditions to the granting of conditional use permit are as follows: FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION FOR — PAGE 8 CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT F 30.1, Minimize adverse impact on other development in 'the vicinity; 30.2 Control the sequence and timing of development; 30.3 Control the duration of development; 30A4 Assure that the development is maintained properly; 30.5 Designate the exact location and nature of the development; 30.6 Require the provision for on-site and off-site public facilities or services; 30.7 Require more restrictive standards than those generally required, in this Ordinance; 30.8 Require mitigation of effects of the proposed use and development upon service delivered by political subdivisions, including the School District providing services with the planning jurisdiction of the City of Meridian; and 30.9 Consider -imposition of conditions such as bonds and safeguards in conformity -with the Zoning ordinance. RECOMMENDATIONS I.- That the Findings of Fact. and Conclusions of Law and Order of Decision "In the Matter of the Application of Eagle Partners, L.L.C., 603 South Eagle Road, The Application For Conditions Use Permit, Northwest Corner of Eagle Road and Magic View Drive, Meridian, Idaho", consisting of -29 pages be amended at 4.24 and at 4.45 of the conditions of development of the Order of Decision to provide as a specific condition. of development the approval of the construction and use of a monument sign for Idaho United Credit Union as depicted in Sketch.#7377 dated 4/7/99 by Idaho Electric Signs, and a Chevron and McDonald's double face internally illuminated pylon display as depicted - in Sketch #7317 dated 2/18/99 by Idaho Electric Signs. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION FOR — PAGE 9 CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2. The Commission recommends denial of the application _to amend the conditional use permit for the construction and -use of a 100' tall double face internally illuminated pylori display as depicted in Sketch # 7317 dated 2/18/99 at the locations as depicted on the site plan which is denoted as "Site Signage Locations as prepared for Idaho Electric Signs Co., dated 5/11/99". M � By action of the Planning and Zoning Commission at its special meeting and public hearing held in this matter on June 17, 1999. ROLL CALL:: COMMISSIONER THOMAS BARBEIRO VOTED COMMISSIONER KEITH BORUP VOTED COMMISSIONER TAMMY DeWEERD VOTED COMMISSIONER BYRON SMITH VOTED 4 CHAIRMAN MALCOLM MACCOY (TIE BREAKER) VOTED DATED: MOTION: APPROVED: DISAPPROVED: Copy served upon Applicant, the Planning and Zoning Department and the =Public Works Department. R By: 0 Dated:' City Clerk msg/ZAWork\N1\Meridian 15360MAGLE PARTNERS CUP SIGNAGE\FCLSforPZ.CUP FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION FOR —PAGE, 10 CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT E' xHUBI'T -p, . ,DESCRIPTION OF CHEVRON PARCEL A parcefof landin the SEI/<NEI/< of Section 17, T.3 N., R.I E., B.M., City.ofMeridian, Ada County Idaho, being a portion bf Lot 1 of the Amended Magic View Subdivision, the official plat of which is recorded in Book 52 of Plats at page 4445 and being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the east 1/4 corner of said Section 17, marked by a brass cap monument in Eagle Road (State Highway No. 55) and located S.00°22'18"E., 2652.85 feet from the brass cap monument m the intersection of said Eagle Road and West Franklin Road which marks the northeast comer of said Section 17; thence, N.00°22'18"W.,749.74 feet along the east line of said Section 17 to the point of intersection of same with the centerline of Magic View Drive; " thence, S.89°38'27"W., 96.45 feet along said, centerline to the point of intersection of samewith the westerly right of way line of said Eagle Road, as described in Deed Instrument no.. 8843782; -thence, Northerly, along said westerly right of way line along a curve to the right having a radius of 5799.58 feet,4an arc length of'48.28 feet, a central angle of 00°28'37", a chord bearing of N.01°34'18"E., and a chord distance of 48.27 feet to the POINT OF BEGLNN7i iG; thence, S.45°43'31 "W., 27.74 feet along the proposed new northeriv, right of way line of Magic View Drive to an angle point in same; thence, S.89°38'27W., 279.35 feefalong said new northerly right of way line!(29.00 feet from center) to a point in the west line of said Lot 1 of the Amended Magic View Subdivision; -thence N.00006'25"W., 442.31 feet along said west lot line to a point in the south right of way line of a proposed new street; thence, S.89°5705'E., 45.00' feet along said south right of way line to a point; thence, S.00"06'25"E., 158.00 feet along a line parallel with and 45.00 feet east of the west line of said Lot 1 of the Amended Magic View Subdivision; thence, S.8905705"E., 268.09 feet along a line parallel with and 266.00 feet south of the north line of said Lot 1, to a point in said westerly right of way line 6f Eagle Road; thence, Southerly, along said westerly richt of way line, along a curve to the right having a radius of 5659.58 feet, an aff length of 73.01 feet, a central angle of 00°44'21 ",.a chord 'bearing of S.03-19'1 3) "W., and a chord distance of 73.01 feet to a point of reverse curvature; thence, Southerly, along said right of way line, along a curve to the left having a radius of 5799.58 feet, an arc length of 190.27 feet, a central angle of 01°52'47", a chord bearing of S.02°45'00"W., and a chord distance of 190.26 feet to, the POINT OF BEGINNING, said'CP1EVRON PARCEL containing 93;335 square feet or 2.143 .acres, more or less. E 1 � EXHIBIT B DESCRIPTION OF CREI7iT UNION PARCEL t A`artel of land in the SE'/. NEI/4 of Section 17, T.3 N., R.1 E., B -M, City ofMeridian, Ada County, Idaho, being a portion of Lot 1 of the Amended Magic View Subdivision, the official plat of which is recorded in Book 52 of Plats at page 4445 and being more particularly described as.follows:., Commencing at the east 1/4 corner of said Section 17, marked by a brass cap monument in Eagle Road (State Highway No. 55) and located S.00°?2'18"E.,,2652.85.fe-_t from the brass cap monument in the intersection of said Eagle Road and West Franklin Road which marks the northeastcorner of said Section 17; thence, N.00'22'1 8'-w.,749,74 feet albn' ? the east'fine wJ°-g sa'd,Section 17 to the point of intersection of same with the centerline of,,Magic View Drive; thence, S.8903827"W., 96.45 feet along said centerline to the point of intersection of same with the Westerly night of way 'line -of said Eagle Road, as described inDe- d Insdiunr ent no. -8843782; thence, Northerly, along said westerly right of way line along a curve to the right having a radius of#5799.58 feet, an arc'Iength of 238.54 feet, a central angle of 02°21'24", a chord"bearing of` N.02°30'41"E., and a chord distance of 238.52 feet to a point of reverse curvature,:thence; Northerly, along said westerly right of,.way line, along a curve to the,left,having a radius of 5659.-58 feet, an arc length of 73.01 feet, a central angle of 00°44'21", a chord bearing of' N:03,° 19'13" E., and a chord distance of 73.01 feefto the POINT'OF'BEGPN ,-,- thence, N. 89°5705"W., 268.09 feet to a point 45.00 feet east of the,west line of said Lot 1 -of the Amended Mag'c:View Subdivision; thence, ' N.00°06'25"W., 158.00 feet along a line parallel.with and 45.00 feet east of said west line to a ti point 108.00 feet south of„the north line of said Lot: 1; thence,'_,, ;w S.8905705t., 243.55 feet along a line parallel with and -17V&00 feet 4south of the north line of said Lot 1, said line being the proposed southerly right'.of,wav,line of a new (as yet unnamed) street; to an angle point in said proposed southerly right of way line;' thence, , S.44908'40"E., 43.02 feet along said proposed right of way line to a point in said westerly right of way line of Eagle Road; thence, Southerly, along said -westerly right of way line, along a curve'to" [he! ight having a radius of 5659.58 feet, an arc leiiQth•of 127.26 feet, a central angle_ of 01').1 718”, dchord bearing of S:0201 8'23"W., and a chord distance of 127.25 feet .to the POLNT OF BEGINNING, said CREDIT UNION PARCEL containing 42,434 square feet or 0.974, acres;.more or less. HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY Mayor LEGAL DEPARTMENT ROBERT D. CORRIE A Good Place to Live (_08)884-4_64 Council Members CITY OF MERIDIAN PUBLIC WORKS 33 EAST IDAHO BUILDING DEPARTMENT CHARLES ROUNTREE (208) 887-231 l GLENN BENTLEY MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 RON ANDERSON Phone (208) 888-4433 • Fax (208) 88 #3ir , T PLANNING AND ZONING �"J 1 I� 1 1 DEPARTMENT KEITH BIRD ��JJ (308) 884-5533 MAY 2 6 1999 City of Meridian TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON%Tf!0PM1ENT PROJECTS WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendations to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: June 10, 1999 TRANSMITTAL DATE: May 24, 1999 HEARING DATE: ,tune 17. 1999 FILE NUMBER: CUP -99-017 REQUEST: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT INCLUDES SIGNAGE FOR CHEVRON C -STORE WITH GAS PUMPS & DETACHED CAR WASH, MCDONALD'S WITH DRIVE - UP WINDOW (SAME BUILDING AS C -STORE) & IDAHO UNITED CREDIT UNION BY: EAGLE PARTNERS LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: NW CORNER EAGLE ROAD & MAGIC VIEW DR TAMMY DE WEERD P/Z MALCOLM MACCOY, P/Z THOMAS BARBEIRO, P/Z 'BYRON SMITH, P/Z _KEITH BORUP, P/Z _ROBERT CORRIE, MAYOR RON ANDERSON, C/C CHARLIE ROUNTREE, C/C _KEITH BIRD, C/C GLENN BENTLEY, C/C WATER DEPARTMENT rSEWER DEPARTMENT BUILDING DEPARTMENT YIRE DEPARTMENT OLICE DEPARTMENT _CITY ATTORN EY _CITY ENGINEER CITY PLANNER MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION (PRELIM & FINAL) IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT ADA COUNTY (ANNEXATION) YOUR COWIW REMARKS: 0 HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY Mayor ROBERT D. CORRIE A Good Place to Live Council Members CITY OF MERIDIAN CHARLES ROUNTREE 33 EAST IDAHO GLENN BENTLEY MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 RON ANDERSON Phone (208) 888-4433• Fax (208) 887-4813 KEITH BIRD LEGAL DEPARTMENT (208)884-4264 PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING DEPARTMENT (208)887-2211 PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT (208)884-5533 TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS . WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendations to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: June 10, 1999 TRANSMITTAL DATE: May 24, 1999 HEARING DATE: June 17, 1999 FILE NUMBER: CUP -99-017 REQUEST: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT INCLUDES SIGNAGE FOR CHEVRON C -STORE WITH GAS PUMPS & DETACHED CAR WASH, MCDONALD'S WITH DRIVE - UP WINDOW (SAME BUILDING AS C -STORE) & IDAHO UNITED CREDIT UNION BY: EAGLE PARTNERS LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: NW CORNER EAGLE ROAD & MAGIC _ TAMMY DE WEERD P/Z MALCOLM MACCOY, P/Z THOMAS BARBEIRO, P/Z BYRON SMITH, P/Z _KEITH BORUP, P/Z _ROBERT CORRIE, MAYOR RON ANDERSON, C/C _CHARLIE ROUNTREE, C/C _KEITH BIRD, C/C _GLENN BENTLEY, C/C _WATER DEPARTMENT _SEWER DEPARTMENT _BUILDING DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT _POLICE DEPARTMENT C ITY ATTO R N EY _CITY ENGINEER CITY PLANNER MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION (PRELIM & FINAL) IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT ADA COUNTY (ANNEXATION) YOUR CONCISE REMARKS: q / LL Coots W4 (./V e4S to Be M . n, fs . ZF .4wLf /f -,4 -,/✓i L - 3_f araC_ 2F 7� e 1 k Pq Al Ce d? fcp f��e oPTtear� �yS{Q�-s. To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendations to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: June 10, 1999 TRANSMITTAL DATE: MaV 24, 1999 HEARING DATE: June 17. 