The URL can be used to link to this page

2008 03-20d Zonina M March 20. 200 Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of March 20, 2008, was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Vice;~Chairman Wendy Newton-Huckabay. Members Present: Commissioner Joe Marshall, Vice-Chairman Wendy Newton- Huckabay and Commissioner Tom ~O'Brien. Members Absent: Chairman David~[~Moe, Commissioner Michael Rohm. Others Present: Ted Baird, Mac Scott Steckline and Dean Willis. Itern 1: Roll-Call Attendan Roll-call X Wendy Newto O Michael Roh le Hill, Caleb Hood, Sonya Watters, Bill Parsons, uckabay X Tom OBrien X Joe Marshall ~vid Moe - Chairman Newton-Huckabay: Good eveningl~ I want to welcome you to the regularly scheduled Planning and Zoning meeting for March 20th, 2008. I'd like to call this meeting to order and have the clerk call roll. ~~ Item 2: Adoption of the Agen''da: Newton-Huckabay: Okay. We ha~e one item -- I just want to make an announcement that if you're here for Item No. 4, ~he Overland Village; our intention is to open fhat continued Public Hearing for the sole purpose of continuing it to May 1 st, 2008. And with that I will ask for adoption of fhe~agenda. Marshall: I so move. O'Brien: Second. Newton-Huckabay: Okay. So, the agenda is adopted. Item 3: Consent Agenda: A. Approve Min Commission ~ Newton-Huckabay: And we are there any changes to the March 6, of March 6, 2008 Planning and Zoning ng: king for adoption also of the Consent Agenda. Is 08. minutes? O'Brien: I have none. Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 2 of 57 Marshall: None. Newton-Huckabay: So, I'd like adoption of fhat agenda. Marshall: Madam Chair, I move tha"t we adopt the agenda. Newton-Huckabay: Consent Agenda. Marshall: Consent Agenda. Newton-Huckabay: I'm winging it. It's my first time acting as chair, so -- we are halfinray through, so - Item 4: Continued Public Hearing from February 21, 2008: AZ 08-001 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 9.06 acres from the RUT & R1 zoning districts in Ada County to fhe C-G zoning district for Overland Village by Relo Development - 3330 E. Overland Road: Newton-Huckabay: Okay. I'd like to open Item No. 4-- oh, I'll open this and move it -- continue it. Item No. 4, fhe continued Public Hearing from February 21 st, 2008, AZ 08- 001, request for annexation and zoning of 8.06 acres from RUT and R-1 zoning districts in Ada County, to the C-G zoning+~district for Overland Village by Relo Development, 3330 East Overland Road, to be co,ntinued to May 1 st. O'Brien: So moved. Newton-Huckabay: Second? Marshall: Second. Newton-Huckabay: Move that item to May 1 st. Newton-Huckabay: Okay. So, I se'e a lot of familiar faces, so I'll go through the rules of fhe meeting raiher quickly. Procedurally, we will hear from staff first, then, the applicant and, then, the public will have a chance to testify third. The staff is reviewing each applicafiion based on its adherence to Comprehensive Plan and city ordinance. Applicant will have 15 minutes to re~spond to fhe Commission and, essentially, sell their product -- project. Public, you will h~ave three minutes apiece to state your concerns. If you have a homeowners association, they will have up to ten minutes if they are speaking for other members of the`audience. Only one person can speak at a time. You do have to come to the podium to speak and you need to state your name and address prior to speaking. If you n~otice here we have a light system. You will have a green light when you're speaking. If it turns to yeilow that means you have approximately 30 seconds before ffi~e end of your three minutes and, then, when the red light goes off we, please, ask that you wrap it up as quickly as possible. You do need to Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 3 of 57 -- again, to speak directly into th audience, we won't be able to put relinquish your right to speak if yo~ will make a note for the record th applicant will have an opportuni conclude the Public Hearing. Th adequate information, we will mo~ fhe nature of fhe application. microphone. If you do make a comment from the on the record, so I would only ask if you're going to ~igned up, you may say that from the audience and I e. Let's see. Once all fihe pubiic has testified, fhe to respond to your testimony and, then, we will Commission will have deliberations and if we have fhis onto City Council or approval, depending upon Item 5: Continued Public He'aring from March 6, 2008: AZ 08-003 Request for Annexation and Zoni~ng of 12.06 acres from RUT to R-40 (10.56 acres) and C-C (1.15 acres)~zones for Reqencv at River Vallev (REVISED) by Mason & Stanfield - 2~500 N. Eagle Road: Item 6: Continued Public He~aring from March 6, 2008: CUP 08-004 Request for Conditional Use P~ermit for a multi-family development in a proposed R- 40 zoning district fortReqencv at River Valley by Mason & Stanfield - 2500 North Eagle Road: Newton-Huckabay: So, with that continued Public Mearing from Ma 08-004, for the Regency at River V Watters: Thank you, Commissioi 12.06 acres of land and it's curreni at 2,500 North Eagle Road, appro~ intersection on the east side of Eac site is directly north of the Meridi< annexation here. This is an aeria landscape plan that was submittec in accordance with staff and Cc access has been added on the required by fhe fire department. A accessible by emergency personnE along the north property boundary wide meandering multi-use pathwa River Valley Road as required by t boundary are still shown within the applicant states fhat Nampa-Meric easement and lateral 20 feet furth~ outside of the new easement. Thc has been added to the west side o proposed building elevations for th buildings A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H an and this is an elevation of the clubl fhese are the proposed common ~aid, we will move onto Item No. 5, which is the :h 6th, 2008, and Item No. 6, for AZ 08-003, CUP ley. srs. Just to recap real quick; the site consists of ~ zoned RUT in the Ada County. The site is located mately a half mile north of the Fairview-Eagle Road e Road, as you can see here on the overhead. The ~ Town Center site that was recenfily approved for view of the property. This is their revised site and by the applicant after the last Commission meeting, nmission recommendations. An emergency only 'ast property boundary adjacent to Allys Way, as ate will be installed across the entry fhat will only be . A five foot wide landscape buffer has been added ~djacent to parking as requested by staff. A ten foot ~ has been added along the future extension of East ~e parks department. Structures along the southern ;asement for the Stokesberry Lateral. However, the an Irrigafion District is amenable to relocating the ~ to the soufih, in which case the buildings would be ~e buildings are located right here. Bicycle parking the clubhouse as requested by staff. These are the multi-family structures depicted on the site plan as I. This is a colored version of Buildings B, C and I ~use. These are the garage structures. And, lastly, ~reas that contain a playground, tot lot, swimming Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 4 of 57 pool, and landscaped open space for a temporary access point to E the request for access to Eagle commercial portion of the property streets has not yet been submittE submitted prior to the City Council received from David Kleiner and , from ACHD on this project. St~ Conditional Use Permit applicants of approval in Exhibit B and thE recommending deniai of the variai spaces required for multi-family Commission may have at this time Newton-Huckabay: Does the Com O'Brien: No. Marshall: No, I don't. The applicant withdrew their request for a variance ~le Road at the last Commission meeting. Without ;oad, staff is supportive of the annexation of the r this time. The private street,application for internal by the applicant. Staff is requesting that this be ~eeting. Written testimony on this project has been idy Wilks. Comments still have not been received is supportive of the requested annexation and ;r the revisions made to the site plan and conditions Findings in Exhibit D of the staff report. Staff is e for a reduction in the number of covered parking wellings. Staff will stand for any questions the ssion have any questions? Newton-Huckabay: Applicant like to present their -- Anderson: Good evening, Commis'sion Members. My name is Lars Anderson; I'm with Bach Homes at 11650 South State~Street in Draper, Utah, 84020. And we have made all the changes that have been requested of us and we are okay with all the conditions fhat are proposed in fhe development agreement and ready to move forward. Do you have any questions for us? ` Marshall: I do have -- Madam Chair. There was originally a request for a ten foot wide walkway between the bridge at Te ~~ Mile and East Valley River Road, I believe, through here. It appears we have come to terms and made that a five foot? Anderson: Yes. We have met wii the parks director and we -- he ind River Valley Street and up north or a ten foot through the site, but wE through the site and signage sayin~ we d'idn't have bicyclists or, you kn certainly stroll through there or wall good compromise. Marshall: Thank you. the parks director -- excuse me. Sorry. Met with ated fhat if we put the ten foot pathway along East ~Ilys Way, that he would forego fhe requirement for would still provide an easement for public access it's a public walkway. But we kept it at five feet, so nr, high speed uses through there, but people could through there as they wished. So, it seemed like a O'Brien: Madam Chairman, I have !a -- Madam Chairman, I have a question. Newton-Huckabay: Yes. Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 5 of 57 O'Brien: First of all, I think you h confined space. If's quite unique between fhe outside parking stalls vehicles being able to have acce: getting into them -- it had to have I your concern, if you had any? ve done a wonderful job as far as its layout in this ~ I have just one concern and that is the distance ~nd, then, the covered ones behind there as far as ~ to those -- to those areas. Just backing out and ~en addressed or talked about, I think, so what was Anderson: We have the standard 26 feet there. OBrien: The 26 foot? Anderson: Yes. Twenty-six feet all the way around. All the drive aisles are all 26 feet. So, fhere is nowhere where we ar~ less than 26, including the emergency access is also shown as 26 feet and so we 1believe that fhe turning radius -- and all the turning radiuses meet the fire requirements~as well of 28 foot inside radius, 40 foot outside. So, we are able to make it work. ~ O'Brien: Okay. Sometimes out there they are hard to turn in that kind of a radius, that's all. I~, Anderson: Yes. And the project yiou have seen severat renditions of this site and we have worked through it. It's a bit of a shoehorn to fit in with all the easements that we have, but we have been able to get~~t to work to this point and feel~ very confident that it will work. Our engineer has reviewed it as well. O'Brien: Okay. That's all I have. Thanks. Marshall: I did have one other ques;tion. Newton-Huckabay: Commissioner Marshall. Marshall: Thank you, Chairman. He~e at fhe emergency access -- that's an emergency access only, is that blocked off in an~y way? I mean it's a gate? Anderson: Yes. And we provided ~pictures -- I don't know if she included them -- of a gate system and we provided those to the fire chief as well. A gate system that we built elsewhere that has a lock on it fori the fire department to be able to unlock and go through there if they need to. Marshall: Perfect. Thank you. Tha't's all I had. Newton-Huckabay: Any other comments? O'Brien: I have no comments. Thank you. Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 6 of 57 Anderson: Thank you. Newton-Huckabay: Thank you, M application. If you would like to, pi Commission have any comments c O'Brien: Do you want to close the Anderson. No one has signed up to testify on this ise, come forward. We have no rebuttal. Does the this before we make a motion? blic Hearing? Marshall: First I had a comment. I~`would like to just simply say that I fhink fhe applicant has addressed all the concerns that we -- we had last time. I appreciate their work on that. And I'm -- I like the application. Newton-Huckabay: Okay. Want O'Brien: Do we want to close -- do Newton-Huckabay: Uh-huh. O'Brien: Oh. I move to close the Marshall: I second it. Newton-Huckabay: So moved. Is agenda. Okay. We are done now' MOTION CARRIED: THREE A Newton-Huckabay: Make a motio a motion? have to close the Public Hearing first? blic Hearing on AZ 08-003 and CUP 08-004. -- all those in favor? It's a good thing it's a short TWO ABSENT. OBrien: I'm sorry, I didn't hear that. Sure. After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to recomm~end approval to the City Council of file numbers AZ 08-003 and CUP 08-004, as prese~'nted during this hearing for the following reasons, which we have no further ones -- ~~ Newton-Huckabay: Commissioner O'Brien? O'Brien: Yes. Newton-Huckabay: You left out the ~variance. O'Brien: Okay. The variance was Newton-Huckabay: VAR 08-00 -- O'Brien: Oh, I'm sorry. You're 08-00 -- ich one was -- covered parking. So, after the CUP 08-004 and Variance VAR Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 7 of 57 Baird: Madam Chair, just as a Ipoint of order, you can certainly comment on the variance, but the variance is a ma~ er that -- for the City Council only. It's in the staff report because that does get forwarded onto Ci#y Council, but fwo items before you are Items 5 and 6 on the agenda, so -- ~ Newton-Huckabay: Correct. I just~ in the draft motion here it did list it as I figured we needed to comment on it, if we are ,commenting on the rest. Baird: Well, maybe I'll flip it over 'to planning staff and see if they had a comment on why it's there. ~ Watters: Chairman Newton-Huckabay, Commissioners, you are not required to make a formal recommendation on the varrance, but it would be good to forward your unofficial recommendation to the Gity Council: Newton-Huckabay: So, with that said, do you want us to state our specific reasons for recommending that the variance be~`granted, since thafs the only thing the staff is not in agreement with or may we just lea~;e it off of the motion? Watters: Just leave it off of the Newton-Huckabay: Okay. Okay intended. O'Brien: Okay. Should I just start Newton-Huckabay: I think so. missioner OBrien, you can proceed as originaily r then? Watters: Let me just add to that.~) You can -- you can add your comments on the variance and, then, proceed to the motion, if you -- , Newton-H ucka bay: Okay. O'Brien: Okay. After considering ail staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of file numbers AZ 08-003 and CUP 08-004, as presented during the hearing of Ma ch 20th, 2008. Marshall: I second it. Newton-Huckabay: All those in favo'r'? Opposed? Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES' TWO ABSENT. Item 7: Continued Public H~ aring from February 21, 2008: AZ 06-063 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 38.68 acres from RUT and R-1 Meridian Planning 8 Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 8 of 57 zones to GG zones~ for Waltrnan Propertv (aka Brownin4 Plaza) by Waltman, LLC - 505, 521, 615 and 675 Waltman Lane: Item 8: Continued Public ~earing from February 21, 2008: PP 08-001 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 52 commercial / office lots and 1 common lot on 3821 acres in a proposed C-G zoning district for Browninq Plaza (aka Waltman Propertv) by SLN Planning, Inc. - 505, 521, 615 and 675 W. ~~,Waltman Lane: Newton-Huckabay: I'd like to ope"n fhe continued Public Hearing from February 21 st, 2008, AZ 06-063 and PP 08-001 ~~the Waltman property, aka Browning Plaza. And before we start with the testimony from staff, we do have some comments from the city attorney. ~. Baird: Thank you, Madam Chair, matter was continued for specific about the applicant's presentation to tesfify to matters that they may i we just wanted to let the folks th~ already on the record., there is no have a desire to put anything else as a-- as a courtesy. So, if fhat -- embers of the Commission. Just a quick note. This ~ms, but we did received an inquiry from fhe public nd fhere may be a desire on behalf of those present ~t have had a chance to testify at the last hearing, so ~are here know if you have anything -- everything is ;ason to repeat anything that's been said, but if you ~n the record, we are going to allow that tonight, just ~at's what we all got to say at this point. Newton-Huckabay: Thank you, Ted`~. Applicant -- or Sonya. Watters: Thank you, Chairman NE quick; the site consists of 38.68 County. The site is located on th Subdivision, on the north side of I This is a conceptual site plan show is the proposed preliminary plat, w common lots on 38.21 acres. TF conceptual building elevations th~ appear. These were submitted at into the staff report as part of the subject applicafions on February cantinue the project until tonight'~ comments from ACHD and to g agreement provisions recommen response to fhe original developme updated the development agreer including some of the requests b discuss these changes. The appl provisions that you should have, C February 25th, city and ACHD staff area. During that meeting the c~ ivton-Huckabay, Commissioners. Just to recap real ~cres of land and is currently zoned RUT in Ada `south side of Waltman Lane, east of The Landing 'terstate 84. This is an aerial view of the property. ig how the property may develop in the future. This ich consists of 40 commercial building lots and two s is the landscape plan and, lastly, these are the : represent how future buildings on the site may ie last Commission hearing and have been entered ;cord. When the Commission previously heard the 21 st, at that meeting the Commission voted to meeting in order to have sufficient time to obtain ~e the appiicant time to review the development ed by staff. The applicant submitted a written it agreement provisions proposed by staff. Staff has ent provisions in Section 10 of the staff report, the applicant and has met with the applicant to ;ant submitted another written response to the DA ised on the updated provisions made by staff. On net with the applicant to discuss tra .ffic issues in this ~rent access limitations and long-term solution for Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 9 of 57 traffic in this area was discussed. A loop frontage road was briefly discussed, but it was not considered a viable option due~'to the state's plan for the new westbound on-ramp onto I-84. This new on-ramp will take a substantial portion of the property due east of the subject site. ACHD and city staff both expressed an interest in having Corporate Drive extended to the north to conn~ect with southwest 5th Avenue. If this connection is made, a viable secondary access to the site will be established. A solution that ACHD staff offered up to get fhe Corporate - 5th connection made, but not put the entire burden on the application, unless j~o enter into the development wifh the development agreement with the developer to establishing an extraordinary impact overlay district in this area. If an extraordinary impa~`ct area is established, the developer of the subject