Loading...
2008 11-06{. ?`~~' _;~~, ~'k~'cf ~c 3,~,,"Y +: ... ~_'~> ~ 13~• ~- ., tk s _y~j ,> -'•~X'. ~r~/ ~Y ~ ~ ?A 5:: ; b~ .~ ~ ~ ,: ~;Lqv ;_ .~~ s: °~?, ,h,~; ~~ ;~~ ~4{>.: 1 Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting November 6, 2008 Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of November 6, 2008, was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Commissioner Michael Rohm. Members Present: Commissioner Michael Rohm, Commissioner Joe Marshall and Commissioner Tom O'Brien. Members Absent: Chairman David Moe, Commissioner Wendy Newton-Huckabay. Others Present: Bill Nary, Machelle Hill, Tara Green, Anna Canning, Bill Parsons, Scott Steckline and Dean Willis. Item 1: Roll-Call Attendance: Roll-call Wendy Newton-Huckabay X Tom O'Brien X Michael Rohm -Vice Chairman X Joe Marshall David Moe -Chairman Rohm: Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. At this time I'd like to call the regularly scheduled meeting of Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission to order and begin with the roll call of Commissioners. Item 2: Adoption of the Agenda: Rohm: Okay. The first item on the agenda is the adoption of the agenda and we do have one change. Item No. 5 on the agenda, the RZ 08-007, will not be heard tonight and it will be continued to the regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission of December 6th, 2008. Other than that, there is no other changes. Could I get a motion to accept the agenda as changed? O'Brien: So moved. Marshall: Second. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to adopt the agenda. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 3: Consent Agenda: A. Approve Minutes of October 16, 2008 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting: ~; Meridian Planning & Zoning November 6, 2008 Page 2 of 12 B. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 08-026 Request for Conditional Use Permit to operate an animal care facility in an L-O zoning district for Mills Veterinary by Dave Evans Construction -NEC of Meridian Road and Ustick Road: C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 08-025 Request for Conditional Use Permit for a residential care facility in a C-C zoning district for Shaylee Estates by Marc Johnson -1332, 1402 & 1414 N. Meridian Road: ~~ D. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 08-027 Request for Conditional Use Permit approval for an assisted _ living facility in the TN-C and TN-R districts; to exceed the maximum building height allowed in the TN-C and TN-R districts; and to exceed the maximum building footprint square footage allowed in the TN-C district for Beacon at Southridge by Eastern Washington/Idaho Synod of the ELCA -south side of Overland Road, approximately 800 feet west of Linder Road: E. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: MCU y"` 08-002 Request for Conditional Use Permit approval to Modify the previously approved site and building layout for Lot 4, Block 3 of Devon Park Subdivision No. 1 to reflect that which was recently constructed for Fairview Lakes Retail by Doug Tamura - 950 E. Fairview Avenue: Rohm: The next item on the agenda is the Consent Agenda and there are five items on F;;- this. Item A being the minutes of -- approve the minutes of the October 16th, 2008, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. B, Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for approval of CUP 08-026. Item C is Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for approval of CUP 08-025. Item D is Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for approval of CUP 08-027. And the final item number E is Findings of Fact and ;~~ Conclusions of Law for approval of MCU 08-002. ~~~`~'^' Marshall: Mr. Chair, I move that we approve the Consent Agenda. O'Brien: Second. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to approve the Consent Agenda. All those in ''"~~ favor say aye. Opposed same sign? That motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. ~- :,;:. Item 4: Public Hearing: IZZ 08-006 Request for Rezone of 1.39 acres from I-L to C-G zone for Lanark Property by Patrick McKeegan - 3131 & 3163 'E. Lanark: ,- ~. , . ~~fii0'~ :~ 4r,.y'~, i1'~~yiz7h 4 ~~ ~ ~ 4~ { i , tR ,: ~ ~ yt3~ • ti ~ t y~~y 5' Y N ~ F 1 L Ja:f~- `5' ~~~ ~1 ,F ?r~~ { , C ~ is ~;:,; -N +Y ~ r:- ~.nx~ 4 ~ fi: ~ ~t Y4 y l: 1 C J kf p ~ ~~,. h T., 1~'I ~. A'' 1- } ~.