Loading...
1990 05-08 A G E N D A MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MAY 8, 1990 MIN[TPFS OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING HEfD APRIL 10, 1990:(APPROVED) MINCTPFS OF THE SPDCLAL MEETIIJG HELD APRIL 23, 1990: (APPROVED) 1: PUBLIC HEARING: REZONE REQUEST W/PRELII~IINARY PLAT ON MISTY MEADOWS: (FINDINGS TO BE PREPARED) 2: PUBLIC HEARIIVG: PROPOSID AN~IDMENTS TO THE MERIDIAN 03MPRHENSIVE PLAN:(FINDINGS TO BE PREPARED) 3: VACATION OF EASEMENP REQUEST BY AI,BII275ONS: (APPROVED) Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission May 8, 1990 The Regular Meeting of the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairman Jim Johnson at 7:30 P.M.: Members Present: Jim Shearer, Charlie Rountree, Tim Hepper, Moe Alidjani: Others Present: Charles Bates, Charlene Bates, Brent L. Barham, Charles Gowing, Roy Johnson, Jack Ruteland, Dale Atkinson, Randy Nieson, Lee & Cathy Barry, Daniel Morris, Beverly Fricke, Erik Gabrielson, Carole Gabrielson, Wayne Crookston, The Motion was made by Alidjani and seconded by Shearer to approve of the Minutes of the previous meeting held April 10, 1990 as written: Motion Carried: All Yea: The Motion was made by Alidjani and seconded by Rountree to approve of the Minutes of the Special Meeting held April 23, 1990 as written: Motion Carried: All Yea: ITEM #1: PUBLIC HEARING: REZONE REQUEST W/PRELIMINARY PLAT ON MISTY MEADOWS: Chairman Johnson: Is there a representative for the applicant that would like to come forward, I will now open the Public Hearing. Roy Johnson, 6017 W. State Street, was sworn by the attorney. Johnson: I am the project engineer for this request. The proposed subdivision is 58 lots we are proposing both a preliminary application and a zone change. The present zone is R-4, we are asking for an R-8 Zone. The surrounding properties are the reason for our zone change. It is the intention of the developed to have lots that are approximately 7500 sq. ft. They do not intend to have any duplex lots, all single family. One of Gary Smith's comments was to provide access to the south which would go straight down all the way to Cherry Lane, that would be about between lot 10 & 11, Block 1. What he asked is that we stub the street down there to the south to provide access to that strip of land that goes from the south boundary of this subdivision all the way to Cherry Lane. We don't have any problem with moving the lot lines over and making provisions for this roadway, however we would request that we do not construct the roadway at this time, simply make an easement available on the two lots for fifty feet wide so that in the event it did go at some time in the future, the easement would be available. Shearer: You're talking about a fifty foot easement off those two lots, would you change your lot configuration so those lots wouldn't be taking a full 25' out of each lot. Johnson: We would move the lot lines and pick up a few feet from each lot. Rountree: What would that do to the square footage of the lots. Johnson: It would take them down to about 7200 sq. ft. MERIDIAN P&Z MAY 8, 1990 PAGE #2 Rountree: How are we going to address the irrigation ordinance. Johnson: We will put in the pressurized irrigation. Hepper: One the easement for that street stub, would that be graveled or anything. Johnson: It would be part of the lot, it would be owned by the adjacent lots. We would continue the curb, gutter & sidewalk. Crookston: Do you know if that type of arrangement is acceptable to ACHD? Johnson: Yes, it has been in the past. Crookston: The biggest problem that I foresee in that situation is it not being sufficiently outlined on the plat, that that eventually will be a road someday. Johnson: Anyone else who wishes to testify? Hal Hatch, 2055 N. Ten MIle, was sworn by the attorney. Hatch: I own that property in question. I would like to see it come out to the edge of the property and I'll hook on at that point. Rountree: Do you have an access off of Cherry Lane? Hatch: Just off Cherry Lane straight dawn through. Rountree: A single access. Hatch: Yes. When I bought it I understood that it was zoned for mutiple family dwellings. I understood that that road would come through there. Hepper: What about the property on the other side of the