property, in concert with ACHD, would build the Corporate Drive extension and any ofher necessary roadway improve iments. And, then, reimbursed through extraordinary impact fees that are generated as buildings are constructed in this area. Unlike ACHD staff, however, city staff believes fh~at the corporate drive extension should occur prior to another 8,000 vehicle trips being a~dded in this area, not after. City staff continues to believe that the extension of Corpo'rate Drive to the north across the Ten Mile Lateral is a critical roadway improvement inl~this area that should be constructed sooner, rather than later. Staff is recommending that no more than 75,000 square feet of gross building area be allowed before th~e Corporate - Southwest 5th connection is made. Staff recommends that the Commission decide what roadway improvements and development agreement provisions~'should be included with this development. I`m just going to run through the development agreement provisions that staff has modified since the last hearing. Const~uction traffic for the purpose of infrastructure improvements is going to be allowed during the construction related to the Waltman Lane - Meridian Road - Main Street intersection as requested by the applicant. Staff is allowing up 75,000 square feet of gross building area prior to the extension of the Corporate Drive across the Ten ~Mile Creek connecting to Waltman Lane prior to occupancy of structures on this site. Also, certificate of zoning compliance application will not be approved for any struct ~ res on the site that exceed the total allowed square footage for the site until Corporate ~Drive is extended. All buildings on the site shall be generally consistent wifh the conceptual office and retail elevations submitted with this application. Staff has added the~last part, unless the development agreement is modified by the developer once actual users are identified. The applicant requested that addition be made to it. Staff's ~n agreement with that. Staff modified the provision for -- except for a potential hote~ site at the southwest corner. Offices shall be constructed along the west and north -- staff added northwest boundaries of this site. There in fhat corner adjacent to tFi~'e residential properties as a transitional use to the existing residential uses, unless the adjacent uses are changed into nonresidential uses. A new provision was added -- restaurant uses proposed ~along the north boundary of the site, excluding fihe northwest corner directly adjacent to existing residences, of which restaurant use~s are not allowed -- restaurant uses are not allowed to have outdoor seating areas located adjacent to Waltman Lane and residences to the north, unless the adjacent uses are changed into nonresidential uses. All structures along fhe west and north property boundaries adjacent to existing residences shall be limited in height to finro stories. Staff added to that: And shall have a minimum setback of 25 feet adjacent to the existing rresidences, unless the adjacent uses are changed Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 10 of 57 into nonresidential uses, with #he ~ the southwest corner of the site, shall be required for the first stor second story, and a 200 foot sett stories adjacent to existing resic property boundaries directly adjac and we added and higher in the c~ have these directly into neighbc provision for no rear loading are~ shall be permitted adjacent to e boundaries. Minimum -- and we c said should. Staff changed fhat t~ site shall be generally consisten application, as determined by development agreement is modifiE Prior to issuance of the first occ~ constructed at the northeast corne plan and as approved by the park Construct a maximum of five acce: plan. Staff added unless the deve actual users are identified. That Staff added a preliminary ptat conc to Corporate Drive. A collector ro And the building elevations that wE in Exhibit A-5 of the staff report. V~ Art Berry. At this time staff will sta Newton-Huckabay: Any questions 'cception of the proposed hotei. If a hotel is built at s depicted on the concept plan, a 25 foot setback , a hundred foot setback shall be required for the ~ck shall be required for anything greater than two ~nces. Structures along the west and northwest :nt to residences shall position the second story -- ~e of a hotel -- windows in such a manner as to not ing residential properties. Staff also added the ~, delivery areas, trash areas, or obtrusive lighting isting residences on the west and north property anged the provision, A minimum of 15 buildings -- it ~shall be required on this site. Development of this ~wifh the conceptual site plan submitted with this ~e planning director. Staff added unless the i by the developer once actuai users are identified. ~ancy, a ten foot wide multi-use pathway shall be `of the site. Staff added as depicted on the concept ' department on the east side of the Ten Mile Drain. ~ points to Corporate Drive as shown on the concept ~pment agreement is modified by the developer once oncludes the development agreement modificafiion. tion of approval for a maximum of five access points d shall be allowed as depicted on the concept plan. 'e submitted from the last hearing has been included `itten testimony on this application was received from d for any questions the Commission may have. O'Brien: Yeah. Madam Chair, I i~ave a question for Sonya. Something I have been thinking about -- fhe applicant is not allowed to build or bring in heavy equipment before Corporate Drive is completed or tli~'e intersection of Waltman Lane and Meridian; is that -- so, that's correct? - Watters: Chairman Newton-Huckabay, Commissioner O'Brien, Commissioners, staff changed the DA provision to allow~' construction firaffic for the purpose of infrastructure improvements to be allowed duri~ng the construction related to the Waltman Lane - Meridian Road - Main Street interse~ction. O'Brien: So, we are talking about~~dump trucks and bull dozers and things like that? I don't know. Watters: Whatever construction traffic is needed for the purpose of infrastructure improvements. Mecidian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 11 of 57 O'Brien: The reason I bring that u if you could build a temporary accE -- I don't know what you call it -- G~ we are talking about here of exces Corporate Lane is going to be e County or the state's going to imp road, temporary one, built alongsid Watters: Well, the applicant -- exci O'Brien, Commissioners, the appl owners -- OBrien: Oh. Okay. Watters: -- to do that. I don't k because if it was going to happen, I just wondered s road -- could I have the overhead of the site -- the ~gle site. Well, this -- that would be fine. Yeah. So, traffic and fhis intersection is going to be rebuilt and ended, but I don't know the time frame that Ada ~ve this on-ramp and could there not be an access fhis area? Has that ever been considered? ~ me. Chairman Newton-Huckabay, Commissioner nt will need to obtain permission from those land they would want construction traffic on -- O'Brien: I was thinking more abo"ut the right of way that the state was going to use anyway until they get that finished land I don't know what the time frame is on that. So, that's -- it's just a wild thought, so -;! Hood: Madam Chair, Commissic enlighten a little bit more. We mei of went through those -- there is re that have been added since the la and I'm sure they told the applica they can allow those bigger constr~ are reconstructing an intersection, something out to allow them that o movements that you just kind of something closer to the intersectio get them into the site, rather than know that. I didn't see ihat plan. doesn't have anything to do with y little bit more, because I was at tr time at the presentation. That sar explain a little bit of this extraordin~ why I personally think it's a grea roadway improvements up front ; happen. Essentially, what happen working with ACHD and ACHD tol work with this property owner on a way needed for the Corporate Dri~ the applicant fronts all the mone~ whefiher it's just this or improving ~ have a finished street or maybe 1 ACHD and the applicant and the c iers, if I may -- and fihe applicant could probabiy vith ACHD, as Sonya mentioned, although she kind Ily not a lot of changes, but fihere were some details : time. The temporary access, ACHD assured us -- ~: the same fihing, only with some more details, that ;tion traffic type trucks in and out of there while they How, I don't know, but they said they would work istruction traff.ic to maneuver. I don't think it's in the ~utlined, though. I would imagine it's going to be and getting them back and using Waltman Lane to :nding them through the state's property, but I don't did want to highlight one quick thing, though. This ur -- wifih your question, but I did want to explain a meeting and Sonya wasn't and I covered this last e meeting that we had with ACHD, I just wanted to y impact fee overlay and kind of how that works and opportunity for the entire area to -- to get some ~d not have them lag behind or potentially never ~is in this case this applicant would be charged with me -- or told us all at that meeting that they would ~uiring some of that right of way or all of the right of extension. Essentially, what happened, though, is for whatever construction is going to be included, I of Waltman Lane, so it connects through and you ere is other roadway needs in the area, whatever / all say, yeah, this is what we want to see grouped Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 12 of 57 in with this area. And what happ slows, the applicant, you know, h~ money. But as anyone wifhin th beyond what their regular ordin extraordinary impact fee. And AC then, hands it over to the applic making sure fhat the applicant gE have to pay their fair share, too, s are still subject to this, but, in fact, how it works. They administer it, 1 and do those types of things. But who up fronts the cost and, then, c give you just a brief -- and I pro~ they function and what staff, agair not put all of the costs -- there is front those costs, but it spreads it c paying their fair share. So, I just w O'Brien: Thank you very much. I ~s is, again, they front the money and if the market to pay all fhat money up front and they are out that geographical area comes in, they pay above and y impact fee is to the highway district. It's an D, basically, tracks all this and collects that fee and, it. So, basically, they're administering this fee in ~ paid back in time their fair share. Now, they still the buildings fihat come in within their development iey are credited back. But that's kind of in a nutshell ey oversee it; they review fihe construction drawings ~e monetary costs are associated with fhe developer ~er time are reimbursed_ So, I just kind of wanted to bly butchered it, but fhat's the general idea of how thinks is a viabfe solution to make this happen and ;ome burden, don't get me wrong, they have to up it over a larger geographical area where everyone is nted to explain that real quick. no further questions. Marshall: Madam Chair, I did h~ave a-- what I fihink is more of a legal question regarding the potential DA and the comment about unless the adjacent uses are changed into nonresidential uses~~: I understand the purpose behind it, but what I wonder is if those residential area~s are purchased, does that null and void everything that comes before it? There is no ~~ Baird: Madam Chair and Comm an example of what your concern Marshall: Well, it's used multiple ti are proposed along the north bo directly adjacent to the existing res not aflowed to have outdoor sea residences to the north. Unless uses. I can understand that if th~ worry about a restaurant there, but again seemed to throw out any cor Baird: Madam Chair, Commissior that I would interpret that is that if only adds additional flexibility, it ~ before. Say fhere is a restaurant correctly, while there is resident ac If the adjacent residence went awa approval for outdoor seafing. I thi that the applicant -- or whoever is tl Marshall, if I could ask you to sort of give me es fihroughout the DA and so I read restaurant uses idary of this site, excluding the northwest corner ences of which restaurant uses are not allowed. Or ig areas located adjacent to Waltman Lane and ~e adjacent uses are changed into nonresidential ~ is no longer a residence there we don't have to just seemed that that comment used over and over ol over how that developed. ;r Marshall, Members of the Commission, the way ~nd when the residential use goes away, then, that ~esn't take away from anything that's been done iere that goes in -- if it's allowed, if I understand it acent, then, there wouldn't be any outdoor seating. , that restaurant could conceivably come in and get k that's the flexibility they are trying to build in, so ; owner, doesn't have to come in every time there is Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 13 of 57 an owner change on the adjacent p'roperties to have the DA updated, because updating a DA is a pretty onerous process and I think we are just trying to foresee what could happen in the future, build in some flexibility, but I don't think it nullifies anything that has happened prior to that. Marshall: Okay. Thank you. Baird: Is that a sufficient expla Marshall: Thank you. Baird: I was getting nods from interpretation. Newton-Huckabay: Okay. Any forward? Nickel: Good evening, Madam Ch Way, Suite 200, in Boise, here toi you for the additional month to get the laundry list that we had that we letter? Okay. All right. And as yo~ development agreement in detail, them in red and make them as use agreement with the majority of the have some issue with two of them we can open discussion. The first bringing you up to speed on the hi; that was important for you guys to i recommending that a limit to fhe Corporate Lane connection is es condition be consistent with ACHD basically at a certain vehicle trip t~ Corporate Drive to be extended. ~ possible extraordinary impact fee a with. You have seen it in a couple View, and Allen Street. Now, that ~ extraordinary impact fee establishe~ fhink it was Allen and Mountain Vie -- to develop with a McDonald's, wi see there now. So, that was -- that' And, then, the second -- second a least bring up for discussion is the see any of retail uses on this west C last meeting we got into a little disc we did allow some retail. Our idea as well. I hope they are agreeing with that er comments? Would the applicant like to come ir and Commission. Shawn Nickel, 6228 Discovery ght representing the applicant. We want to thank %ith staff and ACHD and try to work out these -- well, ~ft with last time. Did you all receive my March 18th can see -- and Sonya went through the items of the ~ut just wanted to point out -- and I try to highlight friendly as possible. But, as you can see, we are in :onditions now that staff is recommending. We still nd so I'll go into those real fast and, then, we can -- ` the first issue -- and I do appreciate Caleb kind of ory of fhat meeting we had with ACHD. So, I think ~derstand what -- what happened. However, staff is ~uare footage of the construction on site until the iblished and, again, we would like to have your ; condition, which staff did read into the record, but ~eshold that would kick in the requirement for that e are excited about ACHD working with us on that d I think that's -- thaf's something that we can work ~ther locafions. One is off of Eagle Road, Mountain >u're there, they had the same type of impact fee -- where those projects developed -- I fihink it was -- I ~ were improved and that allowed that area there to i the credit union, and all those other uses that you an example of the extraordinary impact fee in play. ~ only additional condition we'd like modified or at :ondition -- staff still feels that they do not want to ~undary, they want to limit it to office only and at our ssion on, well, what type of uses would be there if `to have it be neighborhood type retail and so what Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 14 of 57 we -- what we have done is we ha~~e proposed a coupie of things for each night. One is -- and if you can look at that -- that bullet in the red outlining that I have, we have proposed -- ~ Newton-Huckabay: Excuse me. Shawn? Nickel: Yes. Newton-Huckabay: I`m sorry. I don~t think I have that letter. I'm not finding it. I thought that I had read everything. Nickel: There is something that I had given to the clerk a couple days ago. Marshall: I received it in a fax, but I~don't have it with me. Newton-Huckabay: Okay. Sorry to~interrupt you. Nickel: That's okay. Newton-Huckabay: Is that the only~~copy of it? Okay. Can you go make -- O'Brien: I apologize you don't ha~4 that, because it's probably hard for you guys to follow me if I m referring to something you don t have in front of you. Marshall: I went to the source. I went to Sonya and she sent it over to me, so -- Nickel: Okay. So, basically, what we are -- if you want me to continue until that comes back. ~~, Newton-Huckabay: That would be f~ine. Nickel: What we are -- what we ~ that -- on that western boundary. office. What we are proposing is establishments, businesses that w~ or food establishments would only in addition -- and staff has put thi trash areas or obtrusive lighting w~ proposal, which is a little more -- I were looking at last time is to estab included the -- if you had that list, ~ ones that we felt were not compatik you or you can wait for a couple rr that -- and you can look at that list. ~ asking for is to have some limited retail uses on taff has indicated that they want to keep it strictly vo things. One is to prohibit drive-fhrus, drinking Id operate after 10:00 p.m. and, then, restaurants : ailowed as a Conditional Use Permit. And, then, n later on, no rear loading areas, delivery areas, Id be allowed. That's one proposal. The second ~ink might be a little bit better, might be what you h specific uses. So, what I did is I went ahead and ; list of uses in the C-G zone and we took out the with residential. And I can either read those all to utes until Machelle gets back and you can look at Newton-Huckabay: Let's wait for the letter. Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 15 of 57 Nickel: So, those are the two reco'mmended conditions in the development agreement that we would like to discuss this evening and we can open up fhat dialogue -- I'll go ahead and stand for any other questions you have right now and, fhen, we can open up the rest of fihe Public Hearing. ~} O'Brien: I just have a question ab up in that is increased traffic and restaurant in there or anything tha what I heard before from the com don't want to have that kind of pro that is a viable suggesfion or not if Nickel: Madam Chair and Commi: so you would -- you would -- Sony have a-- you'd have a building f matter what that building is, office ~ pickup, lighting, loading, anything going to go in there, it would all be and, then, you would have fhe bui of that compatibility issue. And, ft see the list that we use for that ~ appropriate that you -- it would ~ transifion those into a residential u: Marshall: Madam Chair? Newton-Huckabay: Yes. .