1999 FILE NUMBER: CUP -99-017 REQUEST: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT INCLUDES SIGNAGE FOR CHEVRON C -STORE WITH GAS PUMPS & DETACHED CAR WASH MCDONALD'S WITH DRIVE - UP WINDOW (SAME BUILDING AS C -STORE) & IDAHO UNITED CREDIT UNION BY: EAGLE PARTNERS LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: NW CORNER EAGLE'ROAD & MAGIC VIEW DR _ TAMMY DE WEERD P/Z MALCOLM MACCOY, P/Z THOMAS BARBEIRO, P/Z BYRON SMITH, P/Z _KEITH BORUP, P/Z _ROBERT CORRIE, MAYOR _RON ANDERSON, C/C CHARLIE ROUNTREE, C/C _KEITH BIRD, C/C GLENN BENTLEY, C/C WATER DEPARTMENT _SEWER DEPARTMENT _BUILDING DEPARTMENT _FIRE DEPARTMENT _POLICE DEPARTMENT _CITY ATTORNEY _CITY ENGINEER CITY PLANNER YOUR MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION (PRELIM & FINAL) IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT ADA COUNTY (ANNEXATION) CISE REMARKS: 7 e- ?$�j 7rc 3 svre- f7-2/71Z),PrOd ec f or 4-nV 4�p_ �rr�J ' :5 r) i-hjS rG� 'SHY 2 1q' n • • HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY Mayor ROBERT D. CORRIE LEGAL DEPARTMENT A Good Place to Live ((208) 884.4264 CITY OF MERIDIAN Council Members. PUBLIC WORKS CHARLES ROUNTREE 33 EAST IDAHO I fBUILDING DEPARTMENT (208) 887-2211 GLENN BENTLEY MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (208) 888-4433 • Fax (208) 887-4&1��FCEaNNING AND ZONING RON ANDERSON DEPARTMENT KEITH BIRD JUN 0 1 1999 (208) 884-5533 City of Meridian Cite Clerk Office TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendations to Meridian City Hall, Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk by: June 10, 1999 TRANSMITTAL DATE: MaV 24, 1999 HEARING DATE: June 17. 1999 FILE NUMBER: CUP -99-017 REQUEST: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT INCLUDES SIGNAGE FOR CHEVRON C -STORE WITH GAS PUMPS & DETACHED CAR WASH MCDONALD'S WITH DRIVE - UP WINDOW (SAME BUILDING AS C -STORE) & IDAHO UNITED CREDIT UNION BY: EAGLE PARTNERS LOCATION OF PROPERTY OR PROJECT: NW CORNER EAGLE'ROAD & MAGIC VIEW DR _ TAMMY DE WEERD P/Z MALCOLM MACCOY, P/Z THOMAS BARBEIRO, P/Z BYRON SMITH, P/Z _KEITH BORUP, P/Z _ROBERT CORRIE, MAYOR _RON ANDERSON, C/C CHARLIE ROUNTREE, C/C _KEITH BIRD, C/C GLENN BENTLEY, C/C WATER DEPARTMENT _SEWER DEPARTMENT _BUILDING DEPARTMENT _FIRE DEPARTMENT _POLICE DEPARTMENT _CITY ATTORNEY _CITY ENGINEER CITY PLANNER YOUR MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT IDAHO POWER CO.(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) U.S. WEST(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELIM & FINAL PLAT) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION (PRELIM & FINAL) IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT ADA COUNTY (ANNEXATION) CISE REMARKS: 7 e- ?$�j 7rc 3 svre- f7-2/71Z),PrOd ec f or 4-nV 4�p_ �rr�J ' :5 r) i-hjS rG� 'SHY 2 1q' n Acla ('7oounl ,Riq4way 2)iviCi Sherry R. Huber, President 318 East 37th Street Judy Peavey -Derr, Vice President Garden City, Idaho 83714-6499 Marlyss Meyer Routson, Secretary Phone (208) 387-6100 Dave Bivens, Commissioner Fax (208) 387-6391 Susan S. Eastlake, Commissioner e-mail: tellus@achd.ada.id.us June 8, 1999 City of Meridian RF+ cElvEy 33 East Idaho :JUN 11 1999 Meridian, ID 83642 CITY OF MERIDIAN RE: MCUP99-017 n/w corner Eagle/ Magic View On December 30, 1998.the'Ada County Highway District Commissioners acted on MCUP43-97. The conditions and requirements also apply to.MCUP99-017. { If you have any questions please feel free to call me at 387-6170. Sincerely, n Christy Richardson Development Analyst cc: Project file - Chron fife 5 F ti 13 / A • ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT K Planning'& Development Services Development Application Report MCU-43-97/MA-13-97 603 Eagle Rd. Chevron/McDonald's/Idaho Power Credit Union The applicant is requesting conditional use approval to construct.a 5,000 -square foot Idaho Power Credit Union with a drive-thru window, a 5,359 -square foot convenience store/McDonald's fast food restaurant with a drive-thru window, and an 854 -square foot carwash facility. The applicant also requested a rezone from RT to C -G which has been approved by the City of Meridian. The 4.13 -acre site is located on the northwest corner of Magic View Drive and Eagle Road (Highway 55) approximately 720 -feet north of I-84. This development is estimated to generate 7,500 additional vehicle trips per day based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation manual. The City of Meridian has approved both the application for annexation and the conditional use"permit and entered into a development agreement with the developer. Staff has been advised that a judicial appeal of the annexation has been filed with District Court. On January 8, 1997, the Commission acted on MCU-19-96/MA-4-96 for this site. That application requested a rezone and conditional use approval to construct a 76 -room hotel, a 5,359 -square foot .convenience store/fast food restaurant, and an 800 -square foot carwash. The subject application is similar to the previous application with the exception of the previously requested 76 -room hotel. Roads impacted by this development: Eagle Road (Hwy 55) Magic View Drive ACHD Commission Date - December 30, 1998 - 12:00 p.m. r nklin 4 Magic View ,%, \ St. Luke's RMC Entry Road ITE o F Ovprl2nd �rn TO O W O W E U s Facts and Findings: f. A General Information 1. Owner - Gerald & Deloris Marlin Applicant - Eagle Partners L.L.0 RT - Existing zoning C -G --Requested zoning 4.13 - Acres 0 - Square feet of existing building 344 - Total lineal feet of ACHD proposed public streets 283 - Traffic Analysis Zone JAZ) West Ada - Impact Fee Benefit Zone Western Cities - Impact Fee Assessment' District 2. Eagle Road (State Highway 55) ITD jurisdiction Principal arterial Traffic count 31,975 on 11-6-96 531 -feet of frontage 138 -feet existing right-of-way Comply with ITD for required right' of -way Eagle Road is improved with 5 traffic lanes with no curb, gutter or sidewalk abutting this site. There is curb, gutter "and sidewalk across from this site abutting St. Luke's property. The signalized intersection of the main driveway to St: Luke's complex and Eagle Road is located directly across Eagle Road from the north boundary of this site. 3. Magic View Drive Local commercial street with no pathway designation Traffic count 5,600 on 8/14/96 west of Eagle Road Traffic count,200 on 8/14/96 west of Jackson's Texaco 344 -feet of frontage 50 -feet existing right-of-way (25 -feet -from the centerline) 58 -feet required right-of-way (29 -feet from the centerline) Magic View Drive is improved with 30 -feet of pavement with no curb, gutter or sidewalk abutting this site. There is curb, gutter and sidewalk across from this site abutting the gas station/convenience store/drive-thru restaurant property. 4. State Highway 55 (Eagle Road) is under the jurisdiction of the Idaho Transportation De- partment (ITD). Application materials should be submitted to ITD for review and requirements of that Department. Contact District III Traffic Engineer at 334-8340. MCU4397A.REV - Page 2 0 • ITD has provided a written finding that the ITD staff supports the location of the traffic signal at the St. Luke's driveway, opposite the north boundary of this property. ITD has also approved a public street intersection to Eagle` Road at this location. 5: The Destination 2015 Regional Transportation Plan identified Eagle Road as a limited access facility. Under this plan, access to Eagle Road would be regulated by a limited number of traffic signals (with adequate spacing between successive signals), turn channelization and restrictions at unsignalized intersections and raised medians between channelized turns. Grade - separated interchanges would be anticipated at arterial/arterial intersections. 6. The site is currently undeveloped. 7. Magic View Subdivision, of which this site is a part, is partially developed as a 5 -acre lot single family subdivision. Meridian's Comprehensive Plan designates a circular area centered on Eagle Road and which includes this site, for commercial land uses (see attached map). The abutting area to the west is designated as mixed/planned use development. This designation will allow a range of land uses,that will generate traffic at a much higher rate than the existing residential development. The City of Meridian has confirmed the Comprehensive Plan by annexing this site and zoning it for commercial use. The subject application is the third commercial development the District has reviewed in the Magic View Subdivision within the past year, each a re -development of a large residential lot for a much greater traffic generator. With the City's mixed use/planned development overlay zone and the subdivision's close proximity to the interchange of Eagle Road and Interstate 84, there is' potential` for notal redevelopment of the subdivision. Depending upon the final allocation of'land uses', total trip generation from the Magic View subdivision could reach 20,000 ADT at full build out of the Magic View Subdivision. Traffic from the existing gas station/convenience store/drive-thru restaurant at Magic View Drive and Eagle Road has been counted by ACHD and found to be 5,400 daily vehicle trips. The current application is forecast to generate up to 7,500 vehicle trips per day. B. Increased Traffic and Safety Based upon ACHD counts of 5,600 ADT on Magic View Drive, ITD has reviewed the traffic volume and accident data at the Eagle Road/Magic View, intersection to determine if any additional improvements are required. They determined that the eastbound -to -northbound left - turn from Magic View to Eagle Road is a high risk movement. An even higher risk movement is for the vehicles that use the west -bound off -ramp of I-84 to head north on Eagle Road and attempt to weave across the two lanes of traffic in order to turn left onto Magic View Drive. Because of these safety problems, ITD staff and ACHD staff have recommended that a new public street be constructed, connecting to Eagle Road at this site's northern boundary. The existing intersection and traffic signal would be modified to add a fourth leg. This would create an opportunity for the existing and redeveloping parcels west of Eagle Road to have full access to the transportation system. Constructing a new public street abutting the site's northern boundary would also give northbound vehicles more time to merge and cross two MCU4397A.REV Page 3 lanes of northbound traffic and allow them to make a safe left turn at the signal to gain access to new uses in Magic View Subdivision. A new road would improve access to Eagle Road and improve safety of the traffic to and from this site and the vicinity west of this site. The cost of such a road would exceed the impact fees to be collected from the uses to be developed on this site (see C. Finding of Extraordinary Impact) . 