road. Hatch: They are mostly one or two acre lots. Chairman Johnson: Anyone else from the Public who would like to come forward on this. Brent Barham, 885 Delmar Drive, was sworn by the attorney. Barham: I have no problem with them wanting to develop that property back there. I do have some strong reservations about the way that this is laved out. We have some real speeding problems down through the area of Delmar Dr. & Tana. I can see that the way they propose W. Newport Drive being a straight shot in to connect into 11th Avenue could turn into be quite a raceway in that area. Also have problem with the lots going any smaller than 7,000 sq.ft.. We would like some restrictions on the single car garages. Clerk Niemann: Our ordinance requires double car garages. Barham: Good. I would like to see some different alternatives rather than such straight streets. • • MERIDIAN P & Z MAY 8, 1990 PAGE If3 Chairman Johnson: Anyone else who wishes to testify. Don Fickes, 1016 Storey Avenue, was sworn by the attorney. Fickes: Some of the neighbors couldn't be here tonight so I am submitting for the record some petitions with approximately36 signatures opposing the rezone as well as the preliminary plat of this subdivision. If you drive down through Cherry Manor Subdivision and take a look at it, I am automatically opposed to them making the lots this size. The lots at Cherry Manor or 85 and up. Petitions entered into the record with 36 signatures. Beverly Fricke, 924Storey Avenue, was sworn by the attoney. Fricke: If I understand correctly the reasoning for making these lots smaller is that it will be the same as the surrounding ones. Now if I hear correctly when they make the easement they will be making these lots behind our houses, they will be making the lots even smaller. I am not opposed to a nice subdivision but I am opposed to having these so small. Chairman Johnson: Is that the area where the smallest lots are going to be? Sohnson: They are the smaller lots within the development. I can understand these concerns about having smaller lots, so what we propose to do is rather than change the lots and make them smaller we will take one lot out and make those lots wider. It would make them about 7700 sq ft. in addition to having the easement for the roadway. Chairman Johnson: What is proposed for an average value for the home & the square footage of the homes. Johnson: Thesquare footage of the homes is pretty much fixed by the Ordinances. Value of the homes will be from $70,000. to $90,000. Chairman Johnson: You're looking at a minimum of $70,000.? Johnson: It's possible that there might be a few of them in the mid to high $60's. C. Johnson: What would the square footage be for a $70,000. home? Johnson: Probably 1100 to 1200 sq. ft. Alidjani: Is it correct that you are taking one lot out plus the easement? Johnson: Yes. C. Johnson: Anyone else from the public? Charlie Cowing, 1111 Delmar Drive, was sworn by the attorney. Cowing: I have a couple of concerns, the first is the schools. I question whether he is going to get $70,000. for those houses. Johnson: There are no new homes sitting empty. • • MERIDIAN P & Z MAY 8, 1990 PAGE #4 Gowing: Street drainage is going to be a problem still. The speeding is also a problem. I want an R-4. C. Johnson: Anyone else? Charles Bates, 2182 NW 11th, was sworn by the attorney. Bates: Voiced concerns about overcrowding in schools, and would like it to stay as an R-4. C. Johnson: Anyone else from the public? Randolph Niesen, 1122 Delmar, was sworn by the attorney. Niesen: Also concerned about over-crowding in schools. I would hope that you gentlemen would limit the size and the number of these subdivisions to allow our schools and other public facilities to catch up to the number of homes that have been built. Second concern is the value of these homes. I feel there is an excess amount of homes empty that are less than five years old. Shearer: If those houses were priced properly they would sell. Eric Gabrielson, 2016 NW 8th, was sworn by the attorney. Gabrielson: With this being the final phase I would like to see the lot & zoning remains at R-4 level. Voiced concerns on schools, effect on property values & traffic. Johnson: The R-8 would allow us to go to 6000 sq. ft. we are not proposing that at