1988 09-13i ._.
• ~
•
A G E N D A
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING
SEPTEMBER 13, 1988
ITEM:
MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING HELD AUGUST 9, 1988: (APPROVED)
MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING HELD AUGUST 22, 1988: (APPROVED)
1: FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLIISIONS OF LAW ON PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO
THE ZONING & DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE: (APPROVED)
2: FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW ON REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT FOR A PUD GENERAL BY NAHAS & SIMCO: (APPROVED)
r -~
• •
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING
• •
5~~ 13, 1988
Regular Meeting of the Meridian PLaimiing & Zoning Commission called to order by
Chairman Walt Morraa at 7:30 p.m.:
Members Present: Jim Johnson, Jim Shearer, Charles Rountree:
Members Absent: Moe Alidjani:
Others Present: Wayne Crookston:
The Notion was made by Rountree and seconded by Shearer to approve the Minutes of
the previous Meeting held August 9, 1988 as written:
Motion Carried: All Yea:
The Motion was made by Shearer and seconded by Morrow to approve the Minutes of
the Special Meeting held August 22, 1988 as written:
Iten #1: Findings of Fact & Conclusion on Propezsed Amendments to the Zoning &
Development Ordinance:
Chairman Morraa: Any comments or questions of the Commission McTCibers? There were
none.
The Notion was made by Shearer and seconded by Rountree that the Meridian Planning
& Zoning Ca[SCIiSSlori hereby adopt and approves the Findings of Fact & Conclusions
as prepared by the City Attorney on the proposed Amendments to the Zoning & Devel-
ognent Ordinances:
Motion Carried: Roll Call Vote: Rountree, Yea: Shearer, Yea: Johnson, Yea:
Nbrrow, Yea:
The Notion was made by Rountree and seconded by Shearer that the Meridian Planning
& Zoning Camiission hereby recamiends to the City Council that the Planning and
Zoning Camtission's proposed Amenc~ients to the Zoning Ordinances should be approved
and adopted:
Notion Carried: All Yea:
Item #2: Findings of Fact & Conclusion on request for Conditional Use Permit for
a PUD General by Nahas & Si[tx:o:
Chairnian Nbrrow: Any cacments or questions of the Commission Metnbers?
Shearer: Does this cover the whole project or do they have to cane back for further
consideration when the rest of the project is laid out.
City Attorney: There are specifics in the Subdivision Ordinance that requires
Design Review as well as filing of a Subdivision:
The Motion was made by Shearer and seconded~t~tountree that the Meridian Planning
& Zoning Carm~ission hereby adopts and approves the Findings of Fact & Conclusions
as prepared by the City Attorney on the request for a Conditional Use Permit for a
PUD General by Nahas & Simco:
~- .
MERIDIAN PLANN & ZONI.
SEPTII~ER 13, ~8
PAGE # 2
• •
Motion Carried: Roll Call Vote: Johnson, Yea: Shearer, Yea: Rountree, Yea:
Morraa, Yea:
The Notion was made by Rountree and seconded by Shearer that the Meridian Planning
& Zoning Camtission hereby recamlends 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 under the conditions contained herein,
specifically 11-9-607 of the Revised and Compiled. Ordinances of the City of
Meridian:
Notion Carried: All Yea:
Being no further business to ccnie before the Omission the Notion was made by
Johnson and seconded by Shearer to adjourn the Meeting at 7:40 p.m.:
Motion Carried: All Yea:
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROLE®INGS)
APPROVID
ATPEST:
Mayor Council
P & N~nbers
Atty, Eng, Fire, Police
Stuart, Ward, Gass, Hallett
Stutzman, Valley News
Statesman, ACRD, NINID, CDH
ACC, Settler Irrg.
~dl1LT MO , "CHAIRMAN
File (2)
Mail (3)
>i
BEFORE THE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION'S
APPLICATION TO AMEND
MERIDIAN ZONING ORDINANCE
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
The above entitled application to amend the Meridian Zoning
Ordinance having come on for public hearing and the Planning and
Zoning Commission having heard any and all testimony, oral and
written, that was submitted and having duly considered the
evidence, the facts judicially noticed and its own opinions and
the matter, the Planning and Zoning Commission makes the
following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
AMBROSE,
FITZGERALD
d CROOKSTON
Attomaye eM
CaunNloro
P.O. Box It]
MMtlNn, ICello
B3B'R
Tslplrons BSSdb1
1. That notice of the public hearing on the application
was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to the said
public hearing held August 22, 1988, the first publication of
which was 15 days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly
considered at the August 22, 1988, hearing and was duly
considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission; that copies of
all notices were made available to newspaper, radio and
television stations.