- r'7n °\ Meridian Planning & Zoning ~~JH., November 6, 2008 Page 3 of 12 a~ Rohm: All right. Generally speaking we try to talk about the procedure for opening and hearing hearings, but tonight seeing how we just have the one, I think we will just go straight to the public hearing and so at this time I'd like to open RZ 08-006 and begin ~'~ with the staff report. t ~ ~~ Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. Before you tonight Parsons: Thank you `, :: , is a rezone application of 2.2 acres from an I-L zoning district to C-G zoning district. To f=:- ' the north of this site -- sorry I don't have my magical pointer anymore. To the north of this site is vacant land zoned C-G. To the south is vacant land zoned I-L. To the east is ' Eagle Road and retail R.C. Willey store, zoned C-G. And to the west of this site is S ; industrial uses, zoned I-L. As you can see, the history on this project -- if you recall ~f .~, back in December '07 this same site came before you with a rezone and a CUP for a drinking establishment and you forwarded on a recommendation to City Council for r ` ~# approval of that. Going on. Here is the approved site plan -- or one of the site plans for z. ` this site. It does have two existing buildings on here. One's amulti-tenant building. ~~~ Right now there is only one tenant located in this portion of the building right now and it is a mattress store. All the parking lot and landscaping exists on the site and it will have . to comply with UD standards with the change of use on the site. There we go. A little ~` "~' slow there. Here are the elevations that currently exist on the site. The buildings on the ~.~ . ~ ~=~ site are composed of high quality materials, some glazing, stucco, and stone. One thing ~~' we -- one thing that didn't happen back in '07 when the property came before you with the rezone and CUP is staff did not require a development agreement with that rezone application, because of the fact that it had a current application -- CUP application tied ~' ~ to that, so we felt that those conditions could be governed through the CUP process. Well, now that this is just coming before you tonight as just a rezone application, we ~' , have -- staff has recommended a development agreement be tied to the site when it F > develops -- with future development on the site. So, here is the list of DA provisions p ~ that are attached in the staff report. In the staff report they are labeled A through H, fir:=' believe, and here on the slide they are bulleted. So, the applicant is here in the audience tonight and he will be addressing some of the DA provisions and I have kind ~sx ~° of referenced those, so you will know which ones he will be wanting to talk about and have some open discussions about tonight with you. So, the first DA provision we have ,:; is drinking establishment uses shall be prohibited. The trash enclosure that currently -~ exists on the site is substandard according to our code, today's standards, so we put in ~~ ' ~ a DA provision there requiring them to bring that up to our standards, have similar building materials and get rid of the chain -- chain link fencing and slats. Currently we ~'`~`-~' have also required -- I have looked at the aerial on this site. There appears to be a five ' foot sidewalk along Lanark Street. The applicant says there is a sidewalk in place. I am :~`; covering for Sonya tonight. I got my information from the aerial. So, I'll let the applicant ~.: ~: explain his -- where those -- where that sidewalk is located for you. If you recall back in 2007 there was some discussion about constructing a ten foot multi-use pathway along h '~~~' Eagle Road. The UDC does require that and so as part of this application, again, we ~~> ' , have also asked the applicant to install that. And also coordinate and with the Eagle `~~' Road corridor study to make sure that things are installed with that approved plan as ;may `~' ~~ well. Again, the landscaping on the site is substandard according to today's UDC ~' - ,» ~:,: ..z. ,=, , ~y:,.'.,.. . ~... " '. t -= f+ l+ "~1 .s • 1 ~. •.. v ' ~ j ~ ~ . e a ~'~:rfi%a ~ s ~~ , 'y )?~ ^s- N1~i'~ t f~; t s ~{ C ~, k _ sr E 4~ Iw , ' ~ s r t,, B„ i S.. z . ~ ~ a p(t : ~~.f ~~~ . N:~~,'.~~.. - 15~~y. •..F f,4 i ~1 S tt `C 2~'•=.~:' ye T i.~yy:'F.tl1~.,'~~ ~:v~i::'~'.~~.~ ffa x;: ~(S1T^}`t ~ ~y"'~T~'.. •''r?,~.c . !~3. ia'-. s! M^Fw.7 t '+~ r x, -'3 _•k:.! c` 3 ~ ~ ~'~ ~ ~~~~~ y ~ ~ s a ~ . ~V fi , ' .,_ y a. f ~ , i S"..r t _ ,,t§z*»,2:';§ y~. f` ~.F.