Loading...
1986 06-09 A G E N D A MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING JUNE 9, 1986 ITEM MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING HELD MAY 12, 1986: (APPROVED) MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING HELD MAY 28, 1986: (APPROVED) 1. FINDING OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS ON MICHELS REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION & ZONING: (APPROVED) 2. PUBLIC HEARING: ANNEXATION & ZONING REQUEST BY C & O CONSTRUCTION: (ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS) MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING JUNE 9, 1986 Regular Meeting of the Meridian Planning & Zoning called to order by Chairman Bob Spencer at 7:30 p.m.: Members Present: Walt Morrow, Moe Alidjani, Jim Johnson, Tom Cole: Others Present: Stan Olsen, Steve & Glenn Michels, Mr. & Mrs Harry Hazen, Bill Nary, Bob Wherry; The Motion was made by Morrow and seconded by Cole to approve the Minutes of the previous meeting held May 12, 1986 as written: Motion Carried: All Yea: The Motion was made by Morrow and seconded by Alidjani to approve the Minutes of the Special Meeting held May 28, 1986 as written: Motion Carried: All Yea: Item #1: Findings of Fact & Conclusions on Michels request: Chairman Spencer, are there any comments or questions on the Findings? There were none. The Motion was made by Johnson and seconded by Morrow that the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission hereby adopts and approves the Findings of Fact and Conclusions as prepared on the Michels request for Annexation & Zoning. Motion Carried: Roll Call Vote: Cole, Yea: Shearer, Absent; Johnson, Yea; Alidjani, Yea; Morrow, Yea: The Motion was made by Johnson and seconded by Morrow that it is hereby recommended to the City Council that Lots 1 & 2 should be conditionally annexed and zoned C-G, General Retail and Service Commercial; that Lot 3 should be annexed and zoned C-G, General Retail & Service Commercial, provided the covenants of Doris Subdivision are amended to allow this lot to be Commercial: that the conditions of annexation should be investigated and discussed by the City Council. Motion Carried: A11 Yea: Commissioner Shearer arrived at this time: Item #2: Public Hearing: Annexation & Zoning request by C & 0 Construction: Chairman Spencer, this is a Public Hearing and the hearing will be conducted under the rules of City Ordinance #446: I will now open the Public Hearing. Is there someone present to represent this Request: Mr. Stan Olsen, 1117 13th Ave South, Nampa, Idaho: Mr. Olsen was sworn by Chairman Spencer: MERIDIAN P & Z• • JUNE 9, 1986 PAGE # 2 We are planning on a medium to higher income retirement home on this property, we have found that there is a lack of this type of unit in this area and the residents now have to either go to Nampa or to Boise for this type of residence. Meridian is centrally located for this type of facility. We believe behind the Cherry Plaza is a good location for this facility as it has good access to the shopping as well as the downtown area. We would like to put a medium type center on this property. We have been investigating what type of housing would fit on that land, high rise, low rise or cottage type. We need the higher density there to be able to get enough on the property to make it financially feasable. We have found there is lot of people that need this type of housing who want to move out of their homes and it is just not available. We have a lot of people wanting into the Golden Towers in Nampa and that is not as nice of facility as we are planning. They are willing to pay in the price range of $300.00 to $600.00. We have broke the facility down into two segments trying to find the best ratio of property to building. One unit to be built and if that was successful than the other unit would be built. We plan on incorporating the stream into the landscaping. Alidjani, are you planning on two stories? Olsen, we propose up to five stories. The facility would be fully sprink- eled, there is a problem with fire rescue, if the Fire Chief and the City would, we have a scheme proposed that we might put the two together and have an escape route from one building to the other, in other words to have a free gap of forty feet to hit the other building and it is the same as going to a public rightway. We are also seriously considering with help to the City for a unit. This is one of the options we would propose but this is a balancing game whether it would be feasible . Alidjani, how many units are you proposing? Olsen, anywhere from sixty to one hundred and twenty. Johnson, do you have any drawings of what you are proposing? Olsen, I just have some different schemes of layouts we are investigating. Mr. Olsen showed the Commission the different layouts they were thinking about. There was discussion on where the first unit would be built. Alidjani, what do you have for ingress and egress? Olsen, we have negotiated for entrance with extension of 2; Street and we have a 30 foot deeded strip behind the mall. We are also negotiating with the people to have access off of Meridian Road and also the possib- ility of coming down the East side of the mall on that property. We plan on having parking space for the people who have RV'S that are residents. There was more discussion on the different layouts. A ladder truck would be needed if the five stories was built, we would put .balconies on each unit, five stories would be approximately forty feet high. There was discussion on the access to