The URL can be used to link to this page

1996 09-16 MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AGENDA MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 1996 - 7:30 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD AUGUST 13, 1996: (APPROVED) TABLED AUGUST 13, 1996: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR KARATE CLASSES BY BRAD AND DEBBIE MILLER: (TABLE UNTIL OCTOBER 8, 1996) 2. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING TO C-G AND I-L BY DOUG TAMURA AND ARUTHUR BERRY: (APPROVE FINDINGS; APPROVE RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL) 3. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT BY DOUG TAMURA AND ARTHUR BERRY; TABLED AUGUST 13, 1996: (CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW) 4. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING TO C-G BY EAGLE PARTNERS LLC: (TABLE UNTIL OCTOBER 8, 1996) 5. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A CHEVRON C-STORE, MCDONALD'S W/DRIVE THRU, AND A HOTEL BY EAGLE PARTNERS LLC; TABLED AUGUST 13, 1996: (CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW) 6. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR AN ITALIAN RESTAURANT BY CHRIS MALLANE: (APPROVE FINDINGS; APPROVE RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL) 7. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR BRIDGEWOOD CONDOMINIUMS BY BOISE VALLEY CONSTRUCTION: (APPROVE FINDINGS; APPROVE RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL) 8. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT GENERAL BY WAYNE 8 KAREN FORREY: (CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW) PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A JOHN DEERE DEALERSHIP BY CONTRACTORS EQUIPMENT SUPPLY CO.: (CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPRE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW) 10. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A RADIO ANTENNA TOWER BY WESTERN WIRELESS: (APPLICATION WITHDRAWN) 11. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A THRIFT STORE AND FARMERS MARKET BY IDAHO YOUTH RANCH INC.: (CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW) 12. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY/FINAL PLAT FOR SUMMERFIELD NO.4 SUBDIVISION BY MAX BOESIGER INC.: (RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO CITY COUNCIL) 13. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR GRANITE CREEK SUBDNISION BY KEVIN HOWELL: (RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO CITY COUNCIL) 14. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING TO C-C BY CHERRY PLAZA ASSOCIATES: (CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING TO OCTOBER 8, 1996) 15. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY/FINAL PLAT FOR FIRST STREET PLAZA BY CHERRY PLAZA ASSOCIATES: (CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING TO OCTOBER 8, 1996) 16. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A FAMILY ENTERTAINMENT CENTER BY SELECT DEVELOPMENT AND CONTRACTING INC.: (CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW} MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COM• SION AGENDA MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 1996 - 7:30 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD AUGUST 13, 1996: aP~?ro%e- 1. TABLED AUGUST 13, 1996: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR KARATE CLASSES BY BRAD AND DEBBIE MILLER: 'f2jJlP Gl/a~i'~ ~C~c~Qh ~" ~~~ /~/~r~h fhf~t', 2. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING TO C-G AND I-L BY DOUG TAMURA AND ARUTHUR BERRY: rzF~.-~n~~' ~/{ ~ ~ /l ~pr/~'uvC r~CUmn~Phda¢.b« "ty tlc,~ c'/L 3. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT BY DOUG TAMURA AND ARTHUR BERRY; TABLED AUGUST 13, 1996: C~~~y ~t~av.r~~ f~~ PrPPar~ ~/f ~'~/l 4. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING TO C-G BY EAGLE PARTNERS LLC: 5. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A CHEVRON C-STORE, MCDONALD'S W/DRIVE THRU, AND A HOTEL BY EAGLE PARTNERS LLC TABLED AUGUST 13, 1996: L'/h' ~Lt/Zvr.c/~ ~c' ~QdP~w (~/{ ,~ c% 6. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR ~ ITALIAN RESTAURANT BY CHRIS MALLAN/E: ~ ~rm~~ ~s'~'/C ~1~~10~'~ /~E~LCIFnh7~mf~iL'/78n- ~ C/L- 7. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR BRIDGEWOOD CONDOMINIUMS BY BOISE VALLEY CONSTRUCTION: ~~~~+~~~~ -f/f ~' c'/t 8. PUBLIC HEAkfNG: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT GENERAL BY WAYNE ~ KAREN FORREY: ~~i~~ ~ ~lv~~e~ ~z,~Pr~~g~-r, ~ft"~ ~%/~ 9. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A JOHN DEERE DEALERSHIP BY CONTRACTORS EQ~IPMENT SUPPLYCO.: ~~~r, ~C~~2s,.e~f frj~r~~uou' -~1f' ~c'/L 10. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A RADIO ANTENNA TOWER BY WESTERN WIRELESS: ~~>~?"d~G~i~~~wl~ CL~~it~a-~io~r,J 11. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A THRIFT STORE AND FARMERS MARKET BY~AHO YOUTH RANCH INC.: C'/~f Gt-ffor~,,x~ ~v/~~«,~ f' ~ Vic'/C 12. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR /PRELIMINARY/FINAL PLAT FOR SUMMERFIELD NO. 4 SUBDIVISION BY MAX BOESIGER INC.: 13. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR GRANITE CREEK SUBDIVISION BY KEVIN HOWELL: di,C~,Orov~ ~v'+-~ ~ %i~'a,t' 14. PUBLIC HEA ING: R QUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING TO C-C BY CHERRY PLAZA ASSOCIATES: L'f1Ya.~~h-cc.z- ~'I1~ ~"rt G~~~-t, Y>~~ h~~. 15. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY/FINAL PLAT FOR FIRST STREET PLAZA BY CHERRY PLAZA ASSOCIATES: ~.'~-riflh.au- p/f1 ~~ Ocr ~''z. 1ac1~, 16. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A FAMILY ENTERTAINMENT CENTER BY SELECT DEVELOPMENT AND CONTRACTING INC.: MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 16. 1996 The regular meeting of the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairman Jim Johnson at 7:30 P. M.: MEMBERS PRESENT: Greg Oslund, Keith Borup, Jim Shearer, Malcolm MacCoy: OTHERS PRESENT: Will Berg, Wayne Crookston, Gary Smith, Shari Stiles, Bill Howell, Dean Hoff, Helen Bryette, Karen Ivader, Richard Williams, Wayne Forrey, Robert Phillips, Mike Canfield, John McCreedy, Scott Cook, Tracey Persons, Becky Bowcutt, Jeff Falmer, Carol Lotspeich: MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD AUGUST 13, 1996: Johnson: Are there any corrections, deletions or additions? Is there a motion for approval? MacCoy: Mr. Chairman, 1 make a motion to accept the minutes as written. Oslund: Second Johnson: It is moved and seconded that we approve the minutes as prepared, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Johnson: Three items I would like to make an announcement on for the people in attendance. Item #10, the application has been withdrawn so there will be no action on this item, it has been totally withdrawn by the applicant. That is the one regarding Western Wireless application for an antenna tower. Items number 14 and 15 which are the the Albertson's application Cherry Plaza Associates, they have asked for a deferral until October 8. However since it has been noticed as a public hearing we will take input from you if you are here to provide but there will be no formal presentation by Albertson's or their representatives this evening. ITEM #1: TABLED AUGUST 13, 1996: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR KARATE CLASSES BY BRAD AND DEBBIE MILLER: Johnson: The minutes indicate this item was tabled so that the applicant and staff could meet and iron out some differences. I would like a report from staff at this point as to what has been accomplished in the interim. Stiles: Chairman Johnson and Commissioners the Brad and Debbie Miller application was tabled last time because Mr. Weast didn't agree to any of the conditions and apparently wasn't aware of any of the conditions before he got here and read them. He has since met Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 2 with the Mayor and myself and is still not willing to meet any of those conditions and verbally stated he was going to discontinue the application but has not written us a letter asking for that. Johnson: Thank you, is the applicant or a representative for the applicant present that would like to address the Commission at this time? Apparently not, we need to take action on this gentlemen. Shearer: Do we need to table this until we get a deferral? Is that what needs to be done Jim? Johnson: Yes if that is your pleasure, right. Shearer: I move this is tabled until the next regular meeting October 8, 1996. Oslund: Second Johnson: It is moved and seconded that we table item #1 until October 8, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #2: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING TO C-G AND I-L BY DOUG TAMURA AND ARTHUR BERRY: Johnson: Any discussion or comments regarding the findings of fact and as prepared? Any discussion at all? We just received today, my understanding comments from ACRD on this application which are not incorporated in the findings of fact and conclusions of law, and frankly I haven't had an opportunity to review them myself. Did you have an opportunity to review these Shari, the ACRD comments? Stiles: Chairman Johnson, we received these late today and no I have not had a chance to review them. Oslund: Chairman Johnson, I had a real brief shot looking at these and in their cover letter they do summarize that there are three changes that they have made to the staff report since the one we saw last time. Those are shown on page two of their transmittal. Johnson: Well I wouldn't think that those would create a need for delay if that is the only three that are summarized there just having read those. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 3 Oslund: Mr. Chairman if I could I would like to move that Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopt and approve these findings of fact and conclusions. Shearer: Second Johnson: We have a motion and a second to approve the findings of fact, discussion? Did you have another comment Ms. Stiles? Stiles: Chairman Johnson I just wanted to say that the main reason that we were tabling this item was because of the applicant and Ada County Highway District cannot come to an agreement and apparently with this letter they are. Johnson: Thank you, any further discussion? We have a motion and a second this is a roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: Borup -Yea, Oslund -Yea, Shearer -Yea, MacCoy -Yea MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Johnson: Is there a recommendation you wish to pass onto the City Council? Oslund: Mr. Chairman, I move that the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council of the City of Meridian that the property set forth in the application be approved for annexation and zoning under the conditions set forth in these findings of fact and conclusions of law. That if the applicant is not agreeable with these findings of fact and conclusions and it is not agreeable with entering into a development agreement the property should not be annexed. Shearer: Second Johnson: Moved and seconded that we pass a recommendation onto the City as stated, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #3: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT BY DOUG TAMURA AND ARTHUR BERRY; TABLED AUGUST 13, 1996: Johnson: We have no findings for this right Counselor? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 4 Crookston: That is correct Mr. Chairman, they were not requested. Shearer: Mr. Chairman, I move that we have the attorney prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law on this project. Oslund: Second Johnson: Moved and seconded that we have the City Attorney prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law on item 3, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #4: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING TO C-G BY EAGLE PARTNERS LLC: Johnson: We have findings before us, is there any discussion? Any corrections? There is a typographical error on page 2, item 3, the last sentence, it should be "car wash". Page 12, third of the way down the page Mr. Jackson of Jackson's Food Store is the way that should read. Any other corrections? Is there any discussion? Oslund: On page 22, I was a little confused, but on item 3 it says that the City Council has judged this annexation and zoning application under Idaho Code, I just circled and said question. Shouldn't that be Planning and Zoning Commission? Crookston: It should be. Johnson: It should be because it hasn't been to the City. Is there anything else? MacCoy: On page 27, J reads shall not be higher than 18 feet above the level of the business, shouldn't that be above the ground level not on top of the building? Johnson: Was that your intent? Crookston: It was my intent and my discussion with a Planning & Zoning member that 18 feet actually be measured from the base level of the business. Johnson: Ground level? Crookston: Yes Johnson: Okay, good point, that makes more sense to me. We had a discussion earlier, Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 5 Wayne and I regarding whether some of the items in here really are under the conclusions would be more appropriately placed in a document addressing the conditional use permit as opposed to annexation and zoning. These findings of fact and conclusions are for annexation and zoning only. MacCoy: You are probably right. Johnson: Most of those are found on page 27. They get fairly specific on page 28 I question item M. The 1000 feet seems to be arbitrary. It seems to me to be quite a distance. Does anyone have any comments regarding that? Shearer: I agree with you. MacCoy: (Inaudible) I don't know where this number came from. Do you want to take this back and break it down? Johnson: I don't think we could probably do that here at this meeting is what I am concerned about. When I read this I was not confused but 1 was thinking perhaps too much was incorporated into this document some of which should have been reserved for when the Commission addresses the conditional use part of the application. Borup: Has this been reviewed by the applicant? Johnson: I don't have knowledge of that, I don't know. Crookston: Mr. Chairman, 1 can inform the Planning and Zoning members that much of this came from my discussion with member MacCoy and member Oslund. Mr. Johnson was out of town during the week that I prepared these. Mr. Borup was out of town, I discussed it with member Shearer. He was not however at the meeting so much of this comes from one or two members. When I met with members MacCoy and Oslund in our meeting we discussed some of it, most of it came from my discussion with Commissioner Oslund. I think that it would be appropriate for the members of the Commission to consider these things. I put many of the items that are included in paragraph 17 of the conclusions as a result of the discussion I had with Commissioner Oslund. The reason that I put in the specifics of the conclusion is that on an annexation that is when the City has the most authority that it has. There is another way to handle the items that are included in paragraph 17 of the conclusions this is not exact language but it would be to the extent that the Commission recommends to the City Council that the applicant be subject to staff recommendations, Planning and Zoning Commission recommendations and not state them as specifically as I stated them in these findings. As I said I think it would be appropriate for the Commission to consider these, state whether or not they want that item included. Meridian Planning 8 Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 6 I think an additional thing that I would like to see added if it is the Commissions desire to review those things that are set forth in paragraph 17 would be a clause that says that it is recommended that the applicant abide by and that the annexation is conditioned upon staff Planning and Zoning and eventually City Council recommendations for development. Johnson: Recommendations or conditions? Crookston: Conditions, it would be conditions. Johnson: Well in other words you want us to put a clause in there that gives us the opportunity to go beyond this document and conditions things as we see fit as they come up is that basically what you are saying? Crookston: That is correct, the reason that I suggest that is annexation is the time when the City has the most authority and I think it is appropriate if it is the Commission's decision and the Council's decision to have that in there it is appropriate to do it at the annexation level and not necessarily at the conditional use application. Some applications for annexation and zoning do not have conditional use applications. Johnson: And the reason for that is because we do not have an opportunity on a conditional use permit to go beyond what is in our ordinances right? Crookston: That is correct. Johnson: With respect to page 28 there is one thing that I would like to recommend that we change, item M. That it read that all lighting be set so that it does not shine or glare upon property beyond the exterior boundaries of the land as opposed to the 1000 feet which doesn't make a lot of sense to me. One other point pointed out by staff was that same page, item P, the comment regarding the property shall not be annexed until the building permit for motel/hotel is applied for and paid for. 1 don't believe we can do that. With those comments we can proceed if you want to, but I think it would be wise that we have the insertion of a sentence in there permitting conditioning as staff sees appropriate. Shearer: Mr. Chairman, I am real uncomfortable with items A and B, on item 17 which has to do with landscaping. My uneasiness is that we are stating in that for instance item B that the applicant will provide a landscape plan and etc. That is part of our City code already. So we are taking one portion of our ordinance and putting it into this. From a legal point of view when you take one item out of the ordinance and not all of the items out of the ordinance you are putting yourself on uneasy ground. They will have to do these items although there may be, they are going to have to provide the landscape screening, they are going to have to provide the landscape plans. They are going to have to provide Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 7 the landscape, it really has no place in here, it is part of the ordinance. They are going to have to do it and all we are doing is garbaging up the document by putting it in there. Now if there is something beyond the ordinance that we want on landscaping then that will probably be an item that would be good to be in there. But to do this why aren't we telling them that they should have to follow the Uniform Building Code and all the other ordinances. Johnson: I understand what you are saying with respect to the landscape plan. I don't understand what you are saying when this gets specific about the input being obtained from Greenhill Estates and that to me sounds like it is a special insertion of wording there and maybe is outside of the present ordinance. Shearer: Well like I say there could be portions of that that would be good, however that screen has to be provided which is already in the code. Johnson: Well I understand where you are coming from you are saying it is redundant to put it in here because it is already part of the code for the most part is that correct? Shearer: Right and it loses, it makes us look like we are putting a lot of stuff special on this applicant when we are not. This is stuff that has to be followed through by everyone on all projects. It just doesn't, it doesn't make sense to me. Johnson: I don't know about the legality of it I would leave that up to the Counselor, it seems to me it is probably in there for emphasis just so that we are upfront about the requirement. It is a controversial issue. Shearer: I don't think it is controversial, it is part of the ordinance and it has to be done. Johnson: No I meant the application. Shearer: If we want to say that the owner will follow all codes and ordinances of the City that is what should be said because rather than picking out one specific one. Johnson: Do you have any comments to make on that Mr. Crookston? Crookston: It is very true that some portions of that are in our ordinance already. But I believe that happens or that it happens quite frequently that an applicant does not know what the City requires. We state almost every set of findings of fact and conclusions of law that they are required to meet the ordinances of the City, they read it but they don't do it because they are not actually apprised of it. It is there in the ordinances but if they don't' read the ordinances they don't realize it and we can enforce because it is an ordinance Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 8 requirement but I think that it is probably helpful to an applicant to know some of the things that are more specific. With regard to the landscaping in this application I think that there are some concerns that relate to the homes that are adjacent to this property. That is why it is more specific than just a statement that they have to comply with our landscape ordinances or all of our ordinances. It does state that. Shearer: Well I can assure that you shouldn't have that problem I just submitted a set of plans a month ago to the City and they wouldn't even look at the plans until the landscape plan was in their hand let alone get a building permit. MacCoy: You are talking about that in particular for landscaping. There are a number of items on here which are very explicit to this project. Shearer: Well something that is explicit to this project that is not a code item for every project should be in here. But the screening of the residences next to commercial property is in the code. The landscape plan and developments etc. is in the ordinance. Johnson: Well I want to do with it whatever you want to do with it. I think that we can proceed ahead with some amendments, notations. Specifically the one about additional conditions as set forth by staff etc, however you want to do that. You can probably do that in item #23 on page 29. As far as the redundancy. I don't have a fear of it being in violation of some legal code or anything. It may be redundant and may not be necessary but I don't think it is harmful at this point. I think it is probably helpful to have some of those items emphasized even though it is a waste of paper maybe. 