2007 05-03
Meridian Plannina & Zonina Commission Meetina
May 3. 2007
The regular meeting of the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission was called to order
at 7:00 P.M., Thursday, May 3,2007, by Chairman Michael Rohm.
Members Present: Michael Rohm, David Moe, Steve Siddoway, Tom O'Brien and
Wendy Newton-Huckabay.
Others Present: Bill Nary, Machelle Hill, Caleb Hood, Amanda Hess, Sonya Watters,
Scott Steckline, and Dean Willis.
Item 1:
Roll-call Attendance:
Roll call.
X Tom O'Brien
X David Moe
X Wendy Newton-Huckabay
X Steve Siddoway
Michael Rohm - Chairman
X
Rohm: Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. At this time I'd like to call the regularly
scheduled meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission to order and we will begin
with the roll call of Commissioners.
Item 2:
Adoption of the Agenda:
Rohm: Okay. The first item on the agenda is the adoption of the agenda and there are
a number of changes tonight and there -- some of the projects will not be heard and we
will go through the agenda and inform you, the public, of those changes and if you're
here to speak to those, we will not be hearing them tonight. So, the first item that is not
to be heard tonight is the Waltman Property project, AZ 06-063, and it's to be continued
to the regularly scheduled meeting of June 7th. The second change to the agenda is
the Belhaven Subdivision project, AZ 07-001 and PP 07-001. This project has been
withdrawn and so it will not be heard period. The next change to the agenda is the
continued Public Hearing for PFP 07-001 for Benewah -- it looks like Benewah Homes
-- will be continued to the regularly scheduled meeting of May 17th. The last change to
the agenda is Items No. PP 07-009 and CUP 07-008, both related to Meadow Lake
Village North. That will be continued until the regularly scheduled meeting of May 17th.
So, if there is anybody here to speak to any of those projects, they will not be heard
tonight. Okay. With that being said, could I get a motion to accept the balance of the
agenda?
Moe: So moved.
Siddoway: Second.
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to accept the amended agenda. All those in
favor say aye. Opposed the same sign? Motion carried.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 2 of 62
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 3:
Consent Agenda:
A. Approve Minutes of April 5, 2007 Planning and Zoning Meeting:
B. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP
07 -001 Conditional Use Permit for an 11,000 square foot multi-
tenant retail building on .75 acres in a C-G Zone for Jamaca Me
Tan by Darren Blaser - North of East Fairview Ave and West of
Hickory Ave in Lot 3, Block 1, of Mallane Subdivision:
C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP
07..003 Conditional Use Permit for a public/quasi-public use in an 1-
L zone for Joint School District No 2. Jabil Subdivision by Joint
School District No 2 - 1303 E. Central Drive:
D. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP
07-004 Conditional Use Permit for the operation of a bar, the
Busted Shovel, in the O-T zone for the Busted Shovel by William
Kosterman - 704 Main Street:
Rohm: The next item on the agenda is the Consent Agenda and the Consent Agenda
consists of four items. It's the approval of the April 15th, 2007, Planning and Zoning
meeting minutes, Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for approval of CUP 07-001,
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for approval of CUP 07-003, and the Findings
of Fact and Conclusions of Law for approval CUP 07-004. Could I get a motion to
approve the Consent Agenda?
Newton-Huckabay: So moved.
Moe: Second.
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to approve the Consent Agenda. All those in
favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Rohm: Okay. That's, typically, the way we start our meetings each and every time and
now if -- before we open up our first Public Hearing, for those of you that do not attend
these on a regular basis, the way these hearings work is we will open up a project and
we will begin with the staff report. The staff will present a project as it relates to the
UDC, that's the Unified Development Code, and the Comprehensive Plan. They will
give us their assessment of the project as it relates to those two documents. Once the
staff has given us their presentation, then, we will ask the applicant to come forward and
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 3 of 62
give us their take on the project and, basically, they will give us what value they see
their project bringing to the city. Once those two presentations have concluded, then,
you, the citizens, have an opportunity to respond to the applicant's project and each and
every one of you that has something to say will be given their time and in some cases
there may be a property owner association president or something that will be speaking
for a larger group and that individual would be given a longer time -- ten minutes to
speak to a specific project, if, in fact, there are others in the audience that are waiving
their right to speak and releasing that to a separate individual. Otherwise, anybody that
has signed up or even if they haven't signed up, has an opportunity to speak. Once we
have taken all public testimony, the applicant, then, has an opportunity to come back
and rebut any comments brought up by the citizens. And it is not a debate. It's -- the
applicant responds to your comments and, then, there is not an opportunity to come
back up and rebut his response. That's when the comments are concluded and,
generally speaking, at that point in time we will close the Public Hearing, we will have
discussion amongst the Commission and we may ask staff for additional comments on
a specific project and, then, if, in fact, we have got enough information to draw a
conclusion, we will make a motion to approve or disapprove the project from the
information received. That's the process and the thing that's very important is when an
individual at the microphone, they are the only person that our recorder can pick up
communication from, so it's real important that everybody give that courtesy to allow
that person to speak and when you're at the microphone, that's when you will be heard.
So, with that being said, I will now open the first Public Hearing and this is the AZ 07-
005, The Pfost property and --
Hood: Mr. Chair, I'm sorry, you do need to -- you mentioned in your opening -- the
agenda items you do officially need to open and continue those and accept withdrawal.
So, if you could start with Item No.4, please.
Item 4:
Continued Public Hearing from March 15, 2007: AZ 06-063 Request
for Annexation and Zoning of 38.68 acres from RUT and R-1 zones to C-G
zones for Waltman Property by Waltman, LLC - 505, 521, 615 and 675
Waltman Lane:
Rohm: That's -- thank you. I appreciate that. All right. At this time I'd like to open the
continued Public Hearing from March 15th, 2007, AZ 06-063, the Waltman property, for
the sole purpose of continuing to the regularly scheduled meeting of June 7th.
Moe: So moved.
Siddoway: Second.
Newton-Huckabay: Second.
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to continue Item AZ 06-063 to the regularly
scheduled meeting of June 7th. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign.
Motion carried.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 4 of 62
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Rohm: Caleb, do we need to open the project that's to be withdrawn?
Hood: Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission, you don't have to open the project, but
we have in the past accepted their withdrawal anyway, just so there is a clear action
and we can close the file.
Item 5:
Item 6:
Continued Public Hearing from February 15, 2007: AZ 07-001
Request for Annexation and Zoning of 6.84 acres from RUT to an R-4
zone for Belhaven Subdivision by Pole Creek Properties, Inc. - 5230 N.
Black Cat Road:
Continued Public Hearing from February 15, 2007: PP 07-001
Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 22 single-family residential
building lots and 5 common / other lots on 6.84 acres in a proposed R-4
zone for Belhaven Subdivision by Pole Creek Properties, Inc. - 5230 N.
Black Cat Road:
Rohm: All right. At this time the Commission recognizes the withdrawal of the
application for AZ 07-001 and PP 07-001, both items related to the Belhaven
Subdivision.
Item 7:
Continued Public Hearing from April 19, 2007: PFP 07-001 Request
for a Preliminary / Final Plat approval to subdivide Lot 13, Block 3 of Vallin
Courts Subdivision to create two (2) new lots for Benewah by Walker
Homes, Inc. - 2673 North Ridgebury Avenue:
Rohm: Okay. At this time I'd like to open the continued Public Hearing from April 1 9th,
2007, of PFP 07-001, relating to Benewah, for the sole purpose of continuing to the
regularly scheduled meeting of May 17th, 2007.
Moe: So moved.
Siddoway: Second.
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to continue Item PFP 07-001 to the regularly
scheduled meeting of May 17th, 2007. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign?
Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 8:
Public Hearing: AZ 07-005 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 1.46
acres from RUT to an R-4 zone for the property located at 1205 W.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 5 of 62
Overland Road for Pfost Property by Thomas & JoAnn Pfost - 1205 W.
Overland Road:
Siddoway: Okay. Now, at this time I'd like to open the Public Hearing on AZ 07-005,
related to the Pfost property and begin with the staff report.
Watters: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, the application before you is a
request for annexation and zoning of 1.46 acres of land from RUT, Ada County, to R-4,
medium low density residential. The property is located at 1205 West Overland Road
on the south side West Overland, approximately a quarter mile east of South Linder
Road. You can see here it's this kind of triangular shaped property right there. Rural
residential property zoned RUT in Ada County surrounds the property on the east, west,
and south, with vacant industrial property to the north, zoned I-L. This site is currently
improved with one single family residential home and this is an aerial view of the
property. The house sits over here on the corner. And accessory outbuildings. The
applicant's request for annexation is based upon the fact the well that services this
home is located in the path of the Overland Road widening project For this reason the
applicants are requesting annexation as a stipulation of being hooked up to city water.
Sewer is not yet available to this property. However, staff has requested a development
agreement be required with a provision that the applicant hook up to city sewer within
six months of service being available to this property and that the applicant be
responsible for all costs associated with sewer service installation, including payment of
sewer assessments. That's a picture of the existing house on the property here. The
requested R-4 zoning district complies with the Comprehensive Plan future land use
designation of medium density residential for this property. Staff is recommending
approval of the subject annexation and zoning request to R-4 as stated in the staff
report. And that's all staff has, unless the Commission has questions.
Rohm: Good. Thank you very much. Any questions of staff?
Siddoway: I have none.
Rohm: Okay. Would the applicant like to come forward, please, and state your name
and address for the record.
Pfost: I'm Thomas L. Pfost, 1205 West Overland Road, Meridian.
Rohm: Okay. Thank you. It's pretty apparent what the application is for and I would
presume that you're in agreement with the staff report?
Pfost: Yes.
Rohm: Okay. All right. Do you have any questions of us?
Pfost: No, I don't.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 6 of 62
Rohm: Okay. Is there any questions from the Commission of this applicant?
Siddoway: I have none.
Newton-Huckabay: None.
Rohm: Go ahead, Tom.
O'Brien: Well, you're asking to hook up to city water; is that correct?
Pfost: Yes.
O'Brien: And what was your alternative plan?
Pfost: Another well. Dig another well.
O'Brien: And whose responsibility do you think that was -- or should be if you had to dig
your own -- dig another well?
Pfost: It was our well. It's our responsibility.
O'Brien: I was just curious as to how that process worked with you. I have, I guess, a
question for staff. Maybe you can help me out with this. So, it was -- you would be
hooking up -- if he wasn't able to hook up to -- to water, for instance, with the city, and
its only a single parcel we are being asked to annex, is it the responsibility of the city to
relocate his well? No?
Watters: Chairman Rohm, Commissioner O'Brien, Commissioners, it is not the
responsibility of the city to relocate his well. He could stay in the county and, like he
said, drill another well. But he is adjacent to city ground and he is requesting
annexation for city services.
O'Brien: Okay.
Watters: Be water at this point.
O'Brien: I didn't quite understand how that process worked with that, if something else
was going on. Thank you.
Rohm: Okay. Thank you, sir. Okay. There is not anybody that has signed up to testify
to this application, but if anyone would like to come forward, now is that time. Okay.
Seeing none, could I get a motion close this Public Hearing?
Siddoway: So moved.
Moe: Second.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 7 of 62
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to close the Public Hearing on PF -- excuse me -
- on AZ 07-005. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign?
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
.. Moe: Mr. Chairman?
Rohm: Commissioner Moe.
Moe: After considering all staff, applicant, and the testimony, I move to recommend
approval to the City Council of file number AZ 07-005 as presented in the staff report for
the hearing of May 3rd, 2007. End of motion.
Siddoway: Second.
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to forward onto City Council recommending
approval of AZ 07-005. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion
carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 9:
Public Hearing: CUP 07-006 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for
the operation of an animal care facility in an L-O zone for Liddell
Veterinary Clinic by Falash & Ross Construction - 2300 W. Everest
Lane:
Rohm: Very good. All right. At this time I'd like to open the Public Hearing on CUP 07-
005, related to Veterinary -- Liddell Veterinary Clinic and begin with the staff report.
Watters: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, the application before you is a
request for a Conditional Use Permit for an animal care facility in an L-O zone by Falash
& Ross Construction. The site is located at 2250 West Everest Lane on the south side
of Chinden Boulevard, approximately a half a mile west of North Linder Road. You can
see on the site here these two little cross-hatched parcels. Directly north of the site
across Chinden is vacant property, zoned TNC. To the east is vacant property zoned L-
O. To the south are single family homes in Lochsa Falls Subdivision, zoned R-4. And
to the west is vacant property zoned L-O. Here is an aerial view of the property. And
here is a current photo of the site, showing two existing buildings on the top photo south
of the site and, then, the bottom photo shows the view looking towards Chinden.
Vacant. The Unified Development Code requires conditional use approval for animal
care facilities proposed in the L-O zone. This site previously received detailed CUP
approval for the building locations on the subject lot and adjacent lot in Hastings
Subdivision. Also, a certificate of zoning compliance was approved for the building,
shell, and core proposed for this site. Here is a site plan. The proposed building is
centered over these two lots here. One 6,862 square foot multi-tenant building is
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 8 of 62
proposed to be constructed on this site, 4,913 square foot of which is proposed for the
vet clinic. The hours of operation for the proposed vet clinic are proposed to be from
7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and from 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on
Saturdays. Access to this site will be provided from West Everest Lane, a private street
running along the south here. Driveways are proposed within a platted cross-access
ingress-egress easement for circulation within the site. No new access points are
proposed or approved with this application. Off street parking is provided on the site.
Ten parking spaces are required per the size of tenant space. Twenty-nine stalls are
provided, which exceeds the number required by the UDC. Here is a copy of the
proposed landscape plan. The Idaho Transportation Department has submitted
comments on this application, continued in Exhibit B of the staff report, and that request
a building setback of 100 feet measured from the center line of Chinden for future
Highway expansion. The city requires a 35 foot wide landscape buffer adjacent to
entryway corridors outside of the required right of way. A 35 foot wide buffer currently
exists adjacent to Chinden, but it's within the area proposed for the highway expansion
and will be removed when the highway is widened. Therefore, a new 35-foot wide
buffer will be required adjacent to the highway. Five feet of this landscape buffer exists
to the north of this site beyond the required 100 feet and a 30 foot wide buffer will be
required to be constructed on this site, for a total of a 35-foot wide buffer. Because the
parking shown along the north boundary of the site is outside of the -- or within the
required buffer area, the northern parking area is not approved. Their proposed building
location is outside of the area plan for future highway expansion and the required buffer
area and complies with the required 20 foot rear setback required in the L-O zone. Staff
is requiring that a 30 foot wide landscape buffer be constructed along the north
boundary of this site outside of the 100 foot right of way needed for ITD for widening
Chinden. Additionally, internal landscaping will be provided on the site per the
landscape plan. Here is a copy of the proposed building elevation. The proposed
building and site are required to comply with design standards, because of the site
location adjacent to Chinden Boulevard, an entryway corridor into the city. Staff has
reviewed the design review standards and found the site to comply with the standards
listed, except for the following: The north facing building elevation shall be revised to
include windows, awnings, or arcades that total a minimum of 30 percent of the building
facade length facing a public street. An elevation showing the customer entrance shall
be revised to include a five foot protrusion over the entrance for weather protection, as
stated in the applicant's narrative. The proposed elevations incorporate modulations in
the facade, overhanging eaves, and projections. The primary building entrance is
clearly defined. The building's design incorporates stucco in two different shades of
brown and cultured stone and mixed brown tones on the facade. Staff is recommending
approval of the requested Conditional Use Permit as stated in the staff report, subject to
the conditions listed in Exhibit B. That's all that staff has, unless the Commission has
questions
Rohm: Thank you very much. Any questions of staff?
Siddoway: I have none.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 9 of 62
Newton-Huckabay: None.
Rohm: Would the applicant like to come forward, please?