2. That the proposed amendments are as set forth in the
Application which is incorporated herein by this reference as if
set forth in full hereat.
3. That the Meridian Zoning Ordinance contains a
definition of Planned General Development (PD-G) but the Zoning
Ordinance itself does not address general planned unit
development.
4. That the Zoning Schedule of Use Control does address
Residential and Commercial Planned Unit Developments but does not
address General or Industrial Planned Unit Developments.
5. That the subdivision portion of the Zoning and
Development Ordinance does address Planned Unit Developments,
residential, commercial, industrial and general.
6. That there is presently before the Commission an
application for a General Planned Unit Development.
7. That the application does not pertain to any specific
parcel of property but is a text amendment.
8. That there was no public comment on the proposed
AMBROSE.
FIRGERALD
d CROOKSTON
Attorneys eM
CqunsNOn
P.O. Boz X27
MNlolen, WNo
BJB~R
TsMplpm BB&M61
amendment.
9. That the Zoning Ordinance, 11-2-408 B., Zoning
Districts, 14. requires that mixed use area identified in the
Comprehensive Plan shall be developed as Planned Unit
Development-General.
CONCLUSIONS
1. That the City has authority to amend its Zoning
Ordinances pursuant to Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code,
specifically Section 67-6511, Idaho Code, and Section 11-2-416 of
the Zoning Ordinance.
2. That all notices and hearing requirements set forth in
Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, and the Ordinances of the City
of Meridian have been complied with.
3. That the function of adopting, amending, or repealing
the text of a zoning or development ordinance is a legislative
function in that such does not pertain to any specific parcel or
parcels of property; that the Local Planning Act of 1975 requires
findings of fact and conclusions regardless of whether the
function is legislative or quasi-judicial.
4. That the Commission may take judicial notice of
governmental statutes, ordinances, and policies, and of actual
conditions existing within the City, County and State.
5. That the City has authority to establish standards for
development pursuant to its own ordinances and pursuant to
Section 67-6518, Idaho Code, which allows for standards to be set
on public and private development.
6. That the Comprehensive Plan of Meridian speaks to
Planned Developments at page 50 and states:
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD)
A Planned Development (PD) is one of many devices used to
implement a comprehensive plan. A developer of a PD may be
allowed variations for subdivision and zoning requirements,
if it is in the City's interest to encourage such a
development..
AMSROSE,
FRZGERALO
b CROOKSTON
AROrneys vb
Counsslas
P.O. Bot s3i
MmWMA, IOSIq
B38s2
TsNplgns 88&IM1
PD requlations are intended to encourage innovations in land
development techniques so that the growing demands of the
community may be met with greater flexibility and variety in
type, design and layout of sites and buildings and by the
conservation and more efficient use of open spaces and of
other natural environmental features which enhance the
quality of life.
7. That the failure to include provisions in the Zoning
Ordinance for general and industrial Planned Unit Developments
was an oversight.
8. That it is in the City's best interest to amend the
Zoning Ordinance to address industrial and general Planned
Developments.
APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
AMBROSE,
PIRGERAID
d CROOKSTON
ARpnsys ~nE
DounMkw!
P.O. Bm SIT
MMGIN, WYq
8782
TelaP110M BBB11S1
The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts
and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions.
ROLL CALL:
Commissioner Rountree Voted
~~,
Commissioner Shearer Voted f~~y~"'
Commissioner Johnson Voted~-
Commissioner Alidjani Voted~rE',t/
Chairman Morrow (Tie Breaker) Voted~j/~-
RECOMMENDATION
The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby
recommends to the City Council that the Planning and Zoning
Commission's proposed Amendments to the Zoning Ordinances should
be approved and adopted.