all, we are proposing to go to 7500 sq. ft.. Made comments on traffic problems. The homes that are built on these lots are going to based upon what's existing and what's marketable. Chairman Johnson: I will close the Public Hearing. Hepper: I don't really see how you can require another man to build a street on your property. Shearer: Your providing an easement if he wants to build it okay and if he doesn't okay. Discussion. (TAPE ON FILE) The Motion was made by Shearer and seconded by Rountree to have the attorney prepare the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. Motion Carried: All Yea: ITEM #2: PUBLIC HEARING: PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE MERIDIAN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Johnson: These have been published in the paper and you have copies in front of you. I will open the Public Hearing, is there anyone present who wishes to testify. Being no response the Public Hearing was closed. Explained the amendments. Hepper: Could you explain the difference between the area of city impact and the urban service planning area? • • MERIDIAN P & Z MAY 8, 1990 PAGE #5 Clerk Niemann: The area of impact is the land that we think someday down the road might be in the City limits, the urban service planning area is what we can actually serve with our water & sewer. Discussion about frontage roads - tape on file. The Motion was made by Rountree and seconded by Shearer to amend the petition Item 8-U to change that item to allow the section dealing with the frontage roads to remain but to delete the reference of frontage roads and indication o£ €rontage:roads on the policy diagram. Motion Carried: All Yea: The Motion was made by Rountree and seconded by Alidjani to have the attorney prepare the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. Motion Carried: All Yea: ITEM #3: VACATION OF EASEMENT REQUEST BY ALBERTSONS: The Motion was made by Hepper and seconded by Alidjani to recommend to the City Council to allow the vacation of easement request by Albertsons. Motion Carried: All Yea: Johnson: One of the things that has come up quite often is the street light situation. As a replacement for street lighting we have allowed in the past yard lights to be put in. This is something we need to talk about. Discussion. (Tape on File) Also read a letter received from Winston Moore thanking the City for a pleasurable experience in dealing with the City. The Motion was made by Rountree and seconded by Shearer to adjourn at 8:45 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) APPROVED: JI JO SON, CHAIRMAN ATTEST: J CK NIEMAN~, CITY CLERK ~ / Valle News, Statesman, ACRD, ~~ d.c. Mayor & Council Y ~ P&Z Members, Atty, NIMD, CDH, ACC, SID, Bldg. Dept. Eng., Fire, Police, Mail (2) Stuart, Ward, Hallett, Gass File (2) ,. i ~ ~ . •° BEFORE THE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ALICE CULVER REZONE AND PRELIMINARY PLAT NW 8TH STREET 1J4 MILE NORTN OF CHERRY LANE MERIDIAN, IDAHO FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS The above entitled matter having come on for public hearing May 8, 1990, at the hour of 7:30 o'clock p.m., the Petitioner appearing 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 Rezone AM BROSE, FITZG ERALD 6 CROOKSTON Atbrneys ana Counaelora P.O. eor t2] MerlElen, IOallo 8]N] TelaP~one BSe~aa81 Application and Preliminary Plat was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to the said public hearing scheduled for May 8, 1990, the first publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly considered at the May 8, 1990, 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 and the Applicant is the owner of said property, the property is described in the Application which description is :, incorporated herein; the property is North of Cherry Manor Subdivision and South of Meadowview Subdivision adjacent to and West of Northwest 8th Street. 