Carter: My name is Bill Carter. I'm not with Falash & Ross, but Mike here is. I own the
property.
Rohm: Okay. Want to state your address as well?
Carter: Sure. 10221 West Emerald, Boise, Idaho. I have had a chance to look at
staffs report and I just have a couple of brief comments. The first page of the report
makes reference to -- and I have talked to staff about this today -- makes reference to
the site consisting of 1.57 acres. That is actually the entire office park that they showed,
as opposed to just this parcel. I just wanted to make sure to put into the record that it
was clear that the conditions here in the Conditional Use Permit, are applicable only to
her parcel, as opposed to the entire site.
Rohm: Okay.
Carter: And we talked about that. I think we are good. I just wanted to make a note on
the record of that.
Rohm: Okay.
Carter: Then, the other issue was the -- the ITD setback and the 35 foot landscape
buffer that Meridian requires. You know, I guess our preference is to have, you know,
have parking. Parking is always good and especially in a commercial use. A couple
things to note here. I went back and looked at the plat for Lochsa Falls Subdivision 12,
which shows the existing setbacks -- right of ways for ITD and they are showing -- they
are showing about 65 feet total -- or, I'm sorry, 75 feet total of actual ITD right of way.
Now, I think ITD would prefer to have more than that. They want a hundred from center
line. They haven't actually purchased additional right of way, they just want more for
future expansion. Now, to the extent that the city honors that request and, in turn,
pushes their -- your landscape buffer back, it seems to me that some land here, then, is
being taken without any sort of compensation to the landowner. Now, I don't know how
you reconcile that, but if ITD seriously wants a hundred feet, okay, that's fine, but I'm
just not aware of any document that establishes that they actually have a hundred foot
right of way. I know that's -- that's what they would want in a perfect world, but they
don't actually own it, and so it's just a little question, I guess, for you guys is how is that
not a taking? I mean I don't know, but --
Rohm: I think that's an excellent question and, Mr. Nary, can you provide some
dialogue and a response to that process that he speaks to?
Carter: Do you see what I'm saying? It pushes -- it pushes your landscape buffer back
-- in, essence, we are losing ground, you know what I mean?
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 10 of 62
Nary: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, you probably need to talk to your
own attorney about that, but the right of way setback that they would like to have, the
city in this particular application for this conditional use wants to honor that setback.
Your land is -- I mean if they are going to actually purchase it at some point in the
future, they will purchase it from you. But all they are asking right now is to have that
amount set aside. You probably need to -- whether or not you think that's a taking or
your attorney thinks that's a taking, that's who you should talk to.
Rohm: And I think to expand on that, what we are saying is -- is we work -- try to work
in concert with the other agencies in the area, whether it's ITD or Ada County Highway
District or other agencies within our jurisdiction and if, in fact, we know that it's the
consistency that the hundred foot setback from the center line is ITD's desire, then, if, in
fact, we ignore it and allow our 35 foot setback to be encroached upon that, then, it
defeats the purpose of that all the way along.
Carter: No. I understand completely the logic to it.
Rohm: And so -- and I can't speak for the balance of the Commission, because
everybody has an opportunity to -- for input, but, generally speaking, we are -- I wouldn't
say bound, but it is our desire to work with the other agencies that have input. That's
why they all feed into the staff report before it's presented to us the Commission.
Carter: Sure.
Rohm: And I believe that the answer that Mr. Nary gave you is if, in fact, you believe
that is a taking, then, you -- your recourse will be to go back to IDT through your
process and see if you can get some sort of a recovery.
Carter: Sure. And that's fine. I thought -- you know, I just raised the issue.
Rohm: And it makes perfect sense exactly what you're saying, but we are kind of in the
position that we have to support the balance of the agencies that contribute to the
project as they come before us as well.
Carter: Right. Right. The good news here is it doesn't impact the construction of the
building itself or the fire loop or anything like that and we have sufficient parking on site.
So, I think we will probably be okay. I don't know. Mike, do you want to add anything?
Okay.
Rohm: All right. Thank you.
Carter: Thank you.
Falash: Commissioners, my name is Michael Falash. I'm representing Sarah Liddell on
this veterinary clinic. Address is 150 South Adkins, Suite 140, in Meridian. Basically,
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 11 of 62
I'm probably more in tune to the conditional use on the application for Sarah on the vet
clinic, the proposed site on that. We have designed the spaces to keep more and get
everything within the vet clinic is contained within -- with inside the vet clinic. The
entrance is on the south side. All kennels are inside the building itself. So, everything
is pretty much self contained. I read through the staff report, I have no problem with any
of the conditions of approval, other than what Mr. Carter has kind of gone through here
on that parking. Be nice to have that -- if we could keep that. It doesn't -- like I said,
doesn't kill the building -- stop it from going up and in the process of what we are going
through on that end, but I'm kind of open up to any questions you may have of the
veterinary clinic and the conditional use application for that.
Rohm: I have none, but --
Moe: Mr. Chairman?
Rohm: Commissioner Moe.
Moe: I, actually, have -- not so much for the clinic itself, but I am kind of curious what's
anticipated to go in the rest of the space?
Falash: Well, her long-term goal is to expand into it. But right now she only needs
4,600 feet start up, new business, so -- but she sees the future, she knows she needs --
she may need the space down the road. So, anticipated, I think, could be some office
or could be something along that lines. It just would be -- don't really know where that
would go, but it would probably be something comparable that's going in that -- the site
as it is now.
Rohm: Any other questions of the applicant? Thank you, sir.
Falash: Thank you.
Rohm: Okay. Again, we do not have anybody else signed up to testify to this
application, but now is that time to come forward if you have got any input, we would
welcome any testimony. Seeing none, could I get a motion to close the Public Hearing?
Siddoway: Mr. Chairman, I move that we close the Public Hearing on CUP 07-006.
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to close the Public Hearing on CUP 07-006. All
those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Okay.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Rohm: Discussion? Commissioner O'Brien, do you have any --
O'Brien: No, I'm not too familiar with the setbacks and all that's required, so I -- I don't
know -- I wouldn't have any questions right now on that.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 12 of 62
Rohm: Thank you. Commissioner Siddoway?
Siddoway: My inclination would be to approve it with the staff recommendation of a 30
foot wide landscape buffer beyond the existing right of way and the -- it's a typical
scenario that we are faced with, not just along Chinden, but along all section line roads,
whether they are ACHD's or ITD's, and as we have looked at other projects, other
subdivisions that have come through, we have typically required future right of way to
be set aside and landscape buffers beyond that and, then, the road agencies, then, still
have to purchase that land as right of way in the future and that would be my -- the
direction I would recommend for this project.
Rohm: Okay. Commissioner Newton-Huckabay.
Newton-Huckabay: I have nothing more to add.
Rohm: Thank you. Commissioner Moe.
Moe: I would just probably agree with Mr. Siddoway on conditions and whatnot. The
only thing I am curious about the staff one more time, as far as any future expansion of
that space, I assume that would have to be done by a CUP as well?
Watters: Commissioner -- or, excuse me, Chairman Rohm, Commissioner Moe,
Commissioners, if it's a permitted use, no, it would not have to go through the
Conditional Use Permit process.
Rohm: Okay. With that being said, could I get a motion on this project, please?
Siddoway: Mr. Chairman?
Rohm: Commissioner Siddoway.
Siddoway: After considering all staff and applicant testimony, I move to approve file
number CUP 07-006, as presented in the staff report, for the hearing date of May 3rd,
2007, with no modifications. And I further move staff to -- to direct staff to prepare an
appropriate Findings document to be considered at the next Planning and Zoning
Commission hearing on May 17th, 2007.
Newton-Huckabay: Second.
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to approve CUP 07-006, to include all staff
comments with no changes, and to prepare Findings of Fact for the next Planning and
Zoning meeting. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 13 of 62
Newton-Huckabay: This will be a nice addition to north Meridian.
Item 10:
Public Hearing: AZ 07-004 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 2.48
acres from RUT to an L-O zone for Locust Grove Professional Office
Building by Ruby/Edwards: Architecture + Design - 1695 South Locust
Grove Road:
Rohm: Very nice. Thanks for coming in. At this time I'd like to open the Public Hearing
on AZ 07-004 related to Locust Grove Professional Office Building and begin with the
staff report.
Hess: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. The application before
you is a request for annexation and zoning approval of approximately 2.5 acres from
RUT to the L-O, limited office district. The applicant proposes to construct a two story--
you can see the elevations real quick. A two story, 21,000 square foot multi-tenant
office building. The building will be designed to accommodate professional offices and
medical offices. The subject property is located on the southwest corner of Overland
Road and Locust Grove Road. The site is primarily vacant land with one existing
residence and several outbuildings, as you can see on the aerial photo here. To the
north there is the existing Maverick fueling station right here, zoned C-C. To the east
vacant land, zoned C-N. And south and west of the site is the Sportsman Point
development down here. The applicant has not submitted a subdivision application at
this time. However, staff has received a concept plan for how the property may
develop. On the submitted conceptual plan the applicant has depicted one access to
Locust Grove Road right here. The driveway is located near the south property line,
approximately 440 -- not quite 440 feet south of the Overland-Locust Grove intersection.
Because the applicant has not submitted a subdivision application at this time, ACHD
has not reviewed or approved access to the property yet. ACHD will do so at the time
when the applicant submits for a certificate of zoning compliance for the office building.
Due to the proposed use and adjacent residential uses, staff believes that a
development agreement is necessary to insure the property is developed so as to not
negatively impact the nearby properties. Staff is recommending that the city limit the
uses that can operate on the site to only principally permitted uses in the L-O zone.
This recommendation is intended to protect the residential neighbors to the south and
west from more intense commercial uses, such as restaurants, laundromats, animal
hospitals, et cetera. Further, staff recommends that the hours of operation for business
on this site be limited from 7:00 to 6:00 p.m. Additionally, the applicant has proposed
alternative compliance to construct a landing -- you can see the landscape plan here. A
landing at the corner of Overland and Locust Grove. Some retaining walls and two
stairways which lead to a public plaza, which is right here, which are all to be located
within the required arterial buffers. Per city code impervious surfaces are not allowed
within landscape buffers. However, staff reviewed the alternative compliance proposal
and is supportive of this -- the concept's landscape plan. Staff also requested
elevations for what the future building will look like. Staff believes that the building
generally complies with the design standards for office structures of this size. Staff is
recommending approval of the Locust Grove office application. The Commission must
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 14 of 62
make a recommendation to Council on the annexation application. Although it is not on
the agenda as a Public Hearing item, the Commission may also review and make
recommendations regarding the alternative compliance and the design review
application, if the Commission believes it's necessary. And that is all staff has, unless
the Commission has questions.
Rohm: Thank you. Any questions of staff?
Siddoway: None at this time.
Rohm: Okay. Would the applicant like to come forward, please.
Edwards: My name is Wes Edwards, with Ruby Edwards Architecture and Design. I
reside at 3486 West Angelica Drive in Meridian. We are presenting tonight for the
annexation of this property per the proposed use in the Comprehensive Plan. We are
trying to establish a building and a function that is becoming quite predominate along
Overland Road with a lot of professional offices, doctor's offices, as you go throughout
the EI Dorados and the Silverstone developments further down the road. This project
will serve as an anchor for this intersection, especially once that Locust Grove overpass
is complete, which would probably happen prior to this building being complete. We
feel that this use for this site is a logical choice in this location and it is -- since it is
bordered -- this site is bordered on all sides by the city, it just makes sense to annex it
at this time. This use will also serve as a buffer between the residential zone and the
commercial zone and serves as a -- less of an impact compared to other uses as stated
by the staff, such as restaurants and gas stations. The other thing that we would -- we
propose this for is that it puts a place of business close to where people live, so that
they don't have to work so far from home and that people can go to the doctor or a
professional service without having to travel too far from home. And, therefore,
encouraging people to travel shorter distances in their day-to-day lives. Can you turn to
the site plan? Or, actually, the landscape plan would probably be better. The current
site -- oh, this doesn't point very well. It has a weird thing in it. The site slopes about
eight feet at the greatest location. From the corner of Overland and Locust Grove it's
about eight feet higher than it is on the west property line and we are proposing that we
-- in order to get the amount of building that we are looking for, we propose to excavate
down to that level and provide retaining walls in that landscape buffer and it will also be
serving to keep the cars and the elements of the site out of direct view from the
residents on the other side of the fence. We had a neighborhood meeting with the
residents and -- well, everyone within the boundary that was required and there was a
concern about the west property line, that we improve that, that we provide a new fence
and the owner is willing to provide a new cedar or vinyl fence along that property line, as
well as some denser landscaping along that back property line. We have maintained
our landscape -- 20 foot landscape buffer where ever we are adjacent to the residential
and as well as our 25 foot buffer on both of the arterials. I will answer any questions
that you have at this time.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 15 of 62
O'Brien: I have a question. Is there any concern from the homeowners, people that live
there, about the visual loss of the mountain areas, et cetera, because that's sloped
down behind the building quite a bit. Was there any concern about that loss of view of
Bogus Basin, et cetera?
Edwards: I'm not sure. The owner was in attendance at that meeting and I was not and
I'll let him speak to that if he can when he --
O'Brien: The building's quite tall and it's raises up already and, then, the land does
slope down behind there --
Edwards: Well, it is within -- it is lower than the 35 foot maximum height allowed in that
-- in that use. We are -- and that is just that high canopy that you saw on that elevation.
The other -- the other areas are only about 28 to 30 feet tall, depending on which part of
the building you're looking at. So, there is -- if you were to -- if you were to excavate
that extra eight feet down and build the same story building with a pitched roof on it, you
would be about the same -- the same height.
O'Brien: Well, I don't think we need to be concerned about that, I was just curious if you
-- thank you.
Edwards: Thank you.
Rohm: Any other questions of the applicant?
Newton-Huckabay: I'm just curious about the hours of operation. It says here that you
submitted those. Is that a result of your neighborhood meeting?
Edwards: I'll have to consult my client on that. They are the ones that gave me that
number.
Newton-Huckabay: Okay.
Edwards: He can address that when he -- when he addresses the Council. The
Commission.
Siddoway: Mr. Chairman?
Rohm: Commissioner Siddoway.
Siddoway: Wes, could you address the alternative compliance that you're seeking?
Edwards: Yes. It was brought to our attention through our application that on the
corner -- this pOinter is not that good and my hand's very shaky. The edge of the
building on the north and on the east are pretty much at the 25 foot setback. So, if you
intersect those, they -- about where that arrow is is where those intersect So, this stair
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 16 of 62
on either side and the landings of those stairs, are in -- inside that 25 foot buffer and
Amanda brought that to my attention that those are not allowed per the ordinance. But
we feel that providing the water feature in the plaza, providing pedestrian access for
people that either are patrons of the building, employees of the building, are able to
come out to this plaza, cross the street to whatever commercial uses serve this
community, and be able to beautify that corner with some very attractive features and
we felt that that was a superior use application than what was in the ordinance.
Siddoway: Thank you.
Edwards: That also included the retaining walls. And the retaining walls were required
due to the grade.
Rohm: Okay. Thank you very much. Wendy, did you need further response to your
question?
Newton-Huckabay: Yes, I do, please.
Rohm: Okay. Would someone else from your group like to come forward, please?
Eldridge: My name is Charles Eldridge. I reside at 25 -- well, our business is located at
2525 Stokesberry Place here in Meridian and we are the developers on this project. As
far as the hours of operation, Commissioner Newton-Huckabay, we are not -- you know,
we are willing to comply by the hours that are required in this zoning and, typically, the
medical office uses that we are meeting with currently at this time are day operations
and that's what we would propose. There is nothing that we are aware of as far as the
night operation and I don't think that's allowed in the zoning either, so --
Newton-Huckabay: In the L-O?
Eldridge: Yeah. In the L-O. Well, I apologize, I don't know exactly what the hours of
operation have to be, but a rough estimate would be 7:00 morning to 6:00 at night.
