Loading...
2017 04-06 Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda – Thursday, April 6, 2017 Page 1 of 2 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. City Council Chambers 33 E. Broadway Avenue, Meridian, Idaho Thursday, April 6, 2017 at 6:00 p.m. 1. Roll-call Attendance __X__ Treg Bernt __X___ Steven Yearsley __X__ Gregory Wilson __O___ Ryan Fitzgerald __X__ Jessica Perreault __X __ Bill Cassanelli ___X___ Rhonda McCarvel – Chairperson 2. Adoption of the Agenda Approved as Amended 3. Consent Agenda Approved A. Approve Minutes of March 16, 2017 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting B. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: Melissa’s Daycare (H-2017-0015) by Laurie Gallia Located 523 E. Brown Bear 4. Action Items A. Public Hearing for Rockbury Subdivision (H-2017-0018) by Rock Harbor Church, Inc. Located 6437 N. Tree Haven Way Public Hearing Continued to April 20, 2017 1. Request: Rezone of 25.06 Acres of Land from R-15 (8.95 Acres) and C-N (16.11 Acres) to R-15 (6.71 Acres) and C- N (18.35 Acres) Zoning Districts 2. Request: Preliminary Plat Approval Consisting of Two (2) Common Lots, One (1) Commercial Lot and One (1) Multi-Family Lot on 23.56 Acres of Land in the Proposed R-15 and C-N Zoning Districts B. Public Hearing for Gyro Shack at Paramount (H-2017-0017) by Jeff Likes Located 5038 N. Linder Road Approved – Prepare Findings of Fact for April 20, 2017 MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda – Thursday, April 6, 2017 Page 2 of 2 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. 1. Request: Conditional Use Permit Approval for a Drive- Thru Establishment Within 300 Feet of Another Drive- Thru Establishment C. Public Hearing for Oaks South (H-2017-0010) by Thomas Coleman Located South of W. McMillan Road and East of N. McDermott Road Recommend Approval to City Council – Schedule for City Council on May 2, 2017 1. Request: Rezone of 0.005 Acre from L-O to R-8; 0.001 Acre from L-O to R-15; 0.04 Acre from R-15 to L-O; 0.22 Acre from R-15 to R-8; 0.19 Acre from R-15 to R-14; 0.31 an Acre from R-8 to R-4; and 0.07 Acre from R-4 to the R-8 Zoning District D. Public Hearing for Holy Apostles Catholic Church (H-2017- 0019) by Roman Catholic Diocese of Boise Located Southeast Corner of E. Chinden Boulevard and N. Meridian Road Recommend Approval to City Council – Schedule for City Council on May 2, 2017 1. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 16.32 Acres of Land with a C-C Zoning District Meeting Adjourned at 6:45 p.m. Changes to Agenda: • Item #4A: Rockbury Subdivision (H-2017-0018) — Applicant requests continuance to April 20, 2017 Item #4B: Gyro Shack at Paramount (H-2017-0017) Application(s): ➢ Conditional Use Permit Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 0.493 of an acre of land, zoned C -G, located at 5038 N. Linder Road. Adjacent Land Use & Zoning: North: Dutch Bros. Coffee, zoned C -G East: Linder Springs Townhomes, zoned C -G South: Kelson Orthodontics, zoned C -G West: Kelly Creek Subdivision, zoned C -G History: • In 2004, this property was annexed as part of Paramount Subdivision (AZ -03-006) with a Development Agreement, recorded as Instrument No. 103137116. In 2003, a preliminary plat (PP -03-004) and conditional use Paramount Subdivision which include the subject property. retail/office uses. • In 2007, this property was included in the following approvals: permit/planned development (CUP -03-008) was approved for This property was designated on the conceptual site plan for ➢ Preliminary plat (PP -07-011) for 18 commercial building lots on 18,5 acres of land in a C -G zoning district; ➢ Development Agreement modification (MI -07-007) to remove the conditional use permit requirement and require design review approval instead for all commercial development in the C -G and L-0 zoning districts, recorded as Instrument No. 107145935. In 2012, a final plat (FP -12-019) was approved for Commercial Southwest Subdivision No. 2 which includes the subject property as Lot 2, Block 2. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Commercial Summary of Request: The applicant has submitted an application for a conditional use permit (CUP) for a drive-through establishment for the Gyro Shack restaurant in a C -G zoning district. The CUP is required because the proposed drive-through is within 300 feet of an existing drive-through establishment (Dutch Bros) and residential uses (Linder Springs apartments), per UDC Table 11-213-2. Site Plan: A site plan is included in Exhibit A.2 that depicts how the site is proposed to develop with a 924 square foot (s.f.) restaurant with a drive-through and indoor seating. Access: Access is proposed via a north/south commercial driveway along the east boundary of the site within a cross -access easement depicted on the plat for Commercial Southwest Subdivision No. 2 to/from W. McMillan Road. Direct lot access is not proposed or allowed via N. Linder Road. Parking: Based on the overall square footage of the building (924 s,f.), a minimum of 2 vehicle parking spaces are required to be provided on the site per the standards listed in UDC 11 -3C -6B. A total of 16 parking stalls are proposed, well in excess of the UDC minimum requirements. Landscaping: A 25 -foot wide landscaped street buffer exists along N. Linder Road, an arterial street that was installed with Commercial Southwest Subdivision No. 2. All existing landscaping is required to be protected during construction in accord with UDC 11-313-10C. Parking lot landscaping is required to comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-313-8C. The landscape plan should be revised to include one tree within the planter island at the south end of the row of parking on the east side of the building. Additionally, the landscape buffer on the north side requires 1 tree for every 35 feet for a total of 4 required trees. The landscape buffer along the western property line is also required to have 1 tree for every 35 feet for a total of 4 trees. Please revise the landscape plan accordingly. If wheel stops aren't provided within parking stalls that abut street or perimeter buffers, the buffer(s) should be widened an additional 2 feet to allow for vehicle overhang in accord with UDC 11 -3C -5B.4. A 25 -foot wide landscape buffer to adjoining residential uses is required along the east side of the site adjacent to the apartments in Linder Springs as set forth in UDC Table 11-213-3 and is required to be planted in accord with the standards listed in 11-313-9C. Staff recommends the site and landscape plans are revised in accord with the conditions listed in Exhibit B prior to the Commission meeting. Trash Enclosure: A dumpster to serve the proposed restaurant is depicted on the site plan at the northeast corner of the site. The applicant should obtain approval from Republic Services for the location and design of the enclosure (note the requirement above for relocation of the trash enclosure outside of the buffer to residential uses). Materials for the enclosure are proposed to consist of split face CMU block to match the building with metal doors as shown in Exhibit A.4. Specific Use Standards: The proposed use is subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-11, Drive -Through Establishment. Staff has reviewed these standards and believes the proposed site design is consistent with these standards, except for the following standard: "The stacking lane shall be a separate lane from the circulation lanes needed for access and parking." Although the stacking lane separates into 2 order lanes that merge back into one pick-up lane, traffic stacking in this lane during peak hours of operation may block access to the internal parking stalls, funneling vehicles via the one-way drive aisle on the north. To remedy this issue, Staff recommends the internal stacking be used as a one drive aisle into the parking area and the outer stacking lane be used as the stacking lane for the drive-through. Staff believes this would increase site circulation and internal access to the parking area. Staff would also like to make the Commission aware that this proposed drive-through would make the total number of drive- through establishments within this development to 5. Staff has concerns with the number of these establishments in such a small area. Hours of Operation: The proposed hours of operation are from 6:00 am to 11:00 pm seven days a week. Because the site is adjacent to residential uses to the east (Linder Springs apartments), the hours of operation are restricted to those hours per UDC 11 -2B -3A.4. Extended hours of operation in the C -G zoning district may be requested through a future conditional use permit. The proposed hours of operation complies with the allowed operational hours without the need to procure a CUP. Sidewalk: A 5 -foot wide detached sidewalk exists along N. Linder Road on this site in accord with UDC 11-3A-17. A pedestrian walkway is not depicted on the site plan from the perimeter sidewalk along N. Linder Road to the main building entrance as required by UDC 11 -3A-1 9A.4.This must be included on the site plan at the time of the certificate of zoning compliance. Building Elevations: Building elevations were submitted for the proposed structure as shown in Exhibit A.4. Building materials consist primarily of stucco with metal roofing. The proposed building elevations do not comply with the design standards listed in UDC 11-3A- 19 and the Meridian Design Manual. The applicant will shall submit an application for administrative design review and should bring the proposal into compliance with the previously mentioned standards. With submittal of the administrative design review application, the applicant should make several changes to the building elevations to bring the building more in line with the surrounding buildings. The applicant should provide revised elevations which include the following items: a. Provide decorative trim around the all doorways and windows. b. Replace the metal wainscot with stone. Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC): The applicant is required to submit a CZC application for approval of the proposed use, site layout and building elevations from the Planning Division prior to submittal of a building permit application. Design Review: The applicant is required to submit a Design Review application concurrent with the CZC application for final approval of the site layout and building elevations. The proposed site layout and structures are required to comply with the design standards listed in UDC 11-3A-19 and the guidelines contained in the Meridian Design Manual. Written Testimony: None Staff Recommendation: Approval with conditions Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2017-0028, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of April 6, 2017, with the following modifications: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2017-0028, as presented during the hearing on April 6, 2017, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2017-0028 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) Item #4C: Oaks South - RZ (H-2017-0010) Application(s): ➢ Rezone Size of property, existing zoning, and location: The rezone area consists of a total of 0.84 of an acre of land, zoned L-0, R-15 and R-8, located at the SEC of W. McMillan Road and N. McDermott Road. History: This property was annexed in 2013 & included in the preliminary plat for the Oaks South development. Summary of Request: At the request of Staff, the applicant submitted the subject rezone application to "clean up" the existing zoning in the development so that the zoning coincides with the lot configurations shown on approved and future final plats. This will eliminate lots having dual zoning. The rezone is for 0.005 acre from L-0 to R-8; 0.001 acre from L-0 to R-15; 0.04 acre from R-15 to L-0; 0.22 acre from R-15 to R-8; 0.19 acre from R-15 to R-4; 0.31 an acre from R-8 to R-4; and 0.07 acre from R-4 to the R-8 zoning district. The proposed zoning is consistent with the MDR FLUM designation in the Comprehensive Plan. Written Testimony: Kristi Watkins, JUB Engineers, Applicant's Representative (in agreement w/staff report) Staff Recommendation: Approval Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of File Number H- 2017-0010, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of April 6, 2017. Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend denial to the City Council of File Number H-2017- 0010, as presented during the hearing on April 6, 2017, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2017-0010 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) Item #D: Holy Apostles (H-2017-0019) Application(s): ➢ Rezone Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 16.32 acres of land, zoned RUT in Ada County, located at the SEC of E. Chinden Blvd. & N. Meridian Rd. Adjacent Land Use & Zoning: North: E. Chinden Blvd. and rural residential properties in Castlebury West Subdivision, zoned R1 in Ada County East: Zamzow's retail store, zoned RUT in Ada County South: St. Ignatius School, zoned C -C West: N. Meridian Road and vacant/undeveloped land (approved for residential homes - Paramount Director), zoned R-15 History: A record of survey was approved by the County & recorded in 2016 that created the current configuration of the property. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: MU -C Summary of Request: The applicant requests annexation & zoning of 16.32 acres of land with a C -C zoning district consistent with the MU -C FLUM designation. A site plan was submitted that depicts how the site is developed with a 52,220 s.f. church and accessory structures (SFR home & food pantry), parking and access; all of the existing structures are proposed to remain. One full access exists via Meridian Road; and another full access exists via Chinden Blvd. which is shared with the Zamzow's property to the east; no new accesses are proposed. Parking exists on the site that exceeds UDC standards. A 35' wide landscaped street buffer is required along N. Meridian Rd. and E. Chinden Blvd., both entryway corridors; a 10' wide multi -use pathway is required within the buffer along Chinden within a public pedestrian easement. The applicant should reserve all necessary ROW as required by ITD for the future widening of Chinden Blvd. outside of the required street buffer. Connection to the City sewer system is required within 60 days of annexation into the City; connection to City water is not required due to the terms of the 2007 agreement between the City and United Water. To ensure compliance with UDC standards for site improvements, a CZC is required to be submitted within 60 days of annexation. Written Testimony: Tamara Thompson, Applicant's Representative (in agreement w/staff report) Staff Recommendation: Approval with a DA Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of File Number H- 2017-0019, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of April 6, 2017. Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend denial to the City Council of File Number H-2017- 0019, as presented during the hearing on April 6, 2017, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2017-0019 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) Notes: Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting April 20, 2017 Item #4A: New Beginnings Zoning Map Concept Development Plan & Building Elevation Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting April 6, 2017 Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of April 6, 2017, was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Chairman Rhonda McCarvel. Members Present: Chairman Rhonda McCarvel, Commissioner Steven Yearsley, Commissioner Gregory Wilson, Commissioner Treg Bernt, Commissioner Jessica Perreault and Commissioner Bill Cassanelli. Members Absent: Commissioner Ryan Fitzgerald. Others Present: Machelle Hill, Andrea Pogue, Bill Parsons, Sonya Allen, Josh Beach and Dean Willis. Item 1: Roll-call Attendance __X___ Treg Bernt ___X___ Steven Yearsley __X___ Gregory Wilson _______ Ryan Fitzgerald __X___ Jessica Perreault ___X___ Bill Cassanelli ___X___ Rhonda McCarvel - Chairman McCarvel: Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. At this time I would like to call to order the regularly scheduled meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission on April 6th, 2017. Let's begin with roll call. Item 2: Adoption of the Agenda McCarvel: Okay. The first item on the agenda is the adoption of the agenda . We do have one change. Rockbury Subdivision, H-2017-0018, has requested continued to April 20th. So, we will open that just for the purpose of continuing the item to the regularly scheduled meeting date of April 20th. It will open solely for this purpose. So, if there is anybody here tonight to testify on that particular application, we will not be taking testimony this evening. So, could I get a motion to adopt the agenda as amended? Yearsley: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley. Yearsley: I make a motion we adopt the agenda as presented. Wilson: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to adopt the agenda. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carried. Meridian Planning & Zoning April 6, 2017 Page 2 of 18 MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 3: Consent Agenda A. Approve Minutes of March 16, 2017 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting B. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: Melissa’s Daycare (H-2017-0015) by Laurie Gallia Located 523 E. Brown Bear McCarvel: The next item on the agenda is the Consent Agenda and we have two items on the Consent Agenda. The approval of minutes for the March 16th, 2017, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting and Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for approval on Melissa's Daycare. Can I get a motion to accept the Consent Agenda as presented? Wilson: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Wilson. Wilson: I move to adopt the Consent Agenda as presented. Bernt: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to adopt the Consent Agenda. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. McCarvel: Okay. At this time I would like to briefly explain the hearing process for this evening. We will open each item individually and, then, start with the staff report. The staff will report their findings regarding how the item adheres to our Comprehensive Plan and Uniform Development Code with the staff's recommendations. After the staff has made their presentation, the applicant will come forward to present their case for the approval of their application and respond to any staff comments. The applicant will have 15 minutes to do so. After the applicant has finished we will take -- open -- we will open to public testimony. There is a sign-up sheet in the back as you entered for anyone wishing to testify. Any person testifying will come forward and be allowed three minutes. If they are speaking for a larger group, like an HOA and there is a show of hands to represent the group, they will be given up to ten minutes. After all testimony has been heard the applicant will be given another ten minutes to have the opportunity to come back and respond if they desire . After that we will close the public hearing and the Commissioners will have the opportunity to discuss and, hopefully, be able to make a recommendation to City Council. Meridian Planning & Zoning April 6, 2017 Page 3 of 18 Item 4: Action Items A. Public Hearing for Rockbury Subdivision (H-2017- 0018) by Rock Harbor Church, Inc. Located 6437 N. Tree Haven Way 1. Request: Rezone of 25.06 Acres of Land from R- 15 (8.95 Acres) and C-N (16.11 Acres) to R-15 (6.71 Acres) and CN (18.35 Acres) Zoning Districts 2. Request: Preliminary Plat Approval Consisting of Two (2) Common Lots, One (1) Commercial Lot and One (1) Multi-Family Lot on 23.56 Acres of Land in the Proposed R-15 and C-N Zoning Districts McCarvel: So, at this time I'd like to open the public hearing for H-2017-0018, Rockbury Subdivision, and request the continuance to April 20th. Yearsley: Madam Chair, I move that we continue file number H-2017- 0018 to April 20th, 2017. Wilson: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to continue H-2017-0018 to April 7th -- or April 20th. All those in favor say aye. Nay? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. B. Public Hearing for Gyro Shack at Paramount (H-2017- 0017) by Jeff Likes Located 5038 N. Linder Road 1. Request: Conditional Use Permit Approval for a DriveThru Establishment Within 300 Feet of Another DriveThru Establishment McCarvel: So, now we will open the public hearing for 2017-0017, Gyro Shack at Paramount and we will begin with the staff report. Beach: Thank you, Madam Chair, Commissioners. As you said, this is a -- an application for a conditional use permit for the Gyro Shack at Paramount . The site consists of 0.493 -- .493 of an acre of land, which is zoned C-G, located at 5038 North Linder Road. Adjacent land uses and zoning. To the north is the commercial property, the Dutch Bros Coffee, which is zoned C-G. To the east are Linder Springs Townhomes, also zoned C-G. To the south is Kelson Meridian Planning & Zoning April 6, 2017 Page 4 of 18 Orthodontics, zoned C-G. And to the west is North Linder Road and the Kelly Creek Subdivision, which is zoned R-8. A little history on this property. It was annexed into the city in 2003. There was also a preliminary plat. And most recently was in 2012 issued a final plan approval and the Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation for the property is commercial and the applicant has submitted an application for the conditional use permit, as I said, for a drive- through establishment in the C-G zoning district. The conditional use permit is required because the proposed drive-thru is within 300 feet of both an existing drive-thru establishment, which would be Dutch Bros, and residential uses, which are Linder Springs Apartments. The site plan as shown here depicts how the site is proposed to develop with an approximately 924 square foot restaurant, with a proposed drive-thru and indoor seating. Access to the site is proposed via a north-south commercial driveway along the east boundary of the site, with a cross-access easement depicted on the plat for Commercial Southwest Subdivision No. 2, which will provide access to the property. Direct lot access is not proposed or allowed via North Linder Road. A 25 foot wide landscape buffer -- a 25 foot wide landscape buffer exists on North Linder Road, an arterial street that has -- it was installed with the Commercial Southwest Subdivision No. 2. The applicant is going to be required to provide some additional landscaping on that to meet the requirements of the code. Parking lot landscaping is also required to comply with the standards in the UDC. The landscape plan should be revised to include one tree within a planter island to the south -- south end -- let me revise that. This is a -- we had some conditions in here that the applicant revised their -- both their site plan and landscape plan prior to Commission. This landscape plan reflects those changes. So, they have -- they have modified it a little bit to include trees on the north side, the required number, and, then, trees along Linder Road. I will note that there is also a requirement in the code that when a commercial property abuts the residential use, that they provide an additional 20 foot wide landscape buffer. So, that would be going back to the over shot of the property. So, this is -- these are the Linder Springs Apartments right here. The code requires that a 25 foot wide landscape buffer be installed against the residential use, even though there is a commercial drive aisle there that does not meet the requirements. So, the applicant is conditioned to -- to do so. The proposed use is subject to the specific use standards. Staff has reviewed these standards and believes the proposed site design is consistent with those standards, except for the following standard. Quote. The stacking lane shall be a separate lane from the circulation lanes needed for access and parking. Although the stacking lane separates into two order lanes -- I will go back here to the landscape plan so you can see. So, although the stacking lane separates into two order lanes that merge back into one pickup lane, traffic stacking in -- in the lane during peak hours of operation may block access to the internal parking stalls, which are located here. So, staff's concern is that stacking in this area would limit the ability for additional cars to -- to park in this area, funneling vehicles via the other one way drive aisle on the north. To remedy this issue staff recommends the internal stacking be used as a one -- as a one drive aisle into the parking area and the outer stacking lane and be used as a stacking Meridian Planning & Zoning April 6, 2017 Page 5 of 18 lane. Hopefully that makes sense. So, that this would not be a stacking lane here. This would be access for parking and the outer lane would be the stacking lane for the drive-thru. Staff would also like to make the Commission aware that this proposed drive-thru would make the total number of drive-thru establishments within this development to five. There are a large number of drive-thrus in the area. I wanted to make sure that it was understood that there is -- there is going to be a lot of traffic in and out of this development. The concerns with -- with that in such a small area. And so building elevations provided by the applicant show a mixture of materials that consist of stucco and -- stucco and stone. The proposed building elevations, as shown by the applicants, comply with the design standards and staff had indicated to the applicant that we would like to see some additional materials provided on the elevations , which include a decorative trim around all doorways and windows. The applicant is required to submit a certificate of zoning compliance application for approval , as well as design review. Did not receive any written testimony on this application . Staff is recommending approval with the conditions in the staff report and I will stand for any questions you have. McCarvel: Thank you. Are there any questions for staff? Okay. Would the applicant like to come forward. And, please, state your name and address for the record. Wilmot: Richard Wilmot. ALC Architecture. 1119 East State Street. Eagle, Idaho. 83616. Good evening. I'm here representing the -- the owner in this project and I think in general we agree with all of the staff 's recommendations with the exception of item 1.3B, which is that of the landscape buffer along the internal street and the additional trim or decorative trim around the windows. Reason being with the landscape buffer that -- consistent with what's going on -- sorry. The reason for the -- the landscape buffer and wanting to get forgiveness there was it's not very consistent with what's going on on adjacent properties and we are providing a landscape buffer that's set in along -- along that edge. But we would like to have the ability to park additional cars there to serve the internal -- internal operation of the restaurant. And, then, as far as the -- the trim itself or the decorative trim around the windows, this -- these projects all have a very consistent look. It's a very contemporary, clean looking building. I think we -- if we could just discuss what sort of decorative trim would be preferred . If one is absolutely necessary, then, you know, would something like a slim profile blue metal or something complimenting the existing trim be acceptable and if that's the case, then, we wouldn't take any exceptions to -- to that -- that comment either. But other than that I think we are -- we are in general agreement with -- with the comments, except for those two. I will take any questions. McCarvel: Any questions for the applicant? Perreault: Madam Chair? Meridian Planning & Zoning April 6, 2017 Page 6 of 18 McCarvel: Yes. Commissioner Perreault. Perreault: Josh, could you bring back up the slide that shows the landscape -- can you bring that slide back up that shows -- yeah. There we go. I'm sorry, I didn't hear what you said about the -- what you were disagreeing with. Can you show me on here. Wilmot: Sure. So, there is one, two, three -- five parking stalls along the existing street. Perreault: Okay. Wilmot: The internal street with the trash enclosure there. Perreault: Uh-huh. Wilmot: We believe what's being asked for is, basically, that we provided a 25 foot landscape buffer there and, basically, eliminating five parking spaces. This isn't really consistent with either development on both sides of us, plus we already separated from the residential development by the street and the landscape buffer on the other side of the street, plus we are providing one obviously right -- right next to the five parking stalls. So, we just want the ability to, you know, park the site appropriately, alleviating some of those traffic concerns, so that there is not a continual search for parking in the area to serve the restaurant. So, we think, you know, what we are providing here is -- is adequate and would, in effect, meet the intent, even though it's not a full 25 feet, we are still giving some buffer from the drive-thru, the building, the operation, the facility to the residential, plus we are putting the building as close to Linder as possible. So, we would -- we would like forgiveness of the actual 25 feet in lieu of what we are presenting. Perreault: So, with the parking stalls, the intention is for them to come through a drive-thru, get their items, come back around and park and eat in the car or -- they are not going to be parking and walking to the -- to the building or are they? Wilmot: They would, yes. Perrault: Oh. Okay. Wilmot: We would -- we are providing both outdoor and indoor seating within -- within the -- Perrault: The tables there on the north side? Wilmot: Uh-huh. Those are the tables on the outside. There is a large patio. And, then, we have some -- even bike racks and, then, the connection to this -- to Meridian Planning & Zoning April 6, 2017 Page 7 of 18 the sidewalk at Linder and, then, within the restaurant itself I believe there is 15 or 20 seats inside of the restaurant. So, realistically, you could park -- walk to the building, order inside, sit down. McCarvel: Any other questions? Yearsley: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley. Yearsley: Josh, maybe you can help me. On these other projects that we have approved in the -- in the other areas, did we allow a reduced landscape buffer or we -- did we require the 25 foot on the rest of them as well? Beach: So, let me go back to the -- so, he is right that it would be at least two other drive-thrus that were not required to do a 25 foot landscape buffer, but the property just to the south where the orthodontist is, he did provide that and I think -- I don't know the exact details as to whether or not -- well, it would have been a requirement. So, likely in this case Council -- what we have indicated to this applicant is in order to get that condition waved he would have to get Council's approval to do so, so -- I don't know the history as to whether or not both of those did, but I guess I assumed that they didn't, since we don't see a 25 foot landscape buffer there. Yearsley: So, I guess my question is -- so, we are just -- we are -- we are going to approve the conditional use permit for the 300 -- or for the drive-thru; correct? That's -- that's really all we are doing. But he would have to go to Council to get the waiver for the -- the reduced landscape buffer; correct? Beach: Absolutely. Yearsley: Okay. McCarvel: Thank you. And I -- could you go back to that landscape slide, Josh? Explain -- can you talk a little bit more about how that drive-thru stacking works with what -- staff's recommendation or how are you feeling about that? Wilmot: Sure. McCarvel: Is that something you want -- Wilmot: Basically -- what we had initially -- the intent was to have a full double -- double lane drive-thru, but, then, funnel down into a single -- a single lane. Through the process of, you know, just looking at the logistics of the site, I -- we agree with the idea to at least reduce the second lane to the point at which is beyond the access to the parking. Meridian Planning & Zoning April 6, 2017 Page 8 of 18 McCarvel: All right. Wilmot: So, really it could just be a one car stacking situation and it would be identified and be marked as such. McCarvel: Right. So, would there -- there would be markings on there. It's kind of like wait here for the next available line kind of thing. Wilmot: Sort of. Yeah. McCarvel: Yeah. Okay. Wilmot: We wouldn't encourage additional -- additional vehicles to block what would be the access to the majority of the parking. Parking area. McCarvel: Okay. Have you ever -- have you had that work in other areas? Do people recognize that -- wait here and don't form two lines kind of thing? Wilmot: Yes. McCarvel: And, then, I had one other question. Do you have other buildings in Meridian that do not have the -- I mean what do your other buildings look like? Do they have the trim or not? Wilmot: So, the intent with -- there is another -- there is another building by the same owner on Fairview -- next to Smoky Mountain on Fairview and effectively Main Street. Major cross -- and that's -- that's an example of -- of kind of the intent of what this building would be also. Obviously, this building is different -- different shaped. A little bit larger. But there is a -- there is a common -- there is a common design aesthetic with all of the Gyro Shack facilities and we are just -- we want to try to keep that same -- that same aesthetic, which in most cases doesn't include any trim around the windows, because it's just a smooth, clean, modern surface. However, you know, if -- if -- if a trim is -- is needed, you know, we could -- if it would appease the Commission and design review, that we -- that we, basically, take a -- using a blue metal trim that matches the soffit and the -- and the roofing material and the parapet cap, that -- that basically we surround that around the windows and these photos here -- I believe it is -- it's my understanding that a lot of this texture on the facility -- façade here -- McCarvel: Uh-huh. Wilmot: -- isn't actually going to be the case. I think it's just a smooth surface. McCarvel: Okay. Meridian Planning & Zoning April 6, 2017 Page 9 of 18 Wilmot: So, that would be also our intent. McCarvel: Okay. Perreault: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Perreault. Perreault: Could staff elaborate a little bit more on the concern with having the multiple drive-thrus? Is it because of the existing street there on the east side? Is your concern about back up with that? Beach: Maybe I can draw on here, show you what we were thinking. So, I don't know if you have seen this in a drive-thru. So, it's kind of what -- I guess what we are thinking is I don't really necessarily have a problem with the two order locations that they have for the drive-thru here if you look at the plan, it's that if you have got cars stacked from the speakers all the way out to the existing drive aisle there is no ability for cars to pull into the parking lot. Wilmot: And we agree with that. Beach: So, if we stripe it such and if you have seen this other places. McDonald's, for example, does that where they -- they stripe the asphalt in front with arrows and show where it would split. So, the car should veer from the one lane into the two. So, I think there is the ability to do that, so that we don't impact folks getting into the parking lot, with the understanding that if you look at the north side of the landscape -- I guess I'm drawing on it and you can't see what I'm doing. It doesn't really help. So, if you look on the north side that would be a one way exodus from what I'm understanding or we would like them to do it that way, so that you have got your entrance on the south into the parking lot and your exit on the north side out to the drive aisle. Perreault: Uh-huh. Wilmot: Or vice-versa. Beach: Or vice-versa. There is one way in, one way out. If you did it the other way you would have to flop the -- the entrance into the facility would be on the south side. Parsons: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, one of the specific use standards for drive-thru establishments requires that the stacking lane be separate from the access into the parking -- into the parking lot and so if that area gets congested and this is designed to be a one way circulation, no one is going to be able to park and we are going to have people parking on that north- south cross-access drive and it's going to be a cluster, especially with it being Meridian Planning & Zoning April 6, 2017 Page 10 of 18 next to a high school and with the fact that we have other drive-thrus in this development and that's why we bring it to your attention this evening. So, they can't have two drive-thru lanes there. They are not -- they are not separating access per our code. They have to have a separate stacking lane and they have to have separate lanes to get people to that internal parking area. McCarvel: Any other questions? Cassanelli: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Mr. Cassanelli. Cassanelli: Question for the applicant. Ryan, you're showing 16 parking stalls; is that correct? Sixteen parking stall? Wilmot: Yeah. Sixteen. Uh-huh. Cassanelli: Based on other locations, other Gyro Shack locations, if there were -- if we had to remove five to put that landscape buffer in there, is that going to negatively impact the ability to park there for -- for what -- the volume of business? Wilmot: So, the way that we have this -- the building and the site plan now is based on approximately 45 seats. So, that's patio seating, as well as internal seating to the -- to the building. Cassanelli: Okay. Wilmot: And the parking ratio -- that basically equates to 15 parking stalls. Cassanelli: Okay. Wilmot: So, you know, we are in such a location that -- with the residents so close we are encouraging sort of the walk-up activity. But as we all know it's much easier to get there in a car. So, we just want to be able to encourage that if -- if -- if the opportunity, because if there is nowhere to park it makes it difficult for patrons to frequent the facility. Beach: Madam Chair, if I could real quick? McCarvel: Yes. Beach: Just as a matter of procedure -- and I think legal -- Andrea can correct me if I'm wrong. The Planning and Zoning doesn't have the ability to remove that condition of code. The way that it would work is the applicant would appeal the decision and that would go to Council for their review, so -- Meridian Planning & Zoning April 6, 2017 Page 11 of 18 McCarvel: Okay. So, what we are doing -- Beach: You don't have the ability to waive it. McCarvel: Yeah. All we are doing is okaying the drive-thru, because it's within 300 feet of another drive-thru. Beach: You got it. You can talk about the layout, parking, that kind of stuff. McCarvel: Then he goes to City Council for the landscape issues. Right. Wilmot: Just for clarity would they be recommending approval as we have it to City Council? Beach: So, with the conditional use permit -- sorry to speak directly to the applicant, but they have the ultimate say with the conditional use permit, so they recommend -- or they approve or deny those and, then, there is a -- there is an appeal, so you would need to appeal the decision to City Council to -- and ask for them to waive that condition. McCarvel: Okay. Any other questions for the applicant? Okay. Okay. Thank you. Wilmot: Thank you. McCarvel: At this time we would take any public testimony if there is any to be had. Okay. At this time could I get a motion to close the public hearing for item number H-2017-0017? Bernt: So moved. Yearsley: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to close the public hearing. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. McCarvel: Okay. Discussion? Or all discussed? Yearsley: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley. Meridian Planning & Zoning April 6, 2017 Page 12 of 18 Yearsley: You know, I think it looks really good. I like the -- the conditions that the staff has put on. You know, I understand that we are not moving on the recommendation, but I think the parking, the way it's shown, is appropriate and I think it would benefit the -- the area and so with that I'm in favor of this application. McCarvel: Okay. Cassanelli: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Cassanelli. Cassanelli: I, too, am in favor of it. I -- with regards to the -- the additional trim, I -- I don't know that I necessarily see that as a -- as that critical. I mean if they could do blue around the windows I suppose to match -- to line up, but I think with some of the other buildings around I don't think -- I mean it looks like there is stone, there is stucco, there is nice -- it looks like a nice design. I don't know that -- and I don't know if that's -- if that's something they would appeal or if we could approve it without it, but I don't necessarily see that -- that an additional trim would be required. McCarvel: Anyone? Yeah. I agree. I think it will be a nice addition there and for the two cents for the Council I think having more landscape instead of more parking might be more of a problem there than it's worth, so that's my two cents. But I do like the -- the suggestions from staff to make that -- the flow of that drive- thru. Would anybody like to make a motion? Wilson: I can. I mean my question, though, is -- Madam Chair? Sorry. McCarvel: Go ahead. Wilson: Are we -- so it sounds like I would be -- I made a motion -- McCarvel: Uh-huh. Wilson: -- based on what I have heard from my fellow Commissioners, we would be excluding that condition 1.10; correct? McCarvel: Do we need to address that? Wilson: Or do we need -- or is it just the CUP? McCarvel: Are we just kind of like the landscape? Beach: Rephrase the question. So, you're asking me if you need to -- to leave out the -- Meridian Planning & Zoning April 6, 2017 Page 13 of 18 Wilson: The condition of on -- on the -- on the windows -- on the -- Beach: You can approve it without that. Absolutely. So, if you don't -- if you don't like -- and just to clarify. There is -- there is 1.10 A and B. They have done B. They revised their elevations to include the stone instead of the metal wainscoting. But the -- you can approve it without that if you -- if you would desire. Wilson: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Mr. Wilson. Wilson: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I moved to approve a file number H-2017-0028 as presented the staff report for hearing date of April 6th, 2017, with the following modification. Striking the requirement 1.10- A. Bernt: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to approve Item 2017-007 with modification. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Congratulations. MOTION CARRIES: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. C. Public Hearing for Oaks South (H-2017-0010) by Thomas Coleman Located South of W. McMillan Road and East of N. McDermott Road 1. Request: Rezone of 0.005 Acre from L-O to R-8; 0.001 Acre from L-O to R-15; 0.04 Acre from R-15 to L-O; 0.22 Acre from R-15 to R-8; 0.19 Acre from R-15 to R-14; 0.31 an Acre from R-8 to R-4; and 0.07 Acre from R-4 to the R-8 Zoning District McCarvel: Okay. Okay. At this time I would like to open the public hearing for H-2017-0010, Oak South, and we will begin with to the staff report. Allen: Thank you, Chairman, Commissioners. The next application before you is a request for a rezone. The rezone area consists of a total of .84 of an acre of land, zoned L-O, R-15 and R-8, located at the southeast corner of West McMillan Road and North McDermott Road. This property was annexed in 2013 and included in the preliminary plat for the Oak South development. At the request of staff, the applicant submitted the subject rezone application to clean up the existing zoning in the development, so that the zoning coincides with the lot Meridian Planning & Zoning April 6, 2017 Page 14 of 18 configurations shown on the approved and future final plats. This will eliminate lots having dual zoning. The rezone is for .005 of an acre from L-O to R-8. .001 of an acre from L-O to R-15. .04 of an acre from R-15 to L-O. .22 of an acre from R-15 to R-8. .19 of an acre from R-15 to R-4. .31 of an acre from R-4 -- excuse me -- R-8 to R-4. And .07 of an acre from R-4 to the R-8 zoning districts. The proposed zoning is consistent with the medium density residential future land use map designation in the Comprehensive Plan. As you can see here on this rezone exhibit here -- McCarvel: Sonya, we don't see it. We still got Josh's report up there. Allen: Oh. Sorry about that. Sorry about that. Well, any-who. The map here on the right shows exhibit that's showing the little pieces that I just described. So, as you can see it's just clean up. It's kind of remnant little pieces that don't coincide with the lot boundaries, so -- written testimony was received on this application from Christy Watkins, JUB Engineers, the applicant's representative, in agreement with the staff report. Staff is recommending approval. Staff will stand for any questions. McCarvel: Any questions for staff? Okay. Would the applicant like to come forward? Jeffers: Good evening, Commissioners. For the record Travis Jeffers. I am here on behalf of Christy Watkins. I am planner with JUB Engineers as well. McCarvel: And your address, please. Jeffers: 250 South Beechwood Avenue, Boise, Idaho. 83709. McCarvel: Thank you. Jeffers: I don't have a whole lot to add. Sonya pretty much summed up the reason for the rezone. It's just to really clean it up and make sure that everything matches and coincides with one another. So, if you have any questions for me I'd -- I'd stand for them, but -- McCarvel: Any questions for the applicant? Okay. Jeffers: Thank you. McCarvel: All right. And this would be the time we take public testimony if there is any, but I think we will just move on. Okay. At this time could I get a motion to close the public hearing for H-2017-0010, Oak South? Bernt: So moved. Meridian Planning & Zoning April 6, 2017 Page 15 of 18 Wilson: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to close the public hearing for item H-2017-0010. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. McCarvel: Any discussion? Yearsley: I think it's pretty straightforward to me. Wilson: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Wilson. Wilson: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to City Council of file number H-2017-0010 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of April 6th, 2017. Bernt: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to approve H-2017-0010. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. D. Public Hearing for Holy Apostles Catholic Church (H- 2017- 0019) by Roman Catholic Diocese of Boise Located Southeast Corner of E. Chinden Boulevard and N. Meridian Road 1. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 16.32 Acres of Land with a C-C Zoning District McCarvel: Okay. Our last item. At this time I'd like to open the public hearing for item H-2017-0019, Holy Apostles Catholic Church, and we will begin with the staff report. Allen: Thank you, Chairman, Members of the Commission. The next application is a request for a rezone. This site consists of 16.32 acres of land. It's zone RUT in Ada county and is located at the southeast corner of East Chinden Boulevard and North Meridian Road. Adjacent land use and zoning. To the north is East Chinden Boulevard and rural residential properties in Castlebury West Subdivision, Zoned R-1 in Ada county. To the east is Zamzow's retail stores, zoned RUT in Ada county. To the south is St. Ignatius school, zoned C-C that's currently in the development process. And to the west is North Meridian Road Meridian Planning & Zoning April 6, 2017 Page 16 of 18 and vacant, undeveloped land that has been approved for residential homes in Paramount Director Subdivision, zoned R-15. A record of survey was approved by the county and recorded last year on this property that created the current configuration of the parcel. The current Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation is mixed-use community. The applicant is requesting annexation and zoning of 16.32 acres of land with a C-C zoning district, consistent with the mixed-use community future land use map designation. The site plan was submitted as shown that depicts how the site is developed with a 52,220 square foot church and accessory structures, consisting of a single-family residential home along the west boundary adjacent to Meridian Road and a food pantry that shows up at the northeast corner of the site. Parking and access. All of the existing structures are proposed to remain. One full access exists via Meridian Road and another full access exists via Chinden Boulevard, which is shared with the Zamzows property to the east. No new accesses our proposed or approved with this application. Parking exists on the site that exceeds UDC standards. A 35 foot wide landscape street buffer is required along North Meridian Road and East Chinden Boulevard, both entryway corridors into the city. A ten foot wide multi-use pathway is required within the buffer along Chinden within a public pedestrian easement. The applicant shall reserve all necessary right-of-way as required by the Idaho Transportation Department for the future widening of Chinden Boulevard outside of the required street buffer. Connection to the city sewer system is required within 60 days of annexation into the city. Connection to city water is not required due to the terms of the 2007 agreement between the city and United Water. To ensure compliance with UDC standards for site improvements, a certificate of zoning compliance is required to be submitted within 60 days of annexation. Written testimony has been received from Tamara Thompson, the applicant's representative, in agreement with the staff report. Staff is recommending approval of the annexation with the requirement of a development agreement. Staff will stand for any questions. McCarvel: Any questions for staff? Would the applicant like to come forward? And, please, state your name and address for the record. Thompson: Good evening. Tamara Thompson with The Land Group. 