1 think we have enough here to move ahead if that is your pleasure to do that. Borup: Mr. Chairman, I do have another couple of questions if I might. Item E and I had overlooked to mention that earlier, but mention that the primary entrance cannot be on the north side or the east. Was that intended to be east end? Page 27, item E. The east end would be facing Eagle Road. Johnson: Should be West side. Crookston: That was intended to be East, the thought in my mind was that they probably didn't want an entrance on the west side but again that is totally up to the Commission. Johnson: I guess the question is where did that come from? Crookston: The east or no primary entrance, the thinking from Mr. Oslund and myself was that having no primary entrance on the north side was so that there was more protection for the homes in Greenhill Estates and on the east side so that there was no particular use Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 9 of the east side as an entrance which is where you would get a fairly substantial amount of noise wherever the entrance is. The thinking was that you would have the building to act as a barrier from that noise. But if the entrance is on the east side that noise could filter over to the Greenhill Estates people just because it is on the east side and there is no protection, no use of the building for protection of noise. Borup: I guess that was my question, it looks like it would be just the opposite. To have it on the east side would protect it, on the west side you would have no protection. Crookston: That is true Commissioner Borup, the thought process that went through my head was that there likely would not be an entrance on the west side just because that is, well there could be but you would have to go around the structure to get to it. But that could be either way or both. Oslund: Mr. Chairman, on both items D and E I think the emphasis at least in my mind when I discussed this with Wayne was that we had two concerns. One was that on the second floor or the proposed hotel that there not be any windows or openings on that second floor that would allow guests of the hotel to have a clear view of the back yards of the folks that live in Greenhill Estates. Then in item D the concern was that there not be any primary and I underline primary entrance or access on the north side. It seems to me that the east side it is going to be the natural location to have the entryway into the hotel and I personally I am not sure how Wayne feels about this but I personally wasn't concerned about the east side. I just felt like on the north side of the entrance or access on that side should be limited to a fire access or something that wasn't used day in and day out consistently. That is the side that is closest to Greenhill Estates that will be separated by I think about 90 feet per the plan. So I guess I would not, it seems to me that we could delete the or east end from item E, just make it the north side of the structure. Johnson: That doesn't limit you to making it any of the three options, I mean using any of the other three options. It just says not on the north. It doesn't place it anywhere, it just says not on the north. Borup: Mr. Chairman, the other question I had then was it looks like these items probably go a real long ways to answer a lot of the concerns of the neighbors. A lot of them, some of them are some pretty major changes from the initial applicant's submittal. I guess I was wondering if the applicant has had a chance to review those. Johnson: No Borup: We don't know at this point how close they are (inaudible) Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 10 Johnson: That is not the procedure, we make our recommendation to the City Council and they have an opportunity to get copies of the findings of fact and conclusions of law at that meeting. There will be another public hearing with the City Council at which time the City Council may deem that a new set of findings of fact and conclusions of law be prepared. That is the way the procedure works, but we need to move forward with what we have decided to do, what you have decided to do. So that, the applicant hasn't had an opportunity to review this and prepare their case as well as the opponents. So we have to take come initiative on our own and move forward is the way I view this. In other words that is what we get paid for. Oslund: Mr. Chairman, I am a little concerned, in item A we talk about the majority vote of the owners regarding the landscaping. In fact that the applicant would have to get a majority vote from the abutting property owners to tell him how his landscaping is going to be. I think it is going to be, I understand where the comment came from and the intention but I think it is going to be extremely difficult to get that and really to put the applicant in that position where he is tied to a majority vote of the neighborhood. What if they don't come to, what if they don't agree and it looks like a real tedious process. I think another way to say it is that there is a need for a screen a landscape screen and that landscape screen would have to be approved by the City staff just like any other landscaping feature. Johnson: You could do that or you could leave it out altogether as Commissioner Shearer suggested. Shearer: Shari Stiles' recommendations had some good comments on landscaping and etc. that quite clearly defines what I would agree with should be done. Johnson: So you people want to rework these findings of fact and conclusions of law right now or do you want to table this item. Do you want to make the corrections and move forward, what is your pleasure? MacCoy: Mr. Chairman, I recommend that we table this document of findings of fact and conclusions to the next Commission meeting and give a chance to clean up the items which we have discussed with the staff. Shearer: Second Johnson: We have a motion and a second to table these findings of fact and conclusions of law and in the interim rework them prior to our next meeting. Any discussion on that? Oslund: Mr. Chairman, kind of going back to the more basic question, I guess then if we Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 11 decided these items are not appropriate for a conditional use are we going to keep them within these findings the findings regarding the annexation? Johnson: Well these findings of fact and conclusions of law are addressing the annexation and zoning not the conditional use permit. I think that is what our comments should be, those are the comments we should include in these findings of fact and conclusions of law. We haven't addressed the conditional use permit yet, that is the next item on our agenda. Oslund: I understand that Mr. Chairman, but the first item that was brought up on this particular issue was that there was a question regarding whether these items are more appropriate as conditions in the conditional use permit. I seem to think so but the only reason they are here as far as I understand it is the City attorney seems to think that the only place where the City has or the place the City has the most power or the most leverage to enforce these kinds of conditions is where we are now. So are we going to keep them in this format or are we going to move them out of these findings and put them into the conditional use findings. Johnson: Well I believe you also suggested and alternative with some proper wording you can condition the findings of fact so that you have that, you have that opportunity at a future date if you need that. I would propose that as the solution. Oslund: Can I restate what I thought I heard, then your idea your option then Wayne is to place into these findings a statement that simply says that there are, really basically state what we are talking about here in more general terms. Later (inaudible) I am falling apart here help me out? Crookston: What I am saying in the findings of fact and conclusions of law is that you could approach this on the basis as in the fashion that they are written and making the additions that you desire or you could have a phrase as I said previously this is not worded exactly correct. But a phrase basically that says that the City may adopt and may have conditions that will be conditions of the annexation which must be met by the applicant. The situation is that on the annexation and zoning that is where the City has the authority to go a little bit or whatever the City desires to go over and above the ordinance requirements. Because it is an annexation. If you condition the annexation on those matters and that is how it is annexed those are binding. But if nothing is said about those conditions on the annexation the only things that are binding are what in fact are in the ordinances. Oslund: Okay, enough said, convinced me. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 12 Crookston: The other comment that I had was that Mr. MacCoy's motion was to basically reconsider what had previously been discussed tonight I don't know whether or not it is the Commission's desire to limit it to what has been discussed tonight or whether or not you just want to open up the findings for additional review and changes. Johnson: Comment on that Commissioner MacCoy? MacCoy: I would think that we were opening them up to look at them in the proper light we discussed this evening. And if we have to make changes we make changes to meet the criteria that we are actually talking about here. I don't think any of us are sold on the fact that what we have in front (End of Tape) Johnson: Any further discussion, we have a motion and a second to table these and rework them? Crookston: Was the motion amended? Johnson: Do you want to restate your motion Commissioner MacCoy? MacCoy: Mr. Chairman, I recommend that the documents findings of fact and conclusions of law be tabled along with the additions here until the next regular meeting which is October 8. Johnson: Okay we have a motion and a second on that, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: Atl Yea Johnson: We will take a short recess so the City Council can adjourn. RECESS ITEM #5: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A CHEVRON C-STORE, MCDONALD'S W/DRIVE THRU AND A HOTEL BY EAGLE PARTNERS LLC; TABLED AUGUST 13, 1996: MacCoy: Mr. Chairman, in light of what we just have gone through with the findings of fact and conclusions I propose we table this one until we (inaudible) Shearer: Second Johnson: Moved and seconded that table to what date? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 13 MacCoy: October 8 Johnson: Table to a date certain of October 8 our next scheduled meeting, item 5. Oslund: Discussion, Mr. Chairman, would it be possible, well I am not going to say it like that. Maybe we should consider just going ahead and preparing the findings on this one as well. We have collected all of the information I think we need. Johnson: Any further discussion, any interest in changing the motion? Shearer: I move we amend the motion and have the Attorney prepare the findings of fact to our tabled project while it is being tabled. Oslund: Can we withdraw the original motion and start again. Johnson: That is up to Commissioner MacCoy. MacCoy: I withdraw the original (inaudible). Oslund: Mr. Chairman, I move that we direct the attorney to prepare findings of fact for this particular application for a conditional use. Shearer: Second Johnson: I have a motion and a second all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #6: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR AN ITALIAN RESTAURANT BY CHRIS MALLANE: Johnson: It should be pointed out that on item number 6 that the application if really for two restaurants. One of which is an Italian restaurant. This includes the conditional use permit. You have the findings are there any corrections or deletions or comments regarding the findings as prepared? Any discussion? MacCoy: Mr. Chairman, I recommend the approval of the findings of fact and conclusions of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission. Shearer: Second Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 14 Johnson: Moved and seconded that we approve the findings of fact and conclusions of law as prepared by the City Attorney, that we adopt them, roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: Borup -Yea, Oslund -Yea, Shearer -Yea, MacCoy -Yea MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Johnson: Is there a recommendation you wish to pass onto the City Council at this time? MacCoy: Mr. Chairman, I recommend that the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission recommends to the City Council of the City of Meridian that they approve the conditional use permit for a planned commercial development with the conditions set forth in these findings of fact and conclusions of law. That the applicant and owners be specifically required to submit a final development plan, meet all of the requirements of section 1-9- 607 and of the limited office requirements and all of the ordinances of the City of Meridian. Shearer: Second Johnson: Moved and seconded to pass the recommendation onto the City as stated, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #7: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS O FLAW FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR BRIDGEWOOD CONDOMINIUMS BY BOISE VALLEY CONSTRUCTION: Johnson: Any comments, discussion, corrections regarding these findings of fact? Entertain a motion please. Oslund: Mr. Chairman, I move the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopt and approve these findings of fact and conclusions. Shearer: Second Johnson: We have a motion and a second to approve the findings of fact and conclusions of law as presented, roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: Borup -Yea, Oslund -Yea, Shearer - Yea, MacCoy -Yea MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 15 Oslund: Mr. Chairman, I move the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommend to the City Council of the City of Meridian that they approve the Conditional use permit requested by the applicant for the property described in the application with the conditions set forth in the findings of fact and conclusions of law and that the property be required to meet the water and sewer requirements, fire and life safety codes and the Uniform Building Code and the other ordinances of the City of Meridian. Shearer: Second Johnson: Moved and seconded we pass a recommendation onto the City Council as read by Commissioner Oslund, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #8: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT GENERAL BY WAYNE AND KAREN FORREY: Johnson: At this time I will open the public hearing and invite the applicant or his representative to come forward. Wayne Forrey, 3045 Thayen Place, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Forrey: Mr. Chairman and members of the Commission I have a drawing that I would like to hang up on your easel to present to the Commission. Johnson: While you are doing that, we received comments from ACHD today did you happen to get a copy of those? Forrey: I did about 3:00. Johnson: Well you got them before I did. Forrey: I am glad the City got those, thanks for letting me know. Mr. Chairman and members of the Commission my wife Karen and I are purchasing 12.75 acres on East Pine Avenue to develop a planned unit development general. Which is allowed by conditional use permit on land zoned industrial as shown on page 48, section 2-409 C of the Meridian zoning ordinance. Our project includes a mix of community service uses and facilities, institutional uses, recreational facilities, residential, commercial and industrial uses to achieve a planned unit development general as defined by the Meridian zoning and development ordinance. Our project is a planned development general because of the mix of land uses that we have and because the proposed interior and exterior spaces requires Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 16 and unusual design flexibility to achieve a completely logical and complimentary conjunction of uses and functions. Our project includes the following mix of uses. I will read them into the record. An elderly living center, 120 units 3 story building including independent and assisted living. And there are a variety of commercial uses within the elderly living center and I will list them for you. A gift shop, bank, beauty shop, massage therapy, a chapel, technology resource center, recreation center, a large banquet room, a small banquet room, an entertainment and stage area. A counseling center and a commercial laundry. All of those commercial uses would be available to the community at large. Also within the elderly living center there are residential uses and accessory uses to the residential use within the elderly center. Those are the living units which are one, two and three bedroom with full bathroom and full ADA accessibility, a dining room, indoor courtyard and plaza which would be enclosed or covered at the third level but open at levels one and two. Would have personal laundry, greenhouse and solarium combination. Two garden spaces, noted as garden space A and B, an activity room, van transportation, telecommunications, wiring alarm system to each room, 24 hour maintenance and security and all facilities would be fully handicapped accessibility. Also, we have a professional office building 40,000 square feet, 3 story for commercial use on a lease tenant basis. We have two storage buildings shown as storage building A and B. They are single story and they are commercial facilities for commercial use. We have two flexible space buildings A and B. The larger one is A and it is 23,000 square feet single story, B is 7,700 square feet also single story. Both of those buildings are for a variety of office warehouse, commercial and industrial uses contained within those buildings for commercial and industrial use on a lease tenant basis. We also have two greenhouses, the larger is 3,200 square feet, the smaller is half that size at 1600 square feet. Those would be wholesale facilities. We have a central maintenance building right here 800 square feet there is also an outside garden shed. We have four outdoor courtyards and plazas, plaza A is an accessory use to the living center. Plaza B and C are accessory uses to the professional office building. Outdoor courtyard and plaza B is an accessory use to the industrial and commercial uses south of Commercial Street. In our application we talked about site fencing, pressurized irrigation, extensive landscaping. I want to state that this conditional use is really positive because it provides a workable and a functional transitional land use in this neighborhood. It provides a transition from the present residential uses along Pine Avenue and on the west and east and north, and a transition to the industrial and commercial uses south and then onto the east of this property as well. This CUP is desirable because it provides a transitional use buffer between the existing zoned residential land and the zoned industrial land. This project is desirable because the elderly living center is located on the north portion of the planned development general site which is closest to the existing residential land uses. The professional office building is located at mid site to provide a transition between the elderly center and the industrial and commercial uses which are located closer to the railroad. By using this mix and this transitional design we can protect existing property values in that area. Without this Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 17 conditional use permit industrial uses could be located right next to existing residential uses and could severely impact and depress residential property values. Also this property has irrigation easements on all four sides of the project. This property has only about 415 feet of frontage on Pine Avenue but it is almost 1200 feet deep. It is 1185 feet deep. It is narrow and long and skinny and it is exceptionally difficult to develop as a single use development. This situation requires unusual design flexibility to achieve a logical and complimentary conjunction of uses and functions on this property. Now it is the city's policy to encourage developers of land to utilize the planned development provisions of the zoning ordinance and you list eight objectives in the zoning ordinance. The reference is 907 A. We have gone through each of those objectives, we have achieved each of those eight objectives in the City's planned development ordinance. We feel we have done a very good job of addressing all of the City concerns to achieve a good positive development on this property. We received the staff reports several days ago Mr. Chairman and we accept the City Engineer's and the City Planner's staff comments. We have also this afternoon received the Highway District approval of our project and we are in full agreement with those comments as well. We will develop in accordance with the agency approvals and the comments in your staff report. Let me just say in closing please accept and approve our project as a planned unit development general. I hope tonight you wilt call for findings of fact and conclusions of law. We have redesigned this project, we have addressed all of the city objectives for a PUD general. Our project will provide a high tax base enhancement to the City. We are going to have positive impact to the schools, no new school children but a lot of revenue going into the schools. We provide a transitional land use buffer in a mixed neighborhood. This is a true mix of uses that constitutes a planned unit development general. I have asked our legal counsel Mr. Robert Phillips just to summarize to take a minute and summarize and then we will take questions. Thank you. Robert Phillips, 3437 Presidential Drive, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney. Phillips: I just want to make one initial observation that is not (inaudible) points, I heard a book review the other day and they mentioned, it was called "The Better Quality of Life" was the name of the book. They talked about the three things that elderly people struggle with. They were loneliness, helplessness and boredom. They figured those were the three things they struggled with the most. I think it is really interesting that Wayne's development here on the north side has that residential elderly center. It addresses the needs in those areas because there is assisted care to help the helplessness, and there are other people and activities to help elderly people with their loneliness. There are lots of activities and a teaming center to help them with their boredom. I think the way he has designed I think it is really good to help meet the needs of our elderly today here in Meridian. That being said I have three quick legal points and Wayne has kind of summarized these things so I will be brief. One is the zoning law now allows for a planned Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 18 unit development general in the zoned areas, light industrial and that allows for planned unit development general. So it is permitted type of use. Secondly as Wayne mentioned in section 9-607 of the code it not only permits planned development general but encourages it in instances. This is one of those instances where there is a more convenient pad of commercial, residential and industrial uses. You can see the way this is long and skinny and both the fact that there is both industrial and residential uses on various sides it helps transition those in a smooth pattern. So not only does the code permit this it also encourages it. And finally there are mixed uses, there was a question last time about this plan whether or not there were mixed uses. Wayne has listed very specifically the mixed uses both inside the residential center and also outside. Specially inside the center you have a chapel, you have a bank, you have a banquet room, you have a beauty salon and there are other items that Wayne has listed. Outside you have an office building, you have storage buildings, you have a greenhouse and you have flexible space buildings. He has designed it in such a way that it helps transition. So keep in mind the zoning allows for it, it also encourages it and it meets the mixed uses required for a planned unit development general. Do you have any questions? MacCoy: I do, for either you or Wayne, the three story building you have there looking at ADA you are going to put an elevator system in there (inaudible) Forrey: Absolutely, full ADA compliance and handicapped accessible even beyond the ADA minimum requirements would be beyond that. We wanted every unit to be handicapped accessible. MacCoy: Along that same line you speak of buffer zones or (inaudible) considering the handicapped type or people who have problems what do you have as way of securing them so they don't end up in the industrial section or wandering someplace else. Do you have a (inaudible) I am concerned about the fact that you have warehousing in here you have trucking and so on. So somebody that is really not all together could very easily create a problem. Forrey: My grandfather lives in a retirement center in Boise that is right next to a shopping center and I think that is positive because grandpa will go into the shopping center it is what Robert talked about the activity and being around people. So we don't see that as a negative. MacCoy: Not even with the warehousing and stuff back there? Forrey: No, as I mentioned before we have a waiting list of people that are excited about the project they know of the other uses and yet we have never encountered anyone that saw this as a negative to be in the proximity of an office building or a flexible space Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 19 building. MacCoy: I am just curious about your greenhouse, what prompted you to use greenhouses in your facility here? Forrey: We found that there is a