Newton-Huckabay: I'm just generally not a fan of applying operating hours to something
like that without knowing what's going to be in there. That's why I was asking if it was a
result of the neighborhood meeting.
Eldridge: No, it wasn't a direct result of the neighborhood meeting. I think the
neighbors that were at this meeting were more pleased with the fact that it wasn't going
to be a service station or retail outlet or issues such as these restaurants. Those would
be later operations.
Newton-Huckabay: Okay. Thank you.
Eldridge: Any other questions?
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 17 of 62
Newton-Huckabay: I have no more.
Rohm: Thank you, sir. Okay. Mike Bussert. Did you want to speak? Oh. Okay.
From the audience he said that he had nothing to add. Scott Holiday. And also
indicates same. And there is nobody else that has signed up to this application, but if
there is anyone that would like to speak at this time, please, come forward.
Vaughn: Commissioners, my name is Mike Vaughn, Sportsman Point, president of the
homeowners association. We have no objection to this rezoning, as long as the
architect and landscape does not offend the neighborhood. What we are worried about
was the grade, which we further discussed with them and they said there will be an
architectural meeting later. As far as the view, we have -- that's not been an issue, it's
more been concern of the view into the backyards of the homeowners that are adjacent
to this property. The other concern is, of course, the grade from the road coming down
into the property, because that will be a very steep grade, because as they are saying,
it's eight foot down that they are going to excavate down to get down to the level of the
fence on the existing properties and so when they take it down like that it will be no
bigger than a two story house in our neighborhood, so we are not concerned about that
view. So, we have pretty much accepted this, as long as we still can work out some
architectural designs with them to lessen the effect of the back yards of the neighbors
and individuals.
Rohm: Good. Thank you. Appreciate your input.
Siddoway: Mr. Chairman, I have one question.
Rohm: Sir, one question.
Siddoway: Yes. Are there issues that you're saying you're still needing to work out
that --
Vaughn: As far as the issues, it's just -- we wanted to see how that grade -- how that
driveway is going to come down to that grade, but from what I'm understanding, there is
still some ACHD approvals that got to happen on that.
Siddoway: Okay. But in terms of the building elevation itself, you don't have a
particular concern?
Vaughn: That's really not a --
Siddoway: Okay.
Vaughn: They come in and beefed up the landscaping to give us the buffer that we are
looking for, so they agreed to do it then, and stuck out with us. The other remark about
the time, that was mentioned in the homeowners association, that it be a day business
only, and that, you know, that was brought up, that it -- the L-O zoning is, you know,
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 18 of 62
daytime only and it's not going to be 24 hours a day. So, that was very acceptable to
the homeowners that are adjacent to that property. We just didn't want something like
the Maverick being 24 hours a day and the lights being shining in our backyard like it is
today.
Newton-Huckabay: My comment is driven by the fact that, for example, I generally go
to my dentist somewhere around 7:00 p.m., because they are open until 8:30, and so --
and I -- you know, they provide a service that way and more and more service providers
are going to be offering services around hours that work for working professionals. So, I
think that that's more what drives my -- my lack of desire to put 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
and I also -- my family starts their day somewhere around 5:00 a.m. and so --
Vaughn: Yeah. I agree with that, but --
Newton-Huckabay: But I agree with you, 24 hours is not appropriate.
Vaughn: Not appropriate in that type of --
Newton-Huckabay: No. And that wouldn't be what I was looking for.
Vaughn: We would be fighting that, if that was the case.
Newton-Huckabay: Correct. Yeah. No, that would not be what I would be interested in.
Vaughn: Any other questions? Oh, there is -- I noticed earlier on the L-O zoning you
allowed a veterinary clinic. Would that be the same thing -- would that type of
environment be allowed in this --
Rohm: I don't know. I'll have staff -- let's get staff's input on that.
Hess: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, that is a -- with a Conditional Use
Permit that would be allowed. So, they would have to come in, which is another
hearing, where the neighbors would have another chance to speak on the issue.
Vaughn: And, then, there still would be an issue of architecture. So, there still would be
another hearing for the architectural design on this property or is it --
Hess: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, the design review is, actually, at the
staff level approval, so I guess that's why we are addressing it here at this hearing, so
that the Commission can give input on it as well.
Vaughn: Because I was under the impression this is annexation and zoning, not an
architectural design, so --
Rohm: That's correct. And the fact of the matter is is if we are going to have an
opportunity to put any limitations or have some control at this level, it's at the point of
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 19 of 62
annexation, because we can stipulate that they adhere to their conceptual landscape
plan and their elevations as presented in this application as part of their design review
process when they go in for their building permit and so, basically, even though they are
not making an application for structures and the subdivision per se, at this time we are
setting in motion those things that they will need to adhere to, like the landscape plan
and things such as that.
Vaughn: Okay. So, that does bring up a point. What if ACHD does not approve their --
their entry -- driveway entry and they have to come back and change it to a different
format? Does that mean he comes back through here for a hearing or --
Rohm: Well, as far as --
Vaughn: Do you see what I'm saying?
Moe: Mr. Chairman, if I might, and the staff can correct me if I'm wrong, basically, in
regards to either the alternative compliance or the design review, that this body can give
comment and any recommendation and whatnot, but it will go to Council before
approvals and it will not be approval through this body. We can give a recommendation
to Council only.
Rohm: And, then, the staff does the design review on the structures themselves.
Vaughn Okay. Thank you.
Rohm: Thank you.
Hess: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, just to address that ACHD issue,
keep in mind that this piece has no other opportunity for access, so there will have to --
ACHD will definitely have to grant them some sort of access, whether it's a right-in,
right-out only or if they decide to do a full access, they will require access. There is no
other option for them.
Rohm: Exactly. And thank you. That's a good point. Okay. From the audience it looks
like we have someone else that would like to testify.
Dartell: Gene Dartell. My property is where the driveway comes down -- is the back of
my property.
Nary: Address, sir.
Dartell: 1728 Labrador.
Nary: Thank you.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3. 2007
Page 20 of 62
Dartell: And what I'm concerned about is the grade level of that parking lot, whether it
be the grade of what our property is right now, the back of our yard, whether they are
going to raise that grade or what, because the driveway coming down is going to be a
rather critical grade there, there would be a short distance to drop that on the grade and
which is going to happen, as any lights coming down are going to be coming right into
my living room at all times, because lights are on cars now. I'm a little concerned about
what -- the level of that and I'd like it to be put in minutes that we -- that this has been
questioned, the grade of this parking lot, as to the height of it, whether it be raised or
which would bring the parking lot up and the cars would be more accessible from our
viewpoint and I just thought it would be a good point at this time to talk about it as to
how -- what type of buffer -- and we are not against it in any way, but we would just like
to know ahead of time what -- what the plan would be.
Rohm: Okay. Thank you for your input. Okay. Is there anyone else that would like to
testify for this project?
Bussert: Yeah. My name is Mike Bussert and I live at 1700 South Labrador and I live
right next to Gene and my biggest concern would be to try and put some -- some type of
trees that you can't see through in the wintertime, you know, you buffer that up a little bit
and I know that they are talking about doing, but that would be my biggest concern is
trying to block it out with a berm and some --
Rohm: You're talking along their west line?
Bussert: Pardon?
Rohm: You're talking along their west line?
Bussert: Yeah.
Rohm: Okay. Well, the pointer is --
Siddoway: It's on the chain.
Bussert: Yeah. Right along here is where our property is. This is Gene's place and,
then, this is my place and then -- but putting a lot of trees in there that you can't see
through in the wintertime, so that when there is lighting back here -- our bedrooms on
the back of the house are right here, so any families that live there with kids, I mean we
would want them to try to get some sleep at night, too. I'd like some low lighting -- I
mean that would be a concern, you know.
Rohm: There are ordinances that address lighting and the contamination to adjacent
properties.
Bussert: Okay. That's just mainly my concern.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 21 of 62
Rohm: Okay. Thank you, sir. Any questions of this individual? Okay. Is there anyone
else that would like to testify? Okay. At this time would the applicant like to come back
up and respond to any comments offered by the --
Edwards: Do I need to restate my name?
Rohm: Please do.
Edwards: Wes Edwards. 3486 West Angelica Drive. We appreciate the concerns of
the neighbors. At this time no civil design has been performed to design the grading.
At this point it's just a conceptual design. We do understand that there will be significant
grade coming into the site and it will have to maintain the minimum standards required
by code and for -- for storm drainage that is not excessive coming into the site, but we
do want to drop that grade as quickly as possible, so that we are down to the level that
is not disturbing the neighbors. And the landscaping along that line will be -- the
majority of which will be of evergreen nature, which will be -- will grow in a vertical --
there is a juniper that grows vertically that will provide the screening there that they are
requesting. I'd also like to readdress the time frame that you -- that you had concerns
about, Mrs. Huckabay. If my memory serves me correct -- Amanda, was that a line item
on the application we had to fill out the hours of operation?
Hess: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, yes, he did offer those hours of
operation on the application.
Edwards: Yeah. I think it was a required line item. And so when we submitted our
application, we anticipated what those might be. Since it was a request on the
application we anticipate -- that was just an anticipation of what -- and as our -- my
client has stated, that those are not objectionable at this time. But if the Commission
feels that those need to be adjusted, we are open to that as well. And if there is any
other questions at this time I can address those.
Rohm: I think it's pretty well covered, but there may be additional questions.
Commissioner Siddoway.
Siddoway: One question, Mr. Chairman. The -- just to clarify on the record on the issue
-- I believe it was Gene's question about the grade. As you meet Locust Grove, you will
have to -- you will be at existing grade there.
Edwards: Exactly.
Siddoway: And it's probably safe to say you will not be filling or raising the existing
grade at all. If anything, you will be at existing grade or lower; is that right?
Edwards: As soon as we -- you know, about this -- the faint line right by that tree -- that
cuts through those trees, we will probably have a grade break right there and begin our
slope down into the site at that point and maintain our maximum -- probably our
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3. 2007
Page 22 of 62
maximum slope that's allowed, probably about a five percent -- you know, four to five
percent grade coming down into that site. It will be steep, but it will be navigatible or --
you will be able to drive it.
Siddoway: Thank you.
O'Brien: I'd like to bring up a point about winter driving, the slope of that grade, of ice
and snow. To me it's a hazard to--
Edwards: Well, you --
O'Brien: It's a sharp turn, you go down there and you got to make that turn, you know, I
just have a --
Edwards: Our engineer will be very cautious of that as we design through that and
make sure that we can perform whatever maneuvers they -- cars need to at that grade
in winter driving and in any other conditions.
O'Brien: One other point. How close is that -- that south exit or entrance there to the
canal? Is that further up a ways? For the irrigation.
Edwards: It's my understanding the irrigation is quite a ways away.
O'Brien: Okay. Okay. Thank you.
Rohm: From the audience it was noted that the canal is two blocks further to the south.
To the west.
Edwards: Between Sportsman and Labrador.
Rohm: Okay. Yeah. Thank you. Any other questions of this applicant? Thank you,
sir.
O'Brien: No, but I was referring to the canal cut as it crosses or goes underneath
Locust Grove.
Rohm: Okay. That's what I thought.
O'Brien: Thank you.
Edwards: Thank you.
Rohm: Thank you. Okay. Is there anyone else that would like to testify to this -- well,
really, we already had the applicant respond so I think we are done with that. Could I
get a motion to close the Public Hearing and we will have some discussion?
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 23 of 62
Moe: Yeah. Mr. Chairman, I move to close the Public Hearing on AZ 07-004.
Newton-Huckabay: Second.
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to close the Public Hearing on AZ 07-004. All
those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign?
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Rohm: Okay. Discussion. Commissioner Moe?
Moe: Mr. Chairman, quite frankly, I'm -- well, what I see tonight I kind of like the whole
project. As far as the zoning, I have no problem whatsoever on that. I'd kind of like to
just speak to the alternative compliance and the design review. I think they have done a
real good job, quite frankly, of what they would do out front on the corner there, I think
that's going to be very attractive and I would definitely recommend to City Council that
they approve that. I think that's going to be a real plus out in that area. As far as design
review, again, I think they have reviewed other structures that are being built on there
and I think that's going to be a definite plus to the neighborhood out there as well.
Concerns from the neighbors and whatnot, I think that the applicant is going to take care
of that as far as elevations and whatnot. I think your neighborhood as far as line of site
and whatnot into your yards -- I think one of the folks already made a statement it will be
similar to a two story home and I agree with that. I don't think it's going to be intrusive
whatsoever. So, having said all that, I definitely would approve this. The only thing I
would probably want to change would be the hours of operation. I would probably take
it from the 10:00 to 6:00, I would probably take it to 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., which is
pretty standard to what we have done in the past for office buildings. So, that would be
what I'd anticipate wanting to do.
Rohm: Thank you. Commissioner Newton-Huckabay.
Newton-Huckabay: That's -- my only comment -- historically when we have imposed
hours of operation on L-O zone it's been the 6:00 to 10:00. Somebody has to police
that at some point and I think it makes it a lot easier to police one set of numbers, rather
than multiple and I think given the society we live in today that limiting a business
operation from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. isn't really reasonable and so I would, myself, be
more in favor of going with the standard that we historically recommended, which is
6:00 to 10:00. It fits all of the office uses. That's the only comment I would have. Nice
project I think.
Rohm: Commissioner Siddoway.
Siddoway: Without belaboring it, I would just say that I agree with both previous
Commissioners. I would -- I like the project. I like that it's not a -- a cookie cutter box,
it's got -- it's a building that's got some architectural design to it and addresses the site
well. I like the way it addresses Overland Road and I am in favor of the proposed
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 24 of 62
alternative compliance. I would also favor the change to the hours of operation as
previously mentioned. That's all.
Rohm: Commissioner O'Brien.
O'Brien: Yes. I have to agree with all the rest of the Commissioners. I haven't lived
down in that area for quite a long time, but it's a really good fit for a business and I'm
really glad to see these type of things coming to the south side of the freeway. Have
been waiting a long time for businesses to come in there. I also want to reiterate the
importance of working with the homeowners that live around that area to make sure that
everybody's needs are covered as much as we can within -- within their rights and
everything. So, it's really really important. Glad to see that that's happening, so --
Rohm: Okay. Thank you. And I guess in conclusion my comments would be just back
to staff, do we need to add comments in the form of a development agreement addition
to the staff report in order to incorporate some of these things or is -- or just change the
hours of operation as stated in the staff report?
Hess: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, I do have a couple of things just for
the Commission to note and I will comment on additions that will need to be made to the
DA. Currently the -- in the L-O zone we don't have a limited hour of operation, so I don't
-- I mean it's at your discretion if you wanted to limit that to 8:00 to -- or 6:00 to 10:00 or
7:00 to 6:00, whatever the applicant had proposed. Second, there is a stipulation in a
development agreement that states that land use buffer at the west side should be
constructed in accordance with UDC standards and we do have a requirement that
states that all trees must touch at maturity, which will provide a pretty decent buffer, you
know, something to screen for the neighbors. But the last thing -- yes, the staff would
like to see added to the development agreement was that the applicant offered fencing
and currently there was nothing proposed on the landscape plan, but since he proposed
it and the neighbors have requested it, then, you would need to add that as a condition
in the development agreement.
Rohm: Okay. I think that can be done.
O'Brien: Chairman Rohm. I'm sorry. So, the question I have of staff would be these --
the shrubberies and trees, et cetera, that you plan on planting there, sometimes they
take an awfully long time to grow. What is the thoughts, then, on planting mature trees -
- because I wouldn't -- if I lived right behind there and waited ten years for something to
grow together, I don't know if I would be that happy about it. So, is there something we
can put in the development agreement to insure that that has a reasonable amount of
time to grow together?