3. That the Applicant requests that the property, which is now zoned R-4, be rezoned to R-8; that the Applicant also requests approval of a preliminary plat of the property of approximately 12.89 acres for R-8 Residential for 58 single family building lots. 4. That the R-8 District is described in the Zoning Ordinance, 11-2-408 B 2 as follows: (R-8) MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT: he purpose o the R- istrict is to permit the establishment of single and two (2) family dwellings at a density not exceeding eight (8) dwelling units pre acre. This district delineates those areas where such development has or is likely to occur in accord with the Comprehensive Plan of the City and is also designed to permit the conversion of large homes into two (2) family dwellings in well-established neighborhoods of comparable land use. Connection to the Municipal Water and Sewer systems of the City of Meridian is required. AMRROSE, FITZG ERALD dCROOKSTON Allorneye entl C.OUn6B10r8 P.O. Bo. <2T MerlOlan, Itla~o BIZ Telephone B88-N61 5. For single family dwellings the minimum lot size is R- 4 is 8,000 square feet and the minimum street frontage is 70 feet; that in the R-8 zone the minimum lot size is 6,000 square feet and the minimum street frontage is 60.00 feet. 6. That Meridian Manor Subdivision is an R-4 type subdivision which was developed prior to the adoption of R-4, R- 8 zones under the 1984 Zoning Ordinance; that Meadowview Subdivision was developed prior to the adoption of the R-4 and R-8 designation but is actually developed in an R-8 fashion and has smaller lots and street frontages than now required in an R- 4 development; that there is a new subdivision being developed by Capital Development, Inc „ which has been approved as an R-8 zone but where only single family dwellings will be constructed which is to the West and South of the subject property. 7. That the property is contained in the CAIRNS NEIGHBORHOOD as designated on the Policy Diagram at Page 7 of the Meridian Comprehensive Plan; neighborhoods are defined in the Plan at Page 6 and states as follows: "Definition: The neighborhood is a residential area withith unii`orm characteristics of a size comparable to that usually served by an elementary school or a small business convenience center or a local park. Although neighborhoods occur in various shapes and sizes, a section of the City measuring one-half to one and one-half miles across is usually used for planning purposes. It has facilities within easy walking distances and provides the basis for community identification." 8. That the use proposed by the Applicant is set forth above and the Applicant proposes to provide for 58 single family building lots. 9. That the uses proposed by the Applicant of a single- family subdivision and the applicant has indicated that there will be no duplexes in the subdivision even though the requested zoning would allow for such and the purpose of the zoning is to allow for smaller lots than required in the R-4 zone. 10. That the property is a parcel of ground that is AMBROSE, FITZG ERALD b CROOKSTON Attorneys ano Counselors P.O. Box l2] Merlolen, loaho 83842 rlapKOne BBB-!!B1 approximately 12.89 acres in size. 11. That the property is connected to City sewer and water and those services are available. 12. That the Applicant has submitted a proposed subdivision plat of the subject property; that the density would be approximately 4.5 dwelling units per acre. 13. That comments may be submitted by the City Engineer, Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District, and by the Ada County Highway District; if submitted those comments are incorporated herein. 14. That there was testimony at the public hearing objecting to possible increase of traffic but no problem with the actual development; desiring that the parcel be connected to Cherry Lane with a road; objection to the smaller lot size that R-4 requirements; objecting to an increased load on school facilities; objecting that the proposed development, due to smaller lots, could reduce property values. The Applicant's Engineer responded that smaller lot sizes does not necessarily mean more school children than larger lots would mean, and testified the home values would probably be between $70,000.00 and $90,000.00. 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 grant AMBROSE, FITZG ERALD B CROOKSTON Altorneya ena Couneelora P.O. 80. X27 MerlElan, IEeNo BBNP Telepftpne 888-NBt zoning amendments and rezones pursuant to Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, and, pursuant to 11-2-41b of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian, Idaho. 