shortage of, there are so many businesses that are required to have landscape plans, I think we are all so landscape conscious and flower beds and what not that there is a shortage of landscape materials. We found a real need for to have a tenant that would take that and build a wholesale operation just to supply landscape materials to local businesses in this growing community. MacCoy: Along that same thought, a little different direction here, on the professional building there the fact that it is tucked away inside there you are planning to sign something out on Pine Street to let people know that they are way back in the back end here? Forrey: Yes MacCoy: What kind of professional people are you looking at? Forrey: That is professional office building, it would be class A office space, a variety of tenants, insurance, real estates, as well as some, we think we are going to get a corporate person that would probably take one floor of that building. It is about a 13,000 square foot floor there. So we are going to have small business and medium size businesses there. You know it is tucked back but we designed it so it has a really good street appeal. It is set back, we think it is going to have a real good architectural feel coming down the road and seeing an opening and the nice office building in the back. MacCoy: I think it is a good idea but I was curious about the (inaudible) businesses are in business to be noticed and now you have (inaudible). Forrey: This isn't retail oriented at all, this is corporate office space. MacCoy: Along the positions of the handicapped or the people that are not always able to handle themselves, what do you have in the way of night time security for these people, are you going to have low lights or something so once evening comes on they can negotiate and work (inaudible). Forrey: The entire area around the elderly center will be fully lighted and we have shown on the plan all of the street lights. We would have all of the marking lights and lamp along the sidewalks as well. My wife toured a facility in another state that is very similar to this Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 20 but it was during the day, so I don't know how it worked in that facility. The one that my grandfather is in in Boise is not real well lit. If I owned it I would sure put in more lights so our plan is to make this first class and very safe. I have learned from my grandparents actually what they like and what they don't like in the places they live. MacCoy: You have very picked out the very thing, you normally look at these things during the day time and nobody sees it as night time and yet that is a very definite handicap for the handicap and we have to look at that point. What else do 1 have, buffer and what do you have in the way of buffer zones here. How do you plan Forrey: In our application one of the criteria that a City asks for in a planned unit application is screening and it is described in the application. But in a nutshell you will see on the east side that is a 40 foot landscape area. That is us against the Railside Industrial Park which was recently approved by the City. Beyond the 40 feet is (inaudible) so with this being fully landscaped there is an excellent buffer for that industrial area. And you see the nice landscaping we have on the north side and also here on the west side. And then of course these buildings (inaudible) south of the Railroad tracks. So I think we have good buffers (inaudible) MacCoy; (Inaudible) we read and see pictures, I think it is good that you walk us through that. You are going to have a landscape architect. So you will be picking trees , you end up with a buffer zone ten years down the road but pretty soon. One thing I have done and maybe this is good or bad. I did meet with Shari Stiles one day and she showed me a sample landscape plan and I made note of some of the tree species. Maybe you are changing your mind on whatever the guidelines for the City are I would like to be apprisd of that because we will start working on that soon, the landscape plan. But personally yes I want to get that greened up and effective as soon as possible. Shearer: Mr. MacCoy brought up something that put a question in my mind. We are talking about an elderly living center, not a nursing home or a shelter home? Forrey: Not a nursing home, not a shelter home. Phillips: Along that line there is some assisted care provided for some people and that is not nursing home oriented. Crookston: What is the building that you have basically in almost the center to the right, it is marked in yellow. Forrey: That is the maintenance building, the City ordinance requires in a planned unit development general that there be facilities for maintenance and I didn't know if that meant Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 21 it could be inside I interpreted that as a separate maintenance building. I would prefer that on a project of this scale to have a maintenance building and that is described in the application. That is what that is. Johnson: Wayne, how far along are you in your thinking in terms of phased construction. Forrey: Well we would like to get this approved. Johnson: Well why don't I repeat the question. Forrey: We will turn dirt as soon as we get a permit how is that. Johnson: Are you thinking in terms of phasing your construction? Forrey: Yes Johnson: Would you explain to me then how you are going to approach that. Forrey: The market will dictate the timing of the professional office building and the flexible space buildings A & B. The first phase right out of the gun will be the elderly living center and all of the facilities it needs to make that support and get a building permit. In other words the landscaping, all of the utilities put in the street work all of those facilities needed to make it up and running in phase one. There is a very real possibility that we would build Commercial street at the same time we build Penrith but I can't say for certain tonight that those two streets would be built simultaneously. That is, we are still talking to people about the office building and about flexible buildings A and B but we have commitments here to proceed as soon as we get approved. Crookston: Wayne, you have that red line on your drawing and it appears as though it cuts off the I assume it is the southwest corner. Do you own that land? Forrey: What that is is an existing gravel road that is there to serve Nampa Meridian Irrigation District access along the railroad tracks and also the City has a sewer line underneath that road. It is for City access to maintain that sewer trunk line, that is part of the Five Mile Creek Trunk that was installed as part of the St. Luke's trunk sewer project. So that is why that road is there. It is to get access off of Pine and to the back of this property for sewer and irrigation maintenance. It is an easement, it can't be removed. Crookston: It appears as though you have buildings quite close to that, how are you going to work around that easement with those buildings as close as you are showing them? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 22 Forrey: Well those buildings don't encroach in that easement. That easement is wide enough just to get a pick up and a back hoe in there. It is just irrigation maintenance and sewer maintenance for the City. So there is adequate room there. The easement doesn't intertere with the buildings. We have worked around that. Oslund: I am looking at it, does it need to remain when you are done? Forrey: I met with Nampa Meridian again today and they tell me it needs to remain. They have got to get back to the Gruber lateral plus the City has the sewer. Oslund: If you build Penrith or Commercial you can provide them equal or better access then them having to go down through the side of your property right through you landscaping. It just seems kind of odd. Forcey: There is a piece of lateral here a big piece of the lateral here and all along the rail road tracks and that is where the City sewer is. Oslund: I see, so it is not just the one that is running parallel to the rail road track, you are providing access to other little pieces. Forrey: Yes, correct. Johnson: Any other questions of the applicant? This is a public hearing is there anyone else in the audience that would like to address the Commission at this time on the application? Any other questions before we close the public hearing? Hearing none then I will close the public hearing at this time. Shearer: Mr. Chairman, I move we have the Attorney prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law for this. MacCoy: Second Johnson: Moved and seconded that we have the City Attorney prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law on item 8, application by Wayne and Karen Forrey, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #9: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A JOHN DEERE DEALERSHIP BY CONTRACTORS EQUIPMENT SUPPLY CO.: Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 23 Johnson: At this time I will open the public hearing and invite the applicant or his representative to address the Commission. Mark Canfield, 1100 Clearview Court, Eagle, was sworn by the City Attorney. Canfield: As I was saying we are a John Deere industrial equipment dealer located currently by the Boise City Airport. The Airport is expanding their north runway operation and has forced us into making a move. We have purchased the property formally known as the playground, the golf driving range portion of that. The property was recently replatted. We are going to, propose building a 24,000 square foot facility on approximately 10 acres within that site. If I may Mr. Chairman I have a drawing that I would like to share with the Commission members. Johnson: As long as you realize that anything you share with us becomes our property. Canfield: (Inaudible) vacant property currently over here on this side our east boundary and on the west boundary currently this is a parking lot that was used for vehicles to park as they came and drove golf balls on the range which is this area right here. We have as I mentioned earlier a 24,000 square foot building that we propose that will service for selling parts and working on the John Deere equipment that we sell and represent. The front portion of the building is office space and we have approximately 66 parking spaces. We currently employ approximately 28 employees we anticipate with the move into this larger building that our employee base would go to approximately 30 plus people. We have selected a group of what we feel are quality companies to help us bring this development along. Those companies are Wright Brothers is going to be our building contractor. Hubble Engineering is doing the engineering work for us on this facility. And we have Jensen Belt as our landscape architect designer. As you can see we have complied with the Meridian City Ordinances as far as landscaping along the Overland Road route and on our East and West borders of the property. We have a display berm similar to what Western States and Arnold Machinery have further down to the west that we will display machines along I-84 in the area along the North boundary. Our hours of operation will be Monday through Friday, normally from 8 to 5, there are times that through the busier construction seasons that we may need to operate from 6 a.m. to no later than 7 p.m. in the evening. Outside of that, I do, I would like to at this time introduce our legal counsel to address some of the staff comments in regard to this project, Mr. John McCreedy. John McCreedy, 323 Ressigue, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. McCreedy: As Mark stated they have put together a real high quality development team for this particular project. They have been at their Boise facility since 1955 so I think it is Meridian Planning 8 Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 24 along term proposal. It is not the kind of thing that will come today and then be gone next year. It is a very stable company, very stable business that they have been in for quite some time. They have been a John Deere dealership for quite some time and they have been CESCO for quite a while. So they are there to stay and I think there is quite a bit of need behind the company. You are a little bit familiar or at least I know some of the Council members and some of the Planning and Zoning commission members are familiar with the property. You have probably seen it in a couple of different forms and a couple of different shapes. We are hoping that ends quite frankly. Not that there was anything wrong with what happened in the past because we think a little permanence might in order in that area and it has been fluctuating a little bit. We did have an opportunity to review the staff report that was put together by the City Engineer and City Planning and Zoning Administrator. I quickly returned the comments as requested on that and need to modify a few of the comments that I submitted to the Planning and Zoning Commission in my letter of last Friday, September 13. Just quickly go through a few of those comments and hopefully we have worked out few more things with Shari in the mean time that we might have been a little confused about when the letter was drafted. First, the Cook's lateral, the City code requires that it be tiled, we understand from ACRD that they are going to expand overland Road in the near future. We think it might be a waste of money to file that lateral, rip out the file and have it changed again when it is expanded. We have asked that item be deleted from a condition of approval. If that is going a little to far to go full and delete an item that is part of the Meridian City Code perhaps we could agree upon something that is a little bit in between and that is that we file it unless the City agrees otherwise. And Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District agree otherwise. Mark Canfield has spoken with John Anderson of the Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District, he seemed at least preliminarily to indicate that it would be a waste of money to the that lateral. So that might be one that when the City Attorney when he does prepare findings of fact we could take a look at that see if there is some way to (inaudible) so we don't waste money on it. Johnson: You might consider applying for a variance on that, that is probably the only thing that could be done on that. McCreedy: We will do that if that is what needs to be done. We originally Johnson: On that issue before you leave that, did you meet with ACHD, is this a funded and is it on ACHD's agenda for the next two to three years or was that just a general comment? McCreedy: 1 believe it is in their plans but I don't know that for sure but I can get that information and put it together in the form of a variance application. If we go with a variance application we will get all the background documents and fully submit it. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 25 Johnson: Thank you McCreedy: Item 3 in the general comments was a requirement that we determine the seasonal ground water, high ground water and subsurtace soils. We originally thought that would be a little more intensive than we figured out and we are here tonight to say that we will comply with that requirement. We have actually got Strata Company which is formally Howards Consultants working on that. So never mind on my comment on item 3 we will comply. On the site specific comments I think probably the one with the most significance at least from the City Engineer's standpoint we have talked with him on occasion about this. Is the sewer service for the facility. I understand from the City Engineer that Meridian needs to bring the Five Mile Trunk extension, 1 guess it is the Five Mile not the Nine Mile Trunk extension to that piece of property. Also to Bill Howell's piece of property that was approved as Transport Truck and Trailer next door. 1 think that project is a couple of years down the road although t don't know that for sure. In the meantime and we need a place to hook up to sewer. There might be some confusion between City staff and the folks that have worked on this piece of property. There is a sewer line that ran through the first two lots, lots 2 and 3 of the Playground property. We are lot 1 of the Playground Subdivision. So there is a sewer line that we can hook up I did provide you with a copy of our easement agreement with the Playground. The facilities are there they can be engineered, we can hook up to them as part of construction of this building. I also want to say that CESCO is more than willing to participate in the Five Mile Trunk extension, more than willing to hook up to that trunk extension when it is available. More than willing to pay its fair share along with the other neighboring users in cooperation with the City. But they do need sewer within the next year is this project is approved and they are allowed to go forward. So they do need to take advantage of the existing sewer service that is there. I have drafted some language in my letter that I think might take care of that problem. Again we are more than willing to work with the City on that. Another significant item is what Johnson: Before you leave that item, though I would like some comment from Gary Smith our City Engineer. If there is confusion, I am always amazed when Gary is confused because he is so seldom confused. (End of Tape) Smith: Thank you Mr. Chairman, there is a sewer that was extended through the RV overnight park. I am not sure how far east it goes from the RV park. I am told it was extended through lot 2 but we are not at least when I talked to my associate Bruce Freckleton he wasn't certain that it was actually completed. The construction was not inspected by the City apparently so we don't have any real record of that, maybe it is there. We don't know how deep it is if it is physically possible to sewer into this lot or not. The fact of the matter is when Dr. Clark sold this property he requested a letter from me Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 26 concerning sewer service to lot 1. I wrote Dr. Clark a letter at that time which was early on in 1996 stating that sewer service was available to Lot 1 as pertains to a support facility building for the driving range. That was all. That isn't all my letter said but that is basically the contents of it. Also at the time the plat was recorded sanitary restrictions were placed on the plat concerning construction on Lot 1 by Central District Health Department. I don't know that those sanitary restrictions have been lifted off of that plat. My main concern and it has always been my concern and City Council's concern is that we start getting sewage from an adjacent drainage area into a drainage area that was not intended to accept that sewage. And the possibility of problems in the future of capacity in the sewer line from an area outside of a drainage area for a specific sewer line. What kind of liability would the City incur by allowing connection to that line. We don't have a time table for extension of the Five Mile Creek sewer line under the Interstate. The Meridian School district has purchased some property from GL Voigt and I understand it is their intention to construct a high school at some point in time. I don't know when that is whether it is three years from now or five years from now. But it is a sizable expenditures to cross under the Interstate with the sewer from where it exists at this point. Construct it to Overland road, West on Overland Road to the school site and it would have to come a little farther west through the Howell site to Lot 1 of the Playground Subdivision. So that is kind of some background on what I remember has happened to this project. When the Clark's had the project when they had the subdivision and that is the reason I wrote the letter, I was very explicit as to what kind of sewage could come back toward the Nine Mile Drainage. Johnson: And your letter didn't address lots 2 and 3 only lot 1? Smith: That is the only one he asked for, correct. The lot 3 I guess it is that the RV park is located on it in the Nine Mile Creek Drainage, it is on the west side of Hunter lateral which is the break point in the topography out there. I don't recall the proposed use for lot 2, it almost seems like it was a miniature golf proposal which I don't know, I think there were some restrooms that were proposed as part of that miniature golf development. Shearer: Gary, while you are here, why are we asking for determination of high water, high ground water elevation and profiling of subsurface soil conditions on this site. This is a high ground site as near as I can tell. Smith: That is all they need to tell us, we have had problems with water in crawl spaces, under foundations, and we just want to know what is down there. If we are going to get some lateral movement of surface out of the Hunter Lateral for example although it has been piped I wouldn't expect that would be a problem. But we continue to have problems with ground water or surface water in crawl spaces and the reason is because we have a clay layer. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 27 Shearer: Do you have them up on the bench there? Up in that area? Smith: Not that 1 am aware of, there hasn't been any real construction out there other than down in the Nine Mile Drain area. Shearer: Well this is the highest ground out there and any place, you know like when we did the well place there we were down a lot of feet and the (inaudible) it seems like it is a redundant. Smith: It is a standard comment that we put on all of our reviews. Shearer: Well, I don't know we keep tacking stuff on owners eventually they won't build buildings. Johnson: Well then we wouldn't need any architects and then we would have a better world. Smith: I might add Commissioner Shearer that every once in a while we run into pockets, perched water tables that can cause us grief. It is just a precaution, it doesn't, I don't think it amounts to very much as far as an expense is concerned for them to dig a hole and have somebody look at it and verify that they don't have a perched water table. Johnson: Thanks Gary. McCreedy: Regarding the ground water height and the subsurface soils after talking with Shari just briefly and then again with my client earlier. It is not a problem with us we understand what the City wants and we will get it done. I think we were wanting to try and solve the stickier problems like the sewer and perhaps the development agreement and put our resources there. On the sewer system as far as the location of that sewer line over to Lot 1 which is the lot owned by CESCO my understanding and I haven't dug there and neither has my client but my understanding based on our negotiations and representations with the Clarke's is the sewer line may not extend all the way to Lot 1 but it is pretty close. We could not get an accurate figure from them at any one time and therefore we included in the easement agreement our right to cross their land to hook up to that system. We also included in the easement agreement one of the concerns that we had was the size and the engineering of the facilities on site not only on our lot, Lot 1 but on their lots 2 and 3. And so we included in the easement agreement CESCO's right to increase the size of that pipe if necessary to satisfy the City Engineer's standards. So I think we have hopefully anticipated those issues and covered them as well as we can. Now the capacity of the sewer system to handle that waste beyond those two lots is really something that is beyond our control for the time being. But I do want to reiterate that we are willing to Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 28 participate in the extension to the site from the east. We will do anything we can to engineer the facilities on site and if there are some limits that need to be placed reasonable limits on the amount of waste that can be discharged from the CESCO facility then we will do that in order to assure that capacity isn't exceeded. But I can't stress enough hour critically important it is that we have access to the existing sewer line. There is one there, it was intended for building on that lot and it is very important that we have access to that even if on a temporary basis until that new line gets put in. Without it the project basically fails at least for the time being. We will work with the City Engineer in whatever way we can to get it done. The development agreement, there is an existing development agreement that was entered into with the Clark's quite some time ago. I kind of question where that development agreement stands, it has been my experience with some development agreements they are very rosy up front whether they get enforced or not, whether they get complied with or not is sometimes questionable in some instances. I did have a chance to mention with Mr. Crookston just briefly before the meeting that we will proceed in whatever way the City wants us to proceed in order to get the project approved. If the development agreement is defunct and needs to be terminated then so be it. If the City wants a modified and amended development agreement I will draft that and have it over here post haste within the next week or two for Mr Crookston to agree. Even so you can have it in advance of the next Planning and Zoning Commission meeting were you to decide to request findings of fact and conclusions of law and a recommendation. We will go whatever way the City wants to go with a development agreement. Regarding hours of operation, I want to add that having the facility open from 6 in the morning to 7:30 at night would be on a as needed basis only. The normal hours of operation would be 8 to 5. I have included some language in my letter that I hope would accomplish that. Regarding the transfer of the permit or the property to two new owners that was my mistake. I didn't read your ordinance carefully enough, I found the section that does deal with transfers and as my understanding it does require City Council approval so I would like to delete that request from my letter. That staff condition looks fine. We request that the Commission order the findings of fact and contusions of law be prepared, that you recommend approval to the City Council in accordance with the Meridian zoning and development ordinance. That if it is at all possible that we get on the October 8, 1996 P & Z Commission agenda to have those findings of fact and conclusions of law reviewed. I have asked Ms. Stiles to fax them over to me a few days in advance, we will review them post haste and get our comments back in and do as much upfront negotiation with the city staff on all of the conditions we can before we come to the Commission again to hopefully reduce as many conflicts. I would also like to add I think the record supports a finding that Section 2-418 C of your ordinance has been satisfied that requires nine different findings, I won't go through them in detail but a couple of the highlights. First is it a conditional use, I think in fact rf we wanted to get strictly technical and we looked at the zoning ordinance it is a permitted use. It is heavy farm equipment sales and repair section 2-409 C in an industrial area zoned C-G. I think it is clearly the type of use that is contemplated in that Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 29 area. We are more than willing to go through the Conditional Use process to get the conditions that the City wants. It is harmonious with the general vicinity, we have Arnold and Western States dealerships very close to us. Mobile home sales and service facility in the area, Meridian Ford in the area. I think it is fairly compatible with the vicinity. There has been a problem as you may know with some of the bright lights from the driving range in the past. Those will be removed, I repeat they will be removed. We will have low wattage lights that focus around the building sufficient for security but they will be focused on the property and nowhere else. You have ACHD comments we agree with them and we will comply with them. They seem to indicate the traffic can handle the area and the public facilities. There won't be any additional cost to the public for the facilities, traffic may even be less than what is currently there now, although I don't have those numbers in front of me but the traffic count from ACHD was 270 vehicles per day which isn't alarming and they indicated that the facilities can handle it. There aren't any natural or scenic features of any major importance that we haven't protected. I would also like to add that at least from the Staffs point of view we put a lot of time into the landscaping plan and I think that Shari might have made a comment that the landscaping exceeds City requirements and that was intentional, we would like to have as attractive of a facility as possible. Johnson: What is the distance from Overland to the building? McCreedy: (Inaudible) I believe it was somewhere close to (inaudible) from Overland to the building itself? Johnson: Yes, just to the face of the building. McCreedy: I don't have that figure off the top of my head but it looks fairly significant 80 or 90 feet. Johnson: (Inaudible) What would you say Mr. Architect? Shearer: Well the parking lot has got to be at least 65 feet across there so just the parking lot alone plus the landscaping, you would be 120 in that parking lot excuse me. Oslund: Is your scale correct there, the 1 inch equals 40 feet? You are probably in the 240 foot range. (Inaudible) Johnson: So we went from 80 to (inaudible) Is that the end of your presentation and comments, are there any questions of the applicant at this time from anybody other than Wayne Crookston? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 30 MacCoy: I do, you have done your homework well, I like the fact that you have a berm out there on Overland, it is going to be a real nice addition. Based on the fact that you have done your homework and knowing that Overland is not going to be widened for awhile it is only a two lane road right at present. At best they are speaking of a three lane what about your trucks carrying equipment and so forth getting in and out of that place. You have run tests I am sure or at least (inaudible) McCreedy: ACHD worked with us allowing us to expand these radiuses from the traditional 15 degrees to 25 degrees to accommodate swing turns with longer semi trucks. The maximum driveways width that they would be willing to grant us was 40 feet. So our entrance is 40 feet and that is the maximum as permitted by ACHD. MacCoy: So you can make a turn and stay on the roadway without going off. McCreedy: We believe we can. MacCoy: (Inaudible) You already know from your site out there you have ditching on both sides, you put that truck in there and you just locked Overland and we have seen it happen very easily out there. So I would suggest that you look at that very carefully. On, you have already addressed lighting, what about signage. I know you are going to have to submit signage to us for review but what do you have planned? McCreedy: We have, I thought it was in the plan somewhere, we have a low profile sign in this area right here of the driveway that would say the words John Deere on it. MacCoy: Just like your cover (inaudible) that you gave us, like this one here. I didn't know if that was an artists conception or if that was (inaudible) McCreedy: That is the style and design of sign that we intend on using on the Overland Road side of the property. MacCoy: I imagine that it will be lit. McCreedy: Florescent type tubes, low wattage type lighting. MacCoy: What about up on the freeway side or anyplace else? McCreedy: We would anticipate doing a sign similar to what Western States and Arnold Machinery have done a display sign that would meet City ordinances as far as height and lighting requirements. It would be an elevated sign in this area of the berm. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 31 MacCoy: You wouldn't plan to do what Ford did over there and put one up on Overland which was objectionable. McCreedy: It will be a low impact type sign, nothing flashing. Just again displaying our product name. MacCoy: And be sure to keep away from flashing because that will get you for sure. Your ADA requirement code is required of you and (Inaudible) I would suggest that you, you probably already have worked out, although I don't see all the pieces here, on parking for handicapped, to the nth degree which means you have side pieces for your vans to get wheelchairs out and so on. Your building on this end the south end would be two story is that office building? McCreedy: It will be single story on the office portion the parts warehouse and shop area will also be single story but approximately 20 to 24 foot high ceilings in that area. MacCoy: You don't plan to excavate and drop that section down, it is all going to be on level land? McCreedy: It will be on level land yes. MacCoy: Everything internal will be with the ADA (inaudible). McCreedy: The architect, we haven't determined who we are going to use for certain, we have interviewed with CSHQA, ADA has come and we want to be sure that we are in full compliance. MacCoy: Good because that is a very important thing with us. Your trash receptacles and so on are going to be where? McCreedy: The trash receptacles for the building will more than likely be on access wise it will probably be located behind this screened off fenced area here, so whoever the trash contractor is will have direct access. MacCoy: So you will have a screened McCreedy: This is screened, this will be a fenced off area, the full facility will be fenced to this portion here, the back half of the building if you will and this will be screened (inaudible) that may be stored outdoors and trash receptacles etc. MacCoy: Okay you brought the next part us was will you keep any parts outside, will you Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 32 screen those because it becomes a used car lot and you don't' want that. Okay, I think that is all 1 have. Johnson: Anyone else including Wayne Crookston? Crookston: I do have a question, excuse me the ditch that you said that you were going to tile, what is that ditch? McCreedy: The ditch that the city is requiring us to the is Cook's lateral, it is my understanding. It traverses both the Playground property and what is now the CESCO property. I am not completely sure it has been tiled in its entirety on the Playground property. I think there was some question regarding that in the past. Crookston: Do you happen to know the size of the ditch? Canfield: I can't answer that question I have no idea, I would take a hunch that it would take some 30 inch diameter pipe to the just an educated guess. Crookston: I believe that should have been tiled by the Playground. Do you know the status of that Gary? Smith: No I don't, it is my understanding there is a ditch that goes to the north that crosses under the Interstate. That might, I am sorry that was the Howell property. I don't know on the Cooks's lateral. Crookston: Thank you Canfield: (Inaudible) that says unless otherwise agreed by the City and Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District to not the it. Johnson: I was interested in your comment that you felt this was a permitted use and didn't require a conditional use permit. Did you look at it from that perspective Wayne, how did you arrive at that being a conditional use permit? Crookston: I believe that this is in a planned use area in which all uses are required to have a conditional use permit. Oslund: The same thing that we ran into last time with the one over on Eagle. McCreedy: The advice that I have given John Deere CESCO is to not worry about it and let's do whatever the City wants if they want a conditional use permit as a way of Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 33 amending the development agreement. Let's do that whatever it takes to satisfies City's conditions. We really don't want to debate that issue. Johnson: I understand that, I want to debate the issue because I don't want to be doing things we don't need to be doing. That is why I am asking that question. Any other questions for the applicant. This is a public hearing, anyone from the public that would like to address the Commission at this time on this application? Anyone at all here for this? Any other questions then? At this time I will close the public hearing and I would appreciate it if you would leave that diagram with us. Shearer: Mr. Chairman, I move that we have the attorney prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law on this project. MacCoy: Second Johnson: We have a motion and a second to have the City Attorney prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #10: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A RADIO ANTENNA TOWER BY WESTERN WIRELESS: Johnson: This application has been withdrawn FIVE MINUTE RECESS ITEM #11: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A THRIFT STORE AND FARMERS MARKET BY IDAHO YOUTH RANCH INC.: Johnson: I will now open the public hearing and invite the applicant or his representative to come forward and address the Commission. Is anyone present representing the Idaho Youth Ranch Inc.? Ms. Stiles? Stiles: Chairman Johnson and Commissioners, due to the fact that the representative of the applicant is having some health problems, we stressed him out too bad. I think it is a very straight forward project, it is the Food Town existing grocery store. They have submitted their plan that they are showing adding the parking and some landscaping that hasn't existed at the site before. Ada County Highway District has placed some restrictions on in and out because they plan to still use the existing pumps as part of their program plus probably open to the public. The smaller 8 1/2 by 11 drawing you have is for Hills Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 34 Farmers Market which is directly north of King Street adjacent to this parcel. Hills or Idaho Youth Ranch has agreed to our conditions and has agreed to be responsible for the roadway improvements and landscaping improvements that are part of Hills Farmers Markets. If you have any questions I will try to answer them. MacCoy: Let me try to clarify something here, are you telling us that the tanks that are buried out there are not going to be torn out and are going to be used? Stiles: They are, they have been tested and I, we would request a letter from Health and Welfare or the appropriate agency to get that approval to leave them in place. Johnson: We are talking about continued use is what we are talking about because they have been used all along right? Stiles: Yes Johnson: So in order to be used, they have met compliance in the past. Are they all required to be tested? Stiles: Yes Oslund: Where is the farmers market? Stiles: The farmers market would be directly north of King Street where Osprey Boats is now. This is actually, Hills Farmers Market would actually occupy the southern half of that lot. Oslund: Okay so right now they are using the pump area for their market and that is not the plan? Stiles: No Shearer: They are going to use the parking lot (Inaudible) they are not going to use the boat (inaudible) Stiles: They are going to erect a building there and hook it up to sewer and water and have their own parking. Oslund: They are going to use the parking lot for Hills? Stiles: Yes, the parking lot to the north that is shown on the 8 1/2 by 11. It would be across Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 35 the street on this side. Oslund: Is there going to be enough parking for the use? Stiles: For the use they are proposing yes. MacCoy: What kind of signage are they planning on putting up here do you have any idea? Stiles: 1 don't know if they are intending to use the existing sign and somehow using that sign. One thing I was concerned about on the Hills Farmers Market was the proliferation of the A frame signs. I think we can talk to him, Mr. Hill, doesn't quite understand but I think we can let him know what our expectations are. Johnson: Well they would have to comply with our ordinances. Any other questions of Ms. Stiles at this point? Oslund: One more clarification, they are going to actually operate the gas station and a thrift store? Stiles: Yes Borup: At this point are they intending to move the existing building from Fairview over to here? Stiles: That was Mr. Hill's plan. Oslund: Hey wait, moving buildings, what is the deal? Stiles: He currently operates in a building that is east of the Idaho Athletic Club, it is in the County. It sits back up against the adjacent residential lots. He knows he is going to have to comply with the building code requirements but he believes that he can use that existing building and it will save him money. I think part of it is metal but the front portion is, I don't know what it is. Daunt will have to inspect the building and make sure that it is up to code before he get's an occupancy permit for that building. Oslund: So he is not going to use the Food Town building? Stiles: That is where the Idaho Youth Ranch will be. It is confusing because these are really two separate pieces of property but the Idaho Youth Ranch agreed to let Doug Hill come in as part of their conditional use permit to save him some money. Do you have an Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 36 8 1 /2 by 11 sheet in your packet? Borup: That was my concern what the building was going to look like. (Inaudible) Stiles: Mr. Hill stated that it would cost him $6000 to move the building, he was going to move the building initially because he got a temporary permit from the City Council so he could use it temporarily. But even if they had to move it 2 feet from the position that he had it set he would have to pay another $6000 to move it onto a foundation later. He can't get a building permit until he gets a conditional use permit. Shearer: Are they going to landscape the parking on the farmers market part? Stiles: One of my comments was they should provide a 20 foot landscape strip on that parcel. It is not really possible on the Idaho Youth Ranch parcel because of maintaining the use of those tanks. But they would need to meet the tree requirements and landscaping requirement. Johnson: Okay Ms. Stiles in the past ten years we have had a lot of professional presentations this is not one of them. Stiles: Thank you Johnson: This is a public hearing, is there anyone else that would like to address the Commission on this application, anybody here for this? Any further questions or further discussion? There are a lot of things going on here, a lot more than meets the eye. So what is your pleasure? Shearer: I move that we have the attorney prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law on this project. MacCoy: Second Johnson: Moved and seconded we have the City Attorney prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law on item 11, application by Idaho Youth Ranch Inc., all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #12: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY/FINAL PLAT FOR SUMMERFIELD SUBDIVISION NO. 4 SUBDIVISION BY MAX BOESIGER INC.: Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 37 Johnson: I will now open the public hearing, is the applicant or representative here at this time and would like to address the Commission? Scott Cook, 9550 Bethel Court, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Cook: This application that you have before you is basically a house keeping item. The staff report indicates that and we are just requesting your support and approval of this application. I can entertain any question you might have. Johnson: Any questions of Mr. Cook? Thank you, this is a public hearing is there anyone here for this item? Any further discussion? I will close the public hearing at this time. This is a preliminary plat/final plat no findings of fact are necessary is that correct? Crookston: That is correct. Oslund: Mr. Chairman, I move that we direct the City Attorney to prepare findings of fact Johnson: No that is not necessary Oslund: I would like to withdraw that half motion and make another motion that we, I would move that we approve the application for preliminary plat. Shearer: Second Johnson: We have a motion and a second to approve the preliminary and final plat for Summerfield No. 4, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #13: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR GRANITE CREEK SUBDIVISION BY KEVIN HOWELL: Johnson: I will now open the public hearing, is Mr. Howell or his representative here? Tracey Persons, 1087 W. River Street, Suite 250, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Persons: The application before you was previously approved by City Council in 1994. The developer at that time withheld development of this project due to the market. When he was ready to begin construction again earlier this year we discovered that the time extension for the final plat had not been requested and therefore it had been expired. So we are back before you. The plat has not changed from the original approved preliminary Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 38 plat, it contains 21 lots, 20 buildable and 1 common. The property is zoned R-8 and has 3.4 building lots per acre. We are providing sewer and water and pressurized irrigation to the development. The streets will be constructed according to the Highway District standards, we will have five foot sidewalks. There is a users ditch that delivers water to a parcel to the west of us, that will be tiled so we don't interrupt the flow of water to the parcel to the west. I went through and reviewed the comments offered to you by Shari and Bruce Freckleton and responded to Shari and Bruce in writing as they requested. I only have a few conditions I would like to discuss for a moment. The first one is number 7 of the site specific comments. The one indicates to install non-combustible 6 foot high perimeter fencing prior to obtaining building permits. Generally in the past it has been 6 foot chain link along ditches for maintenance of the ditches when they burn so you don't have a wood fence. I don't think they meant 6 foot chain link along all perimeter. So I just wanted to clarify we would construct perimeter fencing but not that it be chain link on all of our boundaries just for looks but we would construct chain link along the Finch which runs along our southerly boundary. The second item is number 12 of our site specific, it talks about an out parcel, I don't know if you have a plat in front of you. There is an out parcel that has frontage on Locust Grove, it has an existing garage that sits fairly close to our property line. They commented that it doesn't seem to meet the setback requirements. That out parcel isn't owned by Kevin Howell at this time, and hasn't been since 1994. I don't believe that is so much an issue of our preliminary plat as much as it is for the person that owns that lot that parcel, it is not contained within our plat. Number 13, Shari talks that out parcel was included in the original rezone of this project when the property was rezoned to Rte. It was included in that but it was never including in the preliminary or final plats that were previously approved. Again this out parcel is no longer owned by Kevin so 1 don't know how we could include that in our preliminary plat. Those are the only conditions that I wanted to discuss. I would be happy to answer any questions if I can. Johnson: Since this letter you sent on September 14, probably arrived today at least we got it today, has there been any communication from staff back to you in response to your letter? Persons: I talked to Shari this evening late and asked her if there were any problems and she said no. We didn't discuss the out parcel in particular, I told her our position on it which was that we didn't own the out parcel and we hadn't since 1994. Nothing more than that was truly said. MacCoy: How do you egress your property? Persons: We will take entrance through Finch Creek Subdivision which is located there just to the east. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 39 MacCoy: You have just one? Persons: Yes we are providing a stub street to the west and we will have a secondary emergency access easement across our lots, across Locust Grove. That lot will have a building restriction on it so we can't build on that until that stub street is punched through to provide for another access. MacCoy: I didn't check the road way sizes but is that going to meet your fire truck requirements? Persons: Yes they do. Johnson: Any other questions? Thank you, this is a public hearing, anyone here for this application? I will close the public hearing at this time. This is a preliminary plat. Shearer: Mr. Chairman, I move that we approve the preliminary plat. MacCoy: Second Johnson: We have a motion and a second to approve the preliminary plat, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #14: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING TO C-C BY CHERRY PLAZA ASSOCIATES: Johnson: I stated earlier there will be no presentation by the applicant, however since we have noticed the public if you are here to testify feel free to come forward and we would be glad to take your testimony at this time. I will now open the public hearing? Is there anyone here for this application? No one is here, we have a request to table that to October 8. Shearer: Mr. Chairman I move that we continue the public hearing on October 8. Oslund: Second Johnson: Moved and seconded that we continue our public hearing on item 14 Shearer: And 15 Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 40 Johnson: We can do both if you want, let me confirm, is there anyone here for item 15? Okay we are incorporating 14 and 15 in the motion, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #16: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A FAMILY ENTERTAINMENT CENTER BY SELECT DEVELOPMENT AND CONTRACTING INC.: Johnson: At this time I will open the public hearing and ask that the applicant or a representative of the applicant address the Commission. Becky Bowcutt, 1111 S. Orchard, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Bowcutt: This is a conditional use application for a family fun center it is on the property owned by WH Moore Company that adjoins Interstate 84. This is Interstate 84 right here and if you go further south that is Overland Road to the east is Kuna Meridian Road, on our west boundary here is Mountain View Equipment. Let me show you this to give you a little better idea. This is the Interstate Center plat that came through the Planning and Zoning Commission not too long ago. We have done construction plans for the project and are proceeding forward with the subdivision. This particular project would be right here on this lot 5. So it would be tucked right in here. We are building this to ACRD standards with curb, gutter and sidewalk (End of Tape) additional roadway however it will be constructed in the second phase. Sewer is available right here, there is a sewer trunk line that we will be picking up and bring up here and pulling into the streets and water is available here we will be extending water down Overland Road to the western boundary and then pulling it down into the subdivision. This project has gone through Ada County Highway District, they have reviewed it and have made comments and done the staff report. Just to give you a brief little run down it will have a go cart facility that is right next to the Interstate 84. It will have bumper boats, miniature golf facility right here. We have this 14,400 square foot building here that will have arcade, snack bar, little party rooms, it will have offices associated with operation of the park. This facility right here is a batting cage, there is also a shop facility for maintenance. There are little kiddie bumper cars for small type children. Litt{e kiddie electric cars here, there will be benches and planters. This area here will be concrete and then they have an area here for future expansion. AT this time they plan to have that grassed and have picnic benches and so forth. All of the traffic will enter right here at the top of this culdesac and then they have a parking facility here. They have allocated handicap spots and substantial parking areas. This will all be paved and striped according to the code. They have dumpsters that will be screened, there are two on each side here and here. The exterior here will be landscaped along track and then they will have landscaping here so we will have landscaping along that Interstate corridor. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 41 They have provided for landscaping along their perimeter here internally within in the subdivision. Estimated time for construction will begin probably on the utilities in about 60 days and they hope to be open in the spring. So weather permitting we will try to get this open as soon as possible. I read through staffs comments, I think there was one question in Shari's comments what were the hours of operation. On weekdays the hours of operation are 10 a. m. to 10 p.m. and weekends it is 10 p.m. to midnight. Mr. Fulmer is here from Select development, he can answer any questions that you may have on the specifics of it. They have built many facilities just like all over the country. They are out of Utah and I submitted pictures, I don't know if Shari provided those for your review. But on the packet I submitted pictures of what the facility would look like. The ponds internally in here, these are (inaudible) they are chlorinated. The bumper boat pond is also self circulating system. Do you happen to have any questions that I could possible answer and then I will turn the podium over to Mr. Fulmer for questions. MacCoy: I am just curious the land that is down below this that you have shown here is that yours? Bowcutt: Which land that is down below, excuse me? MacCoy: South of the property Bowcutt: That is part of the Interstate Center, really our only neighbor, this is the lot right here, our only neighbor would be Interstate 84 and Mountain View Equipment (inaudible) I think they have a shop that has a rear entrance (inaudible). MacCoy: I am just curious from the standpoint of what is going in there because you have the thing all detailed out. Bowcutt: I brought some elevations if you would like to take a look at these of the building (inaudible) as you can see it is kind of an attractive building with (Inaudible). We have submitted detailed plans on the ponds and this is a detail of the inside of the building. As you can see there is a video arcade, there are little party rooms, there is a snack bar (inaudible) it is oriented toward family entertainment. Jeff Fulmer, 895 Escalante, St. George, Utah, was sworn by the City Attorney. Fulmer: Are there any questions? Johnson: Does anybody have any questions? Crookston: Are you going to operate throughout the year? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 42 Fulmer: Yes we are planning on opening the amusement side, actually we will have the whole facility completed hopefully by May and we will end up shutting these amenities down November December for about 2 to 3 months. In a similar climate, the miniature golf will stay open year round and as long as we don't have too much snow. Johnson: Is your firm the operator as well? Fulmer: Yes, the little brochure that I gave you the pink one, that was actually our first facility that we built for ourselves in St. George, Utah. The very back of that shows a picture of our building which is going to be similar to what we are building here. That construction was actually done out of block and we are going to do this out of (inaudible). Crookston You spoke about your batting cages are you going to try and operate those year round too? Fulmer: If the demand is there, right now we will kind of play that as we go. We would like to keep it open year round, we keep St. George open year round. But the arcade and the restaurant will definitely be open year round. Johnson: Any other questions? Borup: You have a future area there, do you have any concepts in mind of what might be going in? Fulmer: Not necessarily, things in the market kind of change and we are just going to keep that available. We may do an expansion of the building if we want to enlarge the arcade building. Right now we will do grass and we are planning to do a patio in here for company parties to accommodate two to three hundred people in a group. Basically just a soft area, we don't have any plans in the next three years at least. Johnson: Anything else? Thank you very much, this is a public hearing would someone from the public like to address the Commission at this time? Carol Lotspeich, 1032 E. Cayman, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney. Lotspeich: I would like to know, is this going to adjoin Mountain View on the West and if it is going to be in that area from Mountain View east toward Meridian Road because we own some property there. I would like to know how noisy it is going to be. But see I can't from this (inaudible) okay that is one thing that I wanted to know. Another thing I would like to ask is 1 used to live in one of those houses across the road from there and the traffic from that street is so terrible that it is even hard to get out of a house. Now, how are you Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 43 going to adjust for all of these cars going down Overland. Because trust me the traffic there is really bad. I would like to know how noisy it is going to be and how much, how bright it is going be. I would like to know how noisy it is going to be, and how bright the lights are going to be. Johnson: So far I have got, does it adjoin Mountain View, noisy, what the traffic is going to be and the congestion and how bright the lights are going to be, is there anything in addition to that? Lostpeich: Not that I can think of right now. Johnson: Okay, you think about it and we will try and get you those answers. Is there anyone else from the public that would like to address this? Okay, Becky either you or Mr. Fulmer, if you would like to address the concerns there as much as you can at this point we would appreciate it. Bowcutt: 1 think I can address the issue of traffic. Ada County Highway District has reviewed this. This type of facility doesn't have your standard peak hours that other residential and commercial type uses have. Therefore they did not require a traffic study because it just will not generate enough to warrant one. They have asked us to construct a decel lane or a right turn bay on Overland Road. So we will be expanding that section of Overland Road at the entrance. We will also be piping the Kennedy Lateral in conjunction with our construction therefore allowing for future widening of Overland Road. That section of Overland Road west of Kuna Meridian Road is not within the five year plan at this time. The east side is within the five year plan. Fulmer: As far as the lighting, all lighting is projected downward and we will have about, I think the candle power is about 17 so it is going to be fairly well lit but not real bright and everything is pointed down. As far as the sound is concerned, I have some information on the decibel readings on the go carts. They are a new cell go cart with a 5 horse power honda engine on them and they are very quiet on this go cart track with the berm and the elevation from the building I think from the south bound you will hear the Interstate over any attractions that we have going on there. We don't have any outside speakers or any loud music that is going to be playing other than some background music in the miniature golf course area which will just accommodate the scenes and the water fall areas. Johnson: What are the readings, you said you have some readings? We are really into this stuff so we want to know exactly what it is. Can we have a copy of this then? Fulmer: Yes Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 44 Johnson: If you don't mind I would like that for the record, it doesn't make any sense to me but it will to somebody. And was it close that it adjoined Mountain View's property, that was one of the questions. Fulmer: Yes, as far as the elevation of the property, 1 might be corrected if I am wrong but up towards Overland Road I think we started about 35 and we are down here at about a 10 so there is about a 20 foot drop from Overland Road. So the chances of any light coming back up that hill are remote. So we think we picked a great location in a commercial area that is down towards the interstate. If anything the noise of the Interstate will be louder. We are excited about it. (Inaudible) Johnson: He wants to know if you are going to construct a foot bridge over the freeway. (Inaudible) Fulmer: We are excited to be in town, there is myself and two other partners are moving in town, we are moving our families and are going to relocate our construction company that we build these parks all over the country. So this is going to be our new home. We have hired a manager to continue to run the center in St. George. Johnson: In your other facilities have you had to alter any of your lighting from original design to the last one you did or do you find those to be fairly acceptable with the downward, because you need the illumination for the profile. Fulmer: The illumination on the batting cage and the go cart track will be the brightest, the miniature golf course is done with overheard fixtures which are 250 fixtures that are, it is a lot dimmer than what you would find on (inaudible). Those will probably be about a 10 candlepower. Lotspeich: What is in this area in the white area between, is this going to be parking or some other kind of development? Johnson: Maybe Becky you can show her that on your diagram as best you can. Lotspeich: I am just curious I am excited about it too, it sounds like (inaudible). Is this going to be developed commercial is that what this is. You don't know (Discussion Inaudible) Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 45 Bowcutt: This will probably be like either office or other commercial developments on each lot. We can't tell you specifically what is going to happen, it depends on what the buyers Lotspeich: I am just curious to know because we own these houses over here so it is hard enough to get out of those now I just was wondering how much traffic would be generated by it. Bowcutt: We are going to do a loop eventually here so then it will have more than one egress and ingress: Johnson: Is this the same property that was originally or at one time was destined to have Cineplex on it or is that adjacent property? (Inaudible) Johnson: Any other questions? Anybody else have any other comments before I close the public hearing? I will close the public hearing at this time. Shearer: Mr. Chairman I move that we have the attorney prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law on this conditional use. MacCoy: Second Johnson: Moved and seconded we have the City Attorney prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Shearer: I move we adjourn. Oslund: Second Johnson: Motion and second to adjourn, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:24 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 16, 1996 Page 46 APPROVED: r ~~ ~~~~ i ~/ - i ~ J1M J~HNSON, CHAIRMAN \J ATTEST: ~~ L WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., CLERK CITY OF MERIDIA PUB~C MEETING SIGN-U SHEET ~~Y S" c CITY OF MERIDIA PUB~C MEETING SIGN-U HEET NAME PHONE NUMBER S~ C(3°t-~~33~_ ,Z i ter-. ~. .- ~ - --, BEFORE THE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION BOISE VALLEY CONSTRUCTION, INC. DAIRLD WURTZ GOVERNMENT LOT 6, SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH. RANGE 1 EAST BOISE MERIDIAN ADA COUNTY, IDAHO CONDITIONAL USE MERIDIAN, IDARO FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS The above entitled matter having come on for public hearing August 13, 1996, at the hour of 7:30 o'clock p.m., the Petitioners representative, Charles Eddy, appearing, the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian having duly considered the evidence and the matter makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. That a notice of a public hearing on the Conditional Use Permit was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to the said public hearing scheduled for August 13, 1996, the first publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly considered at the August 13, 1996, hearing; that the public was given full opportunity to express comments and submit evidence; and that copies of all notices were available to newspaper, radio and television stations; 2. That this property is located within the City of Meridian, which property is described in the application, which description is incorporated herein. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW BRIDGEWOOD CONDOMINIUMS - PAGE 1 3. That the present zoning is R-15, Medium High Density Residential; that a four unit apartment is constructed on each lot within this subdivision. 4. That the owners of several four-plexes, Gary L. Bunemiller, and Edgar and Karen Barnett, have consented to the application and have requested this conditional use; the application is not at the request of the City of Meridian. 5. That Applicant stated the proposed project is to re-plat the existing four unit apartments into four unit condominiums, which are two story structures; that this proposal will not increase the number of units nor add any new right-of-ways or require new construction; that this will provide an opportunity for the existing tenants to purchase rather than rent; that most tenants are single mothers interested in purchasing the units they now occupy. 6. That the Applicant's Application stated that this project is constructed; that the exterior of the units is vinyl siding; that each condominium unit, comprised of four privately owned spaces, will be governed by a homeowners association consisting of all the homeowners of the project; that the homeowners association will be responsible for the project maintenance and upkeep; that this project will not create additional requirements for public facilities and services; that the water and sewer services to the individual units will remain unchanged; that the impact of police and fire services by the City should be minimal that this will allow the very people who now rents these units to purchase them; FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW BRIDGEWOOD CONDOMINIUMS - PAGE 2 that all units have access to an internal street system which is connected to E. James Court Drive at two intersections; that the project over the past two years has improved the appearance of the Five Mile .Creek; that the present owner has maintained the creek and will pass this same responsibility to the new owners; that the Applicants desire to keep the property compatible with the surrounding area; that landscaping, streets, curbs, gutters and sidewalks are constructed and have been in place since the site was constructed in 1994 and to the standards required by the Ada County Bighway District and the City of Meridian's Ordinances. 7. That the property requires a conditional use permit to allow the existing units to be sold ae condominiums, which is the use the application requests; that such use requires a conditional use permit in any zone where allowed. 8. That the R-15 District is described in the Zoning Ordinance, 11-2-408 B. 3. as follows: DISTRICT: The purpose of the (R-15) District is to permit the establishment of medium-high density single-family attached and multi- family dwellings at a density not exceeding fifteen (15) dwelling units per acre. All such districts must have direct access to a transportation arterial or collector, abut or have direct access to a park or open space corridor, and be connected to the Municipal Water and Sewer systems of the City of Meridian. The predominant housing types in this district will be patio homes, zero lot line single-family dwellings, townhouses, apartment buildings and condominiums. 9. That the (R-15) Medium High Density Residential use proposed by the Applicant is an allowed conditional use in the R-15 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW BRIDGEWOOD CONDOMINIUMS - PAGE 3 district. 10. That the subject property features 48 units at 15.48 units per acre on 3.1 acres; that there are no visible hazardous areas on the property. 11. That sewer and water is available to the property and is required. 12. That the Assistant City Engineer, Bruce Freckleton, the Planning and Zoning Administrator, the Meridian Fire and Police Departments, Central District Health Department and the Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District submitted comments and they are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 13. That Bruce Freckleton and Shari Stiles' comments are as follows: 1. That this is an existing site that was constructed in 1994; that the owners of a majority of the lots is requesting this conditional use permit to allow the existing units to be sold as condominiums. 2. That the Applicant shall be required to comply with Idaho Statute Title 55, Chapter 15 regarding Condominium Property Act. This Act includes the requirement to file a Declaration setting forth specific details of the development. In essence, this Declaration serves as the Protective Covenants and Restrictions of the development and does, in fact, define the entire condominium project. The City Attorney should be given copies of this Declaration, and any other supporting documentation required for establishment of a condominium plan, for review and approval prior to City Council approval of this development. 3. That the Applicant shall be required to plant additional trees throughout the development as a condition of approval. 4. Applicant shall be required to construct the 12 foot wide gravel access road over the existing sewer between Lots 6 and 7, Block 1, of Bridgewood Park Subdivision. This was an original requirement of Bridgewood Park that was never completed. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW BRIDGEWOOD CONDOMINIUMS - PAGE 4 5. The existing storm water system in this development has experienced recent problems, causing flooding; that the Applicant is to remedy this problem through working with the Ada County Highway District prior to the City's sign-off on the planned development. 14. That the Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District submitted comments and they are incorporated herein as if set forth in full; that the District requires that a Land Use Change/Site Development application be filed for review prior to final platting; that all laterals and wasteways must be protected and all municipal surface drainage must be retained on site; that if any surface drainage leaves the site, Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District must review drainage plans; that the developer must comply with Idaho Code 31- 3805; that it is recommended that irrigation water be made available to all developments within the Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District. 15. Charles Eddy testified that this site is generally located about one-quarter (1/4) mile north of the existing Cherry Plaza mall; that this is a re-subdivision of Bridgewood Park Subdivision which was done in 19,94; that there are currently 12 four unit apartments on each parcel; that the existing zone is R-15 (Medium High Density), which allows for a minimum of 2400 square feet of lot per dwelling unit and that the Comprehensive Plan designates this area as an urban development; that there are 48 dwelling units on 3.1 acres which equates out to 2795 square feet per unit; that the Applicant is requesting to re-subdivide the current lots into condominium lots; that services are currently there; that there is an improved street with curb, gutter and FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW BRIDGEWOOD CONDOMINIUMS - PAGE 5 sidewalk that rune through the property; that directly north are newly developed apartments, to the west are existing apartments and to the south, currently under development, looks like single family development; that this development will not add any new services to the current system; that the Applicant is looking to take the current four unit apartments on the parcel and create condominiums which would allow either the current renters to purchase or any other parties that would be interested in purchasing a condominium unit; that the Applicant does not object to the additional landscaping with trees; that the staff comment with regards to the 12 foot wide gravel access road over the sewer has been completed and has grass planted over for aesthetics; that the problem of standing water is being worked out with the Ada County Highway District and Briggs Engineering. 