~zk~:*~i1: :,t'L'",~ .s' ?.~.x;'' fs 1S "11 n ~ s?6'~ : k 'f^ ~ 3 ; . . , z ~ r ~ k ; ~ s, `"' ~f a .r4f `,t -~q~„r,Y~;.'. ~V~ , , , i` : ¢: . Y~ .F `v 5 r ~ Y ~~ { V . ~ 4 .'B`':~Yr..yti ~ie, •`r`\.• 'I t~,` . EyCp Na t~jq\ lM~{+f ?"'I,?n: ~ F :..•. ?t ., > _ '. . ~ ' , ; r ~ '~ • .yV %< t'~,,,1 .. ~~. F...~ ! i'p• '2(; J{:$~ .:~+Y'. ~ •tl~,~- 'ir, .k; ,.1.+ ~ ' t r ."~~A~' .~tii~ ~a.. .i, ,ry!`c~ +R4 ~j~ s 4 ? ~;M+.f ~ .~r ^ Sri ,~'~J ~'F:,~~~ :tir; t yN s.f ~ ~ 'rf '~+}k y ~ `~ '~~' i p'i~T h~~ " ' ~ ~ ^ r '~ ~ ry ~v ~. ' 4 f + y, a ~ . . ~ . ¢ t ~ ~ A4`.rf,L~Mq i G~ ter. ~'. .Y ?1 .. 4 Y )i :~~ k :~ Fi. ~ §§yy :.~ is i; v.. ~ + , ~~. d l:.~ ;~ '.~ ~, T ~'- ''~: ~~~ ~._ ,: ~~~` .. -s 4. '. r._ ~.~ . ~:: >;' ;~;.~. ~;; ~ '' _: ~,;. r':~~ Meridian Planning & Zoning November 6, 2008 Page 4 of 12 standards, so the applicant, upon a change of use or development on the site, or new tenant will have to bring the site into conformance with the current standards and the fire department had some issues with a turnaround on the site. The applicant is in agreement with that. They said that they could lose a few stalls and give a -- somewhat of a hammerhead so the fire department can go into the site, do a nine point turn, back in, turn out, a three point turn, and, then, get out of the subdivision. So, they have worked with the fire department and believe they can meet those requirements. Because the site is adjacent to an .entryway corridor, any change of use or any CZC on that site will be subject to design review and they should submit that concurrent with CZC application and, again, a CZC application shall be submitted for any change of use on the site in the future. Again, staff is recommending the rezone application. The applicant had provided comments on the staff report and, again, he wants to address conditions C, D, E and G with you and with that staff will stand for any questions Commission may have. Rohm: Any questions of staff? Marshall: I have none. O'Brien: None. Rohm: Would the applicant like to come forward, please. And, please, state your name and address for the record. McKeegan: My name is Patrick McKeegan. I am the architect representing Mr. Sigmond in this matter. My address is 280 North Latah Street, Suite 100, Boise, Idaho. 83706. Appreciate the opportunity to speak to you tonight. As staff indicated, we were here approximately a year ago with a very similar application, but we had a pretty controversial conditional use application with it and although the Commission graciously approved that, when we got to the Council level we just could not overcome some of the problems they had with it and it was denied. We are fine with that. We have moved on. One of the reasons we came back with a development agreement was to make sure that that was very clear that that was not our intent. In fact, the development agreement will prohibit any drinking establishment type of -- type uses. Very briefly -- and I hope I don't mess this up -- the reason that we feel that this is a good project for this area or the rezone is appropriate is because the property to the north -- no, that didn't work. So, we will just -- the property to the north is zoned C-G. The property across the street is zoned C-G. And the property two lots to the south of us is zoned C-G. So, this is, basically -- this property and the property directly to the south are two that are left that were not -- not zoned in the C-G zone. We think that -- or we believe that because of the small size of the site, because it's already fully developed, that it is a good transitional use 'to the industrial uses behind us and we feel that it's appropriate that it falls in with the intent for the Eagle corridor to be an attractive entrance to the city and be attractive for the residents and to work as a -- as a buffer. Mr. Sigmond and I have worked very hard over the last three or four years to remodel the existing building. I don't know if you remember what was there. Hopefully we have eradicated that from F ~~ ; ~ ~ t~ ~~x~' ~ ~ ~} r F i ~ . kb ~4. l ,. ~ ~ '. A r f~^ 2; a k+.. f ..- ~ ~.: ~ F '1~ I ~~yyq'i~~}R,'. ~: ~+X ~.' k f~ ~ 4' l ~ ~J 1 /r , . ....,:: . ~ Y7J'.jN h p ts.d,~`a ~~ti.. i ~ ~ ~ f .14. ~ .~ `R ;7 'V W~~ V ~' !?