~t some of the issues that I know are going to come ioise and trash collection, et cetera, if you have a ~ retail of that nature is going to -- and I think this is unity, saying this is going to be a problem and they em and I kind of agree with that. So, I don't know if ~at's going to -- going to work. ioner, that's why we are proposing these conditions, , can you put fhe site plan back up. So, again, you ~re. What we would do is we would establish, no this limited retail, would not have any parking, trash ong the back side. So, if there was a use that was andled internally. You would have landscape buffer ing itself. Thafs one -- that's one way to take care ~n, if you look at the list that I'm proposing, you can ~ have taken out altogefher that we don't feel are impossible for us to bring in or to try to -- try to ~, so -- Marshall: I have got a quick question. Shawn, could you refresh my memory here on the recommendafion about an 80 ~percent build out or 75,000 square foot maximum. Was that conditional on the build out of Waltman Lane or Corporate Drive or Waltman Lane and Corporate Drive? ~: Nickel: I guess I'll let staff elaborate'~on that. Watters: It's and Caleb's telling Newton-Huckabay: And. Marshall: So, it would be limited until such as -- such fime as Waltman Lane and Corporate Drive would be built out. Newton-Huckabay: I understood ilthing would happen until Waltman Lane was under construction. Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 16 of 57 Nickel: The -- okay. It's fihe -- thej[intersect~ion of Waltman Lane. Nothing can happen, other than utility construction on~ our site unfiil the Waltman Lane intersection is completed. Macshail; Right. Nickel: Then, additionally, as staff has it written, only 75 percent of -- or excuse me -- 75,000 square feet can be built on site before Corporate has to be extended. Marshall: And the ACHD recomm per day down Waltman Lane. Nickel: They actually said 8,000 study and the -- Marshall: Which was a maximum Nickel: Right. Correct. Correc development with our calculations. on was 80 percent limiting to 8,000 vehicle trips icle trips, because they are basing it on the traffic ,500 vehicle trips per day at build out. And that comes out to about 80 percent of the Newton-Huckabay: So, what's the'difference between the 75,000 square feet and 8,000 vehicle trips? ~. Hood: Madam Chair, maybe I ca difference between us as city pl restaurant or office user is going elevafiions and a floor plan going th - how many buildings or square fo and say, hey, stop at 8,000. I ha essentially. They have o.ffered son are we supposed to know when w don't know how to track that. So, t me just put it in some terms of ~ unless it's just -- I don't fhink a mo it's not -- it's a very small portior Sonya's fhinking in talking with her some building, but we don't want tl 80 percent, we can either spend a can stop now and not and already trips -- to me there is no carrot Corporate Drive extended. That's say, whoa, stop now and build it. trips. So, with 75,000 you get a li1 you have got to get that infrastruct our -- our fhinking and just how w restriction on it, we need it to be try to answer that one a little bit. I guess it's the ~ners trying to track how many trips a retail or - generate. First is us looking at a site plan wifh is how big the building is. I don't know how many - rage 8,000 trips is. ACHD expects us to track that ; no way. I'm not trained to do that and we can't, :thing up and I asked them that at fhe meeting, how get to 8,000. They said, well, track it. I was like I ~t's why we put into a measure that it's certain -- let ~,000 certainly isn't going to generate 8,000 trips, ~ theater generates that. So, I mean you're talking ~f what ACHD is willing to allow. My thinking -- bout it was it allows them to get going with some -- ~m to get 80 percent and, then, say, well, we are at ~illion or two million dollars and build fhe road or we ~ve it 80 percent built out. So, 80 percent or 8,000 iere for the developer to follow through and get ~ay too much. You're too far down the line to now ust don't see it happening, quite honestly, at 8,000 ~ taste of a development. If you want more, then, ~e, really, that can support more. So, that's kind of can -- if we are going to administer this or some n our terms, so we can -- whatever it is, square Meridian Planning & Zoning ~ March 20, 2008 Page 17 of 57 footage for us works. We can track that. If you guys want to modify that, that's fine But we need something that we ca ~ work with, not vehicle trips per day. Watters: If I could just add to that~a little bit. I spoke with Matt at ACHD and he said that ACHD fiigures 8,000 trips is --~8,000 trips is, basically, equivalent to approximately 267,000 square feet of commercial area. So, that gives you some comparison idea of their requirement versus ours. ~ Newton-Huckabay: Which would Watters: I'm sorry? Newton-Huckabay: It would be Hood: If it were all commercial. P going to generate traffic at differen more, so that may be that 280,001 combination of 100,000 square fE 75,000 square feet of restaurant o us easy tracking, whefher it's resta~ this about 320,000 square feet at build out? 320,000 square feet total? v, there is certainly office and hotel and those are ~tes than each other, so retail generates a little bit r whatever she just said, you know, could be any of office and 200,000 square feet of retail and ~hatever to get to tha#. So, we just said again, for nt or office or retail -- square footage. Newton-Huckabay: Okay. Well, yo~u answered my question. What I wanted more than anything was a perspective on wh{at 75,000 square feet means to city staff and what 8,000 vehicles trips per day means~to you and the difference is about 195,000 square feet of space to build, so -- okay. ~ Nickel: And, again, we are real co property that has out -- or has o control over. So, even though ACf the north and we will try to get that to come in that wants to invest an that access to Corporate Drive -- or have. This is something you guys your recommendafiion to the City ~ number, I would rather have some throwing that number out there is th come in, because until you get a. coming are probably not going to k and we don't even know what that are going to establish fhat, they ar draw in your -- our other users. Sc you have to put a limi# on the squ~ know, as opposed to 75,000, we'd I go in and start -- and start construc decision. I'll just leave that with you cerned with having conditions placed on a piece of -site improvement requirements that we have no ~ is saying, yeah, we will work with the neighbor to ;onnection, it's really hard for us to get a developer :hing, not knowing, you know, if we can get that -- hrough Corporate Drive. So, that's the concern we ~ave to, obviously, weigh out and make as part of ouncil. Given that, if we have to come up with a iing closer to about 150,000 -- and the reason I'm t that would provide the anchor tenant to be able to anchored tenant, the chances of a smaller user ~ that great. I think the anchor tenant's going to -- ~. But the anchor tenant is going to come in, they going to start building, and I think that's going to we haven't really talked about this with staff, but if ~e footage, that would be our -- I guess our -- you ;e ,to at least have something that the anchor could ion. So, you guys are going to have to make that o discuss. Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 18 of 57 Newton-Huckabay: I just have one!-- or go ahead, Commissioner O'Brien. O'Brien: Oh. .Madam Chair, I have a quesfion for Caleb. Caleb, when you attended that meeting with Ada County Hig ~way District, did they factor in the residential uses? In other words, people that live in the residential areas that bypass this operation, that still use the highway as -- and, ba~sically, add to fhe congestion, I mean it seems like fhat number is so superfluous that it would be difficult at best to guess what the number would be. ~ Hood: And I missed the very first that 8,000, basically, just this site c I think that was something that the that meeting, that 8,000 trips -- it i~ - closer to Meridian Road coming They are going to limit anyone go they don't even own those 8,000 And if someone builds a residentia Walfiman Lane, it's 8,000 trips total explained to me. O'Brien: Thank you. Appreciate th Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Marshall, testimony? Marshall: I don't at this time, no. Newton-Huckabay: Okay. Shawr first came up that you were really potentiai with ACHD and, then, I he improvements at the end of your te; ~art of that, but I think I heard what you're saying is does it include background firaffic as well. Because ~pplicant bought up and if I heard ACHD correctly at 't just for their site, it's any of the properties further - ~ and they, too, have to go through Waltman Lane. g down Waltman Lane to 8,000 trips. So, those -- ps if it gets approved at 8,000 trips. It's anyone. ~ubdivision back there and they have to go through ~They just happen to be in first, so that's how it was I have nofhing further. you have another question before we take public I just had one question. I made a note when you xcited and okay with the extraordinary impact fee ~d you say that you didn't want to make any outside mony. Nickel: We are not -- I mean we are~not there yet with ACHD and this is something that fhey have said that they are -- you know, they have got it written in. We don't have the details yet and we don't know the a~ea that the -- the boundary that this would cover. It's something ongoing and so I can't4stand up here and say that -- Newton-Huckabay: Do we want to Nickel: It's not something that's goir -- it could take a year for them to -- f are looking at that, because what' Waltman be improved -- improved c be improved quicker. That gives a has to -- has to firont that cost and, then, it will be -- it will be reimbursed nue this unfil you get that worked out? to be done at anytime soon. I mean it could take them to establish it. And we are excited that they going to happen is I think you're going to see cker and you're probably going to see Corporate isis for that to happen, but, again, this developer ~en, as other development comes into the area, Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 49 of 57 Newton-Huckabay: Uh-huh.Okay. public testimony? I That was my only -- do you have any other -- before Nickel: No. Just thanks -- thanks a~ lot. Newton-Huckabay: Kathy Floyd. Floyd: Hello. My name is Kathy concerned about the no loop or fi were being given is because it's go to the exit. I mean it's not going tc kind of a weird reason. And the s like the city or -- I don't know who development go in. I did a little before fhis developer bought this la basicaily the same thing, except i intersection. When the -- when thi 15 million and I think that seems ~ don't think they rise like that much who was on fhe City Council when the developer. I think seems a litt fourthly -- I don't know where I'm at Newton-Huckabay: Fourthly. 'loyd. I live at 520 Waltman Lane. And I'm a little intage road and fhe only reason it seems like that ~g to be widened, but it doesn't need to be right next ~be widened to the whole property. So, I think that's ~cond thing is -- another concern I have is it seems is -- is kind of bending over backwards to heip this :search as far as the split corridor and two years ~'d it was going to be under three million dollars to do ~t open Waltman -- put Waltman further from fhe 'was bought by fihe developer it now has jumped to nd of strange. I mean I know our costs rise, but I 4 And, then, I think it was strange that Joe Borton, :hat was proposed and approved, was representing ; bit conflict of interest. And secondly or thirdly or hi rt -_ Floyd: -- the -- Waltman Lane is ~a one lane road and even when my brother was building his house you couldn't puf cement trucks over the bridge, because it can't handle that. So, for anything to be ~built on Waltman Lane, you have to have Corporate in place, you have to have Waltma~n Lane in place before anything can be done. So, thaf's all I have to say. ~. Newton-Huckabay: Thank you. Haddock's concerns have been c Aldridge: My name is Donna Aldric oldest person down there. I have b~ and quiet and this is going to be a i up about 25 years ago when they ~ traffic -- you couldn't even get out ~ fhere, they had to have that little wa of wild horses set free. So, if it w time, who do you think is going to b~ a nightmare. I think that they ough right with them. Like I said, I have there and if they widen that road th~ na Haddock. Okay. From the audience Nona :d. Donna Aldridge. e. I live at 365 Waltman Lane. And I think I'm fhe ~n there for over 40 years and it's been so peaceful ghtmare. The road, like you say, they opened that ilt that bridge over on the other side there and that my driveway. They had to have the police down ~n down there and that traffic was just like a bunch s fhat much, people coming through there at that when they put this development in? It's going to be to come to the people and try to make something ~een there 40 years and I have a lot of inemories - are going to have to take my well, they are going Meridian Planning & Zoning ' ~ March 20, 2008 Page 20 of 57 to take my whoie yard, half my yai` , my, well and everything and that's not fair. Like I said, I have been there 40 years and that s my home. Newton-Huckabay: Thank you. Mi~ke Swenson. Swenson: Mike Swenson. 815 Waltman Lane. I think what -- I have got a number of concerns. The main one is that we~have been kind of left out of the loop. We have had one meeting for the development that, you know, with very bad pizza and maybe six people showed up type of thing an~d, then, we haven't heard anyfhing about this since that. Well, like, oh, there is a mee~ting, you know, you really need to go. My neighbor had to tell me that this meeting was here tonight. Our -- our -- right now the -- getting onto Meridian Road is a death tra~p. You know, I just can't imagine being able to do anything until you improve Meridia~n -- you know, that interchange and that -- we were told when we moved in 16 years ago that we were going to -- not to worry, they are going to build Corporate through. ~Well, you know -- you know, so you won't have to worry about that death trap kind ofi thing. Well, that hasn't happened and, you know, putting equipment down that road, ~which is a really Mickey Mouse kind of road. I mean Mr. Waltman built it that should tell~you something. I think this whole thing is kind of ill thought out and I think there needs ~o be some more inpu t. Newton-Huckabay: Thank you. Cu~rtis Lee. Lee: Curtis Lee. 265 Waltman Lan~e. I just want to -- kind of the same thing everybody is saying. That bridge will not handle big trucks, cement trucks going over it. It's just a little one lane bridge from a one la~ne road. So, thaYs impossible for that to happen. And the corner is supposed to bie getting done. We are on one side -- we had deveiopers on one side of this, another developer behind us, and the city owns property behind fhat developer and, then, the~ Browning Plaza on the other side of us by the drain ditch. The developers need to get~~together with the city, because they own that land, and make a firontage road back fhere and it wouldn't affect any neighbors, there would be no traffic. They just got to talk to the other developers and the city and do it. That overpass has been in, what, fhe 20~tyear plan, so, you know, things could change in 20 years. So, that's all I got. ~ Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Lee, are yo ~ referring to the Meridian overpass or Linder -- Lee: The Meridian overpass. It supposedly is going to be a big loop tee do, but it's not - - and no immediate plans, so iYs way out in the future. But you'd have to talk with the other developers to use their land tfor a frontage road, but fhey should be having a frontage road also, because they are~developing right -- they already got a sign up there wanting businesses to come in th`ere as soon as that corner's done. So, all the developers should be together and make a frontage road with the city through their land. ~~ Newton-Huckabay: Thank you. No~~one else has signed up to testify. Is there anyone else who would like to come forwardj~ Please state your name and address. Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 21 of 57 Larcher: Joe Larcher. 740 Waltm~an Lane. I was here, in fact, on February 12th -- or 21 st, whenever it was, our last tim~e we were talking about this. I am the own of the property where Corporate needs to go through and I remember Ghairman David Moe saying make sure that I get involved in any Ada County Highway District meeting. I wasn't involved. No one notified ~me. No one called. Knew nothing about the new proposals. Again, if they are going~'to build Corporate Drive, you think one person they want to talk to would be me and I h'ave had no conversations whatsoever with anybody. And I just want to stress the concern on construction vehicles on Waltman Lane, the bridge -- again, we have had a fe~~w people say if they are going to bring construction vehicles down fihere -- that bridge ~~Steve Cooper lives across the street, 755 Waltman Lane, I fihink, he had to stop brin~ging his dump trucks down, because of the bridge limitations, the weight limitations t~hat are on that bridge. So, Ada County Highway District should know what those we~~ght limita#ions are. I think they are fhe ones that put the limitations on the bridge. So, construction vehicles over that bridge I don't think will be allowed by Ada County Highwaiy District. So, I just wanted to state those concerns. Thanks. I!„ Newton-Huckabay: Thank you, Mr.