16. Mr. Eddy added that this will allow people to purchase at a very reasonable rate turning renters into property tax payers; that there will be a homeowners association, Association Management, Inc., that will maintain the common areas throughout the subdivision. That the center section of units are owned by separate individuals and not by the Applicant and added that the developer has been approved for a ten (10) year warranty on all of the buildings so that when the buildings are sold as condominiums the ten year warranty will go with it; that the warranty covers structural or any type of mechanical problems which might occur and will transfer through five (5) owners and that the developer is creating financing to where it is possible, if the homeowner is FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW BRIDGEWOOD CONDOMINIUMS - PAGE 6 unable to come up with a down payment, they would be able to move into the developments with zero down. That the storm water problem has been created by what is believed to be the building process to the north; that a lot of the silt came into the storm drain system; that ACRD and Briggs Engineering are currently trying to remedy by pumping the system. 17. That Tony Drost, a property owner of two of the four- plexes located within the center, testified that he has discussed the storm drain problem with the Ada County Highway District and they have several contingency plans in place; that it is a simple matter of choosing the proper one and least expensive; that the current management will respond to the draining the District does not; that property owners will show much more concern about their property and that this proposal is a good thing for Meridian. 18. That Commissioner Borup commented regarding the landscaping with additional trees and if the access road, which has been covered with top soil and sod, would need to be verified. 19. Planning Director, Shari Stiles, commented that the developer of Aspen Hills Apartments was concerned that since they had done some extensive landscaping along that collector road, that they would like to see something similar done across the street; that Bruce Freckleton, Assistant City Engineer, would be informed with regards to the access road over the existing sewer having adequate gravel layer and top soil. 20. That there was no testimony submitted in opposition to the application. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW BRIDGEWOOD CONDOMINIUMS - PAGE 7 CONCLUSIONS 1. That all the procedural requirements of the Local Planning Act and of the Ordinances of the City of Meridian have been met including the mailing of notice to owners of property within 300 feet of the external boundaries of the Applicant's property. 2. That the Citj of Meridian has authority to grant conditional uses pursuant to 67-6512, Idaho Code, and, pursuant to 11-2-418 of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian; and 3. That the City has the authority to take judicial notice of its own ordinances, other governmental statues and ordinances, and of actual conditions existing within the City and state. 4. That the City of Meridian has authority to place conditions on a conditional use permit and the use of the property pursuant to 67-6512, Idaho Code, and pursuant to 11-2-418 D of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian, Idaho. 5. That 11-2-418 C of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian sets forth the standards under which the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council shall review applications for Conditional Uae Permits; that upon a review of those requirements and a review of the facts presented and the conditions of the area, the Planning and Zoning Commission concludes as follows: a. The use, would in fact, constitute a conditional use and a conditional use permit would be required by ordinance. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW BRIDGEWOOD CONDOMINIUMS - PAGE 8 b. The use would be harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan but the Zoning Ordinance requires a conditional use permit to allow the use. c. The use is designed and constructed to be harmonious in appearance with the character of the general vicinity. d. That the use would not be hazardous nor should it be disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses; that traffic should not increase significantly because of the proposed use. e. That the property has available to it sewer and water service. f. The use would not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and the use would not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. g. The use would not involve a use, activity, process, material, equipment or conditions of operation that would be detrimental to person, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic or noise. h. That sufficient parking for the property and the proposed use will be required and the parking layout in the Application will meet the requirements of the City ordinance. i. The development and uses will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of major importance. 9. It is further concluded that the comments, recommendations and requirements of the City Engineer's Department, City Planning Director, Ada County Highway District, and Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District will have to be met and complied with. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW BRIDGEWOOD CONDOMINIUMS - PAGE 9 APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONER BORUP VOTED OSLUND SEEARER VOTED MacCOY CHAIRMAN JOHNSON (TIE BREAKER) VOTED DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION V v y~l~j9~ ;~- The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council of the City of Meridian that they approve the Conditional Use Permit requested by the Applicant for the property described in the application with the conditions set forth in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and that the property be required to meet the water and sewer requirements, the fire and life safety codes, and the Uniform Building Code, and other Ordinances of the City of Meridian. MOTION: APPROVED: ~~ DISAPPROVED: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW BRIDGEWOOD CONDOMINIUMS - PAGE 10 ~n BEFORE THE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ~ ~ \~ CHRIS MAT.T.araE ~ ~ ~\ ~ EAST FAIRVIEW AVENUE AHD HICKORY WAY v ~~ ~ BOISE MERIDIAN ADA COUNTY, IDAHO CONDITIONAL USE MERIDIAN, IDAHO FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The above entitled matter having come on for public hearing August 13, 1996, at the hour of 7:30 o'clock p.m., that Pete Rockwell, the Applicants architect, representing the Petitioner appeared in person, the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian having duly considered the evidence and the matter makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. That a notice of a public hearing on the Conditional Use Permit was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to the said public hearing scheduled for August 13, 1996, the first publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly considered at the August 13, 1996, hearing; that the public was given full opportunity to express comments and submit evidence; and that copies of all notices were available to newspaper, radio and television stations; 2. That the property is located within the City of Meridian and the Applicant is not the owner of the property; that the owner MALLANE CONDITIONAL USE FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 1 of record is the Capital Christian Center. 3. That the property is approximately seven (7) acres; that the location is to the west of the Capital Christian .Center, north of Fairview Avenue and north of the Treasure Valley Business Center, south and east of Dove Meadows Subdivision. 4. That the property is zoned Limited Office (L-O). 5. That the L-O District is described in the Zoning Ordinance, 11-2-408 B. 7 as follows: (L-O) LIMITED OFFICE DISTRICT: The purpose of the (L-O) District is to permit the establishment of groupings of professional, research, executive, administrative, accounting, clerical, stenographic, public service and similar uses. Research uses shall not involve heavy testing operations of any kind or product manufacturing of such a nature to create noise, vibration or emissions of a nature offensive to the overall purpose of this district. The L-O District is designed to act as a buffer between other more intense non- residential uses and high density residential uses, and is thus a transitional use. Connection to the Municipal Water and Sewer System of the City of Meridian is a requirement in this district. 5. That the Application requests a conditional use permit for a Pizza and Italian restaurant. 6. That the land is not used at this time for any purpose and is not developed in any fashion. 7. That comments were received from the Assistant to the City Engineer, Bruce Freckleton, the City Planning Director, Shari Stiles, the Meridian Police Department, Fire Department, Central District Health Department, Ada County Highway District, City Sewer Department and Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District; that such comments are incorporated herein by this reference. HALT-n~E CONDITIONAL USE FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 2 s 8. Bruce Freckleton, the Assistant to the City Engineer, commented; that his comments are incorporated herein as if set forth in full; that off-street parking, landscaping, drainage, lighting, paving and striping shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in 11-2-414; that all signage shall be in accordance with 11-2-415; that any existing wells and/or septic systems will have to be removed but that wells may be used for non- domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation; that any existing irrigation or drainage ditches crossing the property shall be tiled and that tiling plans shall be approved by the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District or a lateral users association; that the City owns and maintains sanitary sewer and water mains in Hickory Way; that provisions were made at the time of installation of these lines that it would serve the proposed site by means of these mains; that an eight (8") inch diameter sewer main and a six (6") inch diameter water main were extended to the site at each of the driveway locations along Hickory Way; that an existing 12" diameter water main is also adjacent to the southwest corner of the development; that assessment fees for sewer and water service will be determined during the building plan review process; that in addition to these assessments, a sewer "Later Comers" fee will also be charged against this parcel to help reimburse the parties responsible for installing the sewer mains which serve this development; that the Applicant will be required by, the Ada County Highway District, to construct a five (5') foot wide detached or MAT•?•nNS CONDITIONAL USE FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FINDINGS OF FACT fi CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 3 meandering sidewalk along Fairview Avenue and Hickory Way and that alignment of these sidewalks shall be coordinated with the ACHD; that it is their understanding that the intersection of Hickory Way and Fairview Avenue is planned to be signalized at a future date when traffic counts warrant and speed zone reductions are also being considered for that stretch of Fairview Avenue; that the intersection has been designed without acceleration and deceleration lanes and that this creates a hazardous situation; that it is suggested that acceleration and deceleration lanes be constructed in accordance with ACHD standards; also that curb and gutter should be constructed along Fairview Avenue; that three (3) 250 watt high pressure sodium street lights still need to be installed along N. Hickory Way by the developer of the Dove Meadows Subdivision and a final plat map will need to be prepared for this development. 9. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Director, Shari Stiles, commented as follows: A. This site was previously before Planning and Zoning as a planned commercial development and as a preliminary/final plat (Capital Park/Angel Park). An illegal split has now taken place; the final plat needs to be recorded prior to issuance of any building permits. All plat requirements are to be met, including sidewalks on Fairview Avenue and Hickory, streetlight installation, and deposit for traffic signal installation. These items must be satisfied prior to issuance of building permits. B. As Fairview Avenue is an entrance corridor to the City, a landscape setback of 35' should be provided. C. That a minimum of one (1) three-inch (3") caliper tree per 1,500 square feet of paving is required; that MAT•?•auE CONDITIONAL USE FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 4 detailed landscaping plans for review and approval, including species and size, shall be submitted with the building permit application. D. Off-street parking shall be in accordance with Meridian City Ordinance and the Americans with Disabilities Act, including signage, ramping and striping; that two (2) additional handicapped stalls are required. E. That no improvements are shown adjacent to existing residential areas; with regard to these lots being screened, the preliminary/final plat requirement is to build a masonry block wall with a ten foot (10') wide planting strip adjacent to all residential areas in lieu of the twenty foot (20') planting strip; that a letter of credit or approved surety will be required for these improvements prior to signature on the final plat. F. That the Applicant is to keep weed cleared on this property before and during development. G. That screened trash enclosures are required for all trash areas. H. signage will receive design review by the Planning and Zoning staff; no signage shall be erected without a permit; that A-frame (sandwich boards) should not be permitted. I. That the Applicant/owner it to provide curbing and underground sprinkler system for all landscaped areas. J. That lighting shall meet the requirements of City Ordinance, with no glare or illumination of adjacent residential property created. Ms. Stiles added that most of the above comments deal primarily with the plat; that they are only mentioned to reiterate plat approvaa requirements and that the current property owner must comply with all staff and agency conditions and record the final plat prior to any legal transfer of ownership. 10. That the Ada County Highway District submitted draft comments and they are incorporated herein as if set forth in full, MALT_a*~E CONDITIONAL USE FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FINDINdS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 5 as follows: Comply with the requirements of Angel Park Subdivision (formerly Capital Park). For this lots frontage, direct lot access to Fairview Avenue was restricted on the subdivision to one (1) driveway located a minimum of 460 feet west of the near curb on Hickory Way. The driveway was (is) required to be a 40 foot wide (maximum) curb return approach. Dedicate 54 feet of right-of-way from the ultimate street centerline of Fairview Avenue abutting the parcel (4 additional feet) by means of recordation of a final subdivision plat or execution of a warranty deed prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first and owner will be compensated from available impact fee revenues; that if owner wishes to be paid for the additional right-of-way, the owner must submit a letter of application to the impact fee administrator prior to breaking ground, in accordance with Section 15 of ACRD Ordinance #188. 3. Provide a cross access agreement for shared access to Fairview Avenue for the abutting parcels to the east and north. This may be in the form of a note on the plat or by a separate recorded document, which then should be referenced on the plat. 4. Install a stop sign on every unsignalized approach of a project access to an intersection involving a collector or arterial as the cross-street. The stop sign shall be installed when the project access is first accessible to the motoring public. Provide a $3,200 deposit to the Public Rights-of-Way Trust Fund for this development's share of cost of a traffic signal (4-percent of $80,000) at the intersection of Fairview Avenue and Hickory Way, prior to issuance of any required permits or District approval of a final plat, whichever occurs first. 11. That the Meridian Fire Department comments were that all codes, fire hydrants and sprinkler systems shall be met in accordance with the water flow requirements. 12. That the Sewer Department submitted a comment and it is nraT.r.nuE CONDITIONAL USE FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 6 • incorporated herein as if set forth in full which is that this application will require a 1000 gallon external grease trap if one is not already in place. 13. That the Applicant's representative, Pete Rockwell, testified that this piece of property is on East Fairview and the corner of Hickory Way; that the Capital Christian Church is adjacent; that this piece of property consists of 7 acres; that the proposal is to build two (2) restaurants on the southwest corner of the property; that there is access in off of Fairview according to Ada County Highway District regulations and have shared access at two (2) points off of Hickory Way; that the property is currently zoned L-O, Limited Office and property to the west is zoned by Ada County, R-T; that the only restaurant planned at this time is an 8000 square foot Louie's restaurant and they want to plan a restaurant to compliment Louie's, like a pancake house or something similar; that the comment from the City Engineer's Department, Assistant Bruce Freckleton, regarding constructing acceleration and deceleration lanes and curb and sidewalk and gutter, are unclear as to whose responsibility that would be; that the Applicant understands it will be required to put up some money towards a traffic light at the corner of Hickory and East Fairview and would like to accelerate that as it would make things better for the neighborhood and for business; that the Ada County Highway District stated that the plans to make Fairview Avenue a seven ( 7 ) lane road, so the thinking already is for the acceleration and MALLANE CONDITIONAL USE FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 7 deceleration lanes; that the maximum seating capacity is 250 maximum; that there is intended to be different banquet facilities with some modified areas for smaller group meetings. 14. Commissioner Johnson commented that the RT zoning is not found in the City of Meridian; that from the Commission's records, the proposed parcel is entirely zoned L-O, Limited Office. 15. Commissioner MacCoy commented that the four (4) handicapped parking spaces shown for the Louie's restaurant comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act, but that there was no designated spaces shown at the other restaurant and questioned the Applicant about the signage and that it too, would have to go through the Planning and Zoning. 16. Mr. Rockwell added that two (2) more handicapped spaces would be provided at Louie's restaurant and that the other restaurant would indeed be providing handicapped parking spaces and would be coming back to the City with detail plans including the landscaping, irrigation and site utilities; that the signage had not been discussed at this juncture. 17. Corey Grant testified that he lives on the first street on the south side of this proposal; that his concerns lie with the congested traffic this may cause; the kind of sign and the noise factor; that the folks in Dove Meadows have one way in and one way out, so residents don't have an alternate way of avoiding traffic coming in and out of the two exits; that if this were to be a large sign he would basically be .getting the light into his backyard; NALLANE CONDITIONAL USE FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 8 • that this proposal would affect this property but realizes something will be developed there and would like the Commission to address his concerns. 18. That section 11-2-418 d. states as follows: "In approving any Conditional Use, the Commission and Council may prescribe appropriate conditions, bonds, and safeguards in conformity with this Ordinance. Violations of such conditions, bonds or safeguards, when made a part of the terms under which the Conditional Use is granted, shall be deemed a violation of the Ordinance and grounds to revoke the Conditional Use. The Commission and Council may prescribe a set time period for which a Conditional Use may be in existence." 19. That under COMMUNITY DESIGN, at Page 72, Fairview Avenue is listed as an Entryway Corridor; that the Entrance Corridors Goal Statement is to Promote, encourage, develop and maintain aesthetically pleasing approaches to the City of Meridian and under Policies, Page 73, it states as follows: 4.3U Use the Comprehensive Plan, subdivision regulations, and zoning to discourage strip development and encourage clustered, landscaped business development on entrance corridors. 4.4U Encourage landscaped setbacks for new development on entrance corridors. The City shall require, as a condition of development approval, landscaping along all entrance corridors. 20. Section 11-9-605 G, PLANTING STRIPS AND RESERVE STRIPS, of the Subdivision and Development Ordinance, states that planting strips shall be required to be placed next to incompatible features such as highways, railroads, commercial or industrial uses to screen the view from residential properties and that such screening shall be a minimum of twenty feet wide and shall not be part of the ~nxE CONDITIONAL USE FOR PLANNED DEVSLOPMSNT FINDINGS OF FACT ~ CONCLDSIONS OF LAW Page - 9 normal street right-of-way or utility easement. 21. That there was no other public testimony given. 22. That proper notice has been given as required by law and all procedures before the Planning and Zoning Commission have been given and followed. 1. That all the procedural requirements of the Local Planning Act and of the Ordinances of the City of Meridian have been met, including the mailing of notice to owners of property within 300 feet of the external boundaries of the Applicant's property. 2. That the City of Meridian has authority to grant conditional uses pursuant to 67-6512, Idaho Code, and, pursuant to 11-2-418 of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian. 3. That the City has the authority to take judicial notice of its own ordinances, other governmental statues and ordinances, and of actual conditions existing within the City and state. 4. That the City of Meridian has authority to place conditions on a conditional use permit and the use of the property pursuant to 67-6512, Idaho Code, and pursuant to 11-2-418 D of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian, Idaho. 