~a~~ Y Fug Meridian Planning & Zoning ~~ - November 6, 2008 Page 5 of 12 your memories of what's there. But it was a pretty rough piece of property and we tried to make it a new building that everybody would be proud of. And, quite frankly, even in ` the market that we have Mr. Sigmond does get interest in people wanting to rent the ;x ; property, but they are primarily for uses that are not allowed in the industrial zone, which ~: -~~ are similar to what you see up and down the Eagle corridor. The only activity he's really `~~~~ had on the site is a U-Haul trailer guy came on a month to month and was there for ~` three or four months and, then, just couldn't -- couldn't make it, so he moved on -- on elsewhere. The mattress company seems to be doing well. And the blind guy that's there is doing well.. But we really want to get it going, so that we don't have to be telling people, well, yeah, we think -- we'd really like to have you as a tenant, but the problem '`' ' is we got to go through a four month conditional use process and they go, well, we'll just walk down the street to one of the other 200,000 square feet of stuff that's available and ~ R ~; move in tomorrow. So, I think in a way it -- we are just trying to bring parity between this -,,::,>. piece of property and what the competition really is on Eagle Road. With that said the ~ project does -- met the landscaping requirements at the time we did the redesign. It meets the current parking requirements. There is a sidewalk installed from here down to this point. Then, there was -- this is the driveway. Rohm: Your marker's not -- ~: r ~ ~f Canning: It's working. F= Rohm: Is it working? McKeegan: Yeah. Canning: It's red. ~`-- Rohm: Oh. Okay. McKeegan: I'm sorry. I thought red was going to be contrasting. Anyway, this is the existing driveway. And, then, there is about a five foot section between the east side of the driveway and our property line that we did not put a sidewalk in, because. we just '~•"~' ~ wanted to wait and see what ITD was going to do and they -- when they redid the ;v.`,-: intersection. So, that's -- the sidewalk is there, but it -- we do have one little piece that's -srt missing and at this time we'd just request that that be deferred until this intersection is ~, ~~~. improved when they redo the whole -- this whole Franklin Road piece. Regarding the specifics of the -- of the development agreement, item A, the drinking establishment, we agree with that. In fact, we suggested that. We have no intention of putting a bar here or anything that's going to impact the neighbors. The trash enclosure -- Mr. Sigmond is - aware of the fact that he needs to upgrade that to a masonry unit and we will use a split face block to match the existing stucco on the building. The five foot wide sidewalk, ' '~I' addressed that, that we are -- it's currently there, except for one little portion. The ten ~a~~ foot multi-use pathway on Eagle Road. This has been kind of a challenge, because cannot find in any public record at ITD, ACHD, Meridian City website -- I spent two ~: ` hours a day doing web searches on Eagle Road corridor study. I cannot find that .; -~.;;: ~' `k: z; ~ ~.:~ ~ -. a ,.. ~b ~ z ~ , .-~ ~ -~ ~~x ~` .r- ' ~~, tea, , z .,~ ~q,. ~~. e ~~f' 1 : ~ +~ '~c,. rt ~. ~ f f 3 n h • ~ . ~ j,y' ~ '~ `~,~ v ~ u it ;:~2 ~ r ~ t- ~, ` a ,~ }'~ ka .. .~~ ~~ rf4 Sk~ +~u JJll ~ ~ ~~ TC T~ ... X 1 Fg, ~ ~ ~' 4Y ~ ~ ^i ~^~ 1 pt~ w r : y 1 .,:;33 '2~ t x ~ -~'3 f-+~ cn Y~~~~~. ~ cf k? ~ ~~_' ;~r t ~ .~ , ,~~3ax;~. .. , ~. j1 ad C~',.~; 7iR ~ ` .~ .L 1~ i # {~` r,. F ~ i~ ,ti ,e+`R~kY; ti ~a r t Jf t` v y-~~. - =x + ~ ~+` k . y,~tx~44'`~r~ i.~ ,....._. [ ~; ... _ ~ .. y _. 'c}~. ~`~ F ~„ ~, x, _';:a ~ ; '. r~`,<,~ N >ti- ,.~~ ~- . -- „z Meridian Planning & Zoning November 6, 2008 Page 6 of 12 document. All I have in my office in my files is a former staff member found one piece of paper, which is labeled roadway features, which indicates on Eagle Road a 42 foot wide landscape buffer and a ten foot piece of what appears to be pavement with a bicycle and a path standing on it. There is no mention of lights. It doesn't say if it meanders. It doesn't say what it's made of or anything like that. So, I -- and I'm just giving this for information, because if I can't find it, then, that means other people who are going to be under these requirements can't find it either and the only document that I could find is -- ITD does have what is labeled an Eagle Road corridor document -- improvement project, which goes all the way from the freeway to -- I think it goes all the way to Eagle. The piece I was, obviously, interested in was this and what