Hood: Mr. Chair, Commissioners, Commissioner O'Brien that certainly is at your
discretion. I mean, again, the applicant offered some type of arborvitae or something --
a juniper that would -- at maturity maybe an eight foot tall, that way you have something
above the six foot solid fence, but in combination the six foot solid fence is going to
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 25 of 62
screen anything up to six feet today or as soon as they get that put in and it will take
some time to grow some mature trees, but if you want to see our minimum for an
arborvitae is six feet at planting, so if you wanted to require an eight foot tall, just so you
have an extra two feet of screening there, that is certainly something you could require,
but we are looking at maturity for the most part.
O'Brien: Okay. I don't think we should be in the business of making requirements, but I
think it's something that the homeowners would have to agree with the developer to
whatever satisfies them -- their needs. So, that's where I'm coming from, just looking
out for those folks.
Moe: Mr. Chairman?
Rohm: Commissioner Moe.
Moe: Question of staff in regards to the fencing. Was there a type of fencing that the
applicant was agreeing to install?
Hess: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, I think he had mentioned either
vinyl fencing or a wooden cedar fence.
Moe: Okay.
Rohm: Okay. All right.
Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Chair, I just want to clarify something regarding hours of
operation. I'm aware there is not a requirement and my point being is that historically
when we have applied hours of operation, we have kept them at 6:00 to 10:00 and so I
more am in favor of consistency if we are going to apply hours of operation.
Rohm: And I think that we can include that in the motion as part of the development
agreement, so -- and that's an expansion from their original hours requested, so it
doesn't require that they stay open, but it at least gives them more flexibility. So, I don't
think there is any opposition to that.
Moe: Well--
Rohm: Commissioner Moe.
Moe: -- I guess I would just make the point that the simple fact that even though it's not
a requirement of the L-O, with the location of this facility and whatnot, I definitely think
we do need to have hours of operation in there and 6:00 to 10:00 is what I would want
to anticipate seeing in there and just possibly being the maker of the motion that I will be
doing, I will be wanting to require a six foot vinyl fencing along there. And I have no
problem with the way the report is stating for the landscaping at the present time. So,
I'm just looking for -- we take care of the problem for screening with the fence and I'm
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 26 of 62
glad to see that the applicant had offered that all along, so that was in pretty good
shape. So, if there is no other questions, then --
O'Brien: I have -- just to respond to that, too. If the grade is going to be dropped down
by eight feet -- is that --
Nary: You can't get more information from him.
O'Brien: Okay. So, it's going to drop down six or eight feet and the fence is going to be
six feet behind it and there is a one or two foot difference from the roadway, as cars go
out, the lights shine on the houses, you're going to -- it's -- well, my point is to staff is
that it's not going to be an immediate six foot fence, you're going to still have some
lights that -- car lights that are going to flash into those homes. So, my concern was
trees that are fairly mature to be placed in there. Maybe we should make that a part of
our recommendation. Do you see what I'm -- follow what I'm trying to say?
Moe: Yes, I do, but at the same point with the type of trees and whatnot that they are
planning to put in there and whatnot, those are -- they grow rather rapid to begin with.
O'Brien: What type of trees are those?
Moe: Well, they are looking for a juniper or an arborvitae and whatnot and those grow
awful fast. So, I think, basically, as the application is written I think it's fine.
O'Brien: Okay. All right. Thank you.
Rohm: Commissioner Moe, I believe you're ready to make a motion.
Moe: Okay. Well, after considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to
recommend approval to the City Council of file number AZ 07-004 as presented in the
staff report for the hearing date of May 3rd, 2007, with the modification that I do want to
put a stipulation of operating hours of 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., as well as require the
applicant to provide a six foot vinyl fencing -- I guess that would be at the west property
line -- south. Excuse me. The south property line there as well. And I guess part of my
motion I would say that I would also like to recommend to City Council of approvals of
the alternative compliance and design review as noted in the report. End of motion.
O'Brien: Second.
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to forward onto City Council recommending
approval of Item No. AZ 07-004, to include all staff report with the aforementioned
modifications. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carried. Thank
you all for coming in. Appreciate your testimony.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 27 of 62
Item 11:
Public Hearing: RZ 07-008 Request for a Rezone of approximately 4
acres from a C-N zone to a C-C zone for Lots 1 - 5, Block 1 of the Corner
at Vineyards Subdivision for Cherry Wood Village by Richard Brown and
Roy Brown - SWC of Cherry Lane and Linder Road:
Item 12:
Public Hearing: CUP 07-007 Request for a Conditional Use Permit to
allow retail sale and service of motor scooters within the C-C zoning
district on Lot 3, Block 1, of the Corner at Vineyards Subdivision for
.Cherry Wood Village by Richard Brown and Roy Brown - SWC of Cherry
Lane and Linder Road:
Rohm: At this time I'd like to open the Public Hearing on RZ 07-008 and CUP 07-007,
both items related to the Cherry Wood Village and begin with the staff report.
Hess: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. This application
is a request for zoning approval of approximately four acres from the neighborhood
business, C-N district, to community business, C-C district. Concurrent with the zoning
application is a request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow for retail sales, stores,
servicing of motor scooters slash recreational vehicles on Lot 3, Block 1, of the
subdivision. And that is this lot right here. The subject property is located at the
southwest corner of Cherry Lane and Linder Road. The site is currently built out and
houses a Maverick fueling station right at the corner and a retail complex right here.
There is also a car wash facility in here -- in the middle of the cue. The retail complex
houses Dominos Pizza, a Movie Gallery, a Great Clips, a Sprint store, a pet food store,
and a tax service. And a consignment shop. Further development of the site is not
proposed at this time. To the north and east are existing commercial slash retail
complexes, also zoned C-N neighborhood business. On a submitted site plan the
applicant shows -- I apologize, we are having technical difficulties here. Okay. On the
submitted site plan the applicant shows two existing full accesses -- actually, you can,
actually, see them on the aerial photo here, too -- to Linder -- there is two to Linder
Road. There is one here and there is one at the rear of the subdivision. And there are
two full access points to Cherry Lane, one here also on the Maverick site, and one here
in front of the Cherry Wood retail complex. Currently -- let's see. All uses within the
Cherry Wood Center building are principally permitted, within the C-N zone and
proposed C-C zones. The Maverick convenience store, fueling station, is a
conditionally permitted use within the existing C-N zone and would be principally
permitted within the proposed C-C zone. The proposed scooter recreational vehicle
store is not currently an allowed use within the C-N zone and it's conditionally permitted
within the C-C zone, hence, the request. Staff believes that a -- the indoor sales of
scooters slash recreational vehicles may be an appropriate use of the site. However,
the Commission should be aware that staff has received several calls from concerned
neighbors regarding the noise that could be generated from this type of use. Therefore,
staff recommends that the city limit the hours of operation for this proposed scooter
store from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Additionally, staff recommends that no test driving of
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 28 of 62
the store's merchandise be allowed within the parking lot. Staff has also requested that
the applicant upgrade the landscaping at the rear of the site. And all of these
recommendations are intended to protect the neighbors from the potential increase in
noise and traffic that might take place if the Commission were to approve the conditional
use request. Additionally, if the Commission believes that other allowed uses within the
C-C are not appropriate, Commission may choose to add these requirements within a
development agreement if so desired. So, staff is recommending approval of the
Cherry Wood Village application in accordance with the conditions of approval listed in
Exhibit B of your staff report. And that is all staff has, unless the Commission has
questions.
Rohm: Thank you very much. Any questions of staff?
O'Brien: Not at this time.
Siddoway: I have one. So, this use is being classified as what again in the code?
Hess: A vehicle sales -- I think, it's servicing and storage.
Siddoway: And that use is conditional even in the proposed C-C zone?
Hess: It is a conditional use in the proposed C-C, not allowed in the existing C-N zone.
Siddoway: In the C-N. Okay. Thank you.
Rohm: Any other questions of staff? Would the applicant like to come forward, please?
Brown: My name is Richard Brown. I live in Salt Lake City, number 24 South 600 East,
Suite 7, Salt Lake City. Zip code is 84102. I think the staff report fairly states what our
intentions are with the property. The property to the east of us -- several acres to the
east of us is already zoned C-C so it's a developer owner of a piece of property that
gives us the opportunity to compete with other developers in the area for tenants and a
diverse higher tenant mix. The conditional use of the -- a portion of the building for the
scooter business -- I'll let the owners of the business speak to that. The hours limitation
that the staff has recommended is fine as far as I know, with the -- with that business --
the business will be closed on Sundays, so at least part of the weekend there won't be
any impact in the neighborhood from the business. As far as the landscaping
enhancement that the staff is recommending, I haven't had the opportunity to go
through that in any real detail, but I'm sure we can, you know, accommodate what their
needs are. I think the indication is that we need to add about seven to nine trees. You
can see that the majority of the space is actually bordered by a church parking lot and
the church property. It is the space to the west of our property and about half of the
south property line that impacts the residential neighborhood. And so I assume that
they are going to want to add trees primarily in that area. There already exists a six foot
high cedar fence that's around all the property in that area. So, we have -- you know,
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 29 of 62
we have some barrier already existing, but that's, basically, the nature of our
application. Is there any questions or --
O'Brien: Primarily you're interested in putting in a scooter store, service and
maintenance?
Brown: Right.
O'Brien: And you must have some experience in this in the past.
Brown: No. No. I'm the property owner. Eric Fieldstad is the owner of the scooter
business.
O'Brien: Okay.
Brown: He has an existing business --
O'Brien: I'll probably have more questions for him, then.
Brown: Yes. And I'll let him address those questions to do with operation and the
nature of his business and so on. He has an existing business in Boise on Fairview
already and this will be a second location for him.
Siddoway: Mr. Chairman. The site that is -- is this the site where the business would
be or is it in the multi-tenant --
Brown: It's in the multi-tenant. If you go -- right there.
Siddoway: Okay.
Brown: It's in that. Originally, we had about 6,500 feet leased to Movie Gallery and
they chose to downsize their operation, because VHS tapes don't take up as much
room as DVDs and so we split that space in half and the space that the scooter
business would occupy is about 3,200 feet.
Siddoway: Okay.
O'Brien: In yards or feet how far is this from Meridian Middle School?
Brown: The middle school -- if you're going towards the right side of the map here, it's
on the other side of that vacant piece of property. It's probably -- I don't know if it would
be --
Rohm: Three-quarters of a mile --
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 30 of 62
Brown: -- half a mile at minimum I'd say. Yeah. It's -- the R-4 over there, that's the
middle school property starting there. Their field and, then, the school. Yeah.
Rohm: I think the majority of the people that are here are more interested --
Brown: In the operation.
Rohm: -- in the operation and I think we will ask that individual, unless you have
something else --
Brown: No. I'll let Eric --
Rohm: -- you wanted to ask, we'll have the --
Brown: He's, obviously, knowledgeable about that.
Rohm: Yeah, please. Thank you.
Fieldstad: Mr. Chairman and Members of the Commissioners, my name is Eric
Fieldstad, 12979 West Pinion Court in Boise. I own and am the general manager of A-1
Scooter, registered with the Secretary of State's office. Current first store is located on
Fairview for the last 18 months. It's our intent to offer to the buying public motorized gas
scooters, which by state definition are motor vehicles. They are licensed and registered
and titled for on-street use. We have been very successful in our current location. We
propose -- this building site here is three times larger than what I'm in now, so we'd like
to expand our product offering to children's scooters, commonly known as Schwinn or
Razor, that you will see at your large stores. We have been designated by Razor as an
authorized repair center, the only one in the state of Idaho. I employ a 20 year
seasoned mechanic. The maintenance that we do is considered light maintenance. It's
like tune-ups, spark plug changes, air filter changes, and oil changes, in that area. We
feel that the location here is compatible. When we have been in it -- we have been in
there setting up shelving and bringing in product, anticipating opening. And the general
public that has come by has been very supportive. We have also hosted two
neighborhood meetings at two different dates and have been open and attentive to the
concerns of the neighbors. I highly support them. I think the record at our Fairview
store will show that we are good neighbors and honest business people. Our hours of
operation -- I get to stipulate within boundaries, it's 10:00 to 6:00 and we have no intent
of it going beyond 6:00 o'clock at night, unless a patron so wishes to pick up a scooter
after hours at their convenience, but the door will be closed. As far as test riding, the
neighborhood meeting brought up some really good safety issues that we do want to be
attentive of. I have offered to the neighborhood association and to the city staff not to
conduct test rides at the site, as a safety concern, because of the drive-thru traffic,
because it is a multi-business complex. I do ask for one allowance there and that would
be the mechanic, after he completes a tune-up, needs the latitude to conduct a test run
and we will do that out in front, so not to create a noise problem with our residents
behind us, but that is one thing that -- I can't let a bike go out in the street without a
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 31 of 62
member of -- myself or my staff testing riding it to prove it's safe for road use on it. I
would like to note, Mr. Chairman, that the city staff, throughout this process, which
started last November, has been open, available, and very courteous and informational
to myself and to the others who are part of this application and we'd like to commend to
yourself and to the members of the Commission their positive response.
Rohm: Good. Thank you very much. I'm not sure that you can answer this in definitive
numbers, but decibel levels, I think the concern of the public as a whole is how loud are
these scooters. Are they -- is it like the Meridian Speedway when they are running on
Friday nights? Is it where you can hear it five miles away, or is it -- you know, relative to
-- can you speak to the --
Fieldstad: Yes, I can. Scooters, unlike motorcycles, are very quiet. They are
mufflered. They are low cc, which is the engine size. If I were to drive up out front of
your building here you would not know that I am here. The biggest cc we have is a 250.
Most of them are 150 cc's. They are not the big Harleys or hogs that are commonly
known, they don't have that bum, bum, bum sound.
Rohm: They are probably not as loud as a lawn mower.
Fieldstad: They are not as loud as a lawn mower, because they are mufflered larger.
The studies that I have seen out of the national motorcycle industry, which they are a
segment of, is about 5.6 for a 150 cc. I do get asked that, especially when young
people are going to be riding.
Rohm: Yeah. I don't know this to be a fact, but I'm sure we are going to get testimony
to that, but I'm pretty sure that the noise -- the noise level associated with running them
in a parking lot is a primary concern.
Fieldstad: Not to be snide, but my experience -- some of the cars with the boom boxes
are louder than these scooters, sir.
Rohm: Thank you, sir.
Moe: Mr. Chairman?
Rohm: Commissioner Moe.
Moe: As far as on a daily basis, you know, your facility in Boise at the present time, as
far as service, how many people are coming in for service, you know, during the day
and on this facility here are you looking to do the service coming through the back side
or through the front doors?
Fieldstad: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Moe, it's seasonal, but I will give you the
summertime period, which is our maximum. We do services by appointment, so we can
regulate it. We space normally 45 minutes. An oil change will take ten minutes, but --
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 32 of 62
what we do is we will go through the whole bike, when the mechanic has it again, as a
safety compliance and liability issue, we try to space it a minimum of 45 minutes. I
would say not more than three service jobs are done in an eight hour period.
Moe: And, then, the other question I would have is as far as fuel storage, what do you
guys anticipate having on site for fuel?
Fieldstad: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Moe, I met with the fire inspection individual
yesterday. We have the written report for your review. Because we are so close and
adjacent to Maverick gas station, there will no containerized gasoline kept on premises.
We normally keep three to four scooters with about one half a gallon in the tank of the
vehicle itself. We can even eliminate that, because there is no test riding by the buying
citizens. So, the gas that we would have would be those that bikes come in for service,
on occasion say we have to replace a head on it, we would have to drain the gas out of
the vehicle and that normally is not more than two gallons and that would be placed
right back in. And also in conjunction to that, used motor oil today is a concern, not for
flammability, but for environmental. We capture the used oil. Schuck's Auto Supplies
have a no fee turn-in program, which we use about three times a week at our other
sto re.
Rohm: Any other questions of the applicant? Commissioner Siddoway.