2. Prior to the development of their site, St. Luke's Regional Medical Center requested a full access, signalized driveway intersection with Eagle Road opposite the existing Magic View intersection, which is located approximately 700 -feet north of the I-84 ramp terminal intersection. If signals are allowed at all, the optimal signal spacing required for safe and efficient operation of a major roadway is 1/3 of a mile (approximately 1,760 -feet). ITD restricted the access across from Magic View Drive to right-in/right-out operation and required that a signalized intersection be located adjacent to St. Luke's north property line (opposite the subject application), where St. Luke's constructed a 5 -lane driveway into their complex. The intersection spacing between the -Eagle Road/I-84 ramp terminals and the Eagle Road/Franklin Road intersection will allow for only one signalized intersection. ACHD staff fully supports ITD's action and the current signal location. The existing St. Luke's signal is approximately 1,200 feet from both the ramp terminal intersection and Franklin Road. 3. Residents of the Greenhill Estates Subdivision located north of the subject site have asked that a new roadway not be constructed, and that Magic View Drive be the prime access to the developing area west of Eagle Road. Staff believes that a new intersection with Eagle Road must -be in alignment':with the existing St. Luke's traffic signal. .Several problems would be incurred by signalizing the Eagle Road/Magic View intersection: a. The unsafe stacking/weaving between the I-84 westbound off -ramp and Magic View Drive to access a signal at Magic View Drive would increase. There is only 300 -feet available from the end of the westbound I-84 off -ramp to the northbound Eagle Road acceleration lane to the beginning of the Magic View Drive left turn pocket. This distance is insufficient to weave across°two traffic lanes of a high speed high volume arterial. b. A signal at Magic View Drive would be in violation of ITD policy, ACHD policy, and good engineering practice regarding signal spacing on major arterial streets such as Eagle Road. c. Montevue Subdivision is a one to two acre lot subdivision that is north of the St. Luke's site. The future redevelopment of the entire subdivision is also likely, given the desirability of the surrounding property for development and the designations of the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Moving the signal closer to the interstate ramp (at Magic View Drive) opens up the likelihood of a future request for a second signal between there and Franklin Road to accommodate the traffic that would be generated from redevelopment of the above mentioned subdivision and further development of the St. Luke's property. Maintaining the existing signal location allows the future potential for signalized access from the Montevue Subdivision to Eagle Road via St. Luke's driveway. MCU4397A.REV Page 4 d. The�St. Luke's parking lof and circulation system would have to be reconstructed in order to safely and efficiently accommodate a roadway across from Magic View Drive. The cost to redesign the parking lot is estimated to be $200,000. A representative for St. Luke's has indicated they are not willing to pay for the required reconstruction. St Luke's has also submitted a draft concept plan for the next two phases of development on their current site plus a draft concept plan for the parcels to the north and east of their site. The existing signal location is critical to supporting both land use plans, since the future traffic generation from the expansion of St. Luke's and anticipated spin-off development also warrants a signalized intersection. 4. Staff prepared two possible alignments for a new road, with near-term and long-term lane configurations. They are shown on the attached maps. Variation A would curve south along the west boundary of this site and connect with Magic View Drive at that location. This intersection would impinge on the proposed location for a new driveway connecting the subject site with Magic View Drive and require much more right-of-way from the subject site, resulting in the probable elimination of the credit union at the north end of the parcel. , A composite drawing shows the proposed site plan with Variation A superimposed on it. The proposed site plan drawing incorporates Variation B in its plan. Variation B extends slightly farther west and curves southward along the west lot line of the five -acre lot adjacent to the subject site, connecting with Magic View Drive at its existing tee intersection with Allen Street. This location will serve the entire re -developing area much better, providing full acces's . from Magic View Drive and Allen Street, which form a loop around the perimeter, of the entire 1110 -acres subject for re -development. This variation will extend about 150 -feet farther west than Variation A, along the backs of two more residential lots in Greenhill Estates Subdivision -before it curves southward. Staff strongly supports Variation B, on the basis that it provides much more convenient and safe access from the potential re -developed parcels to Eagle Road. 5. A survey map of the subject site and its vicinity indicates that in order for the proposed roadway to align with St. Luke's driveway, the centerline of the proposed roadway must be located at least 68 -feet south of the north boundary of this site. This will require aright -of - way 108 -feet in width, all of which is not required for the roadway itself. This will leave a wide strip of land (appiox. 35 -feet) between the north edge of the new road and the property line. This strip of land can be used for buffering the effects of the commercial development and the roadway volume. 6. A contract purchaser of the parcel abutting the subject site on the west has offered to sell the right-of-way for the new road alignment through his parcel at his acquisition cost. MCU4397A.REV Page 5 0 C. Finding of Extraordinary Impact 0 Staff recommends that the Ada County Highway District Commission find that the fiscal impacts of this and other 'anticipated developments in Magic View Subdivision are of such a magnitude that ACHD will be unable to accommodate the development(s) without excessive and unscheduled public expenditures which exceed the amount of the anticipated impact fees from such developments. Under the provisions of the Idaho Development Impact Fee Act and the ACHD Impact Fee Ordinance the Commission has three options: 1. The Commission may refuse to approve the proposed development. This option is not available to the District because the development has already been approved by the City of, Meridian. The District does not have any authority to -deny the development. 2. The District may recommend to the City of Meridian that the development not be approved. The District previously pointed out the traffic consequences of re -development of this site and the rest of the Magic View Subdivision to the City. The City's Comprehensive Plan supports redevelopment of the area to higher intensity land uses, as does the marketplace. 3. The Commission may calculate a pro rata share per parcel of the extraordinary impact of the development(s) and charge an impact fee greater than the fee indicated by the fee schedule. If an increased impact fee is adopted now, based on the preliminary, costs that are available, the cost should be refined when a design of the roadway is completed. Also, the District should enter into an agreement with each developer -that establishes that development's pro rata share of the new roadway costs and delineates the facilities for which the pro rata cost may be expended. Developers -may also wish to enter into agreements with the District to construct portions or all of the proposed roadway in lieu of payment of the pro rata costs. Staff recommends that the Commission exercise the third option. D Development Agreement 1. On Friday, December 11, 1998, staff met with three representatives of the subject application. The basic terms of an agreement were arrived at as follows: a. The developer would: (a) sell the right-of-way for the new roadway to the District at a fair value, and (b) construct one-half of a new commercial standard roadway plus 12 -feet of pavement within the new right -of -'way from Eagle Road to the site's western boundary at the developer's cost, and (c) constructfinstall the required signal improvements at the Eagle Road/new road intersection, a portion of the cost of which may be reimbursed to this developer from increased development fees to be collected by the District from other developers whose projects would benefit from the new road. I MCU4397A.REV Page 6 .M► b. The District would: '(a)" Impose increased fees' on the •balance'of,the`Magic View Subdivision' in agf6dinenis Ic with the developers of new�pr'ojects to cover,4he''c6-9t of widening- the new`"road. to -its 94 ultimate configuration and, -the costs of upgrading�the tr`affinr ig`nal"at the intersection x - sof Eagle Road and the new'roadway,''and as _' ` .l'd'wid 4 = ' `"f llt.ul (b) "'if available,-provide'the hardware for the new,signaf atDistrictacost-fo''tlie ' ' Vs • j,'developer(s)=for-installation, and' ' .rtt.