462 East Shore Drive in Eagle. Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, I did submit written testimony as Sonya said. We have read the staff report. We agree with staff's analysis and conditions and I'm here to answer any questions. McCarvel: Any questions for the applicant? Cassanelli: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner -- Cassanelli: The -- I guess that would be the southeast corner. Are there any future plans for that southeast corner right now? Meridian Planning & Zoning April 6, 2017 Page 17 of 18 Thompson: Madam Chair, Commissioner Cassanelli, not -- not at this time. No site improvements, other than what the conditions of approval are requiring, are with this application. McCarvel: Okay. All right. Thank you. Thompson: Thank you. McCarvel: And just in case our observer would like to come and have public testimony I will put it out there. Okay. At this time can I get a motion to close the public hearing for item number H-2017-0019, Holy Apostles Catholic Church? Bernt: So moved. Wilson: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to close the public hearing for item number H-2017-0019. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. McCarvel: Comments from the Commissioners? I will start. I think it's a great addition. We already have the school to the south in the city and I think it would be great to have a great building and everything on that corner in the City of Meridian and if -- and especially they will do the sidewalk and everything that will finished it off nicely up there. So, I would be in favor of it. Yearsley: Madam Chair, I concur. McCarvel: Any other comment? Bernt: I'd like to say something this evening. McCarvel: Commissioner Bernt. Bernt: I'm just -- I just want to say that I'm in one hundred percent agreement. McCarvel: Thank you for you input, Commissioner Bernt. Yearsley: I think if that's the case he should make the motion. McCarvel: Would you be -- Wilson: Enthusiastic. Meridian Planning Zoning Commission Meeting DATE: April 6, 2017 ITEM TITLE: Approve minutes of 3/16 /17 pz meeting ITEM NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: MEETING NOTES CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION 3A DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission March 16, 2017 Page 72 of 72 Wilson: I move to continue file number H-2017-0007, to the hearing date of April 20th, 2017. Looking forward to that. For the following reason: To review an updated -- or because of our concerns with the conditional use permit, specifically in the areas of parking, amenities, access, and a revised density. Density. Bernt: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to continue file number -- the hearing on file number H-2017-0007, Goddard Creek. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT. McCarvel: Can I get one more motion, please? Wilson: I move we adjourn for the evening. Bernt: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to adjourn. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:35 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.) APPROVED RHONDA McCARVEL - CHAIRMAN DATE APPROVED ATTEST: 1 r � W C. JAY COLES - CITY CLERK QO tCU A��LS�.l 61'?o City of j�/CERID]AN I�AHd Meridian Planning Zoning Commission Meeting DATE: April 6, 2017 ITEM NUMBER: 3B PROJECT NUMBER: H-2017-0015 ITEM TITLE: Melissa's Daycre CUP FFCL for approval - Conditional Use Permit approval of a daycare group for up to 12 children in an R-8 zoning district by Laurie Gallia - 523 E. Brown Bear MEETING NOTES CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). H-2017-0015 Page 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER In the Matter of the Request for Conditional Use Permit for a daycare group on 0.192 of an acre in the R-8 Zoning District, Located at 523 E. Brown Bear Street, by Melissa Smith. Case No(s). H-2017-0015 For the Planning & Zoning Commission Hearing Date of: March 16, 2017 (Findings on April 4, 2017). A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 16, 2017, incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 16, 2017, incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 16, 2017, incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of March 16, 2017, incorporated by reference) B. Conclusions of Law 1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the “Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975,” codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code (I.C. §67-6503). 2. The Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission takes judicial notice of its Unified Development Code codified at Title 11 Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof. The City of Meridian has, by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Amended Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, which was adopted April 19, 2011, Resolution No. 11-784 and Maps. 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code § 11-5A. 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed. 6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this decision, which shall be signed by the Chairman of the Commission and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk upon the applicant, the Planning Department, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). H-2017-0015 Page 2 7. That this approval is subject to the conditions of approval in the attached staff report for the hearing date of March 16, 2017, incorporated by reference. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the Planning & Zoning Commission’s authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 11- 5A and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The applicant’s request for a conditional use permit is hereby approved in accord with the conditions of approval in the staff report for the hearing date of March 16, 2017, attached as Exhibit A. D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits Notice of Two (2) Year Conditional Use Permit Duration Please take notice that the conditional use permit, when granted, shall be valid for a maximum period of two (2) years unless otherwise approved by the City in accord with UDC 11-5B-6F.1. During this time, the applicant shall commence the use as permitted in accord with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, and acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or in the ground. For conditional use permits that also require platting, the final plat must be signed by the City Engineer within this two (2) year period in accord with UDC 11-5B-6F.2. Upon written request and filed by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with 11-5B-6.F.1, the Director may authorize a single extension of the time to commence the use not to exceed one (1) two (2) year period. Additional time extensions up to two (2) years as determined and approved by the Commission may be granted. With all extensions, the Director or Commission may require the conditional use comply with the current provisions of Meridian City Code Title 11. E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis 1. The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, a denial of a conditional use permit entitles the Owner to request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review may be filed. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian. When applicable and pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521, any affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the final action of the governing board may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. F. Attached: Staff report for the hearing date of March 16, 2017 Exhibit A PAGE 1 STAFF REPORT Hearing Date: March 16, 2017 TO: Planning & Zoning Commission FROM: Josh Beach, Associate City Planner 208-884-5533 SUBJECT: H-2017-0015 – Melissa’s Daycare I. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT’S REQUEST The applicant, Melissa Smith, has applied for a conditional use permit (CUP) for a daycare group in the R-8 zoning district. See Section IX Analysis for more information. II. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the proposed CUP with the conditions listed in Exhibit B, based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law in Exhibit C of the Staff Report. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission heard this item on August 4, 2016. At the public hearing, the Commission moved to approve the subject CUP request. a. Summary of Commission Public Hearing: i. In favor: Melissa Smith (applicant) ii. In opposition: None iii. Commenting: Roger Tebo iv. Written testimony: None v. Staff presenting application: Josh Beach vi. Other staff commenting on application: Andrea Pogue, Bill Parsons b. Key Issues of Discussion by Commission: i. Is there sufficient parking for the home and for the business? ii. Is the number of children too many for a home with this square footage? iii. If the CUP were limited to fewer than 12 children and the applicant had 12 anyway, what would the consequences be? c. Key Commission Changes to Staff Recommendation: i. Remove condition 1.1 ii. Modify condition 1.7 to read “The number of children watched on the property shall not exceed 8 children at any one time.” III. PROPOSED MOTION Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2017- 0015 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of March 16, 2017, with the following modifications: (Add any proposed modifications.) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny H-2017-0015 as presented during the hearing on March 16, 2017, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial.) Exhibit A PAGE 2 Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2017-0015 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) IV. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS A. Site Address/Location: 523 E. Brown Bear Located in the northwest ¼ of Section 6, Township 3 North, Range 1 East B. Owner(s): Ron and Melissa Smith 523 E. Brown Bear Meridian, ID 83646 C. Applicant: Ron and Melissa Smith 523 E. Brown Bear Meridian, ID 83646 D. Representative: NA E. Applicant's Statement/Justification: Please see applicant’s narrative for this information. V. PROCESS FACTS A. The subject application is for a conditional use permit. A public hearing is required before the Planning & Zoning Commission on this matter, consistent with Meridian City Code Title 11, Chapter 5. B. Newspaper notifications published on: February 24, 2017 C. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: February 16, 2017 D. Applicant posted notice on site by: March 3, 2017 VI. LAND USE A. Existing Land Use(s) and Zoning: The property is developed with a single family detached home, zoned R-8 (medium density residential). B. Character of Surrounding Area and Adjacent Land Use and Zoning: This site is surrounded by existing residential properties, zoned R-8. C. History of Previous Actions:  In 1993, the property was annexed and zoned R-8 and preliminary platted as part of Fothergille Heights Subdivision.  In 1999, the property was granted an accessory use permit (AUP 99-007) for a family daycare for up to 6 children at any one time. D. Utilities: 1. Public Works: Exhibit A PAGE 3 a. Location of sewer: Currently connected from E. Brown Bear b. Location of water: Currently connected from E. Brown Bear c. Issues or concerns: None E. Physical Features: 1. Canals/Ditches Irrigation: NA 2. Hazards: Staff is not aware of any hazards that exist on this property. 3. Flood Plain: This property does not lie within the floodplain or floodway. F. Access: Access for this site is depicted on the site plan via E. Brown Bear. VII. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS The Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designates this site as Medium Density Residential (MDR). MDR designated areas allow smaller lots for residential purposes within City limits. Uses may include single-family homes at gross densities of 3 to 8 dwelling units per acre (d.u./acre). Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this property and apply to the proposed use (staff analysis in italics):  “Plan for and encourage services like healthcare, daycare, grocery stores, and recreational areas to be built within walking distance of residential dwellings.” (2.01.01C) The proposed daycare group in within a large residential subdivision. This use will be within walking distance of a large number of residences. The applicant is currently operating a family daycare at this address under the above mentioned accessory use permit. The current daycare allows up to 6 children. This application would allow for up to 12 children at one time. For the above-stated reasons, staff is of the opinion the proposed use is consistent with the applicable comprehensive plan policies and is appropriate in this location. VIII. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE A. Purpose Statement of Zone: The purpose of the residential districts is to provide for a range of housing opportunities consistent with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Connection to the City of Meridian water and sewer systems is a requirement for all residential districts. Residential districts are distinguished by the allowable density of dwelling units per acre and corresponding housing types that can be accommodated within the density range. B. Schedule of Use: Unified Development Code (UDC) Table 11-2A-2 lists the permitted, accessory, conditional, and prohibited uses in the R-8 zoning district. The proposed daycare facility is classified as a daycare group and is a conditional use in the R-8 zoning district, subject to specific use standards set forth in UDC 11-4-3-9. C. Dimensional Standards: The dimensional standards listed in UDC Table 11-2A-6 for the R-8 zoning district apply to this site. D. Off-Street Parking: Per UDC Table 11-3C-6 the applicant is required to provide two (2) stalls in a garage and two (2) on a driveway. Per the specific use standards, additional parking is also required in accord with UDC 11-3C-6. Exhibit A PAGE 4 IX. ANALYSIS A. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation: Conditional Use Permit: The request is for a conditional use permit to operate of a 1,549 square foot daycare group for up to 12 children in an R-8 zoning district. The UDC allows for up to 6 children in a “daycare family” with an accessory use permit in the R-8 zoning district. To allow up to 12 children in a “daycare group”, the R-8 zoning district requires a conditional use permit. One of the main reasons for this distinction is the increased number of vehicle trips for the “daycare group.” There are specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-9 that apply to daycare facilities that the applicant shall comply with. The applicant shall pave the 3 stalls as shown on the site plan attached in Exhibit A.2. Specific Use Standards: The proposed use is subject to the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-9, Daycare Facility. A. General standards for all child daycare and adult care uses, including the classifications of daycare center; daycare, family; and daycare, group: 1. In determining the type of daycare facility, the total number of children at the facility at one time, including the operator's children, is the determining factor. The applicant is proposing to care for up to 12 children and therefore is classified as a daycare group. 2. On site vehicle pick up, parking and turnaround areas shall be provided to ensure safe discharge and pick up of clients. The applicant proposes to provide three (3) parking stall to accommodate drop off and pick up of children. The increase of children from 6 to 12 will increase the number of trips to and from the home and therefore the UDC requires additional off-street parking. 3. The decision making body shall specify the maximum number of allowable clients and hours of operation as conditions of approval. See Conditions of Approval in Exhibit B. 4. Upon tentative approval of the application by the director or commission for a daycare center facility, the applicant or owner shall provide proof of criminal background checks and fire inspection certificates as required by title 39, chapter 11, Idaho Code. Said proof shall be provided prior to issuance of occupancy. The applicant or owner shall comply with all state of Idaho and department of health and welfare requirements for daycare facilities. The applicant will comply with this standard. 5. In residential districts or uses adjoining an adjacent residence, the hours of operation shall be between six o'clock (6:00) A.M. and eleven o'clock (11:00) P.M. This standard may be modified through approval of a conditional use permit. The applicant will comply with this standard. The applicant shall not exceed the maximum number of clients as stated in the approved permit or as stated in this title, whichever is more restrictive. Exhibit A PAGE 5 The applicant will comply with this standard. B. Additional standards for daycare facilities that serve children: 1. All outdoor play areas shall be completely enclosed by minimum six foot (6') nonscalable fences to secure against exit/entry by small children and to screen abutting properties. The outdoor play area is enclosed with a six-foot non-scalable fence. With submittal of the certificate of zoning compliance application, the applicant shall provide details of the 6 foot non-scalable fence. Certificate of Zoning Compliance: Due to the fact that the proposed daycare center use is within an existing building and no site or exterior building modifications are proposed a Certificate of Zoning Compliance application will not be required to commence the proposed use on this site. All interior modifications (tenant improvements) associated with the daycare center use must receive all required permits and inspections from the Building Division of the Community Development Department prior to operation of the daycare center. Staff recommends approval of the proposed CUP with the conditions listed in Exhibit B. NOTE: The City has adopted a local amendment to the international building code (IBC) that does not require a change in occupancy of the home if it is to operate as a daycare facilities for twelve or fewer children. Because the occupancy of the home is not changing from residential to non-residential, the parking for non-residential uses doesn’t apply. However, staff has concerns with the limited parking on the site and is recommending that the applicant pave the gravel area on the east side the driveway in accord with UDC standards. standards. The applicant anticipates that the arrival of the children will be staggered so that the provided parking both on the driveway and the additional off-street stall will be sufficient . X. EXHIBITS A. Drawings 1. Vicinity/Zoning Map & Aerial Map 2. Site/Landscape Plan (April 28, 2008) & Floor Plan 3. Building Elevation (photo) B. Conditions of Approval 1. Planning Department 2. Public Works Department 3. Fire Department 4. Police Department 5. Sanitary Service Company 6. Ada County Highway District 7. Parks Department C. Required Findings from Unified Development Code Exhibit A PAGE 6 Exhibit A.1: Vicinity/Zoning Map & Aerial Map Exhibit A PAGE 7 Exhibit A.2: Site/Landscape Plan (dated: April 28, 2008) & Floor Plan Exhibit A PAGE 8 Exhibit A PAGE 9 Exhibit A.3: Building Elevation (photo) Exhibit A PAGE 10 B. Conditions of Approval 1. PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1.1 The applicant shall pave the current gravel parking space in order to use it as one of the three required spaces. 