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 upon granting a zoning amendment. 5. That the City has judged this Application upon the basis of guidelines contained in Section 11-2-416 of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian and upon the basis of the Local Planning Act of 1975, Title 67 Chapter 65, Idaho Code, the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, and the record submitted to it and the things of which it can take judicial notice. 6. That 11-2-416 (K) of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian sets forth the standards under which City shall review applications for zoning amendments; that upon a review of those requirements and a review of the facts presented and conditions of the area, the Planning and Zoning Commission specifically concludes as follows: a. The new zoning would be harmonious with an in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and no Comprehensive Plan amendment is required. AM BROSE, PITZGERAlO BCROO KSTON Attorneys and Counselors P.O. Box 027 MerlElan, IES~o 87812 Talepnone 8880181 b. The area is in the CAIRNS neighborhood which is designed for residential uses and a mix of those uses and a rezone of the subject property is in line with that designation, c. The area included in the zoning amendment was intended to be developed in a neighborhood fashion which is the fashion proposed. d. There are R-8 Residential developments existing and planned for in the area which tends to dictate that the area may lend itself to be rezoned. e. That the property should be designed and constructed to be harmonious with the surrounding area, and such is a requirement and condition of the rezone. f. The proposed uses would not be hazardous or disturbing to the existing or future uses of the neighborhood. g. The property will be able to be adequately served with public facilities, and connection to municipal sewer and water is required. h. The proposed use would not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and would not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community but should in fact be beneficial; however, see the comments below regarding schools. i. The proposed uses will not involve any detrimental activity to any person's property or the general welfare. j. Development would not cause a significant increase in vehicular traffic and should not interfere with surrounding traffic patterns. k. That this rezone will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any natural or scenic feature or major importance. 1. The proposed zoning amendment is in the best interest of the City of Meridian. 7. That the comments, if submitted, by the Nampa & AMRROSE, FITZG ERALD d CROOKSTON AIIpmAye Ant) CounaelorA P.O. Bov A2] MAtlCIOn, IOAno 838A2 TAIApKOnB BBB~JAeI Meridian Irrigation District, the Ada County Highway District, and the City Engineer as incorporated herein and shall be a requirement for the rezone. 8. That all applicable fire, life safety, building codes, and other codes and regulations and all of the ordinances of the City of Meridian shall be met prior to any occupancy. 9. That even though the requested rezone is to R-8 which allows duplexes the use of the property shall be limited to single-family dwellings and such shall be a restriction in the rezone ordinance. 10. That the comments regarding the impact of new AMBROSE, F1T2G ERAlO 6 OROOKSTON Attomeya enC Counaeloro P.O. Boy {27 MBrlElen, IBaPo &7812 TeleP~one BBBJeBt residential development on already overcrowded schools are greatly appreciated and understood. Overcrowded schools are of great concern to the Commission and it is hoped that measures can be taken to alleviate that overcrowding. However, the problem is not the result of the City allowing new residential subdivisions. The problem is a result of general growth and economic development of the Treasure Valley creating new jobs and people moving to this Valley to fulfill those jobs, many of whom desire to live in the City of Meridian, and the Meridian School District. Another aspect of the problem is the financial burdens of the Meridian School District. It is burdened with the following: 1) underfunding and inequitable funding from the State of Idaho; 2) with a bond election procedure which requires