Loading...
2017 04-06Meridian 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.