that document showed -- and I'm going to -- we will try a -- we will try green. What that document shows is coming up to --from the north, coming up to the -- coming up to the intersection of Lanark, it shows two parallel lines identified as sidewalk, which appear to be about ten feet apart, which would indicate that maybe that's where the barrier is. Once you cross the street they show a single line going up next to the new -- the future tum lane, which is indicated to be sidewalk, curb -- new sidewalk, curb, and gutter. And so that's what is shown there. I think that indicates -- or intended not to have anything up on top, because, quite frankly, if you have been there, there is not a lot of room. They are probably going to have to put a retaining wall anyway to do what they want to do for the future improvements. What -- in the past when we have talked to the -- of the staff, they have said that we can come in and they want us 40 feet from the street anyway, so that we can come in and somewhere on our property in this area we can come in and provide that ten foot pathway. My concern is if we build that today, we may not be in congruence with what is going to happen to the south or what Eagle -- the highway district wants and I am real reluctant to recommend to my clients to build things and, then, just have them tom up in five or ten years. We are not unwilling to do it. I'd rather just wait until we have agreater -- the city, ITD, and everybody has a better idea of what -- of what is going to go in there. And so I'd like to -- if in a development we can work with staff with some kind of wording or some kind of a timeline or something that said once the rest of the world knows what they are doing, then, we will come in and participate by putting it in on ours. Rohm: Don't you think that retaining wall that you're already kind of of the opinion you're going to have to place will be to the east of where this ten foot path may occur? McKeegan: I believe so. Rohm: Well, then, I don't think there -- there would be an occasion that you would have to relocate the retaining wall down the road, do you think? McKeegan: No, I'm not worried about the -- about the retaining wall. What I'm -- what I'm worried about right now is that -- if we put ours -- a portion of where we are going to have to put ours is actually on a portion of a slope also. So, we are going to have to come in, do some cut and fill work and -- and, actually, some of that may be in ITD's right of way and they may not allow us to come in and do that. I don't -- I don't know. I'm just -- all I'm asking for is -- in the document is just some -- some -- the condition to ,~ F ~- ST. ~~~_ :' 3 f ~ -A ;~ V~..._ ~.:"..,. x ~, J.` h ^. 'T ~l ..),L,~ ,; ~'H• y ~.:•~:a r ~ ~,~ tat µa . ~ ,~t ~ ` ~ s ' ~ ~~r.? 4, t 5 S: ~K , ~y -h ]~~ L~ e 1 ~ ^S ~r l ~ rx ~~ ~ .~. ~kt ~t ~~ ivy. ,,ty~ r ~~ } i ~ ~ ~ Meridian Planning & Zoning November 6, 2008 Page 7 of 12 ~~ state that we will work with ITD and we will work with staff to come up with a solution ~ . ~~ that makes -- makes sense for everybody. We are not saying we don't want to do it, but fir; , I just -- I'm trying to just -- because I can't find the -- the other thing that troubles me about this is there is talk of lighting, which I can't find the document, so I don't know ~~"'Y' what lighting I'm committing my client to. I don't know if I'm -- we are talking about, you know, decorative street lights at ten feet on center, if we are talking about, you know, ~'k `- general lighting that the transportation department's going to put in. It's just -- :~: Rohm: Excuse me. May I ask staff about that? }-~~ McKeegan: Yes, sir. ~"~', Rohm: Is there published ITD specs on both the lighting and -- well, let's start with ~~~ lighting. Do they have that for that section of the highway? ~~ , , ~' Canning: Commissioner Rohm, I can answer both questions. Actually, if we could start ~ ; :' with the larger one. The study that Mr. McKeegan mentioned, the corridor plan with the street section that goes the length of Eagle, is the correct document. We have had '~ ~ ~ other developers base their construction drawings -- Portico is the most recent example '';''F -- has based their improvements on that -- those plans and there is a modification kind wz-~::; of in play because of the Center Cal, but they had been able to establish a right of way ~~ - line and establish where the pathway needs to go. This is not -- a lot of times we have some flexibility with the pathway standards, because they come from the landscape ,, .. section of the code, but this particular pathway it comes from the highway code and so ~~~ ->~ there is not the flexibility that there is with alternative compliance and things like that. ~'~ ` : There is a requirement for a ten foot multi-use separated pathway. Any deviation from ~, that needs to be through a variance procedure, not through an alternative compliance. ';~ ~ That's really not an option that's in play. So, given that, the next question is the lighting and we have worked with ITD and the developers to establish a lighting fixture. It's similar to the one in Old Town and Bill is going to drag it over for you. You have to ~' minimize it first. There you go. This is the fixture. It's the one with the star there and if ~r' - you can scroll down for them, Bill. ~ ' ., ; : ~. , "~ Rohm: Well, I think the point is is there is documentation available for the applicant to ~~ ` ~' be able to determine exactly what his requirements are to meet the terms of the ~ `Y " ~~ r'`~~` ' development agreement. ~` ~~ Canning: Yes. And Sonya was out of the office today. We could have gotten these to loo ' '.. Mr. McKeegan. It's -- we didn't know you were looking for them until earlier today, so -- ~~ ,' Rohm: And that's fine. That's the direction we need to go is -- ~:: . McKeegan: As long as I know what I'm agreeing to I have no problem with that. Canning: Yes. r ~~ ~~;~. t ~z ;1 ,_ ~r t , ~ a ± ~"~ ~ ~x .~ ~ e F t~* ~,,,; r -~ ,n,~~d t~y~t~ v.~.~ r rat ~~ ti k~ 2 ~: ~ - ~ ~-7~ .. Y x~t rt!' '" '~ ~; ti ~ ~ ~ ~ . t ~T ~'~~ L~ ~ ~ f TY ~ l.: ~ :.~; - x Zvi ,4 x1~J',~.~: - ~ '~`r ~ r - n. .r . ~` ka, r ~, t'~' -- ;~ ~~ 6r1+. y ~, y A-' ~~"~ }~'~" ~~ r - y?( e t r'11F 1 ~ ~~~'~,: - 1 ~y ~ ~~ €1 a a+s ~5.~' y ~h ~' W _ ,~_ ~t~ Y Y ~1 P1 (~i y~L~ 2. M ~~ ~ I ,,~~,,,,.~ -~. t ~"i' t, f ~" ^ Meridian Planning & Zoning November 6, 2008 Page 8 of 12 Rohm: That's kind of why -- that's why I was directing them this way -- McKeegan: Okay. Rohm: -- so you will see the lighting and -- Canning: Right. It is a -- it is a decorative light post and it's 200 -- at 250 -- scroll down. Two hundred and fifty watt at 100 foot on center. McKeegan: Oh. Okay. That's reasonable. Okay. Thank you. And Iwill -- if you can get me those documents, I'd appreciate it, because I -- Canning: We only have them -- I'm sorry, Commissioner Rohm. We only have the one of the quarter plan and it sounds like you have the same document; is that correct? Or we can get you the sheets you need on that one. McKeegan: I have just one piece -- just one literally, Anna -- or, Mrs. Canning, one sheet. Canning: Okay. And that's probably all you need, but -- McKeegan: I'll come down and we can get a copy of it from your office. Canning: Okay. McKeegan: Okay. Thank you. That clarifies that. So, now that I know I only have to put lights at a hundred feet on center, I can deal with that. And I think we can deal with the ten foot -- the ten foot lane without any problem. So, the next item is the establishment of -- the applicant shall comply with all current UDC standards. In the -- in the narrative of the staff report the applicant -- there is some discussion about how we achieve the plan that we have and how we got there trading off landscaping and a 35 foot setback for landscaping at the building and all of that. I just wanted to request that -- that that -- that discussion in the base -- in the -- in the staff report be included as part of the motion or as part of the development agreement, so that it's acknowledged that these previous discussions we have had our -- stay in place and everybody agrees that that's what we are going to do, so that we don't have to revisit the ITD right of way slope thing that we have been talking about for the last two years and have finally came to an agreement on that, I believe. Are you drawing a blank or do you want me to elaborate? Rohm: Well, I think if I understand what you're saying is you want the staff report to reflect that you have already met certain standards from previous applications and I think that Sonya's staff report really doesn't expect you to make landscape changes, just that you have to be in compliance with the UDC as it is currently written. I -- Bill, could you speak to that? ., ~;,, Meridian Planning & Zoning ~~ November 6, 2008 Page 9 of 12 ~.: McKeegan: Well, if -- .: ::, ~~. Parsons: Commissioner Rohm, Commissioners, the way I read Sonya's staff report, it ,,, , sounds like he has to add additional plantings and remove the gravel from those planter islands as it is today and bring it into compliance. y. p ; ~, McKeegan: That's fine. Y"-~- F~ ~;: ~.ts, u~';~`, Y, K,. '. Parsons: Through a CZC process. So, that's what she means when she brings it into -- the site into conformance with the UDC, it's really the landscaping requirement. Like Mr. McKeegan has said, the parking meets the standards -- I'm sure meets the dimensional standards, it's just that he had gravel with trees and shrubs and gravel is just not an appropriate landscape material. If you're going to have -- our code reads if you're going to have hardscape or perma bark, you have to have plantings touching at 70 percent of maturity, which currently it doesn't exist on that site. So, that's -- therefore, Sonya had conditioned or had put a DA provision in there that the applicant bring that site into the UDC -- into compliance with the UDC. McKeegan: And then -- I'm fine with that part of it. What concerns me is what's on my screen and I don't know if -- yeah. The first paragraph -- you're typically a 35 foot landscape and there is some discussion and, then, it says: For this reason staff is not requiring the applicant to install landscaping within the buffer adjacent to Eagle Road. And I just want to make sure that that is reflected in that the -- the development agreement requirement that we be with -- comply with all current UDC standards, which would require the 35 foot landscaping, doesn't override what we have in the staff report. I just -- I just want to make sure I'm on the record and everybody is clear that we are -- we are going to take the gravel out and put -- put ground cover in. That's reasonable. We are going to change the width of the one stall that was -- or the one planter area that was too narrow -- to a wider planter area. We have no problem with that. I just don't want to have to go back and revisit the -- the 35 foot ITD thing that we had worked so hard on that. Rohm: Bill, could you address that? Parsons: Yeah. Commissioner Rohm, Commissioners, we can certainly add that language to the DA. Yeah. We can just add that, that he's not expected to put the 35 foot landscape buffer along Eagle Road. McKeegan: Okay. Rohm: All right. We are doing pretty good here I think. McKeegan: That's fine. I'm not asking for the world. Rohm: No. No. That's -- e? - .. \i.J'~:~'~ x ~~~+~yy.~~.{{ ~ ~ t " ~ J ~ ` ~ ~ ~ 3'~ i3~ y '~ ~' ~ ~ ~ ~~yJ ~. _ 4 ~ , , Y / F. ~ t ~, ~ f: .~ihb '~5. ..... 3"4 ir~.~G b~ y * Y a,' ~ t ~ S~ {~ t ? '~? ~~$ ~fsy'4.4 ~fi'; RA/ ... ..c. ~. ~4 -v~al3 _. .J. .~. .... ., t r ~x yyrv~'~f}~ 1 ~.. _' ~~ '.:. Rlf ! y.* CAF I'C~i S-4 4`Ni h T. _.. k v y r., r$~~' 7 F LRr ~ ,_ ~ ,.1,V~.._ ~ .:L.. ~ ,: :R y~l'1 lt~., -4 .r ~ e p{r~~~. ~' o S i i '~~1.~ ~~ f ~; f r { b ~~' ~/ J r . Y) `'?C.~ .- ~. Meridian Planning & Zoning ~'?`~. November 6, 2008 Page 10 of 12 } McKeegan: Okay. On the next item, the fire department -- I don't recall that coming up before, but, apparently, they have looked at the plan and decided that we aren't in compliance and that's very easy to fix. We can -- we are way over-parked. We have 66 spaces, we are only required to have something like 18. So, I can remove two or three spaces and put in the standard three tum -- three point hammerhead tum at the end of it and they will be -- and I can satisfy that. That's not a -- that's very easy. It's just ? ~.' repainting, basically, so -- and marking so that it's marked as a fire zone. Design review ~~ ° application, I have no problem with that. If we are making any changes to the site or the exterior of the building -- most of the things we anticipate we will just be doing interior remodeling, which will not affect the exterior, except for possibly signage, which is a separate application and approval process anyway. So, there is not a problem. And we do agree that the certificate of zoning compliance -- that we will provide that at the time e':, ~ that we -- we get a user and want to proceed with putting them in the building. ~::.;~ ~: ._. Y .. :;~ -~.. ~k ~:r ~; - s :- ~~ ,. ,. b; . ;t. Rohm: Okay. McKeegan: And I will encourage -- actually, I will encourage my client to start working on these things ahead of time, so we don't end up with timing issues in the future. Other than that, I will stand for any questions