5. That 11-2-418 C of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian sets forth the standards under which the Commission shall review applications for Conditional Use Permits; NALLANE CONDITIONAL USS FOR PLANNBD DEVLLOPMSNT FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 10 that upon a review of those requirements and a review of the facts presented and the conditions of the area, the Commission concludes as follows: a. The use, would in fact, constitute a conditional use and a conditional use permit is required by ordinance. b. The use would be harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan but the Zoning Ordinance requires a conditional use permit to allow the use. c. The use shall be designed and shall be constructed to be harmonious in appearance with the character of the general vicinity. d. That the use would not be hazardous nor should it be disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses; that the access and traffic requirements of the City and the Ada County Highway District shall be met and if they are, traffic should not increase significantly because of the proposed use. e. That the property has available to it sewer and water service and .the Applicant shall connect to such at its expense. f. The use would not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services if the Applicant meets the requirements of the City and Ada County Highway District and the use would not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. g. The use would not involve a use, activity, process, material, equipment or conditions of operation that would be detrimental to person, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic or noise. h. That sufficient parking for the property and the proposed use is required and the parking layout must meet the requirements of the City ordinance and should provide for additional parking beyond the ordinance requirements. i. The development and uses will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of major importance. 6. That all ordinances of the City of Meridian must be met, MALLANE CONDITIONAL USE FOR PLANNED DEVELOPNENT FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 11 including but not limited to, the Uniform Building Code, Uniform Fire Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, Uniform Electrical Code, the Fire and Life Safety Code, all parking and landscaping requirements. 7. All requirements of these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for the annexation and zoning and the annexation Ordinance must be met, including entering into a development agreement; that the development agreement must meet the requirements outlined in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law adopted on the annexation of the property, specifically including the 35 foot landscape requirement along Fairview Avenue, an entryway corridor to the City of Meridian. 7. It is further concluded that the comments, recommendations and requirements of the Assistant to the City Engineer, Planning Director, Ada County Highway District, and other governmental agencies, shall be met and complied with. 8. It is concluded that the Application for a Planned Development - Commercial, should be granted; that the Applicant shall be required to meet the requirements of the Limited Office (L-O) district and the requirements of the Planned Development Ordinance, 11-9-607. 9. That the Applicant shall get a .detailed site plan approval at the building permit stage so that it does not have to come again before the Planning and Zoning Commission to ensure compliance with City goals and standards and staff and agency MA*•?•aNE CONDITIONAL USE FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 12 requirements. 10. That the final plat must be recorded prior to any issuance of building permits. APPROVAL OF FINDINC~3 OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONER BORUP I~' COMMISSIONER O~Urt~ COMMISSIONER SHEARER COMMISSIONER MacCOY CHAIRMAN JOHNSON (TIE BREAKER) VOTE, VOTE. VOTE VOTE VOTE_ u ~i~d~am The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council of the City of Meridian that they approve the conditional use permit for a planned commercial development with the conditions set forth in these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, that the Applicant and owners be specifically required to submit a final development plan, meet all of the requirements of Section 11-9-607 and of the Limited Office requirements, and all of the Ordinances of t City of Meridian. MOTION: APPROVED: ~IIII~~ DISAPPROVED: MALT•n**E CONDITIONAL USE FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FINDINC~B OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Page - 13 ~,, • • ~, ~:~, ~~~v DOUG TAMURA AND ARTHUR BERRY J .~~ ANNERATION AND ZONINO NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOCUST GROVE ROAD AND FRANKLIN ROAD MERIDIAN. IDAHO FINDINOS OF FACT AND OF LAW The above entitled annexation and zoning application having come on for consideration on June 11, 1996, at the hour of 7:30 o'clock p.m. on said date, at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho, and was tabled to July 9, 1996, then tabled again to August 13, 1996, the Planning and Zoning Commission now having heard and taken oral and written testimony and the Applicant, Doug Tamura, appearing in person, and having duly considered the matter, the Planning and Zoning Commission makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. That notice of public hearing on the annexation and zoning was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to the said public hearing scheduled for August 13, 1996, the first publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly considered at August 13, 1996, hearing; that the public. was given full opportunity to express comments and submit evidence; and that copies of all notices were available to FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - TAMURA-BERRY PAGE - 1 newspaper, radio and television stations. 2. That the property included in the application for annexation and zoning is described in the application, and by this reference is incorporated herein; that the property is approximately 36.5 acres in size. 3. That the property is presently zoned by Ada County as R-T (Rural Transition); that the Applicant requests that the property be zoned General Retail and Service Commercial (C-G) and I-L Light Industrial and has requested a conditional use permit to allow a commercial planned unit development. 4. The general area surrounding the property is currently zoned Light Industrial; that the property to the north has been purchased by Anderson Lumber; that the property to the west is Builder's Marketplace; that Layne Industrial Park and Locust Grove Industrial Park are located to the east; to the south is vacant land, pasture land and residences. 5. That the property is adjacent and abutting to the present City limits. 6. That Doug Tamura and Arthur Berry are the Applicants; that the Applicants own the land and .have consented to this annexation and zoning and the application is not at the request of the City of Meridian. 7. That the Application stated that the land is zoned by Ada County as Rural Transitional (RT); that the proposed use is for a Commercial Planned Unit Development in four (4) phases; Phase One FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - TANURA-BERRY PAGE - 2 to consist of concrete tilt up office, showroom and warehouse space developed along the existing Locust Grove Road frontage; Phase Two, would consist of developing office space along the Franklin Road frontage next to Builder's Marketplace, a possible location for the State Department of Employment; Phase Three would consist of a concrete tilt up office, showroom and warehouse space, working with the Ada County Highway District (ACRD) on relocating Locust Grove to the existing section line and Phase Four would be developing a commercial center at the intersection of Locust Grove and Franklin Road; that due to the future proposed street improvements, it is the Applicant's intention to develop the north half of the parcel first and let the market place dictate the type of commercial development that should be placed at the corner of Franklin and Locust Grove Road. 8. That the property included in the annexation and zoning application is within the Area of Impact of the City of Meridian; that the parcel of ground requested to be annexed is presently included within the Meridian Urban Service Planning Area (U.S.P.A.) as the Urban Service Planning Area is defined in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. 9. That the property could be physically serviced with City water and sewer. 10. That Meridian has, and is, experiencing a population increase; that there are pressures on land previously used for agricultural uses to be developed into residential subdivision FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - TAMURA-BERRY PAGE - 3 lots, commercial and/or industrial uses. 11. That the property is included within an area designated on the Generalized Land Use Map in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan as being in a Mixed/Planned Use Development area. 12. That the Meridian Police Department, Fire Department, the Assistant to the Meridian City Engineer, Ada County Highway District, City Planning Director, Central District Health Department, and the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District submitted comments; that those comments are incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full. 13. That Bruce Freckleton, the Assistant to the City Engineer, submitted the following comments: 1. That the legal descriptions for annexation included in the Application don't include portions of the Franklin Road, and Union Pacific Railroad right-of- way; that Applicant shall submit an annexation perimeter legal description for each proposed zone and shall include all those portions of adjacent public rights-of-way contiguous to the Corporate City Limits of the City of Meridian and 1/2 of all other adjacent public right-of-ways, and shall be prepared by a Registered Land Surveyor, Licensed by the State of Idaho, and shall conform to all the provisions of the City of Meridian Resolution No. 158; that the legal description for annexation must place these parcels contiguous to the existing city limit boundary. 2. That water service is contingent upon positive results from a hydraulic analysis. 3. That any existing irrigation/drainage ditches crossing the property shall be tiled. 4. That any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service per City Ordinance, but wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - TAMURA-BERRY PAGE - 4 landscape irrigation. 5. That a drainage plan designed by an architect or an engineer shall be submitted for all off-street parking areas and all site drainage shall be contained and disposed of on-site. 6. That outside lighting shall be designed and placed so as to not direct illumination on any nearby residential areas. 7. That all signage shall be in accordance with Meridian City Ordinances. 8. That off-street parking, paving and stripping, shall all be provided in accordance with City Ordinances. 9. That all construction and the paving and striping shall be in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. 10. That assessment fees for water and sewer service are determined during the building plan review process; that in addition, water and sewer "Late Comers" fees will also be charged against this parcel to help reimburse the parties responsible for installing the sewer mains to their current points. 11. Determine the seasonal high groundwater elevation, and submit a profile of the subsurface soil conditions as prepared by a soil scientist with the design of site drainage plan. 12. Provide sidewalks in accordance with City Ordinance. 14. That Bruce Freckleton submitted site specific comments and they include the following: 1. Water service to the proposed site could be to the existing 10" diameter water line installed along the easterly side of Locust Grove Road; that the Public Works Department be provided with information on the anticipated fire flow and domestic water requirements for the proposed site; that the Applicant will be required to construct new mains along the east and south frontages of the FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - TAMURA-BERRY PAGE - 5 site; that size and locations shall be determined by the Public Works Department; that the new main in Franklin Road will have to be extended across the frontage of the Builders Masonry Products parcel to complete the loop to another existing 12" main. That Sanitary Sewer service to the proposed site could be to the existing main line installed along the Five Mile Creek, directly adjacent to the west. 3. That the treatment capacity of the City of Meridian's Wastewater Treatment Plant is currently being evaluated; that approval of this Application needs to be contingent upon the City's ability to accept the additional sanitary sewage generated by this proposed development. 4. That the site plan be revised to show the existing 20 foot wide City of Meridian Sanitary Sewer Easement; that free access to the existing sewer main must be maintained at all times; that there is an existing gravel access road along the route of the sewer trunk line; that each manhole must be accessible to truck and trailer mounted flushing equipment and that no trees shall be placed within the sanitary sewer easement. 15. That the Planning and Zoning Administrator, Shari Stiles, submitted comments and they are incorporated herein as if set forth in full and include the following: 1. That ACBD reviewed this project on May 31, 1996; however, the Applicant took exception to several requirements ACRD imposed; that among the items being deliberated are the extension of Lanark Street a public street to the west, whether ACHD will reimburse the Applicant for the entire right- of-way to be dedicated along section line for future Locust Grove Road, and access locations. 2. That a 35 foot (35') landscape setback (lot) is required adjacent to Franklin Road as a condition of annexation; that a minimum ten-foot (10') landscape setbacks should be provided along the existing and future Locust Grove Roads. 3. This property is located in an area designated as FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - TAMURA-BERRY PAGS - 6 Mixed Planned Use Development on the Meridian Comprehensive Plan's generalized land use map. Development as a Planned Unit Development - General under the conditional use permit process is required. 4. Location of landscaping in future required right- of-way on Locust Grove Road and within the Evans Drain easement is not acceptable. A minimum of ten percent (108) of the gross land area is to be landscaped open space under PUD requirements. 5. All ditches, including the Evans Drain, are to be tiled per City Ordinance unless a variance is requested and granted by the City Council. 6. Non-combustible fencing is to be installed outside the Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way prior to obtaining building permits. No encroachment of this 200' right-of-way will be permitted per City policy. 7. Sidewalks are to be provided adjacent to all public right-of-way; submit approval letters from Ada County Bighway District for work within their respective rights-of-way; pedestrian walkways within development are to be a minimum of five feet (5') wide. S. Provide a minimum of one (1) three-inch (3") caliper tree for every 1,500 square feet of asphalt; provide a detailed landscape plan that includes sizes of plants for approval. 9. Parking stalls are to be a minimum of 10' long with minimum 25' wide driveways. 10. A Certificate of Occupancy must be received prior to utilization of any building and must be signed by the Building Department, Fire Department, Planning and Zoning Department and all agencies; that phasing of improvements for tiling of ditches and fencing should not be permitted. 11. Signs shall meet the Uniform Sign Code and City Ordinance and shall be subject to design review. 12. Illumination of the site shall be designed to not cause glare or adversely impact neighboring residential properties. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - TAMURA-BERRY PAGE - 7 13. All uses on this property must be approved through the conditional use permit process; that any changes to an approved plan may require additional hearings. 14. Provide handicap parking striping, signage and ramping per requirements of the American with Disabilities Act. 15. Dedication of required right-of-way is required prior to obtaining building permits; that Applicant submit recorded Warranty Deed to City Clerk's office; that ACRD indicates a total of 96 feet is required for the new Locust Grove Road; that 58 feet is required for the existing Locust Grove Road. 16. That Five Mile Creek is to be preserved as a natural feature and is designated in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan as a multiple use pathway; that a detailed plan be provided prior to obtaining building permits; that the City's trunk line sewer traverses Five Mile Creek through this property and that this easement must be preserved and a suitable driving surface maintained for access by City equipment.. 17. That a development agreement is required as a condition of annexation. 16. That the Ada County Highway District submitted draft comments and they are incorporated herein as if set forth in full as follows: Dedicate 96 feet of right-of-way for new Locust Grove Road through the site by means of recordation of a final subdivision plat or execution of a warranty deed prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. The owner will be compensated for the right-of-way in excess of 50 feet, but will not be compensated for 50 feet of right-of-way along the entire site. 2. Dedicate 45 feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Franklin Road abutting the parcel (5 additional fee) by means or recordation of a final subdivision plat or execution of a warranty deed FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - TAMURA-BERRY PAGE - 8 prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. The owner will be compensated for this additional right-of-way. 3. Dedicate 58 feet of right-of-way for a new east- west roadway between old and new Locust Grove Road through this site by means of recordation of a final subdivision plat or execution of a warranty deed prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first; that the owner will not be compensated for this additional right-of-way. 4. Construct new Locust Grove Road to a minimum width of 24 feet abutting the site. 5. Construct curb, gutter, 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk on both sides of new Locust Grove Road abutting the site prior to the issuance of any required permits or District approval of a final plat; that the sidewalks shall be located 1 foot within the new right-of-way line. 6. Construct a 5 foot wide concrete sidewalk on both sides of new Locust Grove Road abutting the site and shall be located 1 foot within the new right- of-way line prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. 7. Provide a $11,220.00 deposit to the Public Rights- of-Way Trust Fund for the cost of constructing a 5 foot wide concrete sidewalk on Franklin Road abutting the parcel prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. An east-west commercial/industrial roadway connection shall be constructed between the old and new Locust Grove Roads; that the street shall be constructed as a 41 foot street section with 5 foot wide sidewalk on both sides within 58 feet of right-of-way; that the roadway shall be located along the south right-of-way line of the railroad track, or shall be aligned with Lanark Street to the east with right-of-way (or an easement) for a turnaround provided at the end of old Locust Grove south of the railroad tracks; that driveways on the new east/west roadway shall be a minimum of 50 feet FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - TAMURA-BERRY PAGE - 9 apart and/or aligned with driveways on the opposite side of the street. 9. The five 24 foot wide curb return driveways on old Locust Grove Road shall be permitted with a minimum driveway/intersection separation of 50 feet; the driveways shall also be a minimum of 50 feet apart and/or aligned with existing driveways on the east side of old Locust Grove Road; that the third driveway from the north property line shall be relocated to align with the driveway on the east side of old Locust Grove Road (approximately 190 feet north of Lanark Street). 10. One right-in/right-out driveway with a 30 foot wide throat on Franklin Road located a minimum of 150 feet from old Locust Grove and a minimum of 220 feet from New Locust Grove Road shall be permitted; that the right-in and right-out traffic lanes shall be required to be 20 feet wide, separated by an on- site channelizing island with a minimum area of 100 square feet within the driveway throat; that the design shall be reviewed by the Development Services staff. 11. The easterly full access driveway proposed to be approximately 135 feet west of the new Locust Grove Road on Franklin Road shall not be permitted. 12. The middle driveway on Franklin Road located approximately 340 feet from .new Locust Grove Road shall be permitted as a right-in/right-out driveway; that the right-in and right-out traffic lanes shall be required to be 20 feet wide, separated by an on-site channelizing island with a minimum area of 100 square feet within the driveway throat and shall be reviewed by Development Services staff. 13. The westerly full access driveway on Franklin Road located approximately 580 feet from new Locust Grove shall be permitted as long as a minimum distance of 150 feet between the driveways is maintained. 14. The southern most driveway on the west side on new Locust Grove Road shall not be permitted; that the second driveway north of Franklin Road may be permitted as a right-in/right-out driveway (design to be reviewed and approved); that the third FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - TAMIRA-BERRY PAGE - 10 driveway north of Franklin Road may be permitted as a full access driveway if it aligns with the east/west roadway; that fourth driveway north of Franklin road may be permitted; that the fifth driveway north of Franklin Road may be permitted unless the east/west roadway is constructed at the south right-of-way line of the railroad. In any case, a maximum of three driveways on this frontage shall be permitted, including street intersections. 15. That District policy will apply to any driveways proposed on the east side of new Locust Grove Road and will be outlined once a revised site plan which shows the east/west roadway is submitted. 16. Restrictions on the width, number and locations of driveways, as required by District policy, shall be placed on future development of this parcel. 17. Other than the access point(s) specifically approved with this application, direct lot or parcel access is prohibited. 