~[Larcher. Haddock: My name is Rob Haddock. I live at 650 Waltman Lane. IYs I guess going to be the future corner there of Corpo~rate and Waltman, that square shaped property. I have got a lot of fhe same conce~rns that have been addressed already. My major concern is just opening up the road ~o the subdivision to the -- to the west. You know, if you do that you're going to get you ~~car count whether you develop that property or not, because the only way those people have to get out is through Linder right now. You know, if those people want to go shopping at Winco or Home Depot, you know, they are shooting up Waltman and like Donn~a mentioned earlier when that was open when they were building that subdivision, it was -- it was crazy. So, I think, you know, the only thing I agree with so far is that nob~ dy knows the timing of this. I heard the Ten Mile exchange was going to be completed in 2007. You know, we are here in 2008, they haven't even begun. And so to -- you know, I fhink we are just premature on the whole thing. If the Waltman exchange was in, I think we'd have something to talk about. Where it's not, you know, I think this is all premature. Like Joe said, you know, no conversations on Corporate. So, y~ou know, I see a lot of unanswered quesfions. I haven't seen a development agreem~ent. I'd like to be involved in fhat. Don't see a lot of buffer or transition space. It's a co'ncern. You know, right now we might have -- we have got five neighbors west of ine~~on a dead end lane. Talking 8,000 vehicle count, you know, on a busy day we might ~s~ee 20, you know. And so those are my concerns. The green light sfill -- oh, yellow. Newton-Huckabay: No, you're still -i!Manifest Destiny here. Haddock: But, anyway, there are probably other things I want to say, but that's all I can think of right now. And I think if the I` en Mile interchange did go in, you know, I'd like to see those -- that subdivision funneled fhrough to Ten Mile and have that be their Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 22 of 57 secondary access, because, you know, even for the development I couldn't see, you know, businesses wanting that kind of residential traffic shooting through their businesses. So, from both sides I think that's a lose to connect that -- that subdivision entrance, so thank you for your time. Newton-Huckabay: Is there anyone else that would like to testify? Would the applicant like to rebut? ~~ Nickel: Thank you, Mr. -- or Madam''Chair. Newton-Huckabay: It's your first fim"e too, uh. Nickel: Sorry about fihat. And Commission. To address some of the concerns of the neighbors -- and we do -- you know, we do want to work with them and assure them of a few things. First of all, the bridge will have to be built. That's one of the first things that's going to have to be rebuilt kbefore we can bring, you know, heavy equipment across the creek. So, that is something that will have to be taken care of as part of our - - part of that first phase of the -- of~the infrastructure, when the infrastructure has to go in. And one thing to point out is ~that -- and, again, we do -- we do understand the concerns of the neighbors, particularly over here. But also to point out that this property is zoned commercial. It is designated for commercial uses. So, not that they are going to be, you know, forcibly taken from their properties, but as this area develops per the -- per the city plan, there is going to,be a change from residential to commercial. That's what the city has already established. And so I just want to point fhat out. And, again, fhe intersection of -- this intersection right here has to be -- it's a condition and we have understood this from the very beg~nning, fhat that has to be built before we can start construction of any -- of any buildings, any structures on site. All we have asked for though ACHD and through your sfiaff is the allowance that once this starts building -- and we are probably not going to start our construcfion until this gets started, because that's the only time frame we can ~work on is -- you know, when we are going to have this completed. Otherwise, we will sit there until that development is -- or until this development -- or this construction{~s finished. And so we will plan on doing that when that construction is started. So, again, no construction of structures on our site or uses or additional traffic unfiil that intersection is built. Newton-Huckabay: I think we ca i~all agree, Shawn, you have nothing to sell without fhat intersection. Nickel: True. Which brings me to my next point. We understand the situation with Waltman and the fact of the matter~~s until Waltman gets approved -- I mean our future users are not going to want to have a multi-million dollar development with a goat trail leading back to it. So, we do unde~`rstand and that's -- and I think thaYs why ACHD is helping us with the extraordinary irn~pact fees, because we understand that Waltman is going to be -- is going to need to be~improved. We are doing it on the property that we have control over. We have no control over the Waltman -- outside of our -- outside of our boundaries. There is a 50 foot ~right of way there now, but that's not enough for the Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 23 of 57 ulfiimate improvements that you're going to hamper some of that. B~ different looking road when we arE And, again, just for clarification, th~ fihe city has no confirol over thi: construcfion options for this prope But, eventuaily, they are going to land -- develop land and tear fhinc sweeping on-ramp or it's a cloverl they have that property set aside. your name. Sorry. We have met and ACHD has every intentions extraordinary impact bounda .ry a conversations, it's just that we ha~ And, then, finally, the comment al here coming out of the -- the subd upon this development. Trust me, could completely redo our -- our sit the requirements of interconnectivi that is a requirement that we b~ development. So, with that I will st~ ~oing to see on Waltman and so that right there is , again, we are confident that that is going to be a =- when we are -- when we have got uses in fhere. state owns this property, not the -- not the city. So, and we have seen or heard of several different y and, unfortunately, ITD, it could be 20 years out. ~ something and they are not going to want to buy ~ down to get their -- whether it's a-- whether it's a ~f of whatever, they have got plans and fhat's why egarding Mr.-- is it Larcher? I don't want to butcher %ith Mr. Larcher one time, my client and I, early on of ineeting with them once they figure out the d so he's not being purposely left out of any ;-- we are not to that point yet, so to clarify that. ~ut connecting Ruddy Street -- this is Ruddy right ~ision. I mean that's a requirement that's being put we could just block it off, we'd love to, because we plan. But because of the development, because of ~ through the highway district and through the city, d that -- that connection to take it through our id for any questions you have. Newton-Huckabay: Shawn, I have one. Mrs. Aldridge made a comment -- Mrs. Aldridge made a comment about th~`e road improvements would run into her yard and her well. Can you clarify that? Nickel: I can't. I don't know where her well is. If it's -- if her well is in the right of way right now -- Newton-Huckabay: Is all of the right of way on the property -- the development to improve -- the road you're going to b~e improving -- that will be improved on the Waltman -- the end of Waltman that you will b~ improving? Nickef: Yes. Is all our property. Newton-Huckabay: So, on your property. Nickel: Yes. From this -- from this p~ int over is our property. Newton-Huckabay: And there is als~~a 20 -- Nickel: I believe their house is -- ar~ you u s ri ht here? Oka . Yeah. So we have 9 Y 9 Y , no intentions right now of disturbing ~their wells or -- well or anything. Newton-Huckabay: Commissioner !!-'Brien. Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 24 of 57 O'Brien: I had a question, Madam Chair. Shawn. So, what would be a solution if there would be an impact on these -- on the residences disturbing their -- their property, their weil, their yard -- I mean is it emine,nt domain or what? Nickel: Well -- I mean that's going way in place right now, so -- O'Brien: That goes into their pro Nickel: I believe they have some i - I don't know about your well, bu~ ACHD is not just going to go in th someone's well off and leave therr to be worked out with the highw~ ACHD at some point in the fufiure that they would -- they would do. be up to ACHD and they have got a 50 foot right of ~rovements that -- there is trees, there is probably - iose things will all be worked out. They are not -- :-- or we are not just going to go in there and cut igh and dry. So, these are all things that will have district within that existing right of way. Now, if ~nts to expand their right of way, thaf's something O'Brien: Okay. So, it's just -- I have a question for staff. What is the transition or what kind of transifion is normally require~d between a build out like this at a residential area? I thought there was supposed to be more of an open space or more of a transition with light office somewhat more designated than what they have here. Watters: Madam Chair, Commissi~oner O'Brien, Commissioners, the zoning ordinance requires a 25 foot wide landscape buffer to residential uses. The Comprehensive Plan does encourage, you know, a tranksition in uses -- you know, to residential uses and commercial properties. So, you know, we would prefer to have an office use as a buffer to residential use between a higher Cntense commercial use and the residential uses. O'Brien: Okay. Thank you. I have Nickel: And if I could elaborate on trying to build a set of conditions fo we want -- we want the same thing fhe same fencing requirement, yc buildings like storage, trash compa~ retail uses or commercial uses on 1 would. And whether thafs done a: list, a lot of those uses would be c back in for a Public Hearing. You c at lighting, you can look at light wr know, look at lighting, things like tr are asking for definite restrictions a flat out say, you know; no other us~ that we can make a compatible use ing more. iat. That is our intention as well and that's why I'm those -- for those future uses on the west, because nd we feel that if -- if you have got the same buffer, ~ don't allow anything back in the back of those ors, loading, anything like that, that you could have ere that would be compatible like an office building a Conditional Use Permit, which if you look at that ~ditional use, therefore, it would still have to come ays would review those, at that time you could look ~ther a wall is needed, additional landscaping, you t. So, we are not just asking for cart blanche, we d we will abide by those, but we don't want to just ~ besides office on that boundary, because we feel ver there. O'Brien: Okay. Thank you. Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 25 of 57 Newton-Huckabay: Commissioner Marshall: I have no further questio Newton-Huckabay: Okay. Marshall: Would you like me to ma Newton-Huckabay: I believe so. rshall. a motion that we close the Public Hearing? Marshall: Okay. If I can find the numbers here. I move that we close fhe Public Hearing on AZ 06-063 and PP 08- ~~01 and CUP 08-002 at this time. No? Did I get the wrong one? ~; Newton-Huckabay: No. You went ;one ahead. Marshall: Sorry. Just fihe -- excu the Public Hearing on AZ 06-063 a O'Brien: Second. Newton-Huckabay: All those in MOTION CARRI:ED: THREE A Newton-Huckabay: Okay. Disc Marshall: Yes. Newton-Huckabay: We have lots Marshall: I have some thoughts an~ one is to the Comprehensive Plan commercial. I-- and it should. It's interstate. Eventually, as times cl long period of time has looked at < have decided that is a commercial ~ said, the Comprehensive Plan als~ referred to that several times tonigl uses and we use terms incompafib~ obtrusive to residences. They are residences to have high intensity of commercial, I still strongly feel th residences both on the west and al though not nearly the size I would me. Let me rephrase that. I move that we close PP 08-001. I will stop there. Opposed? TWO ABSENT. n? sues. concerns. Namely dating back, number one -- first This area is zoned commercial, it is going to go ~ an area that is close to the downtown, close to the ~nge, this is something that the community over a ~d years developed that Comprehensive Plan and that should be a commercial area. But, that being alludes to transitional uses and I think we have . The transitional uses are to buffer incompatible uses because high intensity commercial uses are iot compatible. It's not in the best interest of the ~affic next door. So, even though this site is zoned re needs to be a transitional use befinreen the ng the north, along here, and that transition, even ce to see it, needs to be something there. And it Meridian Flanning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 26 of 57 needs to be a lower intensity use. Therefore, the next step down is office -- office space. I don't believe that retail is~an appropriate use next door to residences. I also have a eoncern wifh the hotel next door to residences. Now, I have heard some -- some very persuasive discussion about -- from staff concerning a hotel next to an interstate, next to residences, but, again, I understand a hotel is not nearly as traffic intense as retail, but the fiime of the~ day that that traffic happens is at a time when you're at home. For the people living a~long here, even though they are very close to the interstate, the interstate is a white ~noise. You -- your reticular formation in your brain turns it off after awhile. You stop hearing it. Car doors, people yelling across the parking lot, you got the kids, things like that, when they are traveling at 2:00 a.m. coming in, are things that alert the~brain and wake you up in the middle of the night. They are things tha# I don't want n~ext door to me when I'm sleeping, when I'm eating dinner, when I'm trying to relax in, the evening. That's why professional offices are appropriate to be next to residences, because they close up shop at 5:00 or 6:00 o'clock when I come home. When I come~ home to my -- my house they are leaving, so the place next door is quiet. Now, ye~ah, you're going to have higher intensity here fairly close by, but the buildings help b~'uffer some of that sound. The distance and the build'ings and things like that buffe~that. And the fact that the interstate is close by, white noise will stop some of fihat. ~So, I have serious concerns about any retail along that area and I have concerns abou~t putting a hotel up against that area. I would like to see this area developed with -- wi`h high quality commercial, but yet, again, I would think fhat we can move this and p ~ t office space along these areas and still move the hotel back over here in the intensity retail back up here where it's still somewhat visible to the interstate, still visible to Merid~an Road, but still allows a buffer zone all along here of office. That's one concern I ha~~e. The other concern I have is infrastructure and Waltman Lane. I understand that this bridge will build out first. It has to or you can't get in and even build this. But the t affic -- right now there is a traffic count on Waltman Lane of approximately 500 vehicle~trips per day, according to Ada Count y Hi ghwa y District. They say fihat this road is~designed for 10,000 vehicle trips per day. I don't necessarily agree with that, you k~now, I-- fhat's maximizing that road to absolute potential. I mean you would have ai~significant amount of traffic through there. I believe fihat infrastructure needs to be i~ place and especially both Waltman Lane and Corporate Drive. Now, that -- this also needs to connect and part of the reason for the connectivity here is for emergency ~services. Both the fire department and EMS want that. They want to be able to get into the back side of this subdivision. The idea that there are many ways out, many ~ ays in, is a tenant of new urbanism and neo- traditionalism that we are trying to embrace. That being said, that will significantly add to the traffic count on Waltman Lan~e and I am very concerned that not only the traffic coming through here, which we are~ requiring, it needs to be there, it needs to -- we need to have fihat connectivity, but t~hat additional traffic, with the traffic generated from this commercial development, I feel will overwhelm Waltman Lane immediately and without Waltman Lane built out a~nd without Commercial Drive, I don't think the infrastructure there is -- is there to s~upport it. And one other more minor issue was that I would have liked to have seen fhe Cbike pafh or the pathway here cross over the creek and come down this side. If you're going to have a large retail facility here, I would like access to it without having to ride my bicycle or walk through the entire parking lot for a Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 27 of 57 quarter mile -- it's not a quarter rr ride fihere with my bicycle and my there if I have to spend the last full liked to have seen -- even though this to continue on the west side, I Excuse me. Yes. The city is exp~ liked the developer -- the applicanl side. That's not a deal breaker to are, number one, infrastructure anc Newton-Huckabay: Commissione level on the bullet regarding squ~ equal trips per day, do you have hi city's 75,000 square feet if you're n we will need to address that -- ur entirety, we need to address that. Marshall: I could not support the trips per day. Newton-Huckabay: Okay. Would build out or the city's 75,000? Marshall: Well, I would stick wifih Newton-Huckabay: Okay. Comm O'Brien: I agree with a lot of the The two bullets I have are traffic -- care for fhe layout myself. I think t big box. Maybe it could be turned ! fhink we definitely need a better tra area. Of course, I don't know -- ii anyway from the existing buffer. ~ with -- with the city. I think that w And was that correct, Sonya? e, but a very significant distance. I'm not going to cids or walk with my kids along the pathway to get ~ortion of it through the parking lot and I would have his is now -- I understand that the city is expecting elieve. But I would have -- on the east side. Yeah. ;ting to continue on the east side, but I woutd have o have offered up an additional path along the east ie, but I think that's good design. The issues I have two, the transitional uses. Those are my concerns. ' Marshall, regarding the appJicanYs letter and their ~e footage and build out square footage would be 4specific opinion on whether you would stick with the it -- do you want to take a position on that? Because ess you're going to vote against the property in its contention that this can support 8,000 vehicle support a compromise of 150,000 square feet of city's 75,000. ner O'Brien. ~ings that Commissioner Marshall had menfioned. ;ontrol traffic and fhe transition. I don't particularly : hotel is in the wrong place. And maybe even the 1 degrees. I'm not sure how that would work. But I ~ition between this development and the residential he hotel is built it has to be 200 feet further back ; that gives you something, if that's -- if that works ald be okay, but right now it shows it pretty close. Watters: Madam Chair, Commissioner O'Brien, Commissioners. The condition reads that a 24 foot wide setback -- or ~a 25 foot setback is required for the first story, a hundred foot setback is required for~tthe second story, and a 200 foot setback is required for anything greater than finro stories~'adjacent to existing residences. O'Brien: So, it looks to me like this -- this isn't shown or drawn 200 feet from that -- okay. Okay. Of course, that would interfere with that big box, too. So, I would think that there would have to be some re~drawing here for -- for us to look at to see -- for me, anyway, to see if this thing would w~'ork. As far as the congestion and tra~c, I think in Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 28 of 57 the long run I think it's still goii downstream if this whole thing get~ know how to address it or to say,~ happen. I don't know. Mayb~ Comprehensive Plan says it's okay and it's going to end up at -- mostly don't know how it aan be addressei ~g to be a considerable -- considerable problem ~~ built out. I just -- I just have a concern and I don't ~hey, this -- maybe this whoie thing shouldn't even : this is the wrong use for this, although the ~ Again, I think that the big problem is -- is the traffic 'at Meridian - Waltman Lane at some point and I just P.' Those are my main concerns. I think -- Newton-Huckabay: Commissione'rk0'Brien, you don't think requiring the extension of Corporate Lane and no development until the Meridian Road - Waltman intersection is improved and a new bridge address~es any of the traffic concerns? O'Brien: I think -- my feeling is fhis~~ If they improve both of those -- the Corporate Drive and Waltman Lane all the way th ~ough without the development happening at all, it's going to be crowded. That's my