the electorate to approve bond levies for new school facilities by a 2/3's majority rather than the simple majority required in most elections in a democratic society; and 3) with a residential tax base rather a more income producing industrial or commercial base. It is concluded that, while the school overcrowding is of great concern to the Commission, it is not within the province or power of the City to solve the problem by denying one new residential development, or even all new residential developments, within the City of Meridian. The problem is a societal problem of this City, the Valley, the school district, the State of Idaho, and particularly the citizens and electorate thereof, which all must work together co-operatively to salve. AMBROSE, FIT2GERAlD d CROO KSTON Atlorneye and Counaelore P.O. Boa a2] MerlElan, IENo 83812 TelsD~one BBB~M61 ,- 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 HEPPER COMMISSIONER ROUNTREE COMMISSIONER SHEARER COMMISSIONER ALIDJANI CHAIRMAN JOHNSON (TIE BREAKER) DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION VOTED VOTED VOTED iJ-QS~~ VOTE D VOTED The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby AMRROSE, FITZG ERALD fl CROOKSTON Allorneys entl ('iOn n9BlO r9 P.O. Bo. ~Y] Meritllan, IOMo 83b1Y TeleO~one BB&d~81 recommends to the City Council of the City of Meridian that they approve the Rezone and the Preliminary Plat requested by the Applicant for the property described in the application. M OT ION: L~ APP RO VE Df DISAPPROVED: _ - The below listed citizens of Meridian Idaho are opposed to the rezoning of Misty Meadows Subdivision from R4 to RS as well as the proposed preliminary plat of this subdivision. We are concerned that the lowering of the zoning to R8 will solicit the type of houses that will significantly decrease our property value. We are concerned that these lower priced homes will not be of the type of construction nor maintained as well as the existing homes pride themselves in. Request the Planning and Zoning Commission consider our desires and concerns and disapprove this rezoning request. /~ S n /J :C~ TURE ~~ n ~~~i 1 ~~. ~ ~~ NUMBER << ;~ , i<< l 1 ~~ a l I .. /P b~r~~S ~VC~~C= 'J75~1 ~~~o~q_:. l_(2 CC'~C ~~I( I~~~~ ~~(~c~~ yam. ~.~r~~ ~_ lll~~ ~V f~191 ~ S ~~~ /~l(l~s i %Ci /C/J -~-51~ /"f=1" ~~J'S - l / ~ ~ ~'~~>u - ~~/~ NAMF. ADDRESS TELEPHONE NUMBER' SIGMA AME ADDRESS ~-' TELEPHONE NUMBEx si~nniurn NAME ADDRE~ TELEPHONE NUMBER SI T RE %~ _~ NOTICE OF HEARING AMBROBE, 9TZOERAlO CROOI(BTON counwan '.o. Be. ~xr .nei.n. w.ne ax~x P11ons BBlJIl1 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN pursuant to the Ordinances of the City of Meridian and the laws of the State of Idaho, that the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian will hold a public hearing at the Meridian City Ha11, 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho, at the hour of 7:30 o'clock p.m., on May 8, 1990, for the purpose of reviewing and considering the Application of Alice Culver for a rezone of a portion of the - _ N.E. 1/4 of S. W. 1/4 of Section 1 T. 3 N. R. 1 W., Boise Meridian, Misty Meadows Subdivision, Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, frorn R-4 Residential to R-8 Residential. Hearing will also be held on Applicant's requests approval of a preliminary plat of Misty Meadaws Subdiv=ision-which is to be located on the above described property, which requested approval is of approximately 12.-89 acres for. R-8 Residential for 58 single family building lots. The property is generally located at NW - -- __ - - -- 8th Street 1/4 mile-North of Cherry Lane. ` A more particular legal description is on file in the office of the Ci-t;y-Gl-e~-k--o-f--the--City of Meridian and is available upon regnESt. - - -- - - _-- ---- - -- Public comment is we~i~trtre-an~+-w#a_1-beataken and=Heard. - - - _ - -__ _ __ - DATED this ~~ - l~__ day of April, 1990. - "--- - - _ -_ 3fiCK N3fMAN CITY CLfRK -- _ ~.. 33 M~1S I ` I ^.~ ~ •. pr~ a~ e D s ^m r h0 ° tJ i A v Q • D Lt ~ ,~~. ~_dEe I R0 m e ~~ a ^vlow•Ir. r (e ,d. ~~i ~ - _ ' ~ s i~ • r' , v ~ ~ = s . ^e'~~'~yy;' <• W3Da '3AV 4101'M'N W ^wo•ur,ry 1332l1;S $:?6858 > r... ... • •. •10 ^ ^ m t Z n • • ~ ... • .