Siddoway: Mr. Chairman and Mr. Fieldstad, the -- just for the record and to clarify the
use, you know, when I -- I believe I now understand exactly what we are doing, but the-
- when I first read that this was a scooter slash recreational vehicle sales and repair,
thought we were doing scooters and fifth wheels and motor homes, but your intent is
really just the scooter, small motorcycle industry, is that correct?
Fieldstad: Mr. Chair and Commissioner Siddoway, yes, that's our intent. Our focus will
be scooters. Now, I understand scooters cover a broad spectrum of devises, Razor
little aluminum kick scooters that you see almost every child -- that was the toy of the
year in 2000 and it has been so for seven years. We do sell that. The children's electric
scooters are very popular, both stand up and the sit down on a seat. We also service
that. Up to a large scooter for on-road use. The recreational vehicles was the outcome
of consumer demand. My generation grew up wanting go carts. This generation wants
what we children's all terrain vehicles. A TVs. They are approximately that far off the
ground and stuff. The business plan calls for the sale of two to three hundred of such
all terrain vehicles, children's, between the two stores this year. The demand is just
phenomenal.
Siddoway: Thank you.
Rohm: Commissioner O'Brien.
O'Brien: When I first read this application what I came up with was pneumatics, so can
you tell me what kind of tools, pneumatic tools will you be using there? Air compressor?
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 33 of 62
Fieldstad: Yes. Mr. Chairman and Commissioner O'Brien, we have a roll-around air
compressor. It is noisy. To fill the entire tank if it's empty takes no more than ten
minutes and it's indoors. It's not used outdoors on it. That's the only pneumatic tool
that we use.
O'Brien: So, in your estimation, can you hear it from outside when you use an air gun or
blowing air? Because that does make a lot of noise.
Fieldstad: Again, Mr. Chairman and Commissioner O'Brien, in the use of the air gun
itself, the only time we use it is to remove the main drive washer, which is -- allows the
engine to come out from the front of it. Yes, you can hear that outside, to a distance I
would say about 30 feet. But it's not like your Les Schwab or Goodyear, the zip, zip, zip
that you hear when you're having your tires changed.
O'Brien: What about for blowing off tools and things like this with an air gun?
Fieldstad: Again, Mr. Chairman and Commissioner O'Brien, we don't use them to brush
off our tools and stuff, our tools are hand-wiped. We also do use a power washer,
again, one of the small commercial roll arounds and that makes absolutely no noise.
O'Brien: What is the regulation modifying mufflers?
Fieldstad: Mr. Chairman and Commissioner O'Brien, as a licensed and insured dealer, I
do not modify mufflers from the manufacturer's specifications.
O'Brien: So, If you sold a unit to someone and they modified it and brought it in for
repair for something, I think that would be a concern of mine if I was living nearby and
hearing two or three scooters coming in with their mufflers modified. I know it's not your
problem, but I think as a resident homeowner, I would be.
Fieldstad: Yes, again, Mr. Chairman and Commissioner O'Brien, it's not -- it's not
unbeknownst to a -- I'll say young person to knock out the baffles in a muffler. If it
comes to my company under that condition it is so noted on the work order and that's,
again, because of liability, be it noise liability or mechanical failure by the cycle itself. If
that vehicle were to come in, we would not test ride it.
O'Brien: Yeah, but my concern would that of the neighbors hearing this. I don't know
how often this happens. It may be to your experience in this has that happened?
Fieldstad: Mr. Chairman and Commissioner O'Brien, I have had it happen once in 18
months.
O'Brien: Okay.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 34 of 62
Fieldstad: Let me, though, give you a little more vision. When customers come in for
service and things, they will come to the front of the complex. Myself or a member of
my staff will wheel it -- hand wheel the vehicle to the back of the building. Again, we do
that for insurance liability.
O'Brien: Do you keep the doors open in the back or -- during the summertime?
Fieldstad: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner O'Brien, my mechanic has a tendency of
enjoying the outdoor air, so, yes, if -- again, if it's a noise situation we can definitely
quiet it.
O'Brien: Well, I think this is one of the major things is the noise issue and that's what
I'm trying to get to in all these -- my questioning is to make sure that somehow this was
addressed before these things are made. So, that's my question. Thank you.
Fieldstad: And Mr. Chairman and Commissioner O'Brien, in follow up to that -- and I
have stated this at both neighborhoods, my commitment to the neighbors individually
and collectively as a neighborhood association, is to be a good neighbor, and as one of
the neighbors said, well, Eric, we can only take your word, but I grew up in Spokane
valley, my father and grandfather were general contractors, and a handshake and an
individual's word was a contract.
Rohm: Thank you, sir. Do you have any questions?
Newton-Huckabay: I was going to suggest we need to do public testimony.
Rohm: Thank you, sir. Okay. Ralph Gentry, would you like to come forward, please?
Gentry: My name is Ralph Gentry. I reside at 1502 North Santa Rosa Place. I have a
couple of questions here. I understand under C-N zone he is not allowed to be open for
business? That's the reason he's applying for a C-C zone. The business is open right
now and has been for some time. And he's using the word scooter, he's had at least
one machine, a used off-road bike, parked out front for sale. That's not a scooter.
That's a motorcycle. I'd like for him to answer this, that I called and they assured me
that code enforcement would check him out as far as he is -- zoning. And he's open for
business right now. I'd like to know now he's doing that.
Newton-Huckabay: Okay. We will get an answer for you. Thank you.
Fieldstad: But the word scooter that he's implying is a -- a small quiet machine and he's
already -- I know at least one machine out front, a used machine, an off-road machine,
which is not a scooter. You know, he's talking about servicing. He will have to test run
these if he does any major servicing on them, outside of the building on the rear of the
building. My property is within 33 foot of the boundary around that commercial use. So,
do any of you have questions for me?
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 35 of 62
Rohm: No, sir. And, basically, your testimony stands for itself.
Fieldstad: I am against it one hundred percent. I attended one of his neighborhood
meetings. There was two of us, three of us that showed up, and we never voiced our
opinion. Was in favor of it to start with. But these machines, if he sells them, he's going
to have to run them someplace. He's talking about out in front of the shop. If he
services the machines and does any internal work on the motor, he's going to have to
crank that machine up -- I'm assuming it's going to be in the rear of the building where
his shop area is. And I'm close enough I'm going to hear all that. And we bought the
property there, we bought it in good faith, with the zoning being what it was, that it
wouldn't be changed. Now it's going to be changed. If he goes bankrupt or broke in six
months, who is to say who moves into that with this C-C that would be, what form of a
business could move in there.
Rohm: Thank you, sir. Carol Gentry. From the audience she said she agrees with your
husband. Good woman.
Newton-Huckabay: He would not be speaking for the entire Commission at that point.
Rohm: Okay. Moving on. Richard Brown. Okay. He's already spoken. John Watson.
Watson: John Watson, 1486 North Silverado Place, Meridian. 83642. I am probably
the home that is going to be overall the most impacted, myself and my next door
neighbor. I live in the house at the very guts of the cul-de-sac. Right there. I'm not
overly enamored with the thought of the project going in. However, from what I have
talked with the applicant, the owner of the store, he appears to be a fairly -- a very
honorable individual and I like what I have heard from him. Apparently he is in
operation at this point in time. I haven't heard excessive noises from the area.
However, if we are going to let the genie out of the bottle by the rezone, I do have some
issues and concerns. We predated the construction of this strip mall by several years,
the Vineyards homeowners -- or the Vineyards Subdivision. The Vineyards Subdivision
is the folks that put the fence in there. That location right there, that's a dumpster. That
dumpster is about six feet from my fence line and about 31 feet from my living room
window. We have dumpsters being opened and slammed all the way up until about
midnight. We have street sweepers that start anywhere between 23:00 or 11 :00 p.m.
and go until about 1 :00 in the morning. We have delivery vehicles from the Dominoes
that start at about 11 :00 o'clock at night and run their engines until they are finished,
because they are refrigerated units. Lots of noise. Now, this gentleman is not going to
add significant noise from what I have seen. However, if we are going to go for a
rezone, I'd like some consideration for the neighbors that live up against here for noise
reduction, so that we don't have street sweepers, we don't have the dumpster located
adjacent to the fence, because in accordance with the Meridian City Code 4-2-1, a
nuisance defined, anything that -- and I quote -- disturbs the peace and quiet is hereby
declared to be a nuisance. That means a street sweeper at midnight. I have called and
made several complaints about that. The police have come out and dealt with those on
occasion. However, it has not fixed the situation. And so if we are going to let the genie
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 36 of 62
out of the bottle, I'd sure like to have the dumpster removed or significant plantings
behind where the fence line abuts Mr. Brown's property to reduce the noise impact that
we are dealing with at this point in time. Subject to your questions, that concludes my
testimony.
Rohm: Thank you. I appreciate your input. Seriously, you did a good job. Any
questions of this individual? Thank you, sir. Gill Thoreson.
Thoreson: My name is Gilbert Thoreson. I reside at 1490 North Santa Rosa Place in
the Vineyards. My wife accompanies me and she is my director. What I'm here to say
is I'm against the zoning change from C-N to C-C. I think you're opening the bottle and
letting the genie out. The veracity of the individual is in question, the one who is going
to run the operation, in that before it was -- before we ever came here to see -- and
discuss this matter with you, the store was already open for business. There were two
motorcycles .- not motorcycles, but the all terrain -- I forget what you call them. Dirt
bikes.
Rohm: ATMs or--
Thoreson: Dirt bikes.
Rohm: ATVs I guess it is.
Thoreson: They are dirt bikes. They are the size of a motorcycle, but they were dirt
bikes. They were outside for sale and, then, they were -- there was also some scooters
outside and, you know, they were enticing business and this is before the store was
authorized for business. So, that question -- this brings up my question as to his
veracity and his continuing to be honest with the public later, so I -- that's my question
there on the honesty of the individual. Noise level, I still think the potential is there,
because they will be getting RV type vehicles in the back for servicing. The potential of
servicing these vehicles, without their proper muffling, is there and the noise level will go
up. The handling of fuel, gasoline, disturbs me a little bit and the servicing of those
vehicles with gasoline in the back. It also is a heavy traffic area going to Maverick,
people going in and around that area, and this is another increase in that type of traffic.
I think it will be a negative impact on my home. He has not specified what the value of
his property would do and his work would do for the City of Meridian, but it would impact
probably our homes and the value thereof and that's about all I have to say, unless you
have some questions of me.
Rohm: Thank you, sir.
Moe: Mr. Chairman, before you ask for the next person, I'd like to know from staff are
you aware of what's going on with him operating in this facility right now?
Hess: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, yes, I am. When we first met with
the applicant he -- we had told him that operation -- scooter sales, things like that, of
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 37 of 62
motor vehicles, ones that could be, you know, licensed and used on the road, were not
allowed on the site until -- if and until the rezone was approved. Kiddie toys, those
kinds of things, like the kind -- the toys that you can buy at Fred Meyer or Wal-Mart, we
__ he was given a temporary occupancy by the building department to sell those, but
store his other items. No sales were to occur. I guess there must have been some sort
of misunderstanding and the applicant did open the store for business for selling A TVs
and, you know, mo-peds and scooters. When staff became aware of this, because
some of the neighboring property owners had voiced their concerns, we contacted code
enforcement and they have been out to the site multiple times and the applicant is not
selling or does not have his doors open for operation. He's not selling to the public, he
is not servicing vehicles in the building at this time. He has taken down his sign. That
was another stipulation of our department, that there be no indication of any sort of
business running at this point.
Moe: Thank you.
Rohm: Thank you. Norma Thoreson, did you want to speak as well? She agrees with
her husband. I'm not going to add comment to that one. I'll just leave that one alone.
Okay. Commissioner Newton-Huckabay, did you have something you wanted to add to
that?
Newton-Huckabay: No. Well, I have a question, if I may around -- around the zoning --
rezoning of the entire piece of property, outside of the scooter store. Through a
development agreement could we require to have the way the perimeter of this property
is treated be upgraded? Is it in there?
Hess: Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission, yes, I have asked the applicant to
provide additional trees within the landscaping buffer, because currently the buffers are
not at full width to -- or not up to code with -- with current city code and -- but if there is
any additional -- if the Commission doesn't feel like what I have proposed -- staff has
proposed is sufficient and would like to have additional landscaping on top of what that
is, then, it's certainly at your discretion to add that.
Newton-Huckabay: I guess I was leaning more towards -- and you did put them in
there, it just escaped my brain. Like the dumpster, the fencing --
Hess: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, if the Commission decides that the
existing fencing isn't sufficient for noise abatement, then, they could certainly add a
stipulation for that, too. As far as the dumpster goes, that site was, I guess, proposed
and approved by SSC, which is a private entity, and so the city doesn't really have
control over when their hours of operation are. So, I guess I would suggest that the -- I
guess the neighboring property owners might contact SSC to work out -- along with the
applicant to workout a more suitable time for garbage pickup.
Newton-Huckabay: I was thinking more along moving it -- moving the dumpster, but I'm
not sure, again, where it would go and I didn't know if that was an option.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 38 of 62
Hess: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, that can certainly be a stipulation
within a development agreement if you'd like to see that moved. But, again, that would
have to be -- the new site would have to be compatible with, you know, the large trucks.
Newton-Huckabay: Right. Yeah. Correct. Definitely. Now, I -- as I don't go behind
that development very often or rarely, is that dumpster in the new brick enclosures, the
cinder block enclosures that the dumpsters are in now, generally, in new
developments?
Hess: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, staff isn't aware of that. When I did
the site visit I didn't -- I missed that. So, the property owner Mr. Brown might want to
come back up and discuss that.
Rohm: Thank you.
Hess: So, just to wrap up my comments. So, that is an option to look at maybe taking
your suggestions a step further if we went with the C-C for the whole site.
Rohm: Thank you. Kevin Snow.
Snow: Kevin Snow, 1470 North Silverado Place. I would be the homeowner -- I have
the corner of this -- adjacent to the church lot and to the commercial property. I
appreciate that the Commission understands our concerns about the noise. I want you
to know that we as the homeowners do not consider that cedar fence to be a sound
barrier. I sent some pictures in with a packet, I don't know if you each have a copy of
that, but in that there is some photographs of the commercial properties. To the east
and to the north of this one -- the properties north and east both have seven foot cinder
block sound barriers. Those properties do not have gas stations, they do not have a car
wash, they don't have vacuum cleaning stations. To the north they don't even allow
vehicle access between the commercial and residential area. I think that's really
neighborly of them. Ironically, this corner has that little cedar privacy fence and all it
really does is block line of sight, yet it is the heaviest use as far as short-term traffic
coming in and out of there. Every resident I have talked to, the Asmussens, the
Corders, who aren't here tonight, the Watson, the Granges, the Farmers, the Petersons
and a couple I have left out, they all have their stories about difficulties in and around
this particular commercial property. And we have become sensitive. It's just a few
scooters; right? There should be no -- you'd think you would hardly be able to notice
behind the rest of the din. I have witnessed the moving and testing of the inventory at
the rear of the shop. I have seen scooters, I have seen one dirt bike. I have seen an
ATV, which was, actually, in one of the photos that I sent in. Had a hard time starting it.
They had to start it over and over and over again. There is takeoffs and landings. I'm
here tonight because even without any operations going on as far as servicing, it's
already been an impact and it will be an impact. We voice our concerns or sent
representatives to voice our concerns to the neighborhood meetings and we actually
plead with them by letter to find a more suitable location. They have offered
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 39 of 62
assurances. I don't feel the assurances are enforceable or particularly reasonable.