feeling. I think it's going to be congested just with those. You add a development like~fhis in there and I think you're going to compound it. Newton-Huckabay: Well, what wou;ld you put in there? O'Brien; I have no idea. But I thin'k that putting -- get out of residential homes. I don't know, it just doesn't seem like it's ~kl don't know. It just seems like it's way back in the cocner somewhere and we are creating a maze that maybe isn't the right fit for this particular corner. ~ Baird: Madam Chair? Newton-Huckabay: Yes. Marshall: May I? Newton-Huckabay: Commissioner~Marshall. Marshall: I do support this deve commercial. This is a proper usE transitional areas and I don't supp~ can get the infrastructure there first building that. But the infrastructure - I know that -- and I keep -- I hark sure how many vehicle trips per because I know we are going to h~ over here and if they were allowec the anchor tenant -- he's right, eco able to draw the other people in. I road, but I don't think it's feasible t available. I would love to see it, property just will never build out the ~pment. It's going commercial. It's going to be for it. What I don't support is retail in along the t a build out until the infrastructure is there. If we ~s staff has recommended, I would be supportive of believe needs to be there first. So, I think 75,000 - n back to the request for 150,000 and I-- I am not ay that would generate. I'm worried about that, e a significant number coming from the subdivision he anchor tenant enough square footage to put in ~mically you have got to have somebody big to be lon't think a loop road -- I would love to see a loop sed on the ownerships and the properties that are >ut I don't -- that's never going to happen. This and as the city grows is a very appropriate use, as Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 29 of 57 determined by the ComprehensivE this. Again, though, I lean back t~ retail uses up against residential. residential. I find it unfortunate tl against a residential in the land usE we didn't have the Comprehensive out, because it could have -- we c that as a buffer. Again, we are bE that. I still t~hink the infrastructure the infrastructure is going to be t request for 150,000, is going to g have got to have the tenant to pi discussion. Can I ask staff a auest Newton-Huckabay: Ted, I forget Plan. It is shown to be a very appropriate use for the Comprehensive Plan. I don't want to see any ~nd I still have a concern about a hotel up against ~t we have placed a commercial property right up plan, yet this is an appropriate area. It's unfortunate ~lan in place prior to that residential area being built uld have had a larger office area or something like rond that. That's already -- we are already passed eeds to be there and if we can -- if we can say that ere first, how much though, as in 75,000 and the 'e them one box store, the one big box. And they I the rest in. Can I-- we are not open for public -n, Chairman -- Madam Chair? rules on that. Baird: I know the answer is yes. I`~m just debating on whether we should open the -- the hearing, so that whatever is said is on the record, because once you close the hearing it's really for you deliberation. So, I would just encourage you to move to reopen the hearing and ask the question. Newton-Huckabay: Okay. Can ~ I-- I want to make one -- ask a question of Commissioner Marshall. I just want to get my head around where we are going with a motion. You're in agreement wifih th~e staff report, with fhe exception of transitional uses on the west and the east. ~~ Marshall: West and north. Newton-Huckabay: The west and n'orth. Marshail: Northwest and west. Newton-Huckabay: Northwest an not in support of the project at all? O'Brien: No, I didn't say that. Newton-Huckabay: Okay. O'Brien: I said -- you know, if I had would have said, okay, let's vote on agree with -- like I said, with the G and in answer to your question abo~ finishing of Corporate Drive and W' things should be completed beforel covered all our bases here and w . Okay. And Commissioner O'Brien, you are iy druthers before this whole thing goes, I probably ~is, I maybe wouldn't have voted on it, but I have to mprehensive Plan, this is fine, this is a good use, t the amount of build fhat could happen before the tman Lane and the intersection, I think those two ny build out at all, just to make sure that we have have a better understanding on what's going to Meridian Plannimg & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 30 of 57 happen. I don't know if that would make any difference or not, but I think -- I think it would cause undue duress I think if~we went into -- if we didn't do that as far as getting it all built out first and try to -- to do all the ofher things that they need to do to buifd this. Newton-Huckabay: So, you're s'aying no development until Corporate Drive and Waltman are built out. ~~ O'Brien: Yes. That's what I'm sayi Newton-Huckabay: Rather than the 75,000 square feet. Okay. I want to make a couple comments and, then, Com~~issioner Marshall, if you still have your question of staff we will reopen the Public Hearing at that time. I, myself, do not necessarily have an issue with retail uses along t~he western edge of this property. I think that a compromise of no traffic, trash compactors, and that type of thing on the west side is appropriate. I have gone through fihe list that the applicant has given us and I'll read a few of them for the benefit of the ~public of what would be permitted -- what they are proposing would be permitted uses and what they are proposing would be with conditional use permits. A Condi~~ional Use Permit being, of course, they'd have to come back in for a public hearing. Animal care facility. Artist studio. Arts and entertainment and recreation facility~` indoors. A church. Let's see. Education, such as a private education insfitution. A ba~'nk. A health care or social service office. A hotel or motel would be with a Conditionall~Use Permit, as I read through this. A laundromat would be a permitted use. Personal or professional service. Public utility. Restaurants would be by CUP only. A retail store on their list would be a permitted use. I think a possible compromise would be fhat~we could qualify a retail store as a Conditional Use Permit and that would have to come back through and give neighbors opportunity to comment on that. We have an ov ~`rwhelming lack of representation of neighbors to the west at the last two hearings that we have had on this to comment on what they would like to see there. One thing that al~~ ays amazes me when these kind of developments come through is we make a broad assumption that the patrons of this are going to come from 60 miles away to trade at this tfacility. I mean anyone who -- who builds or opens their businesses here is going to be~looking for those neighbors around them to support the business that they do, which in the general aspect of the city cuts down vehicle trips everywhere. It may increase them~n your area. So, I mean there is -- there is some trade off there. You don't have to drive as far to go to the grocery store or the bakery or what have you. So, I mean there ~s -- there is some benefit to providing retail within walking distance of neighborhoods. So, to eliminate all use of retail on the -- on the west to northwest of this, I don't th~ink it's appropriate. I think it's appropriate to give neighbors a comment, a method b~'y which to comment on what will be going in and have their opinion heard. So, I would be in support of possibly any development being subject to a Conditional Use Permit~~in there. That would be my stand on that. I guess I'd have to get the rest of your ~opinion on that. As far as the Corporate Drive extraordinary impact fee, I would say that we need to stick with the staff report on that. I think that's a critical piece. Of cours'e, the Waltman Lane build out is already in there. I guess both of fhose are already in ~here. So, that would not change. The only other question that the applicant is not in agreement with the staff report is the percentage of Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 31 of 57 build out that would be allowed ~ resolved. I think that the Corpora because it's going to be very hard It was stated that 8,000 vehicle tri commercial space. I think that 150 think that would be a fair comprom think fhat your -- like I said, you'r wants to purchase and build on t access is huge for anybody who is going to force -- it's going to force guess my only -- my change as a ~ properties on the west and northwE city, so nothing could go in there. f the residents need to be able to cor no windows on the side of the bui residents that may be more approK next to them. I think -- I think it's hotel may be an appropriate use. OBrien: Madam Chair, regarding for the retail applications or just -- office and I think -- Newton-Huckabay: Right now, you a principaily permitted use in a GG O'Brien: Okay. Newton-Huckabay: We could -- yc recommending that we prohibit dri there would be no bars, no one c would be by CUP. So, we can eit was a principally permitted use establishment would be a CUP. O'Brien: Okay. ior to fhe Corporate Drive situation having to be : Drive scenario is going to solve itself by design, ~ market this piece of property without access to it. ~ per day is approximately 267,000 square feet of 00 square feet of commercial space -- 125 to 150, I e on that. But I-- it's not a deal breaker for me. I going to have a hard time finding someone who s if it's not desirable for them and access -- and uilding or opening a business and so I think that it's ;he issue to resolve access here. So, that said, I ~mpromise would be I would suggest a CUP for all t, as a compromise between the developer and the -tels next to residential, I think fhat's something that ~nent on. Some people -- you can build a hotel with ing that folks live on and fhat may be -- for some ate to them than having some type of retail facility appropriate to make that decision at this point. A CUP requirement, are you suggesting that's only leaving out light office or -- right now it says light , it's zoned -- it's a C-G zone. Anything retail is know, the -- where is my notes? The applicant was thrus on the west and northwest, that they would -- Id be open after 10:00 p.m., and that a restaurant ~ go with the CUP -- any business on the west that the C-G zone or we could go with any retail Newton-Huckabay: Would be our c'ompromise. Commissioner Marshall, did you wish to reopen the Public Hearing and as;lc a question of staff? Marshall: No. I think I recall an answer earlier that we don't know how to determine how many vehicle use trips per da~y that would generate and I think that's where my comment was going was square footage to vehicle use trips per day based on square footage and I don't believe we are g~oing to be able to answer that. So, I think I'm going to have to make my best guess on th~'at. Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 32 of 57 Newton-Huckabay: Well, I think vehicle trips per day is a statistic, so based on your faith in a statistic you will have to go as square foot -- square footage build out is an actual data point that could be easil,y determined. Marshall: Well, my point being -- ~my point being fihat we were concerned about the vehicle trips a day and tha# we cannot correlate an exact rafiio between the square footage and the numbers that that g~enerates and that's -- Newton-Huckabay: But we are estimating this entire -- this entire property to .be approximately 320,000 square feet of commercial space. 300,000. 400,000 square feet of commercial space. So, 75~000 square feet is a small portion of that. Eighty percent. Marshall: Right. My consideratic considering 80 percent at this tim~ it's staff's recommendation of 75,0 150,000 would at least allow them probably not going to get a lot of si I agree that a big draw ticket is g again, they could -- if they -- th concerned of going beyond that, ~ a significant number of vehicle tri then, you're going to add to that determine how many vehicles trip; this area developed in a manner 1 but still allow the development. I' think it's good for the city to see appropriate location, as we have d ~ being 75 or 150. Not 80 percent. I'm not even ~ And I'm thinking between 75 and 150. Right now ) square foot. Mr. Nickels made the comment that ~ get an anchor store in there, which I agree, you're ~II tenants in there without a big draw ticket in there. ng to want Corporate Drive finished out, but, then, gs happen and if it's not finished out, I am very ~ause you're going to have -- you're going to create ~ per day simply by putting that road through and, gnificantly with a large anchor store. How do we per day that creates? We can't. I would like to see ~t is as least obtrusive to the neighbors as we can, ieeds to go commercial. I'd like to see a nice -- I good commercial development go in here. I#'s an ermined over time, so -- Newton-Huckabay: Commissioner~~Marshall? Marshall: -- again, I'm struggling with the 150,000 versus 75,000 square footage are the two numbers that I've heard an~d I'm still in my mind grappling with the retail establishments -- a Conditional Use~Permit could be acceptable -- Newton-Huckabay: We are going t;o" have to -- we are going to have to -- Marshall: Make a decision. Newton-Huckabay: You're going Marshall: Yeah. ve to just jump in. Newton-Huckabay: Yeah. We are~'going to have to make a recommendation. Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 33 of 57 O'Brien: I'm in favor of 150 minimum for -- to start with on this. I think we do have to have a number somewhere. I think~Ceverything else would be just a guess anyway, so -- Newton-Huckabay: Okay. What ab~out -- then, the only thing left on the table we are going to have to make a call on is th~e west and northwest uses. O'Brien: They only show two buildings fihere right now on the west side. But, of course, that's -- we don't know what retailer or whatever is going to be going in there. Maybe we limit it to just one retail and the ~rest light office. I don't know if that would satisfy the applicant or not. As far as the nortti~side, I don't have a problem with what is designated right now by staff. ~ Newton-Huckabay: Well, as the chair -- in normal circumstances I would make the motion at this point, but I don't believe I can. Marshall: Okay. So, I'll take a sta I'm pretty new at this, so -- okay testimony, I move to recommend a~ and PP 08-001, as presented in t 2008, with fihe following modificatio northwest and west edges of thE 150,000 square foot until such ti finished, the bridge at Waltman L Does that cover it? Newton-Huckabay: I think the intE condition of the entire project. So, issue? Baird: Madam Chair, I don't bel Newton-Huckabay: Okay. Marshall: Okay. So, I'd say end of Baird: End of motion. Marshall: End of motion. `at it. All right. Appreciate your patience with me. After considering all staff, applicant, and publia -roval to the City Council of file numbers AZ 06-063 e staff report for the hearing date of March 20th, s: First, that a CUP be required for all uses on the rproperty and that buildable space be limited to ie as both the intersection of Waltman Lane is ne is finished, and Corporate Drive is extended. :tion at Waltman Lane and Meridian was -- is a redundant, I think. Just -- Ted will that have an on. Watters: Excuse me, Madam Chair; Commissioner Marshall, can I clarify your motion. Did you mean to require Conditional~Use Permit for office uses along the west boundary and northwest corner? ~ Marshall: No, not office uses. Thank you. Thank you. How can I go back and clarify this. ~~ Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 34 of 57 Newton-Huckabay: You can rest~ opinion the only thing that is at ~ applicant is offering up to -- I think v drive-thrus, drinking establishment: 10:00 p.m. and that restaurants Conditional Use Permit. That no obtrusive lighting would be allowed allowed through Conditional Use PE Marshall: Thank you. Yes. Newton-Huckabay: And to qualify Marshall: Thank you for the help Newton-Huckabay: Does that help Marshall: Let me firy this again need to start over at the beginnii Newton-Huckabay: Yes. Marshall: Okay. Start over at the public tesfiimony, I moved to recom 06-063 and PP 08-001 as presen1 20th, 2008, will the following modifl and west edge of the property, lin northern boundaries. Prohibited u: and businesses with hours of oper~ Newton-Huckabay: Would not be Marshall: I'm sorry? ; your motion. I think our options here -- in my esfiion is a retail use or a restaurant use. The ~ should accept their recommendation of prohibiting and businesses wifih hours of operation exceeding r food establishments can be allowed through a ;ar loading areas, delivery areas, trash areas, or Additional -- and, additionally, retail uses would be nit. fhe hotel or motel -- iate fhat. kay. Yes. Okay. Can I start over with the -- do I eginning. After considering all staff, applicant, and end approval to the City Council of file numbers AZ d in fhe staff report for the hearing date of March ~tions: Concerning the properties on the northwest r uses to allow some retail along the western and s would be drive-thrus and drinking establishments on exceeding 10:00 p.m. Restaurants -- Newton-Huckabay: Would not be allowed. Marshall: Would not be allowed.' Thaf's prohibited. And businesses with hours of operafiion exceeding 10:00 p.m. Restaurants or food establishments could be allowed through a Conditional Use Permit. I would like to say all retail establishments -- Newton-Huckabay: Would require ;,a` conditional use. Marshall: Would require a Conditional Use Permit. No rear loading areas, delivery areas, trash areas, or obtrusive lighting would be allowed. Additional restrictive uses could also be listed -- oh. Including that construction be limited to 150,000 square foot, until such time as Corporate Drive i,s extended through. End of motion. Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 35 of 57 Newton-Huakabay: Sonya, are we clear there? Watters: I believe so. Newton-Huckabay: Okay. O'Brien: Second. Newton-Huckabay: All in favor? opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES: TWO ABSENT. Newton-Huckabay: Okay. That's O'Brien: Can we take five? Newton-Huckabay: Yeah. We will ( Recess. ) end of that hearing. a ten minute break. Item 9: Continued Public He`aring from March 6, 2008: CUP 08-002 Request for Conditional Use Pe~rmit for a drive through establishment in a C-G zone within 300 feet of another drive through facility for Sonic Southern Sprinqs by Boise Food Service - 1870 South Meridian Road: Newton-Huckabay: I'm going to open the Public Hearing on CUP 08-002, request for a Condifiional Use Permit for a drive ~thru establishment in a C-G zone within 300 feet of another drive-thru facility for Sonic~Southern Springs by Boise Food Service at 1870 South Meridian Road. Take staff. ~~ Parsons: Thank you, Madam C application before you tonight is establishment within 300 feet c residential zoning district. Design for the proposed structure and sit corridor Meridian Road. The subj Springs Subdivision No. 2 near tr Road. The property is bordered o zoned C-G and L-O. To the east is Southern Springs No. 2 and 3, zc zoned R-8. One thing -- I'll move 1 ifs kind of an old picture, but dirE adjacent drive-thru windows are foi lot and this lot here. And, then, her like to point out is this is -- staff goi air Person, Members of the Commission. The ~ Conditional Use Permit to allow a drive-thru another drive-thru establishment and existing view approval is also requested for the purpose -- because of its location adjacent to an entryway ~t site is located on Lot 11, Block 1, of Southern southeast corner of Meridian Road and Overland the north by Southern Springs No. 1 and No. 2, tunning Brook Estates, zoned R-4. To the south is ed C-G. And to the west is EIk Run Subdivision, the site plan -- or the aerial here. You can see -- tly to the north there are -- those are where the he other businesses. So, apologize for that. This is your residential subdivisions. One other thing I'd his revised site plan on Tuesday and I did transmit Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 36 of 57 that to the clerk, so, hopefully, you did receive that in your packet. I believe when I sent out the memo earlier on Monday to~the clerk I had mentioned fhat this landscape island had been removed. Well, with fhis most recent site plan the applicant has put that back in. And the applicant is proposing fio construct a new 1,526 square foot Sonic drive-thru restaurant on the subject property. ~Twenty-one parking stalls are provided on site with 17 of the stalls proposed for drive-up ordering or vehicle dining and the four remaining stalls are for patrons who wish to e~at at the patio area. Access to the site is taken from a private internal driveway east of ~Meridian Road and extends north to Overland Road and South to East Calderwood Drive. So, basically, here is Meridian Road. Here is where the access comes into the ~development and along -- running along east -- I guess I'll go back one slide. Along ~he east -- or north-south and east of Meridian Road and, then, at one point it exits onto Overland Road and the other one is -- here is where East Calderwood Drive is. The app'icant is proposing hours of operation from 6:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m., Monday through Th ~ rsday, and 6:00 a.m. to 12:00 a.m. Friday through Sunday. Other drive-thru businesses in the Southern Springs development are restricted to the hours of 6:00 a.m. ~and 10:00 p.m. to help alleviate the effects of noise, traffic, odors, glare and other nuisances created by the businesses to the adjacent residential properties. Staff recom ~~ ends hours of operations to be limited to the same hours as the other drive-fhru businesses in the development. That applicant has submitted a landscape plan with tli~is application. The street buffer landscaping along Meridian Road was reviewed and,~approved with the final plat for Southern Springs Subdivision No. 2. Staff has revie~wed the internal parking lot landscaping depicted on the landscape plan and found i~ -- and finds it substantially complies with the landscaping requirements in the ~4DC. Alfhough a drive-thru restaurant may be an appropriate use for this site, staff has major issues with this site design and building elevations that are currently proposed. Meridian Road is a main thoroughfare and is designated an entryway corridor in ~he City of Meridian and lends itself to opportunities for high quality architecture and si`e design. However, the applicant is proposing to orient the subject building with the rear elevation facing Meridian Road. The rear elevation does not comply with the design review standards for buildings adjacent to an entryway corridor. Further, fhere ~are covered car hop carport structures proposed adjacent to Meridian Road that staff believes are not appropriate next to an entryway corridor. Because the site plan and`elevations do not comply with all the design review guidelines, staff believes the applica~nt should redesign the site and go -- kind of go back to that site plan. Here are those covered carports we were talking about, the parking stalls. You can see here is Merid~ian Road again, you know, trash enclosures. This actually protrudes out farther than the proposed building again. Staff does have concerns with this rear elevation. ~Here is where their seating area is going to be proposed, so, again, it's not fronting on Meridian Road as the design review standards require. Here are the previous elevations. Just -- as you can see here is the front of the building here. Again, you see the arched canopies. This is where the applicant -- the patrons would be sitting. Here is ~the rear of the building. Not much modulation or variafion in the facade there. Very plain walls. Again, you have the doorways, you have the electrical paneling there that you can view from -- again, this is all from Meridian Road. The applicant has revised th~e elevations on the site and -- excuse me -- they are proposing to add a screen -- propo~sing to screen the back of the building with a nine Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 37 of 57 foot wall. The applicant is -- the building between the material -- b The wall is proposed to be constru~ paneling. Also on the proposed -- ~ post display boards. So, basically that they are adding. It's not real feature, rather than adding really c are the menu board, medallions th; two of those on that wall as well. T canopy on the west elevation, sim Included on the revised elevations east that adds to the parapet varial The applicant has made some sigr however, staff would prefer the fror drive aisle. So, again, if I can go b~ is where they have added facia on see here if's -- it's hard to see on ~ out there. You can see that facia their previous elevations to show u; weren't added onto those elevation lines is, basicatly, these are those can order from their vehicle and w can see there is some modulation, you'd basically have a rectangle bo some improvements to the elevatic concerns with the rear elevations frc applicant comply with all the provi report. And that concludes my pres Newton-Huckabay: Thanks, Bill. Marshall: Madam Chair, I have a q Newton-Huckabay: Commissioner vall is approximately six feet from the back of the rween the building and the drive-thru speaker box. :ed of the same building materials, i.e., the concrete so on the proposed wall -- screen wall there are two -what the applicant is proposing is here is the wall ~ part of the building, it's just more as a screening :sign elements to the back of the buildings. These : I'm speaking of. They are also proposing to place e applicant is also proposing a detached arch decor ~r to the west canopy featured in the front facade. ` a half rounded facia added to the north, south, and in and screens the roof top mechanical equipment. Eicant changes to the elevations requested by staff, facade face Meridian Road, not the internal private ;k to these other elevations, they have added -- this ie new elevations and, then, I'll step back. You can ~ese elevations, but you can see it kind of popping idded here. And fhe one thing they failed on with ~too, was that the canopy for the parking structures . So, they have added -- that's what those dashed -arking stalls that you pull up and that the patrons itresses come out and take their orders. So, you ~ome change, but if those canopies were removed `on Meridian Road. Again, the applicant had made is and site plan for the site. Staff feels -- still has iting on Meridian Road. Staff recommends that the ions listed in the staff report -- the previous staff ntation and I stand for any questions. on. Marshall: Bill, let me figure out in my mind about this, but if the entire -- if we went back to the site there. If this entire site i~ere turned 180 degrees, how many of the issues does that address? Parsons: Madam Chair, Members with the applicant there are quite a those things. I'm not sure where thE that information. So, if you wouldn't that quesfion and see what issues ~ don't know why it doesn't work. S~ they -- they know the site better as f ` the Commission, I know, basically, from talking nr constrainfs on the site as far as easements and are located on the site. They would have more of ind, I'd like to have them address that or ask them there and I know they have tried to do that, but I I'd much prefer have them address that, so that as those kind of constraints. Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 38 of 57 Marshall: My question, though, is to'your -- would that address your concerns. Parsons: Correct. Marshall: It would. Okay. Parsons: If this building would -- i facing on Meridian Road, staff wouli Marshall: And the parking here wo f this building would flip and have the seating area i like that a lot better. be over on this side? Parsons: No. That could stay. I mean our major concern is really that rear of that building fironting on a major entry -- major thoroughfare and with no -- and with what the applicant's proposing with just a screened wall and a detached arch canopy, that's not really addressing the back facade, ~t's just acting as a screen tool, rather than actually addressing the rear facade. Marshall; Thank you, Bill. Parsons: You're welcome. Newton-Huckabay: Commissioner;0'Brien. O'Brien: Yeah. Madam Chair. E panels in the back of the building tl very consistent, because less tha finishing which the whole side pan are just painted over. I don't know seems to be some inconsistencies ~ I agree with the -- the issues with the electrical ~e. I have comment about that. We are not being 50 yards away there is a building they are just or wail of fhat thing is full of electrical paneis that I don't remember that going through us, but there h what we look at here. Hood: Commissioners, I'm not exactly sure which building. I know there are a couple of buildings, one that actually went through design review and one of our planners got east and west confused, so looked at the front elevation and fhought it was facing Meridian Road and, in fact, it was the back of the building. The other one you may be referring to I'm not quite sure the history on it o~how it got approved, but -- O'Brien: It's on the same side as this, just a little ways further south and the electrical panels are facing north or are on the'north side of the building. Hood: Yeah. I know of at least one out here on Meridian Road, so finro wrongs don't make a right. So, I don't know all ~the reasons, but I think the planning department, I think, let one or two or maybe even more go through the process wifhout being reviewed for consistency with design review. Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 39 of 57 O'Brien: The only thing -- fhe on there was so much of it on that sic Hood: Yeah. O'Brien: I agree with it being an ason it caught my eye is that it was so massive, the building. That's all. sore as part of the corridor. Parsons: I'd also like to add, if you go and look at all the other Sonics throughout the community, most of their seating a~eas are fronting on a roadway. So, in this particular case this one doesn't, it's on an inte~rnal driveway -- public -- private driveway. Newton-Huckabay: Would the Thompson: Good evening, Madan I am with BRS Architects. I'm repr~ addressing the concerns that are from Bill Parsons, dated March 17t items that staff had. Okay. I gues: He said he wanted you guys to a here? What we have -- we have ~ easements, setbacks, you know, tl a site, we end up with about 19,4 percent of that property can be us~ coming along here and we have believe it jumps over one more fii course, we have all the propert~ development. And what's happe Okay. We got vehicles that are co this way and we really want them know, looping back on ourselves. here. So, bringing them in this w driver on fihe left side and fhe dr window. So, we are bringing then here and that's -- that's where you removed it inifially was there wa; need a 20 foot width of clear and : talked with Joe Silva down at the ~ when they come in they can acc building can park their apparatus r they can access from here. An building. So, he had no constrain SSC and we had a dialogue witr plan, slowed this width, and he g have a copy of that, but we do ha~ this with a 15 foot right here. ON know that -- I caught a catch phr~ nt like to come forward. ~Chair, Commissioners. My name is Joe Thompson, 'senting Boise Food Service. I guess we can start by in the last memorandum -- memorandum that I got i, 2008. I'm assuming that these are the outstanding `we could start off with let me describe the area first. lk me about that. Do we have a little laser pointer bout 34,800 square feet of area in this lot. Due to e usual sfiuff you have to run into when you develop ~0 square feet that's usable, which means about 56 d. And here are the easements. We got something ~n easement along here and, then, like fihis and I ie and, then, we have the shared access. And, of `and the setbacks -- the existing setback for the ~ing with this site -- well, first off, we want safety. iing in here. We don't want them to have to come in ;oming in here, so we are not kind of looping -- you -So, what .you`re doing is doubling up the traffic up iy. And as you know in America we drive with the /er is usually the one that accesses the drive-thru `~in through here and, then, the loop right on around ~re at right there. Now, as far as this island, why we ~a question about fire apparatus accessing it, they >mething about SSC needing that same access. We re department. He said -- or he agreed with us that ~ss part of -- within a 150 feet of any part of this ~re, here, or they can come in here if they have to or I he agreed that they can access all parts of the `s on this 20 foot width. So, that brought us back to ~them and explained our situation, showed the site /e us an approval letter -- I don't know if you guys ~ that stamped and signed showing that he approved ~y. Also, as far as the orientation of the building, I ~e on the previous hearing about new urbanism and Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 40 of 57 that is really fhe catch phrase in this whole area. You're really seeing it in Boise and Eagle and you guys are having thikt in Meridian as well. What you got to decide is what s the front of the building, where is the pedestrian coming in, where do you want the -- where do you want to cater to~hese pedestrians. Well, with this site we have got - - we have got Nampa-Meridian Road -- or not Nampa-Meridian, but Kuna-Meridian Road right here. A high volume of traffic, really uncomfortable, really, to walk next to and that's why we have got fhe me~andering sidewalks and landscaping and such. But for this particular development -- can staff go back to the overall -- right there. That will work. We have got -- as part of this`development we had to have a walkway along here and, really, that services this prop~erty -- or this area and this area. And this is our property. And what we have decided is wifih the site constraints we had, the safety as far as fhe traffic, we felt, well, normally we'd like to face this -- this -- you know, the front onto this road. Well, let's go ahead{kand achieve that new urban kind of process and put the seating up here and really cater to the people that are in the development and consider fhat our front. We agreed~with staff that -- can you go back to fhe -- there we go. We agreed with staff that, yeah, we don't want this there. We saw what was happening down the road, as Commissioner O'Brien brought up, so we went ahead and attempted to make this rear elevatio4n look like the front. We went so far as to take this element and put it in the back. We noticed we had the meters there, so we took the rest of this -- fhis building material, the plaques and all the ornamentations we had on there and put it on a screen wall there. kAnd, then, on top of that, the canopy that we have here tha# kind of lended a ~ook of S~onic, we placed that there. So, as far as a person -- an uninformed person driving along~the road here, they are going to see that, they are going to see these features and they are going to look just like what we have up here, minus the seating. These canopie~s right here, there was a comment brought up that fhis is really just a box without these canopies. Well, these canopies are part of Sonic, they aren't going to remove those. That is their -- their theme. That is how they work. They have -- it's a car hop, you drive' in just like the old retro '50s style type of thing. So, as far as a look, the material, all of that is -- they are trying to achieve that. That's what makes them stand out. And I know~~there was another comment brought about before in staff about trying to make the mater~als match with the rest of the subdivision. Well, fhis is not compatible. This is a modern -- more modern looking -- or at least what they considered back in the 'S0s to be a~modern type style. And, really, I think it will lend to the area. People recognize Sonic and they know -- know what it is. And, lastly, regarding the hours of operation,,~this development is 6:00 to 10:00. What Sonic normally has is during the summer months -- that would be between, oh, May and September, they like to run from 6: ~~0 to 12:00, which is a two hour -- two hour increase. A little bit later. But what we are looking at his -- if you could go back to the overall again. We have got this developm~ent right here, we have got a commercial here, we have got 200 plus feet before we hit any type of residential. We have a huge buffer, a ditch, trees -- I feel that the smells a~nd the odors, the noise and lights from -- you know, the noise -- or the lighting from th~e cars coming into this place, they are going to be overshadowed by the traffic that yo~u may have there, because I can guarantee that you can have more traffic here than you~have coming into here. Just -- it's just how Meridian Road is. It's become one of fhe busiest roads in the valley and I can confess -- attest to Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 41 of 57 that, because I used to commute for any questions. Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Tho Thompson: Uh-huh. it. Anyways, thafs about all I have and I'll stand Newton-Huckabay: Is this building'`similar or the same as the Sonic recently built out in Nampa near the Costco developme~nt? Is it the same architectural design? Thompson: They should be pretty similar. It's their -- their kind of theme. The metallic type of sheen and, then, the colors they use, yes. Newton-Huckabay: The one in Na current Sonic in Meridian and that's Thompson: Okay. He's going to ju Newton-H ucka bay: Okay. ~ looks substantially different than the one -- the at -- I was just curious. It's the same? in there. O'Brien: I have a question, Madam Chair. Mr. Thompson, did you hold any neighborhood meetings regarding ~is operation with the people that are close in the residential area? Thompson: Yes. Yes. That was~a requirement, that within 300 feet, and we had a neighborhood meeting at -- actually, ~ust north of there at the -- one of the buildings in this development. So, we were able to discuss and point -- you know and show where things were going to be. ~ OBrien: I don't know if -- can Thompson: Well, there was a few that you run into when you have a ~ are worried about noise, lights, smE fhe lights are going to be no diff~ Nampa-Meridian Road and the di: property right in between another So, really, it's not going to be that ii O'Brien: Thank you. I have no nt, but was it relatively positive? eople there and it's -- it was pretty much the usual mmercial development near a neighborhood. They ~. And, really, the location we are at, the noise and ~nt than what you have on the -- you know, the ~nce that we have -- we have anofher commercial ~ivate road and, then, we have this -- this project. usive. r -- Marshall: Madam Chair, I do have 'a question. So, the reason for not turning this 180 is because you want to face in? ~ Thompson: No. That was more of a compromise. We would have liked to, you know, had it face the normal way. I mean~we wanted to appease staff and Meridian -- the City Meridian Planning 8 Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 42 of 57 of Meridian, but it really came dov drive-thru works, you know, wher building. And with easements we I seriously -- it would not have wor trying to keep a similar number of ; even so far as this easement h effectively widen the site and, then right here where it kind of widened Marshall: So, you're saying that seafing at this end and just flip it that makes any sense. to the size of the site, the traffic flow, and how a you're on the left side and how you approach a d in place to try and flip that around, it would have d. At least the site plans we ran through wifh it, ~Ils, the same accesses, the shared easement and e helps -- as a shared access, helps widen -- he least amount of easement was right in this area ~ we came through here. can't shift the building back this way, placing the in this box, placing the drive-thru on the side. If Thompson: Yeah. We would have°'had to move this -- these canopies over to here -- I'm trying to fhink how it would work~ I mean we have got it drawn up, we just could not get it to work. ` Marshalt: Okay. O'Brien: Just one other question, Madam Chair. Newton-Huckabay: Uh-huh. O'Brien: So, the people coming in fr"om -- or heading norfh on Meridian Road, they want to have a sandwich, so they access4 the road -- I don't remember what the name of the road was. This here. And they+~come in here, so is there another road? I don't remember the other access to go back on Meridian Road they have to go back out -- Thompson: We have an office -- a little area right here. This is shared access with their parking area. You come out through here, you can either go this way, come back out here or you can go all the way down -- there is another road down here. Or you can take this on up and it kind of curves ~back over to Overland. O'Brien: I remember that part Newton-Huckabay: Okay. We will Thompson: Thank you. Parsons: Madam Chair? Newton-Huckabay: Yes, sir. Thank you. public testimony now. Thanks. Parsons: One thing I failed to mention, too. Staff did get a letter of opposition regarding the project. I failed to mention that. It was from a Blaine and Mary Jane Bennett in opposition of the project. ~. Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 43 of 57 Newton-Huckabay: Okay. Parsons: You should have that in ~ur packet. Newton-Huckabay: I had two or three of them in -- in here I believe, so -- the two people I have to tesfiify both are in favor of the project. Is there anyone in the audience who is against or neutral that would ~ike to testify first? Okay. Skip Hofferber. Hofferber: Madam Chairman and ( of Boise Food Service. P.O. Box was a couple things -- Mr. Parson; perpendicular to the street. Our C this one, and the Treasure Valley : addressing what you're saying the i I:t's a concrete board. All the store eight years. We will have to go bac built. Like Overland store, the olde So, they will all, then, have that sa building 180, it just does not fit with on the other side, because the carn to the property. The -- Billy Ray an~ got where the canopies -- we need know, it's not -- you know, you can' able to, you know, pay for the pro think there is a total of 17 order takii other things that we were addressii put the canopies and everything on or go forward, whichever. Not that We did -- we added the wall and h boards, which are illuminated on fir fhat piece at the -- if you look a# the O'Brien: You have a pointer there, Hofferber: Pardon me? O'Brien: Could you use the pointer Hofferber: Okay. Yeah. This is wf we show a side view of it here. WI This canopy and the structure -- I d~ got three panels that fit over the to~ those at the front and the back. We this is just what's usually at the front get that continuity, so the building dc immissioners. I'm Skip Hofferber, I'm the president 986, Boise, Idaho. And we do have -- I think there 'said -- I think this is our f.ifth store that does not set Idwell store, the one under construction in Nampa, ore at Costco, the one you spoke of. They all are etallic or look or whatever, it's called Nechia board. were required by corporate to redo every seven to now and retro fit all of our stores that are currently : one, is just seven years old. That's due this year. ~e continuity and look. We did try to -- we had the ~e drive-thru. It becomes unsafe with the drive-thru iies do not fit on this side, as you can tell adjacent his office I know have tried two or three things. He C number of stalls to get cars there. If's not -- you get down to where you only got eight stalls and be ~rty, pay for the business, and so we needed -- I ~ stations that we have. The -- trying to think of the ~. The back -- when we changed the building and ~e back -- if you could back up to that one -- fhe -- ine, the newer one of that. Yeah. There you go. all the panels and did all that and had the poster ~ same and that drive-thru canopy is what that is, ~ry bottom at the back. re, please. it they call -- it's, actually, a drive-thru canopy and ch kind of matches the arch -- the ones of these. ~'t -- there is just -- I mean it's massive steel. It's ~of it and there is not enough room to add one of id add this at both the front and the back, because >f the building. So, we have -- you know, trying to s look like it's the front of the building. There is -- Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 44 of 57 the seating, you know, as far as bE know it's a corridor. If you go -- yc fhat's -- I mean talk about corridor i and everyfhing right at the main ei those issues with fhe canopies ai equipment on top with fhis extra pa old car hop. We have car hops. W speak this evening regarding noi development. It was never, you kn the requirements and everything. I see approval. We do have -- and ~ are also in Meridian at 2160 East I and there is no buildings fhat prc Norco's off to the side. And there between us and the -- and fhe resic any complaints at that site and the you're 200 feet -- and also the drivE because that's where the speaker's the noise level at night. We are lii and thafs just during fihe summerti winter, meaning, you know, Octobe to a lot of them up and down ther morning, McDonald's, 2:00 or 3; competitive, that's why we would rE all I have. Thank you. Newton-Huckabay: Thank you. ng at the front of the road -- I mean the corridor. I a're looking at the back of KFC and A&W. I mean ito your city, you're looking at their trash receptacle trance into the city. So, we have tried to address d everything that they have added and hide the apet. It is -- it's a retrofit '50s. It's a diner. It's the ~ deliver. It's that -- I know the developer is going to i everything is supposed to be the same in his ~w, designed for that. We have -- I tried to meet all :hink we have done a pretty good job and I'd like to %ith the noise level, too, we are 200 feet away. We airview. We are 100 feet from the residence there :`rude from the back of our building -- you know, > going to be a building back behind us as a buffer ~nts. So, noise is not a factor. We have never had ~mells and everything -- I mean you're -- you know, !thru is at the back where it will be even less noise, at, you know, and it's facing, actually, the road. So, iited hours at the Meridian store. 6:00 to midnight ne and we are normally closed at 10:00 during the `1 st on through. So, if`s limited hours. As opposed ~, Taco Bell and all them, 2:00, 3:00 o'clock in the l0, you know. But we have to be somewhat ~uest those hours from 6:00 to midnight. So, that's Ross. Ross: Madam Chair Person, Peopli~ of the Commission, my name is Lawrence Ross. I reside at 1684 East Braemere in Boise. I am the developer and an adjacent property owner and I might just pass this around. I have got copies here for everybody, too, but -- ~. Newton-Huckabay: You'll need to Ross: What I kind of distributed tl well as what we kind of used when Springs. Southern Springs is a lit kind of runs through it and limited a put three parcels together. There v property. We, basically, have an ~ center -- a center through road th~ out to -- comes back out to Overla middle of the property. And the : adjacent to that. And a lot of the - been just basically -- can we just N d in one for the record, Mr. Ross. ~re is just, basically, our marketing information, as re went through and got city approvai for Southern : bit different property. We have got a creek that ;ess being on the state highway. So, we, basically, s a question earlier addressing how we access the cess at Calderwood. Then, we have, basicaily, a runs through here, crosses over, and comes back i and we have a full access, basically, right in the nic that is looking at going on is just immediately it seems like a lot of the interest in the project has ~d of see the site plan again, please. Has been -- Meridian Planning 8 Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 45 of 57 the orientation of fheir building and I can just tell you from developing -- I own the Schuck's that's on the corner and I own the 15,000 square feet of retail that's just to the north of this, which is the Southern Springs retail buildings where Moxie Java and Wheat Montana and -- we have goyt it about 90 percent leased. But the difficulty we have had in just developing these p~roperties with the rear access and all the frontage views towards the street has been ~~it's been tough where ever we have done it. And I just -- I fhink if you want the new u~rbanism -- and specifically on fhese two sites, we really don't want to have any access~ points off of fhe access road as far as where they pull in off the highway, because we ~want to get traffic off the road, so we don't have any congestion issues here. We didn't put a curb cut in and fihey didn't put a curb cut in. So, you're really rear loading and so you have got to be able to get all the way around -- get all the way around the building in order to make them work and that's why I think what they have done is -- works well, because you keep the -- you know, the patio away from the traffic almost so you're not just sitting there watching cars drive by and as a parent and eating outside, I'd prefer to eat here, as opposed to right here next to a-- you know, 40,000 cars a day on Meridian-Kuna highway. A couple other points I was wanting to make. I'm not sure on ~where they got our hours for resfirictions on drive- thrus. On a retail building that we did up here to the north, we actually -- it's a spec retail building, there is two buildings there, 15,000 square feet, as I said. We have got -- we had three drive-fhrus approved o~n it. Didn't have any uses. Basically went through the approval process, and out of th~ose three drive-fhrus we are actually using two of them -- or, excuse me, using one o~f them. Moxie Java is the only drive-thru that we ended up using and all the other spaces are rented. We have a Wheat Montana on one end, so we are going to make some conversions on the drive-thru into an outside dining patio. And on the other end we just ~eased it to a dry-cleaning company fhat, basically, has a-- it's -- I guess it is a drive-ir~, but they park, get out of their car, go to a computerized thing to either deliver their laundry or pick it up. It also has kind of a curb side service, but -- so, you know, th~ere is limited drive-thrus in the area as well. But I think the only way they have got a restriction on our drive-thrus is what was imposed on fhat retail area. And I didn't have a~y objections to 6:00 to 10:00 p.m. in a strip retail center. You know, most of our bus'inesses are done by 7:00 or 8:00 o'clock anyway. Maybe 9:00 o'clock with a later -- you know, later drive-in. And I have no objections as a deveioper adjacent property own~er with them having, you know, extended hours during summer. And, then, just maybe talk a little bit about maybe where there is nobody here complaining about anything. When we went through Southern Springs, we, basically, sat and talked to all th`e neighbors that live -- could I get the other one, please. We had like three or four meetings with all the neighbors that live back in here. A few people from Meridian Greens. ~Just about how we were going to handle the noise and this piece right here was always zoned commercial. We actually purchased this parcel, fied it in, rezoned it to co~mmercial and, then, we have some office and commercial here on another parcel. ~And I don't know if anybody was on P&Z at the time, but, you know, we as developers kind of -- I think came in with a good enough concept, had more of a difficult time~~maybe, appeasing, you know, the bike path and the fencing, the screening fhat we p~t in there. Trees and everything. The neighbors objected more to the bike pafh we ha~d to put in than they did the commercial use. We have got a six foot fence that runs a;long here. We have got a 50 foot easement with Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 46 of 57 Nampa-Merid'ian Irrigation District bureaucracy, for lack of a better r fence here, neighbors wanfing it hf But we were able to work through considerable amount of screening ~ the lots that are in there, too, and ~ passed out. But there is an incredik are doing, so that probably said mc that's all I have. Thank you. Newton-Huckabay: Thank, Mr and this whole thing was just a quagmire of le, a better word with Nampa-Meridian wanting a `e. City wanting it here. Where is the green belt. ~verything and so, basically, there is -- there is a ~ng that -- along that ditch and we have got two of >u can see it a little bit better on that -- that thing I e screening here between neighbors and what they ~e in light of extending the hours to midnight. And Discussion or shall we close the Public Hearing? Marshall: I would like -- Madam Chair, I would like to ask staff about the hours, if they could refresh me again -- I remember reading it, I'm just trying to recall it all -- the concern about limiting the hours to 1j~0:00 o'clock. Parsons: Yeah. Madam Chair Pe the previous approvais on the site ~ Planning Commission had limited t was talking about on the previous ~ and, basically, basing those reasor down, keep fumes, keep odors awa~ stuck with that recommendation to was what you guys previously acted Marshail: Thank you. Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Marshall, Marshall: We can move to close 'son, Commissioner Marshall, basically, I looked at id fhis Commission -- not this Commission, but the ie hours of operations on the building site that he ~`pprovals for the drive-thrus to 6:00 to 10:00, so -- `s on trying to appease the neighbors, keep noise `firom the adjacent residential uses and so staff just ust stick with those hours of operation, because it on in the past. you have any other comment? blic Hearing. O'Brien: I have a question for staff, Madam Mayor. Newton-Huckabay: Okay. O`Brien: So, I-- again, I have a que with having these type of establishn they call summer hours. I think it's all the other fast food restaurants tl the freeway. So, I don't know -- I ha - you saw fhat this was consist recommendations to have hours 6:0 Newton-Huckabay: Bill, can I add ion about the hours. I don't have a problem wifh -- ~nts, especially where it's being built, to have what etty consistent throughout that whole corridor with it are in that area, especially on the north side of ; a-- some concerns about that, so you read that - ~t with our recommendafions -- or the zoning to 10:00 -- fhat? Parsons: Sure. Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 47 of 57 Newton-Huckabay: Commissione discussions over the years about o~ to five years or so we have a lot oi predominately residential area in a where we live as being urban. C operations, the hours of operation, neighborhood residenfial feel to -- tc on that is you start to limit hours yo place may not apply consistently i proverbially coming baak to bite you O'Brien: That answers it as -- Newton-Huckabay: So, I-- and on restrict someone from making a livir that City Council is more often to ~ support them. So, with that said, I d fhe applicant is proposing on this -- three of us at least going with the -- Thursday, 6:00 to 12:00 Friday thro~ to have winter hours. You're cei customers to come and purchase yc method behind the madness is it ~ invasion of commercial into residen to remain consistent as a Commissic O'Brien: Yes. So, just to clarify, th O'Brien, having been a party in many of the rating hours from 6:00 to 10:00, over the last four levelopments coming in and they are coming into iestern ethos, if you will, where we don't think of e of our theories was fhat if we could limit the would give a lot of these homeowners more of a heir business. One of the problems that you have re looking for consistency and consistency in one another place and I think we have issues of it f you will. that note, I mean I'm not one to want to restrict -- ~, so to speak, and I have also known that -- seen 'verturn those restrictions of late than they are to in't have a problem with the hours of operation that ~on this site. So, I think I'd feel comfortable if the wrote it down here. 6:00 to 11:00 Monday through ~h Saturday, with fhe understanding they are going ainly not going to stay open if you don't have ar stuff. So, I'm okay with -- but that is some of the as efforts over the years to try to help ease the al -- predominately residenfial areas and an effort i. So, does that answer your question? 6:00 to 11:00 on Fridays? Newton-Huckabay: The applicant ~was proposing 6:00 to 11:00 Monday through Thursday and 6:00 to 12:00 Friday through Sunday. O`Brien: Friday fhrough Sunday, 6:00 to 12:00? And you say that the -- Newton-Huckabay: Sunday throughlThursday 6:00 to 11:00. Friday and Saturday 6:00 to 12:00. I'm clarifying a comment~ from Mr. Hofferber in the audience. Does that answer all your questions? O'Brien: Sunday through Thursday 6:00 to 11:00, 6:00 to 12:00 Friday and Saturday. Okay. Yes. We can close fhe Public Hearing? Madam Chairman, I move to close the Public Hearing CUP 08-002. ~ Marshall: Second. Newton-Huckabay: All those in favo~ Opposed? Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 48 of 57 MOTION CARRiED: THREE AYES'~ TWO ABSENT. Newton-Huckabay: Comments? Di Marshall: Well, I think -- persona hashing through in my mind, becau really juggling here is -- is this a understand -- I like the idea of havin this road, but I also understand thai to the city and for a building to turn i yeah, I'd find it easy to say, yes, fa~ the city and I am -- yeah, I got to ad nice to see a more inviting face an dress up the back of the building, Meridian Road. I think I'm starting t~ sfiill think I want to turn it, but I-- I w~ ion? r I think fhe only issue really left -- and I'm still : I-- I can see both arguments here and what I'm appropriate frontage to Meridian Road. I fully the seating back here. I like the idea of fronting to ~e want to put on a good face in a major entryway back to that area, I mean in -- in another situation, the smaller road. But this is a major entryway to it I-- I understand staff's argument that it would be I appreciate what the client has done in trying to ~cause it is fhe back of the building that is facing anderstand some of the issues as to turning it, so I t to put fronts on it is what I want to do. Newton-Huckabay: You don't think'~that the -- the two -- they are called the -- the architectural feature fhat's on fhe fro~`nt that's been added to the back and the top of the building like an archway that's been added to the front and the back, as well as the canopy -- what other changes would you make to the back to make it look more like a front? Rather than putting seating. ~ Marshail: Madam Chair, I would -- I that it's creating a modulation in fac~ facade here wifh fhis canopy as it sti of -- a change in the elevation, 1 significantly more inviting and attrac going to have a whole bunch of car; they are that busy. You know, busi trying to help shield some of that f here. But, again, I -- Newton-Huckabay: My opinion of recommendafions from the city staff, building needed to be flipped aro~ convincing me fihat maybe that's no1 back is missing in my mind would bE on the front, yes, you can say it look nonefheiess. You can put a canopy know you guys -- I have seen the c over there either and it doesn't look with all the bright colors and stuff, bu ppreciate that this is attempting to be the big arch, e that -- you can see a significant difference in the cs out over -- it creates a very different -- a change e eyes drawn to at least its -- and i find this ~e than this. Now, fhat being said, you're typically iere, too, lining up across here. At least we hope :ss is good, but -- and I do appreciate that this is m the back, that we have some screening back when I read this staff report and looked at the ~oked at the site plan, I was in agreement that fhe ~d. The applicant's done a pretty good job of he best way to go. I think the only thing that the ~ignage that made it look like a front. The canopy like a canopy on a front, but I mean it's a canopy, n the back porch. So, these new Sonics -- I don't e that's over in Nampa. It doesn't front fhe road ideous. They are somewhat of a garish building hey are -- but it's a theme building and -- Marshall: Madam Chair, I cannot speak to that. I have not seen the -- Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 49 of 57 Newton-Huckabay: The only thing of the building to make it look like modulafion on the back adds a lot. the drive-thru message menu board just perpendicular on the back migh sir, you aan't tesfify again. Sorry. drive-thru boards. Thank you. So, is -- I mean I think one thing th~ recommend this to before City Co~ building is going to look like. Baird: Madam Ghair, as a remind Newton-Huckabay: We are doing a Baird: Unless if's appealed to Coun Newton-Huckabay: Thank you for Baird: Perhaps if fhey have one think -- I think if you put some signage on the back he front of fhe building, I think the parapet or the ~Possibly moving the -- I'm not exactly sure where s. Putting it off to one side or the other, rather than make it a little -- a little less like fihe front. I'm sorry, sut I got it. Okay. We clarified the location of the ke I say, I, myself, am leaning towards -- with it as would have helped me substantially and would icil, is a color rendering of what the back of this decision could be final tonight. This is a CUP. UP. reminder, because it had gone over my head. m we could reopen the hearing. No? O'Brien: Madam Chair, I have a couple comments. Newton-Huckabay: Yes, sir. O'Brien: So, I think if's -- if I remer frequently -- is that probably half thE Meridian Road face the other way. enter from the back side and some ~ are all entered from the back side c little strip mail further on down that tl I forget the name of the pastry pl~ problem with the way it's facing now some kind of frontage there that ~n issues we have talked about tonigr recommend. ber -- I drive by that area, watch the growth quite buildings along that strip there on the east side of ace backwards. Schuck's is one of fhem fihat you :ntist offices. I have seen some ofher ones. They the road. So, it's not uncommon. There is like a :y have stores in the front, but something Wheat -- :e and a martinizing center. So, I don't have a ~ut I do agree with you that I think we should have `uld make it more inviting and hide some of the That's about fhe only change I would make or Newton-Huckabay: Uh-huh. I don't~ think the applicant's going to like what I have to say, but having just -- thank you, M ~~ Baird, for jelling that in my mind, because I was losing fihat. I'd like to see a color rendering of the back of this building before I approve it. ~k O'Brien: I would agree. Newton-Huckabay: So, I'd like to continue this hearing to our next meeting -- Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 50 of 57 Hood: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, just kind of a heads up for you. You actually have no items on the next agenda item, so we could have that meeting just solely for this or you get a night off. ISo, if you can -- I'm not -- I'm not trying to sway you to wade through it tonight if you're not up for that, but just as an FYI, be aware of what you're doing if you do continue it for ~two weeks is all I guess I'm trying to say. Newton-Huckabay: Right. I guess me'that this -- that this was a CUP be swayed, say, you know, I'm tot~ could get a better idea of what it re really not comfortable making that fi it's going to -- really what it's going ~ to make design decisions off of for I~ O'Brien: What does April 17th look Newton-Huckabay: We have a r not -- well, I-- are either of you -- O'Brien: I agree wifih what you're ss that frontage or back-age or whate~ don't want to take -- I don't want to have seen recently about all that el building as you drive by. And so I'd it's going to look like, and make it agree with -- I firmly believe that advantage of to make sure that that Newton-Huckabay: Bill -- we Marshall? Marshall: My thoughts? Newton-Huckabay: Yes. Marshall: We have closed the Public visualize pretty weil what it looks like think it's come a long way. I don't kn at this and this alone, because I don'~ that that is a major entryway to the c the front, which I think is appropriate very attractive from Meridian and I'r they have made some significant im to see a little more facade modulatio do to take that extra step. -- like I said, it just for some reason was escaping ~nd I can envision it somewhat and I can probably y happy with it not fronting on Meridian Road, if I Ily truly is going to look like. If I-- and I-- so, I'm ~I -- that final decision without a better idea of what ' look like. Architectural drawings like this are hard % people like me. ~ t for a zoning ordinance text amendment. I have are you leaning towards? ing. I think I would like to have a rendition of what r you want to call it, what it would look like. I just ~ke a chance on seeing something happen what I ~trical panel just sitting there against the side of a ke to see how well hidden this is going to be, what ~ok nice, especially it's an entrance to the city. I ~ese are the opport~unifies that we need to take appens. the Public Hearing, didn't we? Never mind. Mr. Hearing and I'm offering my thoughts. I think I can I'm still wavering on approval because of that -- I ~w the other buildings along there. I'm only looking know the other buildings on that there. I do know :y and I do want this to be attractive, not only from ~to face in fhe small street, but I also want it to be -- I`m really bouncing on approval on it. I think ~rovements relative to what it was, but I really like i, but, then, again, I don't know what else you can Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 51 of 57 Newton-Huckabay: Okay. Mr. Bai Baird: Madam Chair. Newton-Huakabay: We had a hearing not too long ago where we made a recommendations on a CUP for approval based on some criteria being met when we came back and it was on a Consent Agenda to be -- to final approve the CUP. Do you recall that where -- Baird: Madam Chair, I do not. But I think when you're talking about reviewing a visual - - if you do reopen the hearing and continue this for that, you're going to want an opportunity to have that presented to you and to deliberate on the record, rather than just having it on a Consent Agenda~ if that's fhe way you're going. Perhaps planning staff has some comment on that particular -- Newton-Huckabay: Because if we ~were in disagreement with it, we could remove it firom the Consent Agenda, couldn't we? Baird: Well, I'm just not seeing how'~ e can continue a hearing and finish it and make a decision on a Consent Agenda. Or you conclude the hearing, keep it closed, make your decision -- it just doesn't seem to fit in any of the boxes that I'm thinking. Newton-Huckabay: Okay. Well, I g caveat here with this is I'm okay witl building provided that the changes t I could acfually see a rendering of building like they say it would. if v receiving fhe color rendering and ha Hood: Madam Chair, Commissione Newton-Huckabay: Somebody stop Hood: Well, something I guess we ~ we can actually do is just prepare th~ whatever elevation they show us for acfion, but as soon as -- as soon as ; they don't have to come back in two they'd have to wait finro weeks from approved. You can essentially put ~ your decision until that time. But, you're going to approve those. Anc you comment some more, and tell th it back in another two weeks, but -- ~ss what I was thinking is we potentially -- my only the hour change. I'm okay with the position of the at they are proposing to the back of the building, if vhat it would look like, looks like the front of the : could do a motion to approve a CUP based on ng them meet our expectation. ~uld propose that we haven't done in awhile, what findings for approval as if you're going to approve hat. Still leave the hearing open and still not final ~d if you say go, we have got fhe document ready, iore weeks for their findings. They are done. So, onight anyways for their findings document to be I that, but, really, you do have to continue your -- ~gain, we have the findings there assuming that if you don't we yank the findings off the agenda, m what you want it to look like and, then, we bring Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 52 of 57 Newton-Huckabay: That's -- okayll That's what we did fhe last time. I would be completely comfortable with that --lokay. A head nod whether or not the applicant would be. Okay. How about fhe two, of you? Marshall: That's fine with me. O'Brien: Agree. Newton-Huckabay: Okay. The only -- the hearing date would be April 17th that we would continue this to. ~~ Hood: And, Madam Chair, I-- you know, I wasn't -- you have a meeting on the 3rd of April anyways. You know -- Newton-Huckabay: Oh, I just thought you said we didn't. Hood: There is no items on it. We have anofher meeting -- a special meeting before that. So, it would be the only real r~eason to have your regularly scheduled 7:00 p.m. meeting slash hearing, but you're go'o ing to be around, so making them wait a month to me doesn't seem so fair. But that's~ up to you. I just want to let you know iYs not like you totally get the night off anyways, you will be in the neighborhood. Newton-Huckabay: That's the off-site''deal; right? Hood: Correct. Newton-Huckabay: Okay. So, the'n', we would have to come back here to the City Hall -- ~~ Hood: We could -- I could even talk~with the clerk and maybe the applicant and see if they want to meet us there or somethFing, but -- Newton-Huckabay: Well, I don't want to create havoc in that. Is that okay with you guys to come back here and take fhe ten minutes, finish this hearing on the 3rd? O'Brien: That's fine wifh me. I'm Marshall: I can do that. Newton-Huckabay: Okay. Well, Commissioner Rohm on that, but -- Marshall: They can do that, too. nd about. are speaking for Commissioner Moe and Newton-Huckabay: Okay. I guess w,e are ready for a motion. Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 53 of 57 O'Brien: Motion to continue? Baird: Madam Chair and Members ~of the Commission, you actually, technically, need to reopen the hearing and, then, m i~e a motion to continue it. So, two motions are in order. Newton-Huckabay: So, reopen and verbalize the hours issue, the bacl elevation. tinue with the -- continue and, then, you need to the building, fhat we are looking for a colored O'Brien: Okay. I'll give it a wheel. Newton-Huckabay: Okay. O'Brien: So, Madam Chair, I'd like to'reopen the hearing on CUP 08-002. Marshall: I second. Newton-Huckabay: All fhose in favo;r~? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES.IITWO ABSENT. O'Brien: So, just to clarify, there is and that's the hours, but what montl things that I think we need to put in the motion uld they change? May 1 st to October 1 st? Newton-Huckabay: I don't think th restriction a monih. O'Brien: Just say summer hours? -- I don't know that we want to put fhat kind of Baird: Madam Chair, Members of th'e Commission, what you're actually doing is setting the maximum hours and, then, the ~operator would vacillate depending on the market conditions, probably. ~ O'Brien: Okay. Marshall: So, fhe hours would, then~ be Monday through Thursday until 11:00 p.m. -- or Monday -- yeah. Sunday through Thursday. Sunday fihrough Thursday until 11:00 p.m. and, then, Friday and Saturday'Cuntil 12:00. OBrien: And fhe other -- the other th~ng is to -- how do we say it? Have the signage up front or some change -- design change? Marshall: No. Color rendering. Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 54 of 57 Newton-Huckabay: We'd like an elevation showing what the building would look like from the rear, looking at it from Meridian Road. O`Brien: Okay. Madam Chair -- Newton-Huckabay: Do we have one? Parsons: Yes. Madam Chairman, care of one, which was condition 1. Newton-Huckabay: Okay: change the condifion of approval, then, or strike ically, we are looking -- you have already taken far as hours of operation. Parsons: And, then, we are looking'to modify condition 1.1 and 1.2 as well, because the -- we need it in the motion that if you're okay wifh this site plan that they have submitted and these elevations that ~ that they are approved with the CUP. That way when we do the findings everything -~~ all the conditions of approval are in order. Newton-Huckabay: Did you catch O'Brien: I didn't get the numbers. Newton-Huckabay: Okay. If you loo;k at page 15 on your -- O'Brien: Staff report? Newton-Huckabay: On your staff rep,'ort. Starts wifh B, conditions of approval. O'Brien: Okay. Newton-Huckabay: Conditions 1.1 and 1.2. O'Brien: Okay. Newton-Huckabay: You would strike;~1.1. O'Brien: Okay. Newton-Huckabay: And 1.2. Hood: Actually, Madam Chair, make'r of the motion, it would probably be easier for us to just reference the new site plan an~d elevations. That way we have some reference in the future of what -- what's approved rafher than just straight striking through them. Newton-Huckabay: You got ahead of ine. I was just going to say we need to rephrase it. ~~ Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 55 of 57 O'Brien: I would reference the new Hood: We will reference any site p design; is that what you're saying? dates and design, yes. Marshall: Site plan dated -- Hood: And if you don't have those h'andy, we have them and we can fill in those gaps. We need you to get -- get to the me i~ of that and we can fill in the holes if there are any. You don t need to look for those dates at this time. O'Brien: So, I don't need to strike anyfhing; is that what you're saying? Hood: You can teil us intent and we' can write the condition for you. If you look at the findings and you're like that's not what I meant, we can change it at that point. But I think we are -- we understand whe ~e you're coming from. So, if you can just piece it together we will piece it rest of the way together. Marshall: The most recent site plan. O'Brien: Okay. I will give it a wheel adam Chair -- this is a continuance; right? Newton-Huckabay: Uh-huh. O'Brien: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to continue file number CUP 08-002 to the hearing date of April the 3rd, 2008, for the following reasons: We would like to have the ~applicant provide a site plan showing the improved rendering of the back of the building, ~which -- adjacent to Meridian Road. Marshall: Believe that would be elevation plan. O'Brien: Elevation plan. Marshail: Color elevation plan. O'Brien: Okay. Color elevation plan. And just for the record, we can strike out, then, on the conditions B of approval the 1 i1 and 1.2 of fhe staff report. Marshall: I don't believe we are striking those out completely. We are changing the site plan to date of most recent site plan, ~as opposed to the February 6 site plan. O'Brien: End of motion. ~ Newton-Huckabay: Did you catch the~hours? Meridian Planning 8~ Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 56 of 57 O'Brien: Oh. Back up here. Not to be Sunday through Thursday fn Marshall: And Saturday. OBrien: Uh? Marshall: Saturdays also. O'Brien: Saturdays. Fridays and S Marshall: I second. I didn't realize O'Brien: I referenced -- okay. of motion. Also that we would change the hours 00 to 11:00 and Fridays from 6:00 to midnight. ys. Sorry. End of motion. were striking out 1.1 and 1.2, but -- Newton-Huckabay: Okay. All those~~n favor? Opposed? Motion carried. MOTION CARRI'ED: THREE AYES.~~TWO ABSENT. Newton-Huckabay: Okay. Hood: And just to kind of piggy back~~hat, we talked about it, but we are going to put the findings on, too. Can I get maybe even a separate motion to have the findings be put on that same agenda for ratification~ If that could be a separate motion, I think that makes some sense out of the ordina~ry, so -- Newton-Huckabay: Can I-- can I make that motion? Baird: You bet. Hood: I don't see why not. Madam Chair, would you make fhat motion in my behalf. Newton-Huckabay: I'd like to make a~`motion that the facts and findings and conclusions be included on the agenda for CUP 08-002, with the intention that if the -- the site elevations meet the expectation of~the Commission, that they will be signed and approved at fhat time. End of motion~ Marshall: Madam Chair, that's exactly the motion I wanted to make. Commissioner O'Brien to second it. ~~ O'Brien: Second. Newton-Huckabay: All those in Meridian Planning & Zoning March 20, 2008 Page 57 of 57 MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. TWO ABSENT. Newton-Huckabay: Before we -- sliall I adjourn fiirst? I'd like to adjourn -- or like a mofion for us to adjourn. Marshall: I'd like to make a motion to adiourn. OBrien: Okay. Yes. Newton-Huckabay: All those in MOTIDN CARRIED: THREE AYES.IITWO ABSENT. Newton-Huckabay: Thank you. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:06 (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCE,EDINGS.) AP~017~ r~ ~I ~ I ~8' WE - ik DATE APPROVED ~G~ V' i ol. lI/~, ~- ' ~-a~I' -~ \``\`1, ~ w r r r r- r~aip~jp~~~/i ATTEST: \`~`~~~c`~ ~ ~~~~~ ~, ~ ~~ ',~; = o ~ JAYC HO N, CITIE CL RK g~AL = -=. -9 ~"~ ,~~~' =,. -,~, Q/ r t3~ • P•2~,~: ,''~~~~''~<<„C~UiVTY , `~..```.