` r tf� _ •ol I)., o' l "• (c) require the extension of the new road to the intersection of Magic View Drive and Allen,Str`eet.,`Yeithet'by the'develope''r of the lot adjacent°fo''tlie su6ject'site 'or by o`tl er developers who wish to constriictiit"in right-=of=wayjsolditb the DistrictVy'the'owne'r` of the adjacent lot'. t% 1, Jill, 2. Staff :considered other alternative methods of calculating the increased fee, but discarded them for lack of workability, fairness or legal basis. Staff recommends that the Commission enter into a development `agreement, with'this` developer as described -above. x I 4 C Ka, 1100,1 h —1, a. ! L E. Site Design Review=C6hWielnSIJ- 'N 1 1. District policy'requires the'appli6ant4b constructcurb, gutter-', 5ffo'&-'Wide concrete sidewalk, and,pavementwideningOto'one-half hof a 41'foot street=section on=MagicView;Dfive"abutting the parcel'(approximately 344 `feet) -10-- J , " ,. 2. The applicant is proposing to construct two driveways ori MagicAView Drive: a. One 30 -foot wide curb return driveway on Magic View Drive with 15 -foot radii located approximately 90 -feet west of Eagle Road. !,, �r s b. ' X secohd,30=foot Wide,curb return. dr`ivewayon�Magic VieW`D-fiVe,with '45=foot radii located "approxiiimat'ely'238=feet west,'of'Eag1e Road? ' ' 7 x' a ti4Tl L�T� .4i °� :r7 toi.tt 'kilo `_' The proposed driveway locations meet District policy for a local commercial street. 4 3.4 Staff recom—mn"einds!thatLthe applicant'lJ& required to dedicate 108 -feet of right-of-way along the north boundary of the site for the construction of a new public roadway. The developer should be'paid for'the required right -of --way for` the new road:;'The appUdrit shoulasbe required'to construct -one-half of a'41 -foot wide cominercial>'street sect'iori plusdf2-feei'bfpaving-abutiirig-I theL'parcel from Eagle Road to the wesfefn boundary` of this parcel'b Coristruction°should' `r=' it cli W—curW gutter and a 5 -foot wide concrete sid'ewalk'al'ong"tl e'frontage. of the new road abuttiri"'the" parcel.. �'i 6ti s 'iii) V1 t; -13 dll 4. Tlie lalignmentof the road witl' St. Luke's'drivewa`y and"rriodificatioi 0 - • 5. The applicant has proposed two driveway connections to the new ACHD proposed street. One driveway is proposed to be located 50 -feet west of Eagle Road and a second to be located 255 - feet west of Eagle Road. • If the street is approved as proposed, District policy requires a minimum of 50 -feet between a driveway on a local commercial road and the Eagle Road intersection. Staff recommends that a minimum of 175 -feet of separation be provided at build- out of the area in this case due to the volume of traffic that is anticipated on the new street. In action January 8, 1997, on a previous application for this site, the Commission allowed two driveways from the new road. The driveways were approved at locations of 100 -feet and 290 - feet west of Eagle Road. In a meeting with the applicant's representatives, staff and the representatives tentatively agreed that the staff would support two driveways from the new road as follows: a. One temporary driveway to be located a minimum of 50 -feet west of Eagle Road. This driveway should be no more than 30 -feet in width and be a full -access driveway until the new ACRD road is extended to Magic View Drive, at which time it should be converted to a right-in/right-out driveway by means of a median installed in the new road. The applicant should be required to deposit $1,400 with which the District will construct the median. This driveway should be monitored by the District and if a safety problem is encountered, the District should close the driveway. b. One permanent full -access curb -return' driveway, not more than 36 -feet wide to be located a minimum of -255 -feet west of Eagle Road. 6. District policy normally requires a temporary turnaround at the west end of the new street.. An easement for a turnaround is typically permitted by the District where the design of the site will not allow the provisions of a full circular turnaround. If the applicant proposes to access the new street; a driveway in the correct location could meet District requirements for a temporary turnaround if an easement is provided. The easement for the turn around should be coordinated with ACHD Right -of -Way staff. - F (Conclusions and General Recommendations The potential re -development of Magic View Subdivision creates an unanticipated need that cannot be funded by revenue from the regular impact fees collected from the developments that create the need. Staff recommends that an increased fee be calculated to pay the pro rata, share of the cost of a new public road from Eagle Road to the intersection of Magic View Drive and Allen Drive and imposed through development agreements on all future re -development of the Magic View Subdivision. The District should enter into a written development agreement with the developer of each site in which the precise calculation of how the increased fee is established together with the improvements for which it is to pay. 2. Staff recommends that the applicant be required to modify the signal at the existing driveway to St. Luke's driveway to accommodate a new public street connection opposite the driveway. The District will provide available hardware for the signal modifications at District cost if they are on hand. The developer should be reimbursed for a portion of the cost of the signal MCU4397A.REV Page 8 modifications from future collections,of fees to be collected by the District from developers of other properties in the Magic View Subdivision, 3. The existing transportation system will be adequate to accommodate the additional traffic generated by this proposed development with the requirements for modification outlined within this report. An additional, full access, signalized intersection will be needed to accommodate the anticipated traffic volumes. 4. The City of Meridiawhas required this developer to construct the new street across the frontage of the site and to construct a landscaped berm between the roadway and the Greenhill Estates Subdivision. Special Recommendation to ITD: 1. A new east -west public roadway should be aligned with the existing access to the St. Luke's Regional Medical Center. 2. Other than the ACHD proposed public street access proposed at Eagle Road, direct lot or parcel access to Eagle Road should be prohibited. 3. The applicant should be required to construct the traffic signal modifications needed at the signalized Eagle Road driveway. The Highway District will provide materials for the signal modifications at District cost to- the developer for use in this installation if they are available in the District's supply. , The following, requirements are provided to the City of Meridian as conditions for approval: Site Specific Requirements: Dedicate 108=feet of right-of-way for the new public street and mitigation of its impacts adjacent the parcel's north boundary by means of recordation of a final subdivision plat or execution of a warranty deed prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. The alignment of the roadway will extend straight to the west property line. The owner will be compensated for the cost of this right-of-way from impact fee revenue in the West Ada Benefit Zone. 2. Construct a new public street which shall align within 12 -feet (centerline to centerline) with the entry road for St. Luke's Regional Medical Center. Contact District staff for the precise location. Construct the south one-half of a standard 41 -foot wide commercial street section with 5 -foot wide sidewalk, plus 12 -feet of paving from Eagle Road to the west boundary of the site within the right-of-way described in Site Specific Requirement 1. The constructed improvements shall include pavement, base, curb, gutter, and sidewalk along the frontage of the street abutting the parcel. Coordinate the design of the intersection with the District's Planning and Development staff. As the property to the west develops, the District will require the extension of the roadway westward into the next parcel and south to connect with MCU4397A.REV Page 9 Magic View Drive at the intersection with Allen Street, using Variation B as shown in the attached figure. 3. Construct/install modifications to the traffic signal and vehicle detection system at Eagle Road and St. Luke's driveway to accommodate the new public street described in 2. The District will provide the hardware for the signal at District cost, if such hardware is available in the District's stock. A portion of the cost of the signal modifications will be reimbursed from revenue collected from increased fees within Magic View Subdivision. 4. Dedicate 29 -feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Magic View Drive abutting the parcel (4 additional feet) by means of recordation of a final subdivision plat or execution of a warranty deed prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. The owner will not be compensated for this additional right-of-way. 5. Construct curb, gutter, 5 -foot wide detached concrete sidewalk, and pavement widening to complete a 41 -foot street section on Magic View Drive abutting the parcel (approximately 344 - feet. 6. Construct a 30 -foot wide curb return paved driveway with 15 -foot radii located approximately 90 -feet west of Eagle Road on Magic View Drive. 7. Construct a 30 -foot wide curb return paved driveway on Magic View located approximately 238 -feet west of Eagle Road. 8. Construct one temporary 24 to 30 -foot wide paved driveway connecting to the new public road, located a minimum of 50 -feet west of Eagle Road. This driveway will be allowed to be a fuli access driveway until the new ACHD road is extended to Magic View Drive. At that time, the driveway will be converted to a right-in/right-out driveway by means of a median that will be installed in the new road. Deposit $1,400 to the Public Rights -of -Way Trust Fund for the cost of the median. The District will monitor the usage of this driveway and may close the driveway in the future if, in the sole opinion of the District, its continued usage will constitute a safety hazard. 9. Construct one 30 to 36 -foot wide curb return full access paved driveway, located 255 -feet west of Eagle Road on the new public road. There shall be a minimum of 175 -feet of separation between the two driveways. Coordinate the location and design of any driveways with District staff. 10. An easement for a temporary public turnaround shall be provided at the west end of the new road. The easement shall be coordinated with ACHD Right -of -Way staff. 