This property is designed for service in the rear. It is for retail -- not necessarily for
motor exhaust -- and I think they need to be able to use the property if they are going to
use it in this manner. They need to be able to use the rear. I agree with the mechanic, I
think he needs to have the doors open. He can't be asphyxiating his crew in there when
he's fixing a motor or an engine. The only problem is that without a firm sound barrier
they can't do this without impacting residents. Now, that's why I would beg that any
conditional use or zoning change be conditional on there being a sound barrier or cinder
block fence being placed in the commercial properties and the residential properties,
just like has been done on the north and on the east, with those properties that are also
commercial community on the one and commercial neighborhood on the other. But
better yet, I would like to encourage you to keep it zoned as a commercial neighborhood
for business -- for commercial neighborhood businesses only. The reason being -- and
one of you brought up the Meridian Middle School, which is just east of here, just off the
map. There is the Meridian library just across the street. To the north of this
intersection we have Tully Park. Just north of that is Mountain View High School or
middle school or whichever it is. To the south--
Newton-Huckabay: Sawtooth.
Snow: -- you have -- just south of this church lot, on the other side of the division, is
Meridian High School, home of the warriors. We have a very very heavy investment in
the under 18 year old demographic and as such we draw a large community to school
that's oriented to traffic in this area. We have cars from Ustick to Pine, from Linder to
7th, they are all stacked up waiting for the light to change. And my kids get to walk to
and from school through this for the next 18 years. I ask you please -- I don't think we
need to throw more community attractions into this mix. We have thousands of
students and parents that are coming here already and if we allow this change, my
neighbors and I have to live with it for a long long time. If you must rezone, please,
make it conditional on a solid sound barrier between the commercial and residential
properties. I mean all the way around. On the south and on the west. But, please,
consider keeping it a commercial neighborhood. We have a huge neighborhood as it is
and I don't see any reason to designate it as to a community leveling that's going to
draw even more traffic that isn't associated with the schools. I think he can be plenty
competitive -- and I also fear as a homeowner what might or could go in there. A lot of
things worse than a one story scooter shop. Those are my comments. I would like also
to confirm -- my wife drove by it this morning, she witnessed the sign saying that they
were currently closed for business, planning to reopen possibly in June, pending zoning
approval, and presume it was just a good faith misunderstanding as far as running the
business earlier. I have -- as I have said, have seen other vehicles there and I don't
think that's necessarily anything other than moving an inventory or possibly even just
the people who work there. It might be their personal vehicle. But the sound is a sore
point and that cedar fence is not a sound barrier. Thank you.
Rohm: Thank you, sir.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 40 of 62
Moe: Mr. Chairman?
Rohm: Mr. Snow.
Moe: Mr. Snow, I was just curious. Were you an original homeowner?
Snow: I was not.
Moe: Okay. So, you were -- were you moved in before the--
Snow: I came in knowing the Maverick was there and they have got low prices, God
bless them. As a frequent customer I have never been able to find the stacking lane
that's supposed to be there, but I go there quite frequently. I like the neighborhood
services that are there.
Moe: Thank you.
Rohm: Hal DeGrange.
DeGrange: My name is Hal DeGrange. I reside at 1450 North Silverado Place in
Meridian. And my home is the back end of -- the east side of my fence line buts up
against the Church of Christ. I'm in complete agreement with Mr. Snow. My concern is
-- and attended one of the owner's meetings where our concern was the test drive. This
parking lot within the church is a magnet. We have had stuck vehicles back here,
honeymooners or what have you, through the previous years. We have had dirt bikes
riding in this area, in this arena here, and, then, not to mention the RVs that accumulate
during whatever operations the church conducts. But this parking lot -- and they do
have signs posted. I have talked with a representative from the church that they have
no skateboarding, so forth and so on. I'm also involved in maintenance and I used to
ride dirt bikes and motorcycles. I purchased one from Carl's Cycles and we had the
opportunity, because of the property in back of their facility, to actually test drive. You
go in for maintenance and you want to make sure that that maintenance is done
properly, so what do you do, you take your vehicle, your motorcycle out and you test
drive it and what a perfect place to do that. And the right-hand turns all the way around,
we have already, ironically, whether or not this has anything to do with sales or service,
have a lot of traffic -- and I don't know if they think it's a cutoff to get back to this facility
here, but residing next to Snow and my children also, it's almost hazardous. One of us
is always outside. We never leave our children in the cul-de-sac to play on their own,
because of the traffic impact that we have. And I'm not saying that that's a result of this
facility here, but the amount of impact that we do have here, not to mention the noise -- I
have been here -- our home was the first one built in phase two, Lot 33, of the
subdivision. I have been here since 1993 and have endured tremendous noise impact
with this facility. I have attended several council meetings when this facility here, I
believe, was the only one that was present at the time. This strip mall here that was
being built, I was assured through Holland Realty it was nothing more than an office
complex. Well, that's what I get for listening to our realtor. As far as the dumpsters --
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 41 of 62
and I, too, have witnesses and chased off many, called the police department, what
have you, reefer units parked out here -- it's a tremendous noise impact. If I was going
to come out and test drive my vehicle after maintenance, it's nothing but right-hand
turns all the way around through our subdivision, which would be easy departure and
return access back to the facility and same with this parking lot here. Even if I had a dirt
bike and I could come off road, so to speak, on sidewalks, without even getting on a
thoroughfare, this would be a great area to test drive these vehicles. That's my
concern. I agree with Mr. Snow and Mr. Watson about putting up a cinder block barrier,
sound barrier, of some sort, because the subdivision has provided this barrier, which is
no more than a privacy barrier around the perimeter of the subdivision. Like I said, I
have been here for a long time. I hope to be here for some time. As Mr. Snow
mentioned, I have got a son that will probably be doing the same thing, walking to the
nearby high school here in a few more years. This is a high volume traffic impact.
There is a lot of vehicles that cut this corner with the backed up traffic. What I have
witnessed is mainly high school kids cutting through this parking lot to beat the light.
With the addition of any kind of a test drive or any additional movement of motor
vehicles in this area, even with the addition of speed bumps, I think you're going to set
up somewhat of a safety problem here. Anyway, I am in complete opposition of this
rezoning and thank you.
Moe: Sir?
Rohm: Go ahead, Commissioner Moe.
Mae: Okay. You said that you were there prior to the strip mall going in. At that time --
and you said you had been to council meetings and whatnot. Was there any discussion
at all in regards to putting a different fence at that time?
DeGrange: Well, there was discussion, but wasn't in favor. Actually, I was here with
Mr. Watson also -- we -- at that time there was a security problem. We actually had kids
-- and I have watched several kids before Mr. Snow moved in -- I can't remember -- Joe
-- I can't remember his last name. I actually watched two high school kids cut through,
ready to jump the fence and I went out and stopped them. I have had a picket fence
busted out where kids have physically jumped my fence. At the time it was more
security. The neighbor actually had someone break into -- actually walked into the
house, the wife let out a scream, and both of us watched that person jump the fence
and hop into a vehicle behind -- between the fence and the property in question. So, at
the time it was more of a security issue and this is before the growth started coming and
the noise and the population. But to answer your question -- kind of got sidetracked
here. At the time it was more of a security situation, more so than noise.
Mae: But to your knowledge there was really no discussions about wanting to put some
type of a block fence in there --
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 42 of 62
DeGrange: Well, we had mentioned that, but we were pretty well stopped. The zoning
commission laughed and said how could a high school kid jump a six foot fence. So,
that was -- I kind of saw where that situation was going, so we gracefully backed down.
Moe: Thank you.
Rohm: Commissioner O'Brien.
O'Brien: Yes, Mr. Chairman. Any recollection on the use of the dumpster. Now, the
majority of the noise comes from the disposal carried away by truck or is it from people
using it, slamming the lid down?
DeGrange: It's from both. Myself and my wife have contacted SCC to do rescheduling.
At one time the trash pickup was at 4:30 a.m. Saturday mornings, of all times, and not
only hearing the diesel truck, but you would hear the lid slam as the dumpster was
being brought over the truck and, then, however they manipulated the hydraulics to get
all the trash out and, then, set back down and slammed. And, finally, they -- it was later
on in the afternoon, but it was still on Saturdays. But I mean, yeah, the metallic sounds
of the dumpster actually being slammed back onto the asphalt and picked up, is very --
O'Brien: During the day the -- from the people that use the dumpster, is that an issue
that --
DeGrange: Well, there is -- you know, during the day it's -- from -- you hear it, but it's
not so much of a problem. You know, I mean -- when you're at night -- I mean we -- we
have to keep our blinds closed, we keep our windows closed -- if it's not vacuums, it's
the beeper, the timer beepers on the car wash, you know, we have actually had one of
the -- my wife had him come upstairs and actually listen with the windows closed on the
-- the loudness of the beepers and it was at that time that he finally turned them down.
But, you know, I guess in conclusion it's just been a long, drawn out battle. I mean we
strategically placed vegetation to block off the Mavericks, the car wash, you know, I
mean we are just kind of surrounding ourselves in with trees and whatnot to seclude
ourselves and same thing trying to have some kind of a noise abatement there that --
for that mess, but it's -- ultimately it's -- to me this is going to be nothing but an amplifier
that's going to create nothing but havoc.
O'Brien: Thank you.
DeGrange: Thank you.
Rohm: Kurt Farmer.
Farmer: Kurt Farmer. I live at 1530 North Santa Rosa, which is this property right here.
I moved in coming up on two years ago, knowing that this was a commercial
development, zoned for commercial neighborhood. I was willing accept, because it was
existing, the car wash noise, the Maverick noise, kids that wash their cars drive down to
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 43 of 62
my end and have their stereos going loud. I just figured that was part of what would
happen. I will go out and shine a light in their windows and they take off rather quickly.
We do have people cutting through our yards, jumping our fences, that type of thing.
Those are things that I guess I have to accept because' moved in with those conditions
already there. However, changing the zoning on this -- good intentions or not, human
nature is to go for what's convenient. We are -- people are going to bring their scooters
in and they are going to hand walk them around the Dominoes and around to the back
and into the building to work on them. That will probably happen for the first week.
Human nature will be, okay, well, "II just kick it on, get around there really fast, I got to
get going on it. And, then, to bring it out to test drive it. I just see that good intentions
are not always followed, especially by employees, having managed employees in the
past and having been an employee in the past. So, my -- like everyone else, my
concern is noise. And from other comments I agree that as much traffic as comes
through here, I -- I try and walk my kids over to the Maverick or ride their bikes and it's
hazardous enough just trying to cross these -- any of these intersections to go get a
snow cone that might be out here or into the Maverick. I just can't imagine anymore
traffic that we invite in there specific to a vehicle, scooter related. And those are my
comments.
Rohm: Thank you, sir. That concludes the list of individuals that have signed up to
testify, but the microphone is still open, so if there is someone that -- one at a time.
Watson: John Watson, 14 --
Rohm: You're going to have to make it very quick, because you already testified.
Watson: John Watson, 1486 Silverado Place. Just several things I want to add. In the
very near future Linder will be extended to five lanes and the number one entrance to
that I will almost guarantee you will be blocked to a right-in, right-out only and the noise
from the trash is specific -- the pickup is a problem, but also employees dumping trash
between 8:00 and 11 :00 and midnight, that is also one of my primary concerns.
Rohm: Thank you, sir.
Crandall: David Crandall, 1864 East Lock Meadow Street in Meridian. Mr. Chairman,
Commissioners, there was a -- I read in the report -- and there was a brief comment
when it's changed from a C-N C-C doesn't the buffer, then, have to increase? And I
don't remember if it was 25 feet -- 20 to 25 feet or 30 feet to 35 feet. I think in protection
of the neighbors, in addition to the landscape, I think there should be something in the
record that if it is changed to a C-C that that increased buffer zone should also be a
requirement. 'happen to use the business. I happen to come down to Maverick, I
happen to go to that movie store. Human nature, as we have discussed what it's going
to be, it is almost impossible during the daytime to drive a car from one end down to the
end, Maverick, pizza delivery, the car wash, I think human nature is going to be that
these guy who are the employees of the store, when they want to start test driving those
motorcycles, they are going to find they can't test drive them down that outside street.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 44 of 62
It's too much traffic. It's too busy. They, by nature, are going to just say, oh, let's go to
the back, there is no one back there, it's open, and they are going to start racing up and
down that back. I can just see it happen. Because I know the times I have tried to get
to the Maverick, sometimes you can't get up and down that area. But I think we -- the
other things I think you need to consider, too, it does -- I think you heard the statement
opens a Pandora's Box, if you change the zones for this one business, it's changed. I
mean any of the other businesses go change and want to change, it opens the door
what can come in and it's just going to keep escalating and I think that's what the
neighbors here are concerned about. So, in addition to the landscaping and buffering, I
hope you have some strong wording in there to really help protect these residents.
Rohm: Thank you, sir.
O'Brien: Mr. Chairman, question for staff.
Rohm: Please. Go ahead.
O'Brien: Sonya, on the -- on the wall of -- if they installed a concrete wall or whatever,
what is the experience on -- on sound buffering from those. What good do they do? Do
they really buffer up that much different than anything else? I didn't see that in my
experience that they do that good a job. It seems to me like -- you're talking about an
air space between two walls might -- but a single wall, I don't know if that would satisfy
putting that up around the perimeter.
Hess: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, I don't have a lot of experience with
sound abatement walls. I don't know if my supervisor here would know.
Hood: You know, it really depends on where the noise is coming from for the most part.
I mean noise that is happening further away from the wall is going to carry over the wall.
If it's dumpsters and things that are closer to the wall, it actually will do a better job of
screening that. Cars driving down there, you're right, I mean it will do better, it sounds
like, than the cedar fence that's there now. Will it totally abate the noise, I don't think so.
So, you know, without there being some type of noise study, we won't be able to tell but
O'Brien: Yeah. I didn't know if there had been a study done on noise abatement
pertaining to concrete or a brick wall, if one was better than the other, or a double wall
with space in between, you know, that kind of thing. So, I didn't know if the city had
experience with that in other areas.
Hood: Again, Mr. Chair, Commissioner O'Brien, I can't think of any instances -- they are
really site specific and I can't recall some of those instances and what the conclusions
were of what would be the best -- I don't recall any side by side or some spacing with a
double wall -- the taller the wall, sometimes even an eight foot tall is going to be better
than a six foot tall. I'm not proposing that, but a lot of times that is something that is
allowed in the commercial district and it helps to prevent some of the other things you
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 45 of 62
have heard about tonight Scaling an eight foot wall is a little bit more difficult than a six,
so --
O'Brien: Thank you. Appreciate it. That's alii have.
Rohm: Okay. Before we have the applicant come back up, I have one more question.
In your staff report did you recommend that we require them to change the buffer to
match the current code for C-C from what it currently is? Is that in the staff report,
Amanda?
Hess: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, no, it is not. Staff only
recommended that additional trees and landscaping be provided within the existing
buffer. Because the site is existing, it just seemed a little impractical for the property
owner to have to retrofit the site, to rip out concrete curbing and, you know, asphalt, to,
then, put a new curbing with additional landscaping -- you know, which, essentially,
would just be sod, you know, grass and whatnot. So, it sounds like it might be more
appropriate than to require some sort of, you know, fencing and additional trees to fit
what the neighbors are looking for.
Rohm: Okay. Thank you. I appreciate your comments there. Is there anyone else that
would like to testify on a first time basis before we ask the applicant to come back up?
Okay. At this time would the applicant like to come back up? And I don't really care
which one of you comes forward, but, basically, the comments from the field have been
primarily due to the noise.
Moe: Mr. Chairman, I'm glad he's come up, but we probably want to have the developer
come up as well, because I do have definitely a question for --
Rohm: Absolutely.
Fieldstad: Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission, Eric Fieldstad, 12979 West Bain
Court, Boise. I will be very specific. The opening of the store was a good faith mistake
and I take responsibility for it. It's my understanding that children's toys, accessories
like helmets, repair parts, and light maintenance were part of the authorization given.