AMBROSE,
FITZOERALD
6 CROOKSTON
Attansys end
Co11nNIWt
P.O. Boz,27
MMIOIN, IUNO
S3lIZ
TslapMns BBMMt
MOTION:
APPROVED~~~ '~- DISAPPROVED
II • •
BEFORE THE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
GLENNBROOK PROPERTIES
AND SIMIDA CORPORATION CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
MERIDIAN-KUNA ROAD/I-84
MERIDIAN, IDAHO
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
AMBROSE,
FITZGERALD
6 CROOKSTON
Attorneys ula
CWnNbA
V.O. Boz 127
MOr104n,10Ya
87!14
Tslpllgro 88Bd18/
The above entitled matter having come on for public
hearing August 22, 1988, at the hour of 7:30 o'clock p.m., the
Petitioner 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 public hearing on the Conditional Use
Permit was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to
the said public hearing scheduled for August 22, 1988, the
first publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said
hearing; that the matter was duly considered at the August 22,
1988 hearing; that the public was given full opportunity to
express comments and submit evidence; and that copies of all
notices were made available to newspaper, radio, and television
stations;
AMBROSE,
FITZGERALD
B CROOKSTON
A1folnyeYW
CounNlWs
P.O. BOx/2~
MNEIen, IENO
89612
TslapBOM BBBd161
2. That this property is located within the City of
Meridian and is owned by the Petitioners, and is described
in the application which description is incorporated herein;
the property is in the Northeast quadrant of the intersection
of the Kuna-Meridian Road and I-84; Petitioners propose to
develop the property in mixed use fashion containing both
Commercial and Light Industrial uses as a planned unit
development-general.
3. That the property is located in what is presently
designated in the Meridian COmprehensive Plan as a Regional
Shopping Center; that a regional shopping center is about to
open in Boise; that it is likely another regional shopping
center will not be constructed at the location; that the City
has filed a petition to amend the Meridian Comprehensive Plan
and Zoning Ordinance to remove the Regional Shopping Center
designated from the location; that an initial hearing on the
proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment was heard on the same
hearing date as this application. That the Comprehensive Plan
and Zoning changes propose to designate the location as a Mixed
Use Review Area which is the present designation of the other
three quadrants of the intersection of the Kuna-Meridian Road
and I-84.
4. That the specific proposed comprehensive plan
amendment reads as follows:
MIXED USE REVIEW AREA EAST OF KUNA/MERIDIAN ROAD, NORTH OF
I-84 AND SOUTH OF MERIDIAN SPEEDWAY AND STOREY PARK.
1. It is the policy of the City of Meridian to encourage
and promote the further development of the Meridian
Road/i-84 Interchange into a full diamond or clover
leaf interchange.
2. The City shall encourage the development of
Commercial, industrial, and technological uses in
this area and, even though the area is a mixed
use, residential uses shall be discouraged.
3. Development should be conducted under Planned Unit
Development Procedures and as conditional uses,
especially when two or more differing uses are
contemplated.
4. The character, site improvements, and type of
development should be harmonized with previously
developed land in the area and where located
adjacent to or near any existing residence or
residential area, shall be harmonized with residential
uses and all reasonable efforts shall be made to
reduce the environmental impact on residential area,
including noise reduction, traffic routes, air and
water pollution.
5. Strip Development along the arterial and collector
streets included within this mixed-use area is not in
compliance with the goals, objections and policies of
the Comprehensive Plan.
6. Clustering of uses and controlled vehicular access
points along arterials and collector streets should be
encouraged."
5. That the specific proposed Zoning Amendments read as
AMBROBE,
FITIGENALD
B CNOOKBTON
Attomays rM
Counsaors
P.O. Box t2]
MMtllsn, 1Oa11o
BJ8~2
Tslapiwna BBBI18/
follows;
1. Amend 11-2-409 A, Zoning Schedule of Use Control,
Residential, by placing after "Multi-Family Dwelling"
and before "Planned Residential Development (PD)" the
following: "Planned Unit Development-General" and to
state that such is a conditional use in the following
districts: R-40, L-0, C-N, C-C, C-G, OT, TE and I.
2. Amend 11-2-409 B, Zoning Schedule of Use Control,
Commercial , by placing after "Planned Commercial
Development" and before "Professional and Sales
Offices" the following: Planned Unit Development-
General" and to state that such is a conditional use
in the following districts: R-40, L-O, C-N, C-C, C-G,
OT, TE and I.
6. That the location is presently zoned C-G.
7. That a planned general development is defined as
follows:
Planned general Development (PD-G) - A development not
otherwise distinguished under Planned Commercial,
Industrial, Residential Developments, or which in the
proposed use of interior and exterior spaces requires
unusual design flexibility to achieve a completely
logical and complementary 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.
8. That the Zoning Schedule of Use Control does not
presently contain a category for general or industrial planned
unit developments; that there is a proposed amendment allowing
a planned unit development general as a conditional use in the
C-G zone; that the proposed schedule for the zoning amendment
would allow the zoning amendment to be adopted prior to final
action on this conditional use application.
9. That the property to the West is vacant ground, and
AM"ROSE,
FITLDERALD
acROORSroR
Atlomsys Mlo
DOUI1MIIp!
P.O. BOa ~R7
MMMIan,loNo
83612
Tsl6PllOne BB6-U61
residential and zoned commercially, the property to the East is
vacant property and farm ground; the property to the South is
Interstate and Light industrial; the property to the North is
farm ground and vacant property.
10, That proper notice has been given as required by law
and all procedures before the Planning and Zoning Commission
have been given and followed.
11. That the property is presently farm ground and vacant
ground.
12. That the Applicant has submitted petition signed by
at least 758 of the people owning property within 300 feet of
the property indicating their approval of the use of the
property as requested by Applicant.
13. That the City of Meridian has been granted the right
to receive community development block grant funds for sewer,
water, and streets within the location.
14. That the City of Meridian does have control,
guidelines and requirements for planned developments in 11-9-
607 and such are incorporated herein as if set forth in full.
~MBROSE,
FITZGEMLD
dCROOKSTON
Mtaneys anG
Counaebrs
P.O. Box ~R7
MM01sn, IOYro
B]O/II
Taleplane 886~/B/
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 and having obtained the consent of 758 of the 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 Complies Ordinances of the City
of Meridian, Idaho;
3. That the City of Meridian has authority to place
AMBROSE,
FITZOERALD
d CROOKSTON
Allomsys anE
C.OU11NI0!!
v.o. eo. uT
MarIGIN,IEMo
B7M2
TNapUOM BBB11E1
conditions on a conditional use permits and the use of the
property pursuant to 67-6512, Idaho Code, and pursuant to 11-2-
418 (D) of the Revised and Complied Ordinances of the City of
Meridian, Idaho;
AMBROSE,
FITZOERALD
a CROOKSTON
Allanroys N0
CqunNlon
P.O. Bo>t ~Y7
MN101ln, kMM
NM2
Talplwns BSB~M7
4. That 11-2-418 (C) of the revised and Complied
Ordinances of the City of Meridian sets forth the standards
under which the Planning and Zoninq Commission and the City
Council shall review applications for Conditional Use 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 and a conditional
use permit would be required by proposed ordinances.
b. The uses would be harmonious with and in accordance
with the Comprehensive Plan as amended, but the Zoning
Ordinance, as amended, requires a conditional use permit to
allow the use.
c. The use apparently would be designed and constructed,
to be harmonious in appearance with the intended character of
the general vicinity.
d. That the uses should not be hazardous nor should they
disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses.
e. Plans for sewer and water service are in progress.
f. The use would create excessive additional requirements
at public cost for public facilities and services, but such is
deemed to generally aid the City 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. Sufficient parking for the property and the proposed
use must be provided.
i. The development and uses will not result in the
destruction loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of
major importance.
5. That all development in the area shall be controlled
and guided by design review, and shall be guided and controlled
under 11-9-607, Planned Development, and shall meet all of the
ordinances of the City of Meridian.
6. That it is concluded that the lack of specifics in the
Zoning Ordinances for general planned unit developments was an
oversight; that the proposed zoning amendments correct that
oversight; that the application would meet the corrected zoning
ordinances as a conditional use planned unit development.
7. That the granting of this application would be in the
best interest of the City.
AMBROBE,
FITZOENALD
d CNOOKSTON
Altorneya UM
Counwlon
P.O. Boz ~Y7
MMOI~n, IOAIro
8761Y
TsNPMne BlNN7
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 Alidjani
Commissioner Johnson
Commissioner Shearer
Commissioner Rountree
Chairman Morrow (Tie Breaker)
Voted ~ ,N <;+
Voted C ~' G~
Voted ~(~ ~
Voted ~t'`i
Voted ~l/;~`=
DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION
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 under
the conditions contained herein, specifically 11-9-607 of the
Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian.
G- , ,
APPROVED `~.~I. DISAPPROVED
AMSROSE,
FITZGERAID
d CROOKSTON
Atlomsye MIA
Counselors
MNIEIM,10N0
89M2
Telplwrb l