11. Comply with requirements of ITD for State Highway 55 (Eagle Road) frontage. Submit to the District a letter from ITD regarding said requirements prior to District approval of the final plat or issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. Contact District III Traffic Engineer. MCU4397A.REV Page 10 Standard Requirements: r A request for modification, variance or waiver of any requirement or policy outlinedherein shall be made in writing to the ACHD Planning and Development Supervisor. The re uest shall specifically_ identify each requirement to be reconsidered and include a written explanation of why such a requirement would result in a substantial hardship or inequity. The written reauest shall be submitted to the District no later than 9:00 a.m. on the day scheduled for ACHD Commission action Those items shall be rescheduled for discussion with the Commission on the next available meeting agenda. Requests submitted to the District after 9:00 a:m. on the day scheduled for Commission action do not provide sufficient time for District staff to remove the item from the consent agenda and report to the Commission regarding the requested modification, variance or waiver. Those items will be acted on by the Commission unless removed from the agenda by the Commission. 2. After ACHD Commission action, any request for reconsideration of the Commission's action shall be made in writing to the Planning and Development Supervisor within two days of the action and shall include a minimum fee of $110.00. The request for reconsideration shall specifically identify each requirement to be reconsidered and include written documentation of data that was not available to the Commission at the time of its original decision. The request -for reconsideration will be heard by the District Commission at the next regular meeting of the Commission. If the Commission agrees to reconsider the action, the applicant will be notified of the date and time of the Commission meeting at which the reconsideration will be heard. 3. Payment of applicable Road impact fees are required prior.to building construction in accordance with Ordinance x#188, also known as, Ada County Highway District Road Impact Fee Ordinance. 4. All design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway .District s Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACHD Ordinances unless specifically waived herein. 5. The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit (or other required permits); which incorporates any required design changes. 6. Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy. 7. No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized representative of the Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confirmation of any change from the Ada County Highway District. 8. Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject 'of this application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, * MCU4397A.REV Page 11 or other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in interest advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subject property unless a waiver/variance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law in effect at the time the change in use is sought. Conclusion of Law: 1. ACHD requirements shall assure that the proposed use/development will not place an undue burden on the existing vehicular and pedestrian transportation system within the vicinity impacted by the proposed development. Should you have any questions or comments, please contact the Planning and Development Division at 387-6170. Submitted by:.. Date of Commission Action: Planning and Development Staff December 30. 1998 MCU4397A.REV Page 12 CENTRAL CENT AL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPAR ENT •• DISTRICT Environmental Health Division 'If HEALTH R c'� RetuO to: DEPARTMENT U N- 7 1999 ❑ Eagle - ❑Garden City., Rezone # 0T""11 ^"wffi1%if a �„ vx i x V.1, IV - , it1Z7Liti� ,ZMeridian Conditional Use # �-� (� q 9--Nq ❑ Kuna Preliminary / Final / Short Plat r ❑ ACZ ❑ 6. ❑ 7 ❑� 8. We have No Objections to this Proposal. , We recommend Denial of this Proposal. Specific knowledge as to the exact type of use must be provided before we can comment on this Proposal. ♦. 9r � J - r. � t We will require more data concerning soil conditions on this Proposal before we can comment. Before we can comment concerning individual sewage disposal, we will require more data concerning the depth -of, - ,w ❑ high seasonal ground water ❑ waste flow characteristics ❑ or bedrock from original grade ❑ other This office will require a study to assess the impact of nutrients and pathogens to receiving ground waters and/or surface waters. } This project shall be reviewed by the Idaho Department of Water Resources concerning well construction and' water availability. After written approval from appropriate entities are submitted, we can approve this proposal for: ❑ central sewage ❑ community sewage system ❑ community water well ❑ interim sewage El central water ❑ individual sewage ❑ individual water The following plan(s) must be submitted to and approved bythe Idaho Department of Health & Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality: r ❑ , central sewage ❑ community sewage system ❑ community water ❑ sewage dry lines ❑ central water , ❑ 10. Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. ❑ 1, 1. This Department would recommend deferral until high seasonal ground water can be determined if other considerations indicate approval. ❑ 12. If restroom facilities are to be installed, then a sewage system MUST be installed to meet Idaho State Sewage Regulations. , ❑ 13. We will"require plans be submitted for a plan review for any: ❑ food establishment ❑ swimming pools or spas ❑ child care center ❑ beverage establishment ❑ grocery store ❑ 14. Date: 3 / %S Reviewed By: a 2 - ,w 'S [DND 10/91 rck rev. 1/91 Review Sheet , 4 r 4 0 53 SKETCH # 7317 2a-0^ ;I • 1d-101/8" 11' -ll" _I '1 Chevron CV 0 1 NOTES: CABINETS- ORDER N TS - ORDER IN ITEMS, INSTALL ONLY. PIPE SUPPORTS - BY I.E.S. PRIMED AND PAINTED 112 &V-11 r RE ESD 0 J U N 17 1j99 CITY Od MER X610.i FILE: RICK'S/JOBS/CHEV EXT/EAGLRD84 CUSTOMER: CHEVRONl DATE: 2/18/99 JOB LOCATION: EAGLE ROAD & 1-84 �DRHO ?�r4ff 011 JIGOI 1 j THISIS AN UNPUBLISHED DRAWING/DESIGN SUBMITTED SALES: BOB THE COLORS DEPICTED W THIS DRAWING ARE TO FOR YOUR PERSONAL USE IN CONNECTION wml A REVISED FROM SKETCH N 7249 PROTECT BEING PLANNED FOR YOU BY IDAHO ELECTPoC DESIGNER: Bn1e RE�15bN ASSIST YOU IN NSUA TUAL OUR PROPOSAL AND SIGNS, INC. AND IS NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, COPIED OR 1 WAS 90 O.A.H. CABINETS STACKED MAY NOT MATCH ACTUAL COLORS USED ON THE EXHIBRED IN ANY FASHON WITHOUT W WTTEN PERMISSION USING TWO POLES. CHANGED TO FINISHED DISPLAY. OF IDAHO ELECTRIC SIGNS , INC . SINGLE POLE SIDE BY,' CABINETS SKETCH # 7317 • p�� 12'-3112' ,1 REC Er �_g-91,x• _� JUN 17; . r CI'T`Y 0 mi 7'-5' DOUBLE FACE INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED PYLON DISPLAY SCALE 1/4' = 1'-0" pl-oloye"o 6;916 /<V, 62yJ SKETCH # 7317 FILE: RICK'S/JOBS/CHEV EXT/EAGLRD84 CUSTOMER: CHEVRON DATE: 2/18/99 JOB LOCATION: EAGLE ROAD & 1-84 IDAHO okweic JIGRI ® ICBG THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED DRAWNG MSIGN SUBMITTED SALES: BOB THE COLORS DEPICTED IN THIS DRAWING ARE 10 FOR YOUR PERSONAL USE IN CONNECTION VAT" A REVISED FROM SI�TCH # 7249 PROJECT BEING PLANNED FOR YOU BY IDAHO ELECTRIC DESIGNER: Brede REVISIDtJ ASSIST NOT IN MSWCTUAL OUR PROPOSAL AND SIGNS, INC. AND IS NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, COPIED OR 1 WAS 9D' O.A.H. CABINET$ ED TO MAY NOT MATCH ACTUAL COLORS USED ON THE EXHIBITED IN ANY FASHION WIRIOO VMI TEN PERMISSION USING TWO POLES. CHANGED TO FINISHED pi5%AV. OF IDAHO ELECTRIC SIGNS. INC. SINGLE POLE SIDE BY SIDE CABINETS SKETCH # 7317 0 �i6n� �2<�rar�oo�7,— Nel k1T 76/V01e7??' 0 SAMPLE SCALE 1/8' = V -Cr SKETCH # 7317 FILE; RICK'SMOBS/CHEV EXT/EAGLRD84 THIS IS AN UPFUKWIED DRANINGIDESIGN SURAITTED FOR YOUR PERSONAL USE IN CONNECTION WITH A PROJECT BEING PLANNED FOR YOU BY IDAHO ELECTRIC SIGNS, INC. AND IS NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, COPIED OR EXHIBRED IN ANY FASHION WRHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION OF IDAHO ELECTRIC SIGNS, INC. � RE Ce, JUN 1 7TRD CI'I7�OF MEAN ipAeoOAWrkcIIGn/ I COPAMM ® Iwo DATE: 2/18/99 THE COLORS DEPICTED IN THIS DRAWING ARE TO ASSIST YOU IN VISUALIZING- OUR PROPOSAL AND MAY NOT MATCH ACTUAL COLORS USED ON THE FIN&4ED DISPLAY. 0 JUN 17 1999 CITY OF MERIDIAN %ell �°<w._ ° ggar�. 4 .� ; 3k. � iu �Y, �. � r. �'. da / W � F r-.�PMtyr• .�P:.. ex ` .:RAt6 . u�LA`aa�..�y,•�. +N '.'ugp7... O 4y r4+Y iv w.� :'+�.M.' bt1:.. .. v>� -+t�.; N __ �0. `� . �. +`yi_ < '.4 N K Y:�cA. oka _ "c 4 J �,;:` .. �' � � F � w ^9w.: - i i x N � . % {r<oR i Y t b ..Fin �� + �r "4rAY � xm�a, <� j s s.n rh j++jt � n{e.:.,.. 1'.. �� `" � M ' � Ve!. H �. � � E � 'J'-' ' s9 � +'''� > s"" �, �. � �r +. v ,r� �� .. �x �� ar .: � .. r . , .� "� , r �� .. .w tJ stmt may" ,,�_s�AyR+F7'. L 1. _ r .N�r 9'k i : � wxd. '. i+.+ �� C � t � »h.r9 H++, Qy � �' >`YM1a� a ' 7.sry. s � i t J ' `t�A �'� �•;� 4 7 .v w.k 41.�V �•bw a w� ..: ac �N ,. �� z � ; . Y: �' � � , e ��, rt c �+An<nN+sxn,� c s .e � � o '- kF qr+a �_ +b�t+.N'�-sz .% ,. rr� ��^r H ye.:: 'k; fib. ,,"� .� _ ::.r` �tn)l .. k•V ._ REcErvED JUN 17 1999 DIAN • Opt26-� RECEWED JUN 17 1999 c�RIDIAN Aw `S. x ��yyc ee . £�:4y � p •r'i` :i.+ 4 r I ' S "'at �. ; :� � :��'�'�ya� . V ti : o t`l n t, w� �, ..,�nr �n'�£zt � ` i��,��, •� �5 at' Xz "�. ,c �`a'�"+e >. � + �� /-,A b '�s b Pt.��' G ,y�Cfi t 9iI� C .57 ih � .. �4i f �C�•d;,y `� .� k,i+'- "' .yy's43A3 i 1 3 y..- c$t.� cak. Y �.` .t'4 S x• s �_; f ,y ,, t y _ t u . S dr �tiM se .,,F' iy.� w—ki <^�� y, �.j.n1�`i' t: "y., •J�:� �,. p t� > i A amity T "�M3�� t. � } ,: �� 4 r r�r7+ i h r t a t -3,uf*�+ v�} (moi' ss 7 c tr.�w v L1� s w .. � '' ,�"✓ :.,r � '., ,�,),ys ,a - ' �4 .`-F� +a .aw :T. � / � �.,,.�.,,.1c � a. w t a= 'nY `�7^ i..wY lL:y � :-�`! t:d.:. r.._yg - � H+. .Sm•- rd �t.-.u.� .-C' '.ri J A '. ..•i.. - ... _ J :. ..1 W' Y . � ) :):..e PT vY^ T .yo yi.—YLf' i.•F•i 1+yY ±� e� i.�-.. �. y , . y t 1. r .. N... <., ... '..._.,.-- .. .rte ..�.....1 .. :. .'.` '..� ,. A .t i J U N 17 1999 "`-'7r'•"''y; "`°H ✓�. 1 ^�., ra�resmp a +txr�'awx�e++wm�X r. ewr'�«•z"^.a .w• R .. 3� _ RIDIAN '�4'5c+� �:J•�`«r.,.. ,�_'.. '�' . s- '.:Y ,"��":e'�.s" �..V_ � ''tip ,SS. AA�.Xc�.,.3�.a ,..�D 'n:� .., ... f 4 a a r F � -.. .� � t �'%^1�xi L •� Ni, i� Y'�-fi`��G��R�'�4.