1.2 The applicant shall provide proof of criminal background checks and fire inspection certificates as required by Title 39, Chapter 11, Idaho Code, in accord with UDC 11 -4-3-9, prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy. 1.3 The applicant shall comply with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-9 for daycare facilities. 1.4 No signs are approved with this application. The applicant shall submit a sign permit appli cation in accord with the standards listed in UDC 11-3D for approval of any future signs on this site. 1.5 The applicant shall have a maximum of 24 months to commence the use as permitted in accord with the conditions of approval listed above. If the business has not begun within 18 months of approval, a time extension shall be requested in accord with UDC 11-5B-6F prior to expiration. If a time extension is not requested or granted and the CUP expires, a new conditional use permit must be obtained prior to operation. 1.6 Staff’s failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or terms of the approved conditional use does not relieve the applicant of responsibility for compliance. 1.7 The number of children watched on the property shall not exceed 8 12 children at any one time. 1.8 Prior to allowing greater than six children on the property, the applicant shall receive certificate of zoning compliance approval to ensure the property complies with the UDC. 1.9 With submittal of the certificate of zoning compliance application, the applicant shall provide detail of the 6 foot non-scalable fence. 2. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 2.1 Public works has no issues with this application 3. FIRE DEPARTMENT 3.1 All daycares must pass an inspection using the criteria of the Idaho State Fire Marshal as set forth in Idaho Statute Title 39-1109. Prior to scheduling an inspection, the applicant must pay a fee of $20 for the cost of the inspection. 4. POLICE DEPARTMENT 4.1 The Police Department did not submit comments on this application. 5. SANITARY SERVICES 5.1 Republic Services did not provide comments on this application. 6. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT 6.1 ACHD has no site specific conditions of approval for this application at this time. 7. PARKS DEPARTMENT 7.1 The Parks Department did not submit comments on this application. Exhibit A PAGE 11 Exhibit A PAGE 12 C. Required Findings from Unified Development Code 1. Conditional Use Permit (UDC 11-5B-6E) The Commission shall base its determination on the Conditional Use Permit request upon the following: a. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. Staff finds that the subject property is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and dimensional and development regulations of the R-8 district. (see Analysis Section IX for more information). b. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accord with the requirements of this Title. Staff finds that the proposed use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation of MDR. Further, staff finds the proposed use of the site is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan in that the proposed daycare group will contribute to the variety of educational and commercial opportunities available to the surrounding area. c. That the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. Staff finds that if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report, the operation of the proposed daycare group should be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing and intended character of the area. d. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. Staff finds that if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report, the proposed use will not adversely affect other property in the area. The Commission should weigh any public testimony provided to determine if the development will adversely affect the other property in the vicinity. e. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, schools, parks, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, and sewer. Staff finds that sanitary sewer, domestic water, refuse disposal, and irrigation are currently available to the subject property. Please refer to any comments prepared by the Meridian Fire Department, Police Department, Parks Department, Sanitary Services Corporation and ACHD. Based on comments from other agencies and departments, Staff finds that the proposed use will be served adequately by all of the public facilities and services listed above. Exhibit A f. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. If approved, the applicant will be financing any improvements required for development. Staff finds there will not be excessive additional requirements at public cost and that the proposed use will not be detrimental to the community’s economic welfare. g. That the proposed use will not involve activities or 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. Staff recognizes that traffic will likely increase with the approval of a daycare center in this location; however, Staff does not believe that the amount generated will be detrimental to the general welfare of the public since the Comprehensive Plan and UDC anticipated the site to be developed with commercial uses. In addition, a daycare center previously operated on the site and staff is not aware of any issues arising from that use. Staff does not anticipate the proposed use will create excessive noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. Staff finds that the proposed use will not be detrimental to people, property or the general welfare of the area. h. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance. Staff finds that there should not be any health, safety or environmental problems associated with the proposed use that should be brought to the Commission’s attention. Staff finds that the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any natural, scenic or historic feature of major importance. Meridian Planning Zoning Commission Meeting DATE: April 6, 2017 ITEM NUMBER: 4A PROJECT NUMBER: H-2017-0018 ITEM TITLE: Rockbury Subdivision (AZ PP) Publicd Hearing - Rezone of 25.06 acres of land from R-15 (8.95 acres) and C -N (16.11 acres) to R-15 (6.71 acres) and C -N (18.35 acres) zoning districts and Preliminary Plat approval consisting of 2 common lots, 1 commercial lot and 1 multi -family lot on 23.56 acres of land in the proposed R-15 and C -N zoning districts by Rock Harbor Church - 6437 N. Tree Haven Way MEETING NOTES l,en-kn r c.e -moi _1/ H 40 -d 0-/ :7 5y I C� vu) CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING PUBLIC HEARING SIGN -IN SHEET Date: April 6, 2017 Item # al Project Number: H-2017-0018 RZ,PP Project Name: Rockbury Subdivision Pleaseour rint name For Against Neutral Do you wish p Y 9 to testify (Y/N) Meridian Planning Zoning Commission Meeting DATE: April 6, 2017 ITEM NUMBER: 4B PROJECT NUMBER: H-2017-0028 ITEM TITLE: Gyro Shack Public Hearing - Conditional Use Permit for a drive-thru establishment within 300' of another drive-thru establishment by Jeff Likes - 5038 N. Linder Road MEETING NOTES Ap rv-c v`cA wJ hr1 ncl toP�q%e.(,r F `5 s -D CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS Meridian Planning Zoning Commission Meeting DATE: April 6, 2017 ITEM TITLE: Oaks South RZ ITEM NUMBER: 4C PROJECT NUMBER: H-2017-0010 Public Hearing - Rezone of 0.005 acre from L-0 to R-8; 0.001 acre from L-0 to R-15; 0.04 acre from R-15 to L-0; 0.22 acre from R-15 to R-8; 0.19 acre from R-15 to R-4; 0.31 an acre from R-8 to R-4; and 0.07 acre from R-4 to the R-8 zoning district by Thomas Coleman - s/o W. McMillan Road and e/o N. McDermott Road 14,r MEETING NOTES CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION S�o DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING PUBLIC HEARING SIGN -IN SHEET Date: April 6, 2017 Item # Project Number: Oaks South Project Name: Please print your name H-2017-0010 For I Against I Neutral 4C Do you wish to testifv (Y/N) �r�v�5 i �y��s I✓ I I I �/ Meridian Planning Zoning Commission Meeting DATE: April 6, 2017 ITEM TITLE: Holy Apostles Catholic Church AZ ITEM NUMBER: 4D PROJECT NUMBER: H-2017-0019 Public Hearing - Annexation and Zoning of 16.32 acres of land with a C -C zoning district by Roman Catholic Diocese of Boise - SEC of E. Chinden Blvd and N. Meridian Rd MEETING NOTES CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING PUBLIC HEARING SIGN -IN SHEET Date: April 6, 2017 Item # Project Number: H-2017-0019 UN Project Name: Holy Apostles Catholic Church Please print your name For Against Neutral Do you wish to testify (Y/N)