and with the request that you approve the application as we have discussed. Rohm: Thank you. Any questions of the applicant? O'Brien: Well, I think it's pretty well covered, so I don't have any questions. Marshall: My comments are. simply that it appears you're in agreement to everything within the development agreement. McKeegan: That is correct. Marshall: But with just some clarification. McKeegan: With the clarification that we have discussed. Marshall: Thank you. McKeegan: Okay. Thank you very much. Rohm: At this time it's time in the hearing that we take testimony from the audience, but there is -- there is nobody here to testify, so I think maybe we could just move forward and close the public hearing. Marshall: Mr. Chair, I move that we close the public hearing on RZ 08-007. O'Brien: Second. rQ~k ~ :;f« ~ e'~+ i ~ ` y b ~ S ~ LPr .Ftil,rc~3'i g ~ rp a sq- W '~A~:? ~ • f ~ Y •: h I~y~.. C' ' _. ~ Y 3F k '.. 4r } 1' ~ ~ ~~.. . .- F ^i „y ~y~ ~°' yt ' ~t s tai ~r. U a : .~,F . G 1 ~ k rr-- ~Fy i 1 f" U ~ ~'r ~ i Cry d b ~ : f : ' €! 1 5~4; ~ b 'a y~y~,{{ i ~ ~ z 3 '~ ~r'~" !h~ ~ M y ~ x ~~~ .. .~i ~t'iG.aY . ': Y ~k' .... ~~. a Y.cs .~.~ 1 y ,1.., „x' ~~,.. .•,s'- y Sp t* .L`-fir 1 J~~C. .' ~ C7 ~ ~ i! f ~ ~ ~ .. tr~~ id ~~. a ~' t p• ~+L .''~.1'-fit ~ '~~3~ V' `, ~1. ;,~; Meridian Planning & Zoning November 6, 2008 Page 11 of 12 Rohm: 006? Marshall: 006. Sorry. Wrong one. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearing on RZ 08-006. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Rohm: Any final comments before we move towards a motion? O'Brien: No, I don't have anything specific that I -- I remember last year's discussion on the status of what was going in there, so -- Nary: Tom -- Commissioner O'Brien, I think you need to be on the mike. O'Brien: I remember the discussion we had last time in December I think when we went over this Rockin' Saloon I think was going to go in there. So, yeah, there was enough issues there I think that -- which brought about some of the changes. I think this is a good -- a good thing to happen to rezone this thing, so it would be a better fit for the kind of establishments we would like to have commercially in that area. It just makes sense. Rohm: Okay. Thank you, Commissioner O'Brien. Commissioner Marshall? Marshall: I think it's a good move and I think it's a good fit. I appreciate staff s work on this and I think with the development agreement this will be a good move. Rohm: I think so, too. I think that it should be zoned the C-G and with the development agreement we are good to go. So, with that could I get a motion? Marshall: Mr. Chair, after considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to recommend approval of file number RZ 08-006 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of November 6, 2008, with the following modification, that we are to add that the -- the applicant is not expected put the landscaping inside the 35 foot buffer along Eagle Road in the development agreement. Rohm: Okay O'Brien: Second. ' Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to recommend approval of RZ 08-006, to include the staff report with the afore-mentioned modifications. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carries. Thank you very much. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Meridian Planning 8 Zoning November 6, 2008 Page 12 of 12 Item 5: Public Hearing: RZ 08-007 Request for Rezone of 5.91 acres from R-8 to R-15 zone for Windham Place by Eagle Spring Investments, LLC - east side of N. Meridian Road, approximately'h mile of E. Ustick Road: Rohm: Okay. At this time I'd like to open the public hearing RZ 08-007 for the sole purpose of continuing that item to the regularly scheduled meeting of December 6, 2008. O'Brien: So moved. Marshall: Second. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to continue Item RZ 08-007 to the regularly scheduled meeting of December 6, 2008. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Marshall: Mr. Chair, I move we adjourn. O'Brien: Second. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to adjourn. All those in favor say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Rohm: We are done. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:33 P.M. (AUDIO ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.) ~~ ATTEST: JA ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ DATE APPROVED ':~ ~',~ r,~ ~~ ~~ ;K ~ - ~~ 1~~ o - ~®P~;