As soon as it was brought to my attention I met with the code enforcement officer,
asked of the staff for an immediate meeting, which they responded within 24 hours, and
I offered to the city staff to close, so there was no further continuance of violation, either
perceived or actual. So, I take responsibility. The sale of the vehicle that was out in
front was a private thing and was removed. So, that was not in my jurisdiction. Just a
couple of very minor points. We appreciate the consideration of it. Scooters have been
the fastest growing segment of the motorcycle industry for the past five years. We hope
you see that the addition of our store as a positive contribution to this great community
and we appreciate your consideration.
Rohm: Thank you.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 46 of 62
Brown: Richard Brown, number 24 South 600 East in Salt Lake City, Utah.
Moe: Mr. Brown, I guess, you know, the main thing I wanted to get -- you're looking to
change the zoning from the C-N to C-C. On the report you have stated that the
properties to the east of Linder Road there are -- are zoned the C-C and, therefore, you
were wanting to have the same designation. Those properties over there, they are
bound with a perimeter block wall and whatnot through there. Actually, when they __
probably 18 months ago or whatever, when they were going to do some expansion
farther to the east, they came before us and we had also told them if you want to
expand you're going to have to go ahead and match out your block wall all the way
around, again, because going with the C-C zoning. So, I guess my question to you is --
is if, in fact, we were going to be looking to go to a C-C zoning on your property would
you be willing to put up a block wall around your perimeter?
Brown: We have looked into the cost of that. The approximate cost is 31,000 dollars to
do that. That's a pretty significant investment for us, you know, on this piece of property
that's been existing for ten plus years now. If I have to do it in order to change the
zoning, you know, I'd consider it. Do the neighbors want to participate in that cost? It's
adding to the value of their property as well. I don't know. I don't think so from that
comment.
Rohm: It doesn't sound like it.
Moe: You didn't anticipate getting a different answer, did you?
Brown: You know, as far as the -- as far as the additional plantings and those kind of
things, you know, we would be -- we are willing to work anyway we can to help it. I don't
think that we have been totally intolerant of our neighbors in the past. You know, we
have heard complaints in the neighborhood meeting about the -- the garbage service.
Well, there is a restriction in Meridian city limits, you can't pick up garbage in
commercial areas until after 7:00 o'clock in the morning. Ours gets picked up at 11 :00.
We have asked them to change and they did change. The six foot cedar board fence
was installed when they created the subdivision. We maintain it, the homeowners have
maintained it, it's in good shape, it does its job, but, you know, as far as a six or an eight
foot block fence, that's a pretty expensive.investment for us. We'd have to consider that
I think.
Moe: Thank you very much.
Brown: But we will consider that. Any other questions?
Moe: That's alii had.
Rohm: Okay. I think at this time it's appropriate to close the Public Hearing and, then,
we can have some internal discussion amongst the Commission.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 47 of 62
Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Chair?
Rohm: Commissioner Newton-Huckabay.
Newton-Huckabay: I propose we close the Public Hearing on RZ 07-008 and CUP 07-
007,
Siddoway: Second.
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to close the Public Hearing on RZ 07-008 and
CUP 07-007. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Rohm: Okay. Commissioner Moe, would you care to --
Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Chair? Actually, Commissioner Siddoway is looking at the C-C
zoning and has some comments on there. I think it would probably benefit all of us if he
were to go first.
Rohm: Well, thank you for your input. Commissioner Siddoway, why don't you go first
this time.
Siddoway: Such pressure. Okay. I'm going to take them one at a time. On the rezone,
I don't have any particular objection to rezoning in order to accommodate this use as a
conditional use. I have been looking at the zone and looking for those -- the intense --
the more intense uses that the C-C zone would allow that the C-N zone does not. They
actually are quite similar to one another through most of their uses, but there are three
that -- in particular that I saw of some concern. One is fuel sales, one is the vehicular
washing facility, and a third one is building materials. Now, two of those three exist on
the site now as conditional uses and the change in zoning would make them permitted.
Should those uses propose expansions of any type in the future, I would want to see
those remain as conditional uses, so that the neighbors would have a Public Hearing to
testify at regarding any expansion of a car wash or the fuel sales. Therefore, on the
rezone side, as part of the development agreement, I would propose that those three
uses specifically remain conditional in order to address the potential future impacts that
the rezone could create for the -- for the subdivision. Regarding -- there wasn't much
discussion on this one, but I want to bring it up, just because it was the first issue in the
staff report for outstanding issues, and that is the traffic safety and access management
and I would just say in relation to that, my thoughts are that, you know, I would support
additional access management, but I don't want to -- I don't feel this is the time part of
this, because just sticking up a sign that says change to right-in, right-out only doesn't
really change anything and creates an enforcement headache. But knowing that a
future road project is coming that could install medians or something that forced those
changes, I would just go on the record and -- that I would support that as part of the
future road project, but not as a condition of this application. On the -- the Conditional
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 48 of 62
Use Permit, the noise is the big issue for me. I -- as staff, I dealt with noise a lot and __
well -- and I didn't particularly find any benefit to the block wall for noise issues. The
noise just seems to travel over the wall and as commercial areas have gone in, the
noise complaints are still -- still come in with the -- in areas where there are block walls.
So, you know, I could support one, but I don't think it's really going to address the noise
issue. So, in my mind I'm thinking how do we address the noise issue and the no test
rides on the site seem to help that. There needs to be no outdoor sales. The sales
need to be kept indoors. I don't think there is enough parking to accommodate taking
up parking spaces with vehicles that would be for sale. I think the rear doors need to be
closed whenever operating power tools. I think it's accommodations like that that are
going to make the biggest difference in -- in the noise. So, that's -- that's my thought. I
would support the addition of landscaping. I keep trying to think of a place to move that
dumpster, because I would not like to hear that slammed at all hours of the night, but I
don't know if there is -- well, I don't know if there is anything we can do with -- Amanda,
does the existing landscape buffer end at this point here? This looks like asphalt from
that point on. I'm just -- but it looks like there is some trees here, so I'm trying to figure
out what's going on on the site.
Hess: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, actually, at the widest point the
landscape buffer is -- is here and I think in my staff report it talked about being 19 feet
wide, which, then, at this point abruptly -- you know, a 90 degree turn, comes down to
11 feet wide over on these two lots. I think that answers your question.
Siddoway: So -- and this is you say 19?
Hess: Nineteen. Correct. This is 19 feet wide.
Siddoway: So, close to the 20 foot buffer required between land uses.
Hess: Correct.
Siddoway: Inside that 11 foot buffer -- I think that that would accommodate the
dumpster enclosure, but if it were -- the enclosure were relocated further from the
residences -- I'd certainly entertain the idea. I don't -- anyway, I'll let my comments
stand there and move to hear from any of the Commissioners and --
Rohm: Thank you, Commissioner Siddoway. Commissioner O'Brien, did you have
some additional comments?
O'Brien: Yeah, I really do need to comment on a few things. I really seriously listened
to -- as I always do to all the comments from both the applicant and the homeowners
around there. And I have really looked into this as much as I could for as much
experience I have in this Commission. You know, there was a reason why they zoned it
C-N really and I really feel strongly that that reason was for the issues that we are
seeing before us tonight. To change it to C-C, I think -- I'd have to agree that I think we
are opening up a problem. And, you know, I think we look at this thing with all the
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 49 of 62
Band-Aids looking to put in place, I just don't think that's going to work. That's my
personal opinion. I just don't think it's a good idea at this time to change that particular
thing. There is too many little problems that are going to creep up and they are going to
really blow us away there. That's all I have to say.
Rohm: Thank you, Commissioner O'Brien. Commissioner Newton-Huckabay?
Newton-Huckabay: Given that two of the uses in -- on the property are C-C uses,
makes somewhat for me the zoning a little bit of a moot issue. I think we, actually, give
ourselves more power by -- if we were to move forward with a conditional use of the
three uses that Commissioner Siddoway was talking about. It does insure that should
expansion or some other changes take place on that property, that it comes before the
Commission and the neighbors again. I'm not sure if that would have otherwise.
Regarding the traffic, just stopped at Maverick on my way in tonight. That is very busy.
I also agree that we aren't going to get a real benefit until the road is expanded. I live
off of Linder myself in north Meridian. If we could put some gas stations on some other
corners besides this one, I think we would all be happier. I would like to see a block
wall to mirror the block walls that have come on the other properties that are zoned C-C.
I will, I'm certain, be requiring one on the northeast corner when it comes through with
that commercial in the future. We haven't seen that one yet, have we? The northeast
corner. Did we? Okay. Did we require a block wall? We will. That one is the church?
Hood: Mr. Chair, Commissioner Newton-Huckabay, the church abuts that, 50 it's a little
bit different situation, where the other ones are residential directly adjacent. The church
use is directly adjacent to those three homes that are there. So, there was no
requirement for a block wall.
Newton-Huckabay: Okay. There wasn't -- okay. Now, I want -- yeah. I guess would
like to see a block wall and the additional landscaping. Generally, when I envision what
goes in this strip mall -- because I do go in this area, too, this isn't the type of business
that I really envision going in there. So, I'm not really sure where -- where I stand on it.
I think that the scooter industry is only going to get more and more popular as we get
closer and closer to five dollars a gallon for gas, so -- I'm going to have to end my
comments there. I just am not sure where I'm going to vote on -- on the CUP at this
time. But I would vote in favor of the C-C zoning with the -- with the addition of a block
wall, with moving the dumpster, and additional landscaping, trees, and such. Oh. And
the conditional uses on those -- those three uses that are different from the C-N zone.
End of comment.
Rohm: Thank you. Commissioner Moe.
Moe: I'm confused now. Number one, I am an offender. I have been in that parking lot
and I do go through the parking lot to get to the west out and go. I'm guilty. I have done
that many times, as a matter of fact, because there is not a lot in and out and it's a
pretty tough place to be anytime you're in there. We talked about traffic. Dominoes is
the traffic there, folks. I mean is that -- that's a race track over there when they are in
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 50 of 62
and out. That place is very busy all the time. The likelihood of them trying to service
scooters in the front of that building, that's going to be a hazard more than anything else
and my concern is that you could start doing that and then, you're going to find that that
is going to be a problem and, therefore, then, you're in the back trying to take care of it.
So, therefore, then, you got your noise in the back. I'm going to jump around here a
little bit. The C-N to the C-C, I don't have a problem going to the C-C, simply because
of the fact that we already have uses that are in there, but I, too, think if you're going to
go to C-C, I would like to see a block wall, because I do believe you will get -- with a full
grouted block wall you will get some sound deadening at that point, which would be very
helpful. But at the same time I just -- with the amount of traffic there and everything
else, I think it's going to be very hard, you know, for the applicant to be able to truthfully
plan to service everything out the front and the understanding that you want to be a very
good neighbor and work with the neighborhood on that, I just -- I'm having a real
problem that that can happen, just for the simple fact of what I have seen happen in that
parking lot. Again, I'm one of those offenders through there. So, a couple things. I
think the business itself, definitely would like to see it in Meridian. At this location, I'm
having a hard time with it, no doubt about it. So, as far as the zoning, I would -- I would
probably approve a -- to go to the C-C with that, looking for a block wall. As far as the
CUP --
Siddoway: With the block wall, is the use acceptable with the CUP or --
Moe: Well, I would lean towards approval on the CUP. Well, I'm still not, quite frankly,
convinced of what I want to do with the CUP for the business being in that location. I
guess the one thing I would just add to it all, the one thing I was a little bit surprised at --
a little bit -- we have had the neighbors show up, but the direct neighbors to this facility,
no one's here for either Dominoes or the movie theater. I realize they are tenants of this
development, but they evidently don't have a problem with a scooter shop going in
between, so that would be my comments.
Rohm: Boy, I don't know who is going to make the motion, but it will be --
Commissioner O'Brien.
O'Brien: Yeah. Regarding the block wall you have to understand the -- what we are
talking about here. A concrete wall of any type is not an absorptive material, it's a
reflector. It reflects sound back and echoes. It's going to hit the back of those buildings
back there and reflect back over the top anyway. You're not going to deaden the sound
with a block wall. It's not going to happen. It's just not going to go away.
Newton-Huckabay: Well, there is nothing we can do that's going to make the sound on
this property go away, because it's got a pizza parlor, a movie gallery, a furniture store,
a gas station, and a car wash.
O'Brien: I agree with that, but the only thing I think of -- right now the only problem we
have right now is the dumpster making the noise. We had a store there with other
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 51 of 62
potential noise makers, the scooters, et cetera, then, you have got more problems.
Moe: Well, each one of those -- each one of those stores has a dumpster to deal with.
O'Brien: Yeah.
Rohm: Okay.
Newton-Huckabay: My personal opinion is that the car wash probably makes more
noise than anything on that site, with those vacuums and et cetera. And, then -- but I __
Rohm: My last final comments on this application are that the C-C is the predominate
use within this development currently and -- as in the Maverick and the car wash are
almost half of this whole development and to grant a conversion from C-N to C-C seems
to be in order from that perspective alone. The noise that currently exists within this
total development, my personal opinion is isn't going to be significantly changed by the
addition of the scooter store. That's -- that's just my opinion. I do think that it is
appropriate to require that the developer enhance the existing buffer zone and if that
means doubling the number of trees that are there or -- I kind of agree with
Commissioner O'Brien that a block wall won't do much to remove the noise, but possibly
the absorption of noise by a more solid tree line from east to west may be more
appropriate than a block wall. But the fact of the matter is is that is a very very busy
commercial development and it has been for a number of years and whether you put a
scooter store in or not, it's going to be a very well developed commercial section and in
my mind what we can do today is help alleviate some of those things that currently exist
by the granting of a rezone and the conditional use and overall I believe that the
benefits to the community will be enhanced. That's my thoughts. So, with that being
said, I think that pretty well concludes each of us voicing our opinion and I'd like to hear
a motion. And, Mr. Siddoway, you seem to have had the best handle on the various
ordinances and so would you care to give it a shot?
Siddoway: I will give it a shot.
Rohm: Okay. Thank you.
Siddoway: Mr. Chairman, after considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I
move to recommend -- I'm going to do these one at a time -- approval to the City
Council of RZ 07-008, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of May 3rd,
2007, with the following modifications to the staff report. In the development agreement
I would propose that the following three uses for the site be conditional uses and not
permitted uses. They would include fuel sales, vehicle car washing facilities, and
building material sales. Further, I would like to see the dumpster location relocated to
the east, so that it's -- instead of being adjacent to the residential -- Vienna Woods
Subdivision, it's --
Newton-Huckabay: Vineyards.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 52 of 62
Siddoway: Oh. Vineyards. Thank you. Sorry. Vineyards Subdivision. It shifts at least
to where it's adjacent to the church parking. And, then, I'd like to see the landscape
buffer area along the south enhanced -- and I realize this is partly addressed -- I'd like to
emphasize that it needs to be a solid vegetative screen, because I think the vegetation
will help do more to buffer sound. End of motion.
Newton-Huckabay: So, you're not proposing a new fence?
Siddoway: I did not propose the block wall.
Rohm: Could I get a second? Okay. I'm going to second that. I think I -- as Chairman
I can second that. So, it's been moved and seconded that we forward onto City Council
recommending approval of RZ 07 -008, to include all staff reports, with the
aforementioned modification. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign?
Siddoway: Motion failed.
Rohm: Motion didn't pass.
MOTION FAILED: TWO AYES. THREE NAYS.
Rohm: Okay. So--
Moe: Mr. Chairman, could I get a clarification of the maker of the motion earlier?
Rohm: Yes.
Moe: In regards to the landscaping, you were just looking for a -- a little bit more
screening of that or are we looking to widen that and put more vegetation in there? Just
exactly what were you looking at there?
Siddoway: I'm looking to add trees within the existing width, but enough trees to make it
a solid screen.
Moe: Okay. Mr. Chairman, the staff -- Amanda, could you -- you talked earlier about
the width of that area and that takes us from -- from the strip mall area just to the east to
the Dominoes; is that correct? Was how wide?
Hess: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, the landscape buffer up to this
point, which, actually, this is the Dominoes right here, the line divides it right here, that is
where the 19, 20 foot wide landscape buffer ends and it tapers down to a 11 feet to the
rest of the property here.
Moe: So, Mr. Siddoway, you were speaking of just the 19 foot wide area that you would
do additional screening in?
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 53 of 62
Siddoway: I think that's the most concern. I could -- I think there is room with the 19
feet to do evergreen trees. In 11 feet I don't think there is room to do the width of the
base for evergreen trees, but I could say requiring the additional trees that are added to
evergreens, so that they, you know, have their foliage year around and provide buffer
year around. But I think it would need to be something else.
Rohm: The arborvitaes I think could --
Siddoway: You could use the arborvitaes and junipers that were talked about in the last
application in the narrower areas.
Moe: I guess I would be kind of curious to at least get some additional landscaping east
of -- you know.
Siddoway: I would support that.
Moe: To the church parking lot
Siddoway: You bet.
Moe: Basically, what I'm looking at is if, in fact, we don't do the full expanse of a block
wall and whatnot, that I would like to see that all the way through there with
landscaping, so I --
Siddoway: Yeah. Entire south side.
Moe: Yes.
O'Brien: I need to ask a question on the -- so, you didn't mention a block wall being
added to your proposal, but does the current receptacle -- the trash receptacle have -- is
it out in the open? I don't know. How do I find that out? Is it surrounded by a block
wall, like so many businesses have?
Hood: Mr. Chair, Commissioner O'Brien, any relocation of the dumpster will require
three sided screening. So, it's open on one side so SSC can get at it, but screened on
the other three sides.
O'Brien: Right. I have seen a lot of businesses have walls around a -- the trash area,
which maybe would satisfy some of the concerns of not having to build a block wall all
the way around the building, but maybe if the trash receptacle is such an issue, that
might be --
Rohm: I think what he's saying that if we relocate the dumpster, the relocated, sir, will
have a block wall on three sides around.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 54 of 62
O'Brien: A screen or something.
Rohm: No. The relocated dumpster would be required to have a block wall around
three sides with access from the -- in this case it would be the north side.
Hood: Mr. Chair, I should clarify. It could be a cedar fence, too. It just needs to be
screened. So, it wouldn't be -- it wouldn't have to be a block wall, it would just need to
be screened with a solid material. So, they could do wood fencing or some other way to
screen -- visually screen, not noise screen. So, that's by ordinance. I'm just telling you
what the UDC says.
Rohm: And we can stipulate what --
Hood: You bet. You bet.
Rohm: -- wall would be required.
Hood: Yes, sir.
Moe: I guess I'd just make a point on that. Quite frankly, unless you're moving the
trash to the north side of the building, you're still going to hear it.
O'Brien: Yeah.
Moe: Whatever you do it's still going to be there. I'm sure it's going to be in the back of
the building somewhere and that sound is going to be there. So, I don't -- I don't know
what we are gaining by moving it a little farther to the east or putting something around
it I think, basically, a call to SEC or SSC -- anyway --
Newton-Huckabay: We feel better.
Moe: Yeah. Anyway -- so, if the maker of the former motion, if you'd like to redo that a
little bit, with maybe some of the stuff we have discussed, maybe we will get a different
opinion.
Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Chair, I want to add -- I'm going back and reviewing my notes
and the letters from the neighbors and it mentioned enough interest in a block wall did
come up that I found a couple times, so I would still like to see with that zoning change
the addition of a block wall.
Rohm: Mr. Siddoway, would you like to restate your -- or make another motion to see if
we can get some concurrence?
Siddoway: I'm just trying to -- I'm not sure I understand the additions that you're looking
for, Commissioner Moe.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 55 of 62
Moe: Well, you -- in your earlier motion you were not taking your landscape all the way
to the east --
Siddoway: Okay.
Moe: You were just looking to do some more in that nine foot wide area only and not
the rest of it. And just a comment to Commissioner Huckabay __
Newton-Huckabay: Newton-Huckabay.
Moe: Newton-Huckabay. Excuse me. And that would be -- I, too, would like to see the
block wall, but at the same point with the fact that the Maverick and the car wash are
already -- are, basically, a C-C right now and all they would to do is go back in for, you
know, a CUP for any expansion like we talked earlier, the likelihood of them getting that
would probably -- possibly could happen. So, my point is is I think if we could get some
additional screening and whatnot -- I would think I'm going to be in favor of not putting a
block wall, because I realize they want it, but I think that's probably more of a burden to
the developer and it's not necessary, considering the fact that what Maverick and the
car wash are already in for the C-C.
Rohm: Okay. Commissioner Siddoway, I think we are ready.
Siddoway: Okay, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to make a motion that -- to recommend
approval to the City Council of RZ 07 -008, with the requirement added in the
development agreement that fuel sales, vehicular -- vehicle washing facilities and
building material sales are all conditional uses on the site. That the landscape buffer
along the entire south boundary of the project be beefed up with additional landscaping,
preferably evergreen where ever the width allows it, but -- and possibly all the way
across if the arborvitaes and junipers will suffice. But I'd like to really see trees of some
form along that entire south property line within the existing landscape areas. I would
also like to see the dumpster relocated to the east still and I would actually support that
relocated dumpster required to be within a concrete block enclosure on at least three
sides and in compliance with screening requirements per city code. End of motion.
Moe: I'll second.
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to forward onto City Council recommending
approval of RZ 07-008, to include all staff report, with the aforementioned modification.
All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? And just to get an accurate
assessment here, I believe Commissioner O'Brien and Newton-Huckabay voted against
it and Commissioner Siddoway, Moe and Rohm voted for it. Motion passes.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. TWO NAYS.
Rohm: We still have the Conditional Use Permit to address and, Commissioner
Siddoway, I think you're on a roll.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 56 of 62
Siddoway: Well, Mr. Chairman, I am in favor of the use. I do share the concerns about
the noise. I'll just try to make this into a motion. After considering all staff, applicant,
and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to City Council of CUP 07-007, as
presented in the staff report for the hearing date of May 3rd, 2007, with the following
additional conditions: That -- to emphasize that no outdoor sales are permitted. That
there be no test rides on the site. And that the rear doors be closed whenever power
tools are being used. End of motion.
Rohm: Second. It's been moved and seconded that we forward onto -- well, no, that
we approve CUP 07-007, all those --
Hess: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, because you have a rezone in
conjunction with the Conditional Use Permit --
Rohm: Oh, it will go onto City Council.
Hess: -- it will go onto City Council.
Rohm: Okay. All right. Excuse me. Then, let me restate this. At this time we have a
motion and a second to forward onto City Council recommending approval of CUP 07-
007, to include all staff report, with the aforementioned additional conditions. All those
in favor say aye. Opposed the same sign? There are three votes against and two in
favor. Motion denied.
MOTION FAILED: TWO AYES. THREE NAYS:
Rohm: I don't think that we can leave this just hanging as it is, so I --
Siddoway: Let's have some discussion.
Rohm: Let's have some more discussion here. To start off with, one of you that have
voted against the motion, I'd like to hear from Commission Moe. What would it take to
get your approval on this?
Moe: Mr. Chair, I -- again, I'm very concerned about the use at this facility at this site.
As far as trying to service the scooters and whatnot, the discussion of doing that to the
north, that really had -- it did not come up in the -- in the motion that it would be done
there, but at the same point now you're asking for code enforcement to verify that all the
time and I just don't see that that's going to be done. I'm just not sure that this is a good
location, you know, for this business and I'm having a hard time trying to accept that it
can be run in a safe manner at this location.
Rohm: Thank you.
Newton-Huckabay: Without--
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 57 of 62
Rohm; Commissioner Newton-Huckabay.
Newton-Huckabay: Well, it's an enforcement nightmare with all the conditions put on
the operation. I will offer an alternative. After considering all staff, applicant, and public
testimony, I move to recommend denial to the City Council of file number CUP 07-007
as presented in the Public Hearing on May 3rd for the following reasons: We do not feel
that the use of a small motorcycle store is appropriate in this particular area and that it
would not be compatible with the uses and residences around it. End of motion.
O'Brien: Second.
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to forward onto City Council recommending
denial of CUP 07-007. All those in --
Nary: Mr. Chairman? Mr. Chairman, before you vote on that motion, you're going to
need to include more reasons as to what they could do to be approved. Just so you
know, when -- I guess you could vote on this motion. If the motion is approved you're
going to have to establish a record as to what they could do to be approved. The state
law requires that.
Newton-Huckabay: Okay. I apologize.
Nary: That's fine.
Newton-Huckabay: For me the deal breaker, personally, was the block wall.
Mae: That's a different motion.
Newton-Huckabay: I understand that, but not having a block wall around the
development was -- or for the intention of putting one, was a deal breaker for me. And-
- do you have anything to add?
O'Brien: Well, yeah, concerns I had were several of the homeowners expressed those.
Safety is one. Noise is the other. But the misuse of the intent of that business is what I
was really concerned with. Again, like was just mentioned, I think was that we could
have all the intention in the world, but we are going to be bandaiding this thing forever. I
just don't think it's going to work. I just don't think it's a good -- good place to put this
type of function or business in that particular area. It just doesn't make sense to me.
Like I said earlier, it was zoned for C-N for a reason and to change it, even though it
was voted for, but it's -- still I just don't think it's going to be a good step.
Rohm: Is that sufficient to --
Newton-Huckabay: I doubt it.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 58 of 62
Rohm: Pardon?
Newton-Huckabay: I doubt it.
Nary: Mr. Chairman?
Moe: I -- I'm sorry.
Nary: Oh, no, go ahead.
Moe: I guess the only point that I would probably make is that one of the ways I would
assume that I would probably vote on it is -- if there was no service component to this
facility. It would basically be a sale only, no service, then, I would probably go for it.
O'Brien: I could go for that.
Moe: Because of the components of the service aspect of it, those are my concerns,
and what happens during the service aspect.
Newton-Huckabay: I hadn't thought of that, but I do agree with that. That seems to be
where we are placing all the restrictions --
Moe: Yes.
Newton-Huckabay: -- on the business. Again, I'm not known to be a huge proponent of
restricting hours and that type of thing, so maybe those restricted hours for me as well.
So, cinder block fence, no service component in the business --
Moe: Actually, the hours were fine. They were going to do it until 6:00 p.m.
Newton-Huckabay: Yeah.
Mae: I have no problem with that. I would have no problem with the --
Newton-Huckabay: Okay. I won't add that in.
Mae: But the service aspect I think is the main component.
Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Nary does that --
Nary: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, Commissioner Newton-Huckabay,
maybe I misheard it, but I thought part of your original concern was the sales operation
as well in that particular location. Now, maybe -- is that no longer a concern? I did hear
that service use -- it would be very difficult to establish as a -- reason what they could do
to be approved is to assure that their intent wouldn't change. I don't think we could
really do that. But that there is not adequate sound buffering, even with the addition of
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 59 of 62
the landscaping is one thing I have heard. The service component and the restrictions
that are necessary to even attempt to make it compatible, is something they would have
to change, but -- did I misunderstand? I thought there was some concerns about the
constrictions in that lot in regards to the parking or in regards to the front of the building,
to be able to even operate the sales, if they are going to be out in the front of that. Now,
maybe I misunderstood that.
Newton-Huckabay: Me specifically, no--
Nary: Okay.
Newton-Huckabay: -- that was not my concern.
Nary: Okay. Okay. So, it's just the service component and the fact that the buffering
between the neighborhood and the business, that the vegetation -- the increased
vegetation wasn't adequate. There would have to be an addition to that. Okay. That's
fine.
Newton-Huckabay: Can that stand on my amended motion, without making it again?
Rohm: Works for me.
Newton-Huckabay: Okay.
Nary: One more question, I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman. Commissioner O'Brien also
brought up the safety aspect, I think, of the lot and the constriction. Is that everyone's
concern as well about being able to operate the business or is that connected to the
service part of the business or both?
O'Brien: To me it's both.
Newton-Huckabay: I have no safety as part of my motion. Is not the most safest
intersection and parking lot, but I don't feel like this use is going to -- in my motion I do
not feel like the use of this -- of a scooter store would make it anymore unsafe.
O'Brien: But -- can I reiterate something?
Rohm: Absolutely.
Newton-Huckabay: It depends on if you're trying to add it to my motion.
O'Brien: The concern I had with the safety is that when you go and purchase
something, like you purchase a car, you got to test drive it. You're going to ride that
thing somewhere. That's a safety concern for the neighborhood and for the people in
and around. So, along with that service issue, we have test driving of these vehicles.
Where is it going to be done? It's going to be done in and around the -- the business.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 60 of 62
Newton-Huckabay: I guess those are public roads.
Nary: Mr. Chairman, I think part of the staffs recommendation and what was proposed
was that they would not be test driving the vehicles on the site. So, I think they have
addressed that. So, I don't think we could use that as a basis of what they could do to
be approved.
Rohm: I think the two other issues, the service and the noise abatement, that you had
addressed those --
Newton-Huckabay: Yeah. Those have been for reasons --
Rohm: For denial.
Newton-Huckabay: Or things they could do to reverse -- okay. My motion is still to
recommend denial. Those two activities could take place to reverse that decision.
Clear?
Moe: I would second that.
Newton-Huckabay: Caleb's got me.
Rohm: All right. Okay. I think that the intent of that motion is understood. All those __
it's been moved and seconded to forward onto City Council recommending denial of
CUP 07-007, to include all staff report and the aforementioned modification based upon
sound barrier and servicing -- servicing of the scooters. All those in favor say aye. All
those opposed say aye. There are three in favor of the motion of denial and two against
it, so motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. TWO NAYS.
Rohm: Both of these items will be heard again before City Council. This is a
recommending body and they will be heard again and so for those of you that have
spent your evening with us, thank you very much, and you will get one more shot at it.
Thanks for coming in.
Item 11:
Public Hearing: RZ 07-008 Request for a Rezone of approximately 4
acres from a C-N zone to a C-C zone for Lots 1 - 5, Block 1 of the Corner
at Vineyards Subdivision for Cherry Wood Village by Richard Brown and
Roy Brown - SWC of Cherry Lane and Linder Road:
Item 12:
Public Hearing: CUP 07-007 Request for a Conditional Use Permit to
allow retail sale and service of motor scooters within the C-C zoning
district on Lot 3, Block 1, of the Corner at Vineyards Subdivision for
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 61 of 62
Cherry Wood Village by Richard Brown and Roy Brown - SWC of Cherry
Lane and Linder Road:
Rohm: Okay. At this time I'd like to open the Public Hearing of PP 07-009 and CUP 07-
008, for the sole purpose of continuing these items to the regularly scheduled meeting
of May 17th.
13. Public Hearing: PP 07-009 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 52
residential lots, 2 office/commercial lots and 10 common lots on 19.80 acres in
an L-O zone for Meadowlake Village North by Touchmark of the Treasure
Valley, LLC - SEC of Franklin Road and Touchmark Way:
14. Public Hearing: CUP 07-008 Request for a Conditional Use Permit approval to
create 52 residential lots, 2 office/commercial lots and 10 common lots in an L-O
zone for Meadowlake Village North by Touchmark of the Treasure Valley, LLC
- SEC of Franklin Road and Touchmark Way:
Moe: So moved.
Siddoway: Second.
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to continue Items PP 07-009 and CUP 07-008,
to the regularly scheduled meeting of May 17th. All those in favor say aye. Opposed
same sign? Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Rohm: One more motion, please.
Siddoway: Mr. Chairman, I move to adjourn.
Moe: Second.
Newton-Huckabay: Second.
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to adjourn. All those in favor say aye. Opposed
same sign? Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Rohm: Good night.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
May 3, 2007
Page 62 of 62
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:06 P.M.
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
APPROW
t
CHAIRMAN MICHAEL E. ROHM
ATTEST