~ v ~ ~ • ~ Y . r t s G •i ~ • • S ~ r >< m ~ r s tg a '~ 3 x • _ ` e • ~ a ~? • A 7 < ^ O <' < I V 4111 'M'N aru+r lun • * ' ~ 0 • / O < ^ V a ~ o• 9 . %~ c a a ~ ~ , t ~_ e r 3 °'° ~~~{{ ~ ~ t b ~ r ~ le, • ~ • • A r R R r w a ~ ~y~ ~~ b • . • ^ f~ e s i ~'~~. ~ A • lr~ -.rn . O w ^ q i rpm .i8 ~.- : ~mp~ .f s~ • ~ y'•T .._ ~Ji - (. G.r. f ) ft y I~ i K a! 'ate .wr a a a - a I- ! t • IIO 1 < 1 r t ij ~ •e O <r rr r< is ti~• A ~ S ~ ' ~ ~ nfZ/I tf• H1ZI'M' •w '1S H121 ~ i1 • p~ •..f~ ~-° l ,y > I V le ° ± I t • iS ~a q ~ . r b ~" i e M • . tl I ... 2 t ~ \s Iji \ • ; • r0 a „m.• r • + u .. 3 ~V~iyi i ~ e P oar k P ~°, e e rl I _ F < . la • q f J1. • w •xi '` a .al ~. b t s Ia as ~ r !y .• . ~ I ~ f I ~ I Q -erw- .tcr Dar Dar Dw D • )r f + -, d . ~ ' a ~ ai ffi ~ t + r _ • p~» < :s '1S Hlbl 'M'N : a~;; a I . t . _° 4 ~ ^ r ~ . w Is i. v li a ._ __ .Y __ __ 1. as ..ail' ° a y~ F~< ,In o ~~.~ Z. <.• ~ ~ ~- t'i~li~s' o<`.~ ~ . y w w t '1S 191'M'N 3 ~=~.y ~i 3 ~ w, ? I ^ a i IS•_ IGS ~y :__ i_^ fll ii ` _ ; a° O ` Ala .e e • r s-e • t< ja t ~ era Mla ! .ra - i ~• _ ur _.rnr _ _ .;1 ~R21 lw t tih 7, ,1 ~0 0~ q ~~ q ~ J; -:i, • • T ~ / _ ~ - FAME ADD E S TELEP ONE NUMBER ~ - G U ~/-E I n ~~F r~ K ~,~ ~'i;;~~ i 11,E i , ~J, ~:, ~ ~ <I ~~ n ~ - ~ ~ ~~t ~ ~ E~ ~~ C' /-~<<.~~,~R;,, tA~~ ADDRESS TELEPHONE NUMBER SIGNATURE -~//i ~c b`~ ~ The below listed citizens of Meridian Idaho are opposed to the rezoning of Misty Meadows Subdivision from R4 to R8 as well as the proposed preliminary plat of this subdivision. We are concerned that the lowering of the zoning to R8 will solicit the type of houses that will significantly decrease our property value. We are concerned that these lower priced homes will not be of the type of construction nor maintained as well as the existing homes pride themselves in. Request the Planning and Zoning Commission consider our desires and concerns and disapprove this rezzoning request. I~~ I~~C U ,~( ~-~~-~ i~ ~l ~~~~~ ~i~ /L I'~I ~~~rl l~. ~; ~'i~ ~ ~`i~ ~~ ~!,'_ ~.~ r~~l. L~i~ <<~ NAME ADDRESS TELEPHONE NUMBER SIGNATURE ~ ~ r ~ A ~ ~ ~ ~ I~,I~.C- ~~ G~I~U-1 i~ c.CY~ ICI ~ NAME ADDRESS TELEPHONE NUMBE~2!~ SIGNATURE NAtiE ADDRESS TELEPHONE NUMBER SIGNATURE ~. 7 _ ~J~,~C: Diu ~ ~ j ~~li A'~(-._ IIC~_ Il~Pt i [~~A ~~ L~ ~.i 4-`l~ i, ;A ~11;~ y'~'~~~.C~~~~.t'~ _ NAME ADDRESS TELEPHONE NUMBER SIGNATURE / ~ , NAMEi ADDRESS TELEPHONE NUMBER ~ ~ SIGNATURE TELEPHONE NUMBER ~~ SIGNATURE $gS DeJNSt!` TELEPHONE NUMBER S NATURE a )c,c -~'s~~ ~ti ~< JJC ~~~ ~~~ ATURE NAME F ~ • • NOTICE OF HEARING AMBROBE, ~~T20ERAL0 CROOKBTON tian.~n rxt camNwn •.o. so. ~n ulebe, ~e~no ne+z ones.MBJYI NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN pursuant to the Ordinances of the City of Meridian and the laws of the State of Idaho, that the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian will hold a public hearing at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho, at the hour of 7:30 o'clock p.m., on May 8, 1990, for the purpose of reviewing and considering the Application of Alice Culver for a rezone of a portion of the N.E. 1/4 of S. W. 1/4 of Section 1 T. 3 N. R. 1 W., Boise Meridian, Misty Meadows Subdivision, Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, frorn R-4 Residential to R-8 Residential. Hearing will also be held on Applicant's requests approval of a preliminary plat of -Misty Meadews- Subdivision--which is to be located on the above described property, which requested approval is of approximately 12.89 acres for. R-8 .Residential for 58 single. family building lots. The property is generally located at NW 8th Street 1/4 mile--North of Cherry Lane. - - -- A more particular legal description is on file in the office o_f the L-i=t~y:=G-l-ex-k-~f---the--City of Meridian and -is -_ available upon regaESt_. --_--- - - ---____- _.._ Public comment is we~cZme~nd_wfiaj=betaken andh_eard.= _ =~ - -- DATED this - l~,_ day'of April, 1990. -- - - - SACK Ni-EidAN CITY CLERK -- - . O ____ _. y . A s• _ tl i ~ p ~ } C ~ -! `L ~- ~`• i=14.-~a• ail a~ ii.~'i.ial •` 1 a i it N i »»I a ~i - °-• i i ~ n.° a f • it li • i is j + « ! • ~ • % ~ t ~«~~cI'; • i „• t 0 G U w'~• ~ L N.W. 15 ST. w' '~ i i~ a+N ~ ~ D -i • rn i o~•2 •'m 5 iii' •=z • ~ •t a t s ! s ~ ~ t ' ! ! ! t is n w • • ~ a I A • •. [I x 9 1 m • p • . i ~ m i .' ~, it ~ • 14TH ST. : N.W. : Dc l .Y• ~ y flt _ a i ~