��ry3`">�' �,�"'P''��.k'^ a l..tc"��.. �� eD-F4 1 u} `c .: - P � > y'ti � nr 'r3.F lY•f''�.z�"s s t 5'$,r b � 2 6C 'a,�. � t h, r ,y ... J't { r K �� r ue�'+ .ems -.t% J,,,� # -r`_-'Yat '� .•_�r�!�-T ��``+��^_��s^ > > tr'F i � :. J _.'-'+n', r•.-':.?., - L � �'rk+�.ta�' �`z� r...�i. �`'1 �rt�..�a n - ''f i`4..F 1" _. ... w i• w -'Y i -L- Y? x)'34 ; "� i , 41 „n 44 l : • JUN 17 1999 RIDM w•, � n c M +� +� mr T.,.' k F}tf* rWR•cnic ">;rrt �'ti. a,8. �.. r; '7 w 4 -* '✓bk 1 ��,",� T'�` r, `r'�,..';:2• X4 •�-�•'-�„ ak`7 s ,� x ar,, s�. d s f ter{fit h tt ..t T S ✓ r S } .. C .Xn �� pair � y � ..LXi t �� •zc '� ��-, F!Fj5 ��: i r�r� r �' ;.-t f �' Y�; _ ` t yS ,}; � � Fti• " z. s v l �. ,ka �_Co � t r.k i . :. ,_' .• C '`i jx3 e 9 t : ��ha-�✓ k "i t`b Fwq.� L.. d .. .fiG .. i 41 u v e .. i f !`:�`rw+�ra-'�7�� •� ..'r. -'->_,K 'tAff'_"ii� 0 A�- I?Fcr,r� JUN 1 71999 y f� �Fk CITY OF IIRIDIAN a •� [ t z' } �,.o ♦1*' r �, mak. ,r,,, a �aQ.} s��F'- � ,�:[ wr N r v + Ar% wll- i� �s,t ,'^ii.. �i.z � " � "��'k''. :E ,F.�.- `�... � 's.S ,�; r� "4dre: '�� N trk,•i RESTAURANT'�� t t �h'Q t1 {f rk 3 Rd ��.. S� r 7,f r �• '.,Y � S �C?i ,�� r w A ov 0 � � t t! R ic. A�- I?Fcr,r� JUN 1 71999 y f� �Fk CITY OF IIRIDIAN a •� [ t z' } �,.o ♦1*' r �, mak. ,r,,, a �aQ.} s��F'- � ,�:[ wr N r v + Ar% wll- i� �s,t ,'^ii.. �i.z � " � "��'k''. :E ,F.�.- `�... � 's.S ,�; r� "4dre: '�� N trk,•i RESTAURANT'�� t t �h'Q t1 {f rk 3 Rd ��.. S� r 7,f r �• '.,Y � S �C?i ,�� r w A ov 0 • �''�2c�.�� g,EcE�ED JUN 171999 all a -M 5znt yr a -M Notes for Meridian City Council Hearing — 8/17/99 -- Eagle Partners Eagle & Magic View Roads JoAnn Butler, 607 N. 8 1 Street, Boise, ID representing the applicant, Eagle Partners. In its review of the facts and circumstances surrounding the Eagle Partners' sign proposal, the Planning & Zoning -Commission heard and read extensive and competent testimony from the City Staff, the applicant and the applicant's professional consultants as to how the sign proposals meet the conditional use modification standards. We are asking the City of Meridian to: • adopt the recommendation of its Planning & Zoning Commission to approve the Idaho Credit Union sign. • adopt the recommendation of its Planning & Zoning Commission to approve the Chevron sign on Eagle Road with the understanding that this sign will not be turned off in the late night hours. • reject the recommendation of its Planning & Zoning Commission to deny the sign that is in close proximity to 1-84. • adopt the condition of approval proposed by the applicant that the sign in close proximity to 1-84 be turned off between the hours of 11 p.m. and 4 a.m. The facts and evidence presented show that the proposed signs at this location meet the standards set for conditional use requests:' • Will, in fact, constitute a conditional use as determined by City policy. - Although this criteria is not especially linked to the review of signs, Meridian has annexed and zoned this property as General Retail and Service Commercial (C -G) and made the legislative determination that the approved uses are conditional uses in the C -G zone. The Project is located in a designated commercial activity area. The whole purpose of the General Retail and Service Commercia12 district is described in the Zoning Ordinance as being: ... to provide for commercial uses which are customarily operated entirely or almost entirely within a building; to provide for a review of the impact of proposed commercial uses which are auto and service oriented and are located in close proximity to major highway or arterial streets; to fulfill the need of travel -related services as well as retail sales for the transient and permanent motoring public.... a (Emphasis added.) Y The whole goal and purpose of Meridian within the C -G zone is to serve the motoring public with services in close�proximity to major highways., The applicant, with this sign application, is attempting identify its business that serves the motoring public. The applicant is attempting to assist the City carry out its previously adopted policy' and Zoning Ordinance, and do so in a manner that ensures the conditional use goals of the City are met. { ' Meridian Zoning Ordinance, Section 11-2-418.C. 2 Meridian Zoning Ordinance, Section 11-2-416.K. 3 Meridian Zoning Ordinance, Section 11-2-408 B. PAGE -1 F:\APPS\WPDOCS\A—G\EDDY\EAGLE.PAR\ANALYSIS.2 Will be harmonious with andinaccordance with the Comprehensive Plan and this Ordinance. As stated immediately above, the signs will be harmonious with the Zoning Ordinance. When Meridian City adopted its Comprehensive Plan, it identified this area as a major gateway into the City of Meridian, and promoted the service commercial nature of this area. The signs identifying the Eagle Partners' Project promote the service commercial nature of this area. The General Retail and Service Commercial zone adopted for this property, and the specific Eagle Partners' conditional use request, is consistent with the goals and policies of the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Those that have stated their opposition to the Project, or the signs that identify the Project, have given the City no reasons why the applicant is not in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. As one Planning & Zoning Commissioner stated, it was always assumed that freeway -oriented signs would be part of this freeway -oriented Project. The City understands that the City requires this type of commercial development to serve the traveling public and provide an attractive, well - signed gateway entrance to Meridian. Based on several forecasts,4 Meridian stated that it would support and stimulate economic development by designating Commercial Activity Centers in the City,5 and creating a positive atmosphere that encourages commercial land uses to locate in Meridians The Plan shows the location of these Commercial Activity Centers, and the Eagle Partners' Project is in the middle of a designated Commercial Activity Center! As stated in the Plan, "[r]etail, commercial and office development are frequent partners within Commercial Activity Centers. In order to support_ residential and industrial developments, areas should be set aside as Commercial Activity Centers and their development carefully guided."' (Emphasis added.) The careful guidance by Meridian is evident in its long and extensive review of the Eagle Partners' Project: Eagle Partners has presented to the City a unified, integrated, well -signed development, and the City, has guided its ultimate design to foster the policies of Meridian. The design of the Eagle Partners' Project recognizes the importance of neighborhoods in creating 4 The Comprehensive Plan acknowledges that meeting the challenge of providing services to citizens requires the expansion of the City's economic base along with creating new job opportunities for citizens. (Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-15.) In compiling its Plan; Meridian relied heavily on the statistical research of Idaho Power Company, which indicated a continued decline in agricultural employment (but continued employment in agricultural -related industries), substantial increase in commercial building construction, and a substantial increase in retail trade and service employment. (Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-16.) 5 Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-16; E-18, Policy 1.2. 6 " Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-18, Policy 1.1. 7 Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-17. Note that the Comprehensive Map "represents a compilation of input and ideas expressed by citizens, community groups and local leaders. (Meridian'Comprehensive Plan, page E-22.) It was suggested by one neighbor of the Project that Meridian had not gone through a comprehensive planning process in connection with this Commercial Activity Center. Nothing could be further from the truth. Meridian went through an extensive planning process to locate the Commercial Activity in this location, and the result of that process is written throughout the Plan. Meridian has consistently reaffirmed its land use decision for this area. For example, the Plan states that "Medical facilities should be encouraged to locate within or nearby commercial activity centers." (Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-39, Policy 3.1.) St. Luke's medical facility was approved and built directly across the street from the Eagle Partner's Project "within or nearby" this commercial activity center. Further still, in annexing the St. Luke's Property and the property south of the Eagle Partners' property, the City specifically concluded that the best zoning for the area was commercial and not residential. 8 Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-17. PAGE - 2 F:\APPS\WPDOCS\A—G\EDDY\EAGLE.PAR\ANALYSIS.2 land maintaining an attractive and desirable living environment in close proximity to woough !that balances' residential neighbo�h`ood interests with business'interests �. Meridian, reserve (Comprehensive Plan, arranges - the ecoriom c itapty of Commerc allnteActi ity Centers -9 amenities of residential' neighborhoods an . _, The land use I - m'&nt of the Meridian Comprehensive Plan is based, in, part, on the objective o arx ,.provide mixed p)anneduses along -the 1-a4ra84 interchange is high volume;Cor`rdors.oThe mixed-useea pe venityoftheEagle/1 _ -Th b- Partners' Project promotes riori development area for hate ncou aee's coimmercial `usese offices and med cal care uses i Meridian's commercial policy to locate ... near hi h -intens! activit areas such as freewa interchan es." (Emphasis added.). - ¢ »_ ' �. F - , , +! t rI «r a _ " "T' "' t `� "' ' olic'ies the - P Eagle artneProject conforms to , F "' l fit a-1 , , 4 ae to the commercial land' use p rs' =1n additionto the areas » Meridian's Comprehensive Plan La6d' Use, 1-84 Mixed -Use Policies which apply adjacent to k1-84' acent -'!These areas are unique it that tl ey are surrounded'by a e a ldist nct I nlearf shape, and to the freeway (I-84); are relatively. level In topography, and uses. In are greatly affected b . tug o'uand efficient se of t e land might occurdential and commercial ! th s corridor is order that compatible anticipated for a`variety'..` mixed use's. •:Probable mined uses for the areas couses (as a uld be` commercial, combined medium -to -high density residential, open space _means to buffer highway noise); tourist'lodging, industrial, -office, medical, and related » land uses.°13` Eagle Partners has been working diligently witht �City Wined with prevaously-deve -developed and in the improvements, and type of development[ ] sidenceor f area,,and ... [because it is] lociied toatbd dbe'harm nized w th res djacent'to or near any entiale ses, and [Eag eePartne sa ... [the Project has been desig ] have made] all reasonable efforts ... to reduce the environmental impact on residential Including nose and traffic re areas are near I-84 ..., high duction: As stated in the ComprehensiveaPlan, "[b]ecause these quality visual appearance is essential. AII'development proposals in this area will be subject to design review -guidelines and conditionalthe es permitting design work by procedures." 15 The conditional`Ose application of Eagle Partners, _. nsive design review by Meridian;ensures the Project complies with Eagle Partners and the exte the Plan's policies. F 9 Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-21. 10 Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-22. 11 Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-28, Policy 5.15U. 12 Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-26, Policy 4.81-1. 13 Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-27. 14 Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-28, Policy 5.11. 15 Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-28, policy 5.141J. PAGE -3 . F:WPPS\WPDOCSW_G\EDDY\EAGLE.PAR\ANALYSIS.2 • 6• 0 Meridian's Plan recognizes that the City will continue to attract business and residential development and that the demand on transportation facilities will increase, and the City seeks to facilitate design that simplifies the mobility'of people and goods within the City .16 Eagle Road is designated as an entryway corridor to the City of Meridian. "Entryway corridors are a community's 'front door.' It is acknowledged that the corridor's trees (or lack thereof), commercial signage, and site character provide the first, and often times the most lasting, impressions of the entire community."" As the Comprehensive Plan states, the conditional use process affords.the,City the opportunity to address the special features of each property and facility. The extensive design review and conditional use review of the Eagle Partners' Project, and the signs that identify it, ensures the development of an aesthetically -pleasing entrance to the City of Meridian. The community design, entrance corridors policy of Meridian provides that the City will "[e]ncourage landscape setbacks for new development on entrance corridors. The City shall require, as a condition of development approval, landscaping along all entrance corridors."'a Eagle Partners has developed a Project that include an extensive landscape and sign plan for this unified entrance way project. ; The Project, and its identifying signs, is an excellent example of a private property owner using the property in a manner that embodies the goals of the City's Comprehensive Plan. Will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not change the essential character of the same area. The Eagle Partners' Project, and its identifying signs, offers the City the opportunity to provide a creative and unified commercial project and to set examples for an attractive, heavily landscaped, well signed, innovative gateway treatment for Meridian. Will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses. The proposed uses (service station, convenience store, restaurant, and credit union, and their identifying signs) will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future uses. These services will provide service to the motoring public, the existing residential areas, and the existing and future commercial uses in the vicinity. Eagle Partners has had many discussions with residents, staff and the Planning & Zoning Commission in an attempt to design a project and identifying signs that mitigate any such disturbance. Eagle Partners has explained the illumination of the signs and their orientation away from the neighborhood, and has offered to completely turn off the freeway -oriented sign between 11 p.m. and 4 a.m. There are no blinking lights that now disturb the neighborhood from and existing reader board sign in the vicinity. 16 Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-43. 17 Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-73. f 18 Meridian Comprehensive Plan, page E-73, Policy 4.4U. PAGE -4 F:\APPS\WPDOCS\A—G\EDDY\EAGLE.PAR\ANALYSIS.2 0 • Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, sewer or that the person responsible for the establishment of proposed zoning amendment shall be able to provide adequately any of such services. Although this criteria is not especially linked to the review of signs, the City's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance calls for the provision of adequate infrastructure including roads, waste disposal and water to allow development. Eagle Partners has, and will continue to, work with the City, Ada County Highway District,°and others to coordinate the provision of infrastructure necessary to accommodate the Project. Will riot create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. Although this criteria is not especially linked to the review of signs, the Eagle Partners' Project is a natural progression of the development of this area in Meridian's Area of Impact that Meridian previously has identified as commercial in nature. As Meridian has stated to Ada County during the various hearings in which Meridian justified its Area of Impact, public facilities are being extended to this area (as well as all areas within the Area of Impact) in a reasonable, progressive manner. Accordingly, this project will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community, but is a common and typical indication of development that will be occurring within the Area of Impact within the next several years. Will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. Eagle Partners and their consultant's have provided a wealth of information to staff, the Planing & Zoning Commission, and the public on how any potential detrimental element of the proposed signs (for example, lighting glare), if any, will be minimized and not excessive. • Will have vehicular approaches to the property which shall be so designed as not to create an interference with traffic on surrounding public streets. This criteria is not especially linked to the review of signs. • Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of major importance. This criteria is not especially linked to the review of signs. PAGE -5 F:\APPS\WPDOCS\A-G\EDDY\EAGLE.PAR\ANALYSIS.2 lz I � 16'-10 118" � 11'_11• r Chevron T Q Q NOTES: CABINETS - ORDER IN ITEMS, INSTALL ONLY. PIPE SUPPORTS - BY I.E,S. PRIMED AND PAINTED 0 4 0- 0 SKETCH # 7317 FILE: RICK'S/JOBS/CHEV EXi/EAGLRD84 CUSTOMER: CHEVRON DATE: 2/18/99 JOB LOCATION: EAGLE ROAD & 1-84 WHO F�CtI'Ki IIGOI �wacH+ g iwa ' THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED DRAWNG/DESIGN SL.BMRTED SALES: BOB FOR YOM PERSONAL USE IN CONNECTION WITH A REVISED FROM SKETCH # 7249 THE COLORS DEPICTED IN THIS DRAWING ARE TO PROJECT BEING PLANNED FOR YOU BY IDAHO ELECTRIC DESIGNER: Brut REHs�N # WAS ED� FROMOAHCABINETS 72-49STACKED ASSIST MAY NYOU M4TCH ACTUAL OUR PROPOSAL AND RS SIGNS, INC. AND B NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, COPIED OR 1 USING TWO POLES. CHANGED TO FINISHED DISPLAY. USED ON THE EXHIBITED IN ANY FASHION WRHOUf WRITTEN PERMISSION OF IDAHO ELECTRIC SIGNS, INC. SINGLE POLE SIDE BY SIDE CABINETS SKETCH M 7317 m S d O b 0 12'-3 1/2" L ¢-9Th• _ I r DOUBLE FACE INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED PYLON DISPLAY SCALE 114* = 1'-0" SKETCH # 7317 FILE: RICK'S/JOBS/CHEV_EXT/EAGLRD84 CUSTOMER: CHEVRON DATE: 2/18/99 JOB LOCATION: EAGLE ROAD & 1-84 J IDAHO EcoPml6la rm ® c 19wG IIGflf v PROJECT BEING PLANNED FOR YOU BY IDAHO ELECTPoC DESIGNER: BrLdt IztvISB�N ..`..""" ..."... ""`.".. " . "'. — ' T' SIGNS. INC, AND IS NOT TO BE REPRODUCED. COPIED OR WAS O.AH. CABINETS S1ACI�D MAY NOT MATCH ACTUAL COLORS USED ON THE EXHIBITED IN ANY FASHION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION USING TWO POLES. CHANGED TO FINISHED DISPLAY. OF IDAHO ELECTRIC SIGNS, INC. SINGLE POLE SIDE BY SIDE CABINETS SKETCH # 731 7 �2�E�1A7ld 7,- mel�k)IT 710 AIW7?� b 0 00 000 000 0 0 000 ❑CSE] SAMPLE SCALE 1/8' =V , SKETCH # 7317 FILE: RICK'S/JOBS/CHEV EXT/EAGLRD84 WHO opyRcW0AW19" JIGAJ _ eowarrrt ®I oov THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED DRAWINGTDESIGN SUBMITTED DATE: 2/18/99 THE COLORS DEPICTED IN THIS DRAVANG ARE TO FOR YOUR PERSONA. USE IN CONNECTION WITH A PROJECT BEING PLANNED FOR YOU BY IDAHO ELECTRIC ASSIST YOU IN VISUALIZING OUR PROPOSAL AND SIGNS, INC. AND IS NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, COPIED OR MAY NOT MATCH ACTUAL COLORS USED ON THE EXHIBITED IN ANY FASHION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION FINISHED DISPLAY. OF IDAHO ELECTRIC SIGNS, INC. M 0 f .. �. ,F — FM L n V Oil M1 L.S s ♦ M f .. ,F L f .. L T' _..,s L.S s 0 i �� 7� ��tq �3y� inm 1'�� a ,�-+✓ t 1 -ipL- ° S � � i t c. 1"l�b •, a_... 2 � ^nSC R f'�,�! '9ini ,S �. Y� Jy' 'i • 4 Tr, l- yYt 3?l re� +:&j4^.t'er Y��g�p� �i•�� '� .. � L rr lE��r'- din _. �.X',.fa*S."��' �^.. . 3l''X:Vca�_�.u'iK'x��'�='-q .,ce:, n.:s "� r. '�S. � - "'• �;..a �'tSVFw 3 �}.. c t,> 6` � >_ - c, r L. ?:JR' rr •C-z:µx3 S�'c7' `try`' _ v` a�..p,`.y,•y''..a' .,,�4+a1 y"aG, t �m •:.1y;., ,�' z^ e 5'.! c k. ffi`. -F _ '{r - .e ki�u.:. t>Y,,y: ,.y 1 , p - , s�.i0r• 336 -, 7�z xj- Z"o. ;.tP 44. It A I Vo, 2 7o4 M7 t "4 ' '��° �� ni5e- 'L � '*4. � Jc!''k'b>• 2 Y J T �. T ,'�-.: - sew,. L4ti � r ri' .r *.. -� i �E. r- rY. �• ;;y�ab+ ;n; 54�y� cL mit a ' N&i h K y��S 'yy "§ '" .� ..nd'.� h '�'+' ': h�3[ �r "t �.•'��+' 1 >�.�:� 4 C .�.? RESTAURANT�,,J �:z.J rw MAP JWAiw 3'. � w'�r hJ ii9Y,ys., �,�:.: ear? ,f, •1 €. ., 1 Iq Nk1 i �x 5-C) d�; 4' 26'-0" CABINET I C� ABI ETO r' %1 11'-6" (TOP OF P.C.) 3'-4"(+\-) L 7'-2" (P.C.) 5'/2" MOLDINGS t• H A 1,�1�. 1'•�" P.C. F141NT STRIPE 1 O jt►I I(Y'JI Q O b z v Ljl-�Q �000L� �D,9l�s �icomIt:F;F-Tol I?IAI OABINET- FABRICATED FROM SHEET METAL 51 /2" MOLDINGS AND FILLER PRIMED AND PAINTED WHITE (DUPONT # 1 (TO APPROXIMATE BUILDING COLOR). FACES - WHITE FLEX FACE MATERIAL. DECORATION - BACKGROUND &'HOME FURNISHINGS' ARE BLUE (23497) M"LLICENTVINYL -RC VALLEY-, ROOF GRAPHIC & BOX (BEHIND COPY) ARE WHITE, CUT AND WEEDED FROM BLUE B/G. ILLUMINATION - INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED WITH MERCURY VAPOR LAMPS (METAL HALIDE). U.L LISTED. 277 VOLT (AS PER SPECIFIED) POLE COVER - FABRICATED WITH STEEL TUBE FRAME, OVERLAID WITH DIBOND PANELS, PAINTED WHITE (DUPONT # )(TO APPROX BUILDING COLOR), 14" STRIPE PAINTED BLUE (DUPONT #BS 521), 10 APPROXIMATE (23497) BLUE VINYL SUPPORT (VERIFY) 30- X.375 WALL PIPE SKETCH # 7339 PAGE 1 OF 4 FILE: RICK'SNOBS/RCWILLEY CUSTOMER: RC WILLEY SALES; DAN DATE: 2/22/99 JOB LOCATION: MERIDIAN, ID. DESIGNER: Brcic (DAHO�corw 01— IIGf1t THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED DRAWINGIDESIGN SUBMITTED FOR YOUR PERSONAL USE IN CONNECTION WITH A REVI90N # 2 ADDED CHIMNEY, CHANGED TYPE STYLE OF IRC WILLEY" THE COLORS DEPICTED IN THIS DRAWING ARE TO PROJECT BEING PLANNED FOR YOU BY IDAFIO ELECTRIC CHANGED COPY & COPY STYLE IN UNDERLINE ASSIST YOU IN ASUAUiING OUR PROPOSAL AND SIGNS, INC. AND IS NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CORED OR Q MAY NOT MATCH ACTUAL COLORS USED ON THE EXHIBITED IN ANY FASHION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION FINISHED DISPLAY. OF IDAHO ELECTRIC SIGNS, INC. EAGLE PARTNERS SIGNAGE CUP DIAMOND BRYAN & EBERT WILLIAM R & SHERMAN BEVERLY D EBERT JANET R 3134 AUTUMN WAY 2513 E AUTUMN WAY MERIDIAN ID 83642-6239 MERIDIAN ID 83642-6227 CUBER CHARLES L & JERRY A TRST MALONEY PATRICK S & CUBER C L& J A CO -TRUSTEES MALONEY ROSE M 3158 AUTUMN WAY 2621 E AUTUMN WAY MERIDIAN ID 83642-6239 MERIDIAN ID 83642-6234 WILLIAMSON LLOYD J & SODINE IAN R & WILLIAMSON LANA J SODINE JEANETTE M 3182 AUTUMN WAY 2663 E AUTUMN WAY MERIDIAN ID 83642-6239 MERIDIAN ID 83642-6234 HARTLEY TODD S & CHRISTIAN JERRY D & HARTLEY NANCY A CHRISTIAN CHERRY A 3050 AUTUMN WAY 2425 AUTUMN WAY MERIDIAN ID 83642-6238 MERIDIAN ID 83642-6225 ROCKROHR RICHARD L.& GREEN TROY D & ROCKROHR MARY V GREEN ROBIN L 2715 AUTUMN WAY 2475 E AUTUMN WAY MERIDIAN ID 83642-6235 MERIDIAN ID 83642 GREENHILL ESTATES SUBDIVISION WELLMAN JAMES A & NO THREE WATER CORP WELLMAN PATRICIA H 2894 SPRINGWOOD DR 2481 AUTUMN WAY MERIDIAN ID 83642-6262 MERIDIAN ID 83642-6225 FOLEY HOWARD R & WILLIAMS RICHARD C & FOLEY TERESA L WILLIAMS CHEROL A 2875 E AUTUMN WAY 3133 AUTUMN WAY MERIDIAN ID 83642-6236 MERIDIAN ID 83642-6239 CHRISTENSEN SHERON G & NIELSEN WADE C & COLLEEN C REVOCABLE TRUST NIELSEN SHANNON C 3157 E AUTUMN WAY 2881 AUTUMN WAY MERIDIAN ID 83642-6239 MERIDIAN ID 83642-6236 ROBINSON BONNIE J AND HAMBLEY JUDY A 715 SWELLS ST MERIDIAN ID 83642-6249 WELLS DAVID W & M MAXINE 985 FREEWAY DR MERIDIAN ID 83642-6258 E FREEWAY DR POST JAMES A PO BOX 1290 OLDSMAR FL 34677-0023 N EAGLE RD S DAVID W & M MAXONE 985E F �83- BOTTLES MERIDIAN I MARK K & GERI G AND JONES BURKE P 5311 GLENWOOD BOISE ID 83714 875 S ALLEN ST PATEL BHUPENDRA & NILA 2600 FAIRVIEW AVE BOISE ID 83702 N EAGLE RD BUCKERT WANDA 971 S WELLS CIR MERIDIAN ID 83642-6253 DRAPER WESLEY A & ELMA R 942 WELLS MERIDIAN ID 83642 S WELLS ST MIDDLETON ROBERT L & VONA K 955 S WELLS MERIDIAN ID 83642 D R WESLEY A & ELMA R 942S MERIDIAN I 2 t� FUHRMAN JAMES A & DIANE C 1737 E SUMWRFALLS DR MERIDIAN ID 83642-5580 S WELLS ST B & F ENTERPRISES 192 SUN BURST WAY BOISE ID 83709-0675 1151 S WELLS ST IDAHO TRANSPORTATION BOARD ARTIACH JOSE M GLENDA HILDEBRANDT 7025 EMERALD ST, SUITE A BOISE ID 83704-8657 340 S EAGLE RD STATE DEPT OF HIGHWAYS ARTIACH JOSE M GLENDA HILDEBRANDT 7025 EMERALD ST, SUITE A BOISE ID 83704-8657 390 S EAGLE RD RICHEY'VIRGIL C ET UX 365 E MONTVUE MERIDIAN ID 83642 365 E MONTVUE DR ST LUKES REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER LTD 190 E BANNOCK ST BOISE ID 83712-6241 N EAGLE RD 4nteroffice , MEMORANDUM To: William G. Berg, Jr. From: Wm. F. Gigray, III l 1 _ 8 1999 Subject: EAGLE PARTNERS CUP SIGN AMENDMENT CITE' OFilRIDIAN Date: July 8, 1999 Will: Please find attached the original FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION FOR CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT for the above matter. Please present a copy to the Planning and Zoning Commissioners for their roll call from their special.meeting held on June 17, 1999. Also, please be sure to forward the appropriate copies to the Applicant, Planning and Zoning -Administrator and to Public Works. If you have any questions please advise. msg/Z:\Work\M\Meridian 15360M\EAGLE PARTNERS CUP SIGNAGE\MemoBerg070799 t Mayor HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY ROBERT D. CORRIE A Good Place to Live Council Members CITY OF MERIDIAN CHARLES ROUNTREE 33 EAST IDAHO GLENN BENTLEY MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 RON ANDERSON Phone (208) 888-4433 • Fax (208) 887-4813 KEITH BIRD FACSIMILE COVER SHEET LEGAL DEPARTMENT (208) 884-426.3 PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING DEPARTMENT (208)887-2211 PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT (208)884-5533 FAX NUMBER: -3-0-0 — 100 1 DATE: 911199 TO:, 410k] trrusre TITLE/DEPARTMENT: 3Y�1n t� f�c-e-k a CONFIDENTIAL: YES NO TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES (INCLUDING COVER SHEET): �J FROM: CITY OF MERIDIAN - FAX NUMBER: (208) 888-4218 NAME: TITLE/DEPARTMENT: PLEASE CALL US IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL FAX TRANSACTIONS SUCCESSFULLY (208) 888-4433. • MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING: JUNE 17, 1999 APPLICANT: EAGLE PARTNERS. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 7 REQUEST: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT INCLUDES SIGNAGE FOR CHEVRON C -STORE WITH GAS PUMPS & DETACHED CAR WASH MCDONALD'S WITH DRIVE UP WINDOW AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS CITY FIRE DEPT: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SEE ATTACHED COMMENT? ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: SEE ATTACHED COMM S NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: Mavor ROBERT D. CORRIE Council M m6rrs CHARLES ROUNTREE` GLENN BENTLEY RON ANDERSON KEITH BIRD HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY A Good Place to Live CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83612 Phone (208) 888-4433 - Fax (208) 887-4813 LEGAL DEPARTMENT (208) 384--4264 PUBLIC WORKS BUILD(NG DEPARTMENT (208) 837-2211 PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT (208)334-5533 2 (� FACSIMILE COVER SHEET ]]` 199FAX NUMBER: J`T S -�� DATE: (Q l TO: TITLE/DEPARTMENT: CONFIDENTIAL: YES NO TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES (INCLUDING COVER SHEET): FROM: CITY OF MERIDIAN NAME: C� I ms TITLE/DEPAI COMMENTS FAX NUMBER: (208) 888-4218 PLEASE CALL US IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL FAX TRANSACTIONS SUCCESSFULLY (208) 888-4433. Mayor ROBERT D. CORRIE Council Members CHARLES ROUNTREE GLENN BENTLEY RON ANDERSON KEITH BIRD HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY40 ,0 A Good Place to Live CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83612 Phone (208) 888-4433 - Fax (208) 887-4813 LEGAL DEPARTMENT (208) 831-1261 PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING DEPARTMENT (208)887-2211 PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT (208)331-5533 FACSIMILE COVER SHEET FAX NUMBER: a3 T- 1 q M DATE: --, I(Q199 TO: TITLE/DEPARTMENT: CONFIDENTIAL: YES NO TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES (INCLUDING COVER SHEET): NAME: TITLE/1 COMM FROM: CITY OF MERIDIAN - FAX NUMBER: (208) 888-4218 n ,. PLEASE CALL US IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL FAX TRANSACTIONS SUCCESSFULLY (208) 888-4433. ** TX CONF I RON REPORT ** AS OF JUN 16 � 12:35 PAGE. 01 CITY OF MERIDIAN DATE TIME TO/FROM MODE MIN/SEC PGS CMD#t STATUS. 14 06/16 12:33 208 338 9409 EC --S 01'51" 005 118 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ OK Mayor ROBERT NUB OF TRF-4SURE VALLEY D, CORR[E caLES VOUNTc CHARLES ROVNTRFE YTV A Good Pl=e t0 Live CITY i OF j� E DIAN ��/i■ LT iK`�, LEGAL OEP.iRTMENT' (_OLI88.iORK GLENN BE,wTLEY 33 EAST IDAHO PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING DEPARTMENT RONANDERSON ME1tIDIAIY, IDAHO 83612 (808) 387•? -1t) KEITH BIRD Phone (208) 388.4433 • Fax (208) 887-48 t 3 PL.iNNtNG AND ZONING ' DEPARTMENT (208) 884-5533 FACSIMILE COVER SHEET FAX NUMBER: -a3 7 ci og i To: DATE: �� TITLE/DEPARTMENT: TLD1{'fC) f `IRTe-1G '��►�S CONFIDENTIAL: YES NQ TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES (INCLUDING COVER SHEET): FROM: CITY OF MERIDIAN - FAX NUMBER: (208) 888-4218 .,NAME: 5 TITLE/DEPART-M1ENT: COMMFnr nz. ld^ 1 A _ !� A n PLEASE CALL US IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL FAX TRANSACTIONS SUCCESSFULLY (208) 888-4433. **,TX CONF I RMr ON REPORT Hqc DATE TIME TO/FROM 15 06/16 12:35 208 345 7747 ---------------------------------- AS OF JUN 16 199 12:37 PAGE.01 CITY OF MERIDIAN MODE MIN/SEC PGS CMD# STATUS EC --S 01'24" 005 119 OK '(,yon HUB OF TRE4SURE VA(L_ry ROBERT D. CORRI£ A Good Place t0 Live LEGAL DEPARTMENT C==L%J=bfm CITY OF MERIDIAI`N(_USI SS4..1264 CHARLES ROUNTREE PUBLIC WORKS GLENN BENTLEY 33 EAST IDAHO BUILDING DEPART:tENT MERMIAN, IDAHO 83Q2 (308) S87-2211 RON ANDERSON Phonc (208) 888—t+t33 • Fax (208) 88748 t 3 PLANNING AND ZONING KEITH BIRD DEPARTMENT (=o5) $34-5533 FACSIMILE COVER SHEET j� FAX NUMBER. 3� S -11 ��' DATE: lk 1 Q 9 TO: TITLE/DEPARTMENT: CONFIDENTIAL` YES NO TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES (INCLUDING COVER SHEET): TITLE/ COMM FROM: CITY OF MERIDIAN - FAX NUMBER: (208) 888-4218 PLEASE CALL US IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL FAX TRANSACTIONS SUCCESSFULLY (208) 888-4433. BROWN ROBERT P & BROWN PHYLLIS H 2927 AUTUMN WAY MERIDIAN ID 83642-6237 SEGER RICHARD S JR & SEGER MARTHA K 2951 E AUTUMN WAY MERIDIAN ID 83642-6237 ZICKEFOOSE GEORGE L & ZICKEFOOSE JANET A 2975 E AUTUMN WAY MERIDIAN ID 83642-6237 NIELSON DENNIS E & NIELSON JOAN M 3019 AUTUMN WAY MERIDIAN ID 83642-6238 HOREL CHARLES D & 14OREL MARY KAY 3043 AUTUMN WAY MERIDIAN ID 83642-6238 BOWEN MARK A & BOWEN ANN T 3067 AUTUMN WAY MERIDIAN ID 83642-6238 TRUAX RODNEY D & TRUAX KRIS A 3091 E AUTUMN WAY MERIDIAN ID 83642-6238 GREENHILL ESTATES SUB NO 3 WATER CORP 3136 SPRINGWOOD DR MERIDIAN ID 83642 LOREE PAUL M & MARGARET E 2510 E MAGIC VIEW CIR MERIDIAN ID 83642-6242 HOWELL RICHARD D & JUNE 2750 E MAGIC VIEW DR MERIDIAN ID 83642-6244 0 POPP BEULAH O 2662 E MAGIC VIEW DR MERIDIAN ID 83642-6243 HANKS HARVARD D & GENEVA J 2930 E MAGIC VIEW DR MERIDIAN ID 83642-6246 BOYD JAMES L AND MOORE WINSTON H P O BOX 8204 BOISE ID 83707 3050 E MAGIC VIEW DR IDAHO UNITED CREDIT UNION PO BOX 2268 BOISE ID 83701 603 N EAGLE RD EAGLE PARTNERS L L C SOUTH JOHNSON COMANY PO BOX 6290 BOISE ID 83707 603 N EAGLE RD PEARCEY DAVID S & BETTE K 675 S WELLS ST MERIDIAN ID 83642-6249 GIRDNER PAUL K & KAY C PO BOX 190749 BOISE ID 83719-0749 2727 E MAGIC VIEW DR BARNES ROBERT B & KATHLEEN E 2855 E MAGIC VIEW DR MERIDIAN ID 83642-6245 HUBBLE E DON 9550 BETHEL CRT BOISE ID 83709 621 S ALLEN ST JACKSONS FOOD STORES INC PO BOX 488 3500 COMMERCIAL CT MERIDIAN ID 83680-0488 625 N EAGLE RD