17. That Doug Tamura testified that he and Arthur Berry have recently purchased the Ralph Madden property at the corner of North Locust Grove and Franklin Road; that the plan is to develop a four phase project; that the first phase would consist of concrete tilt up light commercial buildings; that the existing properties around this project have all developed as light industrial and in particular the industrial subdivisions to the north and to the east has been mixtures of different types of building types; that the Applicants would like to see a well planned conceptual project where all of the building have more of a planned unit development concept; that they would like to go ahead and run the landscaping along all of the boulevards on both the existing North Locust Grove and the proposed Locust Grove Road along with the Lanark extension; that the Highway District's future plan will be to widen Franklin FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - TAMURA-BERRY PAGE - 11 Road to five lanes with a lighter intersection from Five Mile to Meridian Road and widen Locust Grove from Fairview to Franking Road in a five lane facility that will be a 96 foot right of way; that East Lanark will run from the new proposed Locust Grove all the way to Eagle Road making three paralleling roads, Pine Street, East Lanark and Franklin Road and a ten year plan to build a bridge and extend Locust Grove south; that Lanark would be extended both east to hit Eagle Road and then west to reach Locust Grove for the new proposed Locust Grove; that ACRD would go ahead and redesignate this to more of a local status but still require a 58 foot right- of-way on the existing Locust Grove to Lanark and then the Applicant vacate the northerly portion of Locust Grove from East Lanark to the railroad tracks; that the other three phases at some point in time will be some kind of commercial use and that the Applicant will come back for detailed conditional uses for each on the subsequent uses; that phase 1 and phase 2 would be all of similar type of buildings and look like more or less a campus commercial project; that the property line runs from the existing Locust Grove which is the projects east boundary line, and runs contiguous to Builders Masonry to the west; that the Applicants own everything from there to the railroad right-of-way which includes the Evans Drain; that discussion with the District was to go ahead and road trust both right of way and future street improvements with curb, gutter and sidewalk, and widening the street; that the Applicant would go through the process of vacation totally FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - TAlSURA-BERRY PAGE - 12 contingent on the relocation of Locust Grove to the new section line and to develop the two buildings first and then use the existing Locust Grove and leave it as a public right of way until the timing of the new location; that if it looks like this may go long term, the Applicant will go ahead and push the buildings back, match the landscaping buffers so it will look like a finished product even though Locust Grove will be vacated and go ahead and revise the landscape buffer to reflect what the rest of the project looks like; that the Applicant may request a variance to leave the Evans Drain open, but fence the drain versus covering it; that Shari Stiles was requesting that the sewer easement that runs along the northeasterly portion of the drain run through the Applicant's property where the sewer line is at to be dedicated as a pedestrian pathway; that if it could be worked out, Builders Masonry could continue on down to the Evans Drain and make some kind of pedestrian corridor. 18. That John P. Anderson submitted a letter of concern with this development; that businesses currently adjacent to his property at 120 N. Locust Grove operate during the day and rarely on weekends; that he would like to see the City of Meridian establish a restrictive covenant that the proposed business sight maintain similar operating hours; that he is concerned with the traffic, noise and lighting; that his irrigation delivery comes from the Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District's Barker Lateral; that this proposed building site offers the ability to take care of FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - TAMURA-BSRRY PAGS - 13 runoff water and delivery and cannot be blocked; that all irrigation work be done between October 15 and March 15 because there is no quick way to shut off the water if construction interferes with the normal flow of water during the irrigation season; that a traffic signal light be located at the intersection of Locust Grove and Franklin Road to make it safer; that during the construction phase a 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. curfew be placed. 19. That there was no other testimony offered. 20. That the following pertinent statements are made in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan: A. Under the LAND, GENERAL POLICIES, Section commencing at page 22, it states in Section 1.4U as follows: Encourage a balance of land uses to ensure that Meridian remains a desirable and self-sufficient community. Under the INDUSTRIAL POLICIES, commencing at page 24, it states in part as follows: 3.1 Industrial development within the urban service planning area should receive the highest priority. 3.4 Industrial development should be encouraged to locate adjacent to existing industrial uses. 3.5 Industrial areas should be located within proximity to major utility, transportation and services facilities. 3.9 Industrial uses should be located where discharge water can be properly treated or pre-treated to eliminate adverse impacts upon the City sewer treatment facility and irrigated lands that receive industrial runoff. 3.10 Industrial uses should be located where adequate water supply and water pressure are available for fire protection. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - TAMURA-BERRY PAGE - 14 B. Under ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, Economic Development Goal Statement, at page 18, the following pertinent statements are made: 1.3 The character, site improvements and type of new commercial or industrial developments should be harmonized with the natural environment and respect the unique needs and features of each area. 1.6 It is the policy of the City of Meridian to support shopping facilities which are effectively integrated into new or existing residential areas, and plan for new shopping centers as growth and development warrant. Policies, Page 19 1.1 The City of Meridian shall make every effort to create a positive atmosphere which encourages industrial and commercial enterprises to locate in Meridian. 1.2 It is the policy of the City of Meridian to set aside areas where commercial and industrial interests and activities are to dominate. 1.3 The character, site improvements and type of new commercial or industrial developments should be harmonized with the natural environment and respect the unique needs and features of each area. 1.5 Strip industrial and commercial uses are not in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. 21. That the property is included within an area designated on the Generalized Land Use Map in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan as a mixed/planned use area. 22. That the requested zoning of General Retail and Service Commercial, (C-G) is defined in the Zoning Ordinance at 11-2-408 B. 11. as follows: the (C-G) District is to provide for comme: customarily operated entirely or almost building; to provide for a review of the FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - TAMURA-BERRY ~1: The purpose of cial uses which are entirely within a ianpact of proposed PAGE - 15 commercial uses which are auto and service oriented and are located in close proximity to major highway or arterial streets; to fulfill the need of travel-related services as well as retail sales for the transient and permanent motoring public. All such districts shall be connected to the Municipal Water and Sewer systems of the City of Meridian, and shall not constitute strip commercial development and encourage clustering of commercial development. 23. That the requested zoning of Light Industrial District (I-L) is defined in the Zoning Ordinance at 11-2-408 B. as follows: (I-L) Light Industrial: The purpose of the (I-L) Light Industrial District is to provide for light industrial development and opportunities for employment of Meridian citizens and area residents and reduce the need to commute to neighboring cities; to encourage the development of manufacturing and wholesale establishments which are clean, quiet and free of hazardous or objectionable elements, such as noise, odor, dust, smoke or glare and that are operated entirely or almost entirely within enclosed structures; to delineate areas best suited for industrial development because of location, topography, existing facilities and relationship to other land uses. This district must also be in such proximity to insure connection to the Municipal Water and Sewer systems of the City of Meridian. Uses incompatible with light industry are not permitted, and strip development is prohibited. 24. That Section 11-2-409, ZONING SCHEDULE OF USE CONTROL, B, Commercial, lists commercial uses allowed in the various zoning districts of the City; that planned commercial developments, are an allowed use in the C-G district. 25. That Planned Development is defined in 11-2-403 B, at page 20 of the Zoning Ordinance booklet, as follows: "An area of land which is developed as a single entity for a number of uses in combination with or exclusive of other supportive uses. A PD may be entirely residential, industrial, or commercial or a mixture of compatible uses. A PD does not necessarily correspond to lot size, bulk, density, lot coverage required, open space or type of residential, commercial or industrial uses as established in any one or FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - TAMURA-BERRY PAGE - 16 more created districts or this Ordinance." and a Planned General Development is defined as follows: "A development not otherwise distinguished under Planned Commercial, Industrial, Residential Developments, or in which the proposed use of interior and exterior spaces requires unusual design flexibility to achieve a completely logical and complimentary conjunction of uses and functions. This PD classification applies to essential public services, public or private recreation facilities, institutional uses, community facilities or a PD which includes a mix of residential, commercial or industrial uses." 26. That in 1992 the Idaho State Legislature passed amendments to the Local Planning Act, which in 67-6513 Idaho Code, relating to subdivision ordinances, states as follows: "Each such ordinance may provide for mitigation of the effects of subdivision development on the ability of political subdivisions of the state, including school districts, to deliver services without compromising quality of service delivery to current residents or imposing substantial additional costs upon current residents to accommodate the subdivision."; that the City of Meridian is concerned with the increase in development that is occurring and with its impact on the City being able to provide fire, police, emergency health care, water, sewer, parks and recreation services to its current residents and business and to those moving into the City; the City is also concerned that the increase in commercial and industrial development is bringing in more population and is burdening the schools of the Meridian School District which provide school service to current and future residents of the City; that the increase in commercial and industrial which might locate in this annexation would be helpful. 27. That pursuant to the instruction, guidance, and direction FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - TAMURA-BERRY PAGE - 17 of the Idaho State Legislature, the City may impose either a development fee or a transfer fee on residential property, which, if possible, would be retroactive and apply to all lots in the City, because of the imperilment to the health, welfare, and safety of the citizens of the City of Meridian. 28. That Section 11-9-605 C states as follows: "Right-of-way for pedestrian walkways in the middle of long blocks may be required where necessary to obtain convenient pedestrian circulation to schools, parks or shopping areas; the pedestrian easement shall be at least ten feet (10') wide." 29. That Section 11-9-605 G 1. states as follows: "Planting strips shall be required to be placed next to incompatible features such as highways, railroads, commercial or industrial uses to screen the view from residential properties. Such screening shall be a minimum of twenty feet (20') wide, and shall not be a part of the normal street right of way or utility easement." 30. That Section 11-9-605 H 2. states as follows: "Existing natural features which add value to residential development and enhance the attractiveness of the community (such as trees, watercourses, historic spots and similar irreplaceable amenities) shall be preserved in the design of the subdivision;" 31. That Section 11-9-605 K states as follows: "The extent and location of lands designed for linear open space corridors should be determined by natural features and, to lesser extent, by man-made features such as utility easements, transportation rights of way or water rights of way. Landscaping, screening or lineal open space corridors may be required for the protection of residential properties from adjacent arterial streets, waterways, railroad rights of way or other features. As improved areas (landscaped), semi- improved areas (a landscaped pathway only), or unimproved areas (left in a natural state), linear open space corridors serve: 1. To preserve openness; FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - TAMURA-BERRY PAGE - 18 2. To interconnect park and open space systems within rights of way for trails, walkways, bicycle ways; 3. To play a major role in conserving area scenic and natural value, especially waterways, drainages and natural habitat; 4. To buffer more intensive adjacent urban land uses; 5. To enhance local identification within the area due to the internal linkages; and 6. To link residential neighborhoods, park areas and recreation facilities." 32. That Section 11-9-605 L states as follows: "Bicycle and pedestrian pathways shall be encouraged within new developments as part of the public right of way or as separate easements so that an alternate transportation system (which is distinct and separate from the automobile) can be provided throughout the City Urban Service Planning Area. The Commission and Council shall consider the Bicycle-Pedestrian Design Manual for Ada County (as prepared by Ada County Highway District) when reviewing bicycle and pedestrian pathway provisions within developments." 33. That 11-9-607 A, of the Subdivision Ordinance, states in part as follows: "The City's policy is to encourage developers of land development and construction projects to utilize the provisions of this Section to achieve the following: 1. A development pattern in accord with the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan; 5. A more convenient pattern of commercial, residential and industrial uses as well as public services which support such uses." 34. As stated above in Paragraph 3, the Applicant submitted an application on a conditional use to allow a commercial Planned Unit Development; that the Applicant did not specifically address the conditional use at the public hearing; that the Commissioners FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - TAMURA-BERRY PAGE - 19 stated that the annexation and zoning will be acted on first, before the conditional use. 35. That proper notice was given as required by law and all procedures before the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council were given and followed. CONCLUSIONS 1. That all the procedural requirements of the Local Planning Act and of the Ordinances of the City of Meridian have been met; including the mailing of notice to owners of property within 300 feet of the external boundaries of the Applicant's property. 2. That the City of Meridian has authority to annex land pursuant to 50-222, Idaho Code, and Section 11-2-417 of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian; that exercise of the City's annexation authority is a legislative function. 3. That the City Planning and Zoning Commission has judged these annexation, zoning and conditional use applications under Idaho Code, Section 50-222, Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, Meridian City Ordinances, Meridian Comprehensive Plan, as amended, and the record submitted to it and things of which it can take judicial notice. 4. That all notice and hearing requirements set forth in Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian have been complied with. 5. That the Council may take judicial notice of government FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - TAMURA-BERRY PAGE - 20 ordinances, and policies, and of actual conditions existing within the City and State. 6. That the land within the proposed annexation is contiguous to the present City limits of the City of Meridian, and the annexation would not be a shoestring annexation. 7. That the annexation application has been initiated by the Applicant with the consent of the property owner, and is not upon the initiation of the City of Meridian. 8. That since the annexation and zoning of land is a legislative function, the City has authority to place conditions upon the annexation of land. Burt vs. The Citv of Idaho Falls, 105 Idaho 65, 665 P.D 1075 (1983). 9. That the development of annexed land must meet and comply with the Ordinances of the City of Meridian and in particular Section 11-9-616, which pertains to development time schedules and requirements, and Section 11-9-605 M., which pertains to the tiling of ditches and waterways and 11-9-606 14., which requires pressurized irrigation. 10. That the Applicant's proposed use of the property is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, and therefore the annexation and zoning Application is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. 11. That the City adopted the Comprehensive Plan at its meeting on January 4, 1994, and has not amended the Zoning Ordinance to reflect the changes made in the Comprehensive Plan; FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - TAMURA-BERRY PAGE - 21 thus, uses may be called for or allowed in the Comprehensive Plan but the Zoning Ordinance may not address provisions for the stated uses; it is concluded that upon annexation, as conditions of annexation, the City may impose restrictions that are not otherwise contained in the current Zoning and Subdivision and Development Ordinances. 12. That Applicant has stated and represented that its intention is to develop the subject parcel as a Commercial Planned Unit Development in four (4) phases. 13. That, as a condition of annexation and the zoning, the Applicant shall be required to enter into a development agreement as authorized by 11-2-416 L and 11-2-417 D; that the development agreement shall address, among other things, the following: 1. Inclusion into the development of the requirements of 11- 9-605 a. C, Pedestrian Walkways. b. G 1, Planting Strips. c. H, Public Sites and Open Spaces. d. K, Lineal Open Space Corridors. e. L, Pedestrian and Bike Path Ways. 2. The concerns of the owners of property along Locust Grove Road, stated in prior public hearings, of having lights, particularly automobile headlights, shine into their yards and homes. 3. Payment by the Applicant, or if required, any assigns, heirs, executors or personal representatives, of any impact, development, or transfer fee, adopted by the City. 4. Addressing the property's access linkage, screening, buffering, transitional land uses, and traffic study. 5. An impact fee to help acquire a future school or park sites to serve the area. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - TAMURA-BERRY PAGE - 22 6. An impact fee, or fees, for park, police, and fire services as determined by the city. 7. Appropriate berming and landscaping. 8. Submission and approval of any required plats. 9. Establishing the 35 foot landscaped setback as mentioned in the Planning Directors comments and in the Comprehensive Plan and landscaping the same. 10. Addressing the other comments of the Planning Director, Shari Stiles. 11. The sewer and water requirements. 12. Traffic plans and access into and out of the development. 13. And any other items deemed necessary by the City Staff, including design review of all development, and conditional use processing as required under the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. 14. That Section 11-2-417 D of the Meridian Zoning Ordinance states in part as follows: "If property is annexed and zoned, the City may require or permit, as a condition of the zoning, that an owner or developer make a written commitment concerning the use or development of the subject property. If a commitment is required or permitted, it shall be recorded in the office of the Ada County Recorder and shall take effect upon the adoption of the ordinance annexing and zoning the property, or prior if agreed to by the owner of the parcel. ."; that since the enactment of the above section, the City has found that it is difficult for the City and the Applicant to enter into a development agreement prior to annexation; that it is therefore concluded that a development agreement shall be entered into, dealing with the matters set forth in the preceding section prior to issuance of a building permit. 15. That it is concluded that the City could annex the FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - TAMURA-BERRY PAGE - 23 a • property and zone it as requested but once the property was zoned the Applicant could place many different uses on the property without additional approval from the City other than building permits, which limits the control that the City should have over the development and the uses of the property. 16. That it is concluded that since the Comprehensive Plan, under LAND USE, Mixed-Use Area at Locust Grove Road and Franklin Road, in 5.16U, states that all development requests will be subject to development review processing to insure neighborhood compatibility, that such limitation should apply to the Applicant and the land involved in this Application; that it is further concluded that such restrictions can, and should be, structured and laid out in the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) and the development agreement. It is therefore concluded that the annexation and development of the parcel of land should be subject to being de-annexed if CC&R's are not approved and a development agreement is not entered into by the City and the Applicant. 17. Therefore, it is concluded that the property should be annexed and zoned Light Industrial (I-L) and General Retail and Service Commercial (C-G) as requested in the Application, but shall only be capable of being developed as a planned commercial or industrial development and under the conditional use permit process. 18. That it is concluded that the annexing and zoning of the property would be in the best interests of the City of Meridian, FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - TAMURA-BERRY PAGE - 24 but it is concluded that the property may be de-annexed if appropriate development agreements are not agreed on and executed by the City and the Applicant and CC&R's approved by the City. 19. That the requirements of the Meridian Police Department Meridian City Engineer's office, Ada County Highway District, Meridian Planning Director, Central District Health Department, and the applicable irrigation district, shall be met and shall be addressed in a development agreement, which may be entered into after an annexation and zoning ordinance is passed and adopted, but prior to a final plat. 20. That all ditches, canals, and waterways shall be tiled as a condition of annexation and if not so tiled, the property shall be subject to de-annexation. That pressurized irrigation shall be installed and constructed, and if not so done the property shall be subject to de-annexation. 21. That the Applicant shall be required to connect to Meridian water and sewer, at its expense, and resolve how the water and sewer mains will serve the land; that the development of the property shall be subject to and controlled by the Subdivision and Development Ordinance and the development agreement finally entered into. 22. That these conditions shall run with the land and bind the applicant and its assigns. 23. With compliance of the conditions contained herein, the annexation and zoning as requested in the Application would be in FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - TAMURA-BERRY PAGE - 25 the best interest of the City of Meridian. 24. That if these conditions of approval are not met, the property shall be de-annexed. APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND The Meridian City Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONER BORUP COMMISSIONER OSLUND COMMISSIONER SHEARER COMMISSIONER MacCOY COMMISSIONER JOHNSON (TIE BREAKER) RECONNENDATION VOTED VOTED ~ VOTED /'v' P/ VOTED 9~Ib~~~ VOTED The Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council of the City of Meridian that the property set forth in the application be approved for annexation and zoning under the conditions set forth in these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, that if the Applicant is not agreeable with these Findings of Fact and Conclusions and is not agreeable with entering into a development agreement, the property should not be annexed. MOTION: ~I~G /~~ APPROVED: I DISAPPROVED: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - TAMURA-BERRY PAGE - 26