this property. Olsen, this project is conceptual at this time, it looks very good but we are coming up to the point where if we obtain the zoning approval MERIDIAN P & Z• • JUNE 9, 1986 PAGE # 3 and other necessary items we can proceed with detail drawings. Chairman Spencer, is there anyone else present who wishes to testify in this matter? There was no response. The Public Hearing was closed. Chairman Spencer advised the Commission at the present time they are talking about a PUD where streets are not dedicated and the City as well as the developer has some flexiblity. Alidjani, advised he would like to see more detail on this project. There was discussion on the deeded easement behind Cherry Plaza, also the problem of fire protection for this type of unit. Chairman Spencer, if the Commission is going to do something, it should be contingent on the fire problem and making sure there is more than one access to the property. Morrow, I do not feel it is fair to make the applicant bring more details, either you approve it conceptually or you disapprove the project. The point of it is with this type of project to get what you are asking they could spend 10 to 15 thousand dollars in design fees, then they do not know whether they would be approved or not. Cole, the concept of approving something like this with the possibility of 120 units with only one guaranteed access to it that is a lot of traffic to be coming out of one spot. If you have two of them, one on both ends then that is no big deal. It was decided that this was something that could be addressed in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions that conditions covering these items could be included. The Motion was made by Johnson and seconded by Shearer to have the City Attorney prepare Findings of Fact & Conclusions on this application with no recommedation at this time. Motion Carried: All Yea: Being no further business to come before the Commission the Motion was made by Cole and seconded by Alidjani to adjourn at 7:50 p.m.: Motion Carried: All Yea: (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) APPROVE,. ' ~ ~ ~ R.C. ^NC R, CHAIRMAN pc: Mayor & Council Mitich, Hallett P & Z Member Valley News Atty, Eng, Fire, Statesman Police, Ward, Stuart ACHD,CDH,ACC, NIMD, ACZ BEFORE THE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MICHELS ANNEXATION AND ZONING FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS The above entitled annexation and zoning application having come on for consideration on May 12, 1986, at approximately 7:30 o'clock p.m. on said date, at the Meridian City Hall, 728 Meridian Street, Meridian, Idaho, and the Commission having heard and taken oral and written testimony and the applicant appearing and having duly considered the matter, the Planning and Zoning Commission makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. That notice of the public hearing on the annexation and zoning use was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to the said public hearing scheduled for May 12, 1986, the first publication of which was 15 days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly considered at the May 12, 1986 hearing; that copies of all notices were made available to 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 a AMBROSE, EITZOERALD B CROOKSTON Attorneys entl C.OYneelOfe P.O. BOt<127 MerltllAn, Itle~o 89812 TelepNOne 888-NB1 part of Doris Subdivision, a residential subdivision developed basically in an R-4 fashion; that the property abutts residential lots on the North, Fairview Avenue on the South; some commercial and residential on the East and some commercial lots on the West and consists of approximately three (3) acres of land. 3. Lots 1 and 2 are presently zoned by the county C-2 which is a commercial zone; Lot 3 is zoned R-8 by the county which is a residential zone. 4. The protective covenants of Doris Subdivision indicate that all lots in the subdivision are to be used for single-family residences except for those lots and land adjacent to Fairview Avenue and 181 feet north thereof. 5. The lots adjacent to Lot 3 on North and East are used for residential purpose. 6. That the property is adjacent and abutting to the present City limits. 7. That the petitioners are the owners of the property. 8. That the property included in the annexation and zoning application is within the Area of Impact of the City of Meridian. 9. That the entire parcel of ground is included within the Meridian Urban Service Planning Area as the Urban Service Planning Area is defined in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan; that the property is in the North Curve Neighborhood as designated on the Policy Diagram contained in the Comprehensive Plan. 10. That the Application for annexation requests that the AMBROSE, FITZG ERALD S CROOKSTON Attorneys entl Counselore P.O. Boz 02] Mentllen, IENo 838/2 TelepNOna 888 ue1 AMBROSE, FITZGERALO B CROOKSTON Attorneys entl Counselors P.O. box 12T Merltllen, Itlaho B381Y Telephone 888-1181 parcel be annexed and zoned C-G, General Retail and Service Commercial; that there is no present use of the property other than vacant ground; that the Applicant indicated he had no immediate development plans for the property. 11. That the proposed use of the property apparently, would be to develope the property for some type of commercial use. 12. That if the land were annexed at this time the City would be obligated to provide, at a minimum, police and fire protection services. 13. That the City has in the recent past conditionally annexed and zoned property conditioned upon final platting and commencement of construction of sewer and water and other reasonable conditions. 14. That two owners of residences abutting Lot 3 of the subject property testified objecting to the use of Lot 3 commercially; the fact that the Doris Subdivision Protective Covenants prohibited commercial uses north of 181 feet of Fairview was brought out and they testified that a commercial use would not be beneficial to or conform to their present residential uses. 15. That two other persons who were not owners of lots in Doris Subdivision testified in favor of the Application. CONCLUSIONS 1. That the City has authority to annex land pursuant to AM BROSE, FI72GERALD B CROOKSTON Attomeya ana Counaelora p.o. Box 02y Meaalan, laano lusaz Tslsplwl» BBBd~BI 50-222, Idaho Code; that excerise of the City's annexation authority is a Legislative function. 2. That the Planning and Zoning Commission has judged this annexation and zoning application by the guidelines, standards, criteria, and policies contained in Section 50-222, Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, the Meridian City Ordinances, Meridian Comprehensive Plan as amended February 19, 1985, and the record submitted to it and things of which it can take judicial notice. 3. 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. 4. That the Commission may take judicial notice of government ordinances, and policies, and of actual conditions existing within the City and State. 5. 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. 6. That the annexation application has been initiated by the Petitioner, who are the owners, and the annexation is not upon the initiation of the City of Meridian and therefore the five (5) acre limitations do not apply. 7. That since the annexation and zoning of land is a legislative function the City has authority to place conditions upon the annexation of land. 8. That since Lots 1 and 2 are adjacent to other presently zoned and commercially used lots, front on Fairview Avenue, and are not restricted by the Doris Subdivision Covenants, it is concluded that those two lots should be annexed and zoned C-G. 9. That since Lot 3 is restricted by the Doris Subdivision covenants from commercial uses and two lot owners of Doris Subdivision objected to the use of that lot for commercial purposes, it is concluded that Lot 3 should be annexed and zoned R-4 which is the zone most similar to how the rest of Doris Subdivision is developed. 10. That the Protective Covenants do not restrict the City from zoning or rezoning property in a fashion contrary to the allowed uses contained in the covenants; however, where there are protective covenants which are contrary to a proposed zoning or rezoning the City, as a policy, should not disturb the status quo of the allowed uses and put owners in a conflict of use situation that does not otherwise exist; this is true specifically where there are no immediate plans for development and no overriding public benefit to the changed use which is contrary to the Protective Covenants; that when land is purchased in reliance on protective covenants and the justification for any particular restriction remains valid, the City should not adopt a zoning contrary to the restriction unless there is an overriding public benefit. 11. It is noted that the Doris Subdivision covenants allow an amendment to the Covenants upon a majority authorization. It AM BROSE, F1T2G ERALO B CROO KSTON Attorneys an0 Counselors P.O. Boz as] Merltlbn, ItlNio B38at TslePliona BBBds61 is concluded that if the covenants were amended allowing commercial use of Lot 3, the Commission would recommend the requested C-G zoning to the City Council for Lot 3; however, conditions would have to be placed on any commercial use, such as screening and landscape buffers to decrease the impact on surrounding residences. 12. 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; that the applicant should be required to connect to Meridian water and sewer lines and extend such to the development at its own cost; that the property will be subject to Site Planning Review. 13. That it is concluded that the annexation would be in the best interests of the City of Meridian if the land was going to be immediately developed. 14. Therefore, based on the Application, the testimony and evidence, these Findings and Conclusions, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian, it is ultimately concluded that Applicant's property should be conditionally annexed; that Lots 1 and 2 should be zoned C-G, General Retail and Service Commercial; that Lot 3 should be zoned R-4 Residential; that the conditions should be explored at the City Council level; that such annexation would be orderly development and reasonable. AMBROSE, FIT2GERALD B CROOKSTON Altomeyf entl Couneeloro P.O. Bok ART M..im.n. ia.no Bx~x TsIaONOne BBBMB7 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 Cole Voted~~s Commissioner Shearer Voted Commissioner Johnson Voted Commissioner Alidjani Voted~.r / / Commissioner Morrow Voted e / Chairman Spencer (Tie Breaker) Voted RECOMMENDATION AMBROSE, FIRGERAID B CROOKSTON Allorneys enn Couneelora P.O. eo. l2] Merl0len, IUeNo 8381Y TelapAOna BB6M81 It is hereby recommended to the City Council that Lots 1 and 2 should be conditionally annexed and zoned C-G, General Retail and Service Commercial; that Lot 3 should be annexed and zoned R-4, Residential; that the conditions of annexation should be investigated and discussed by the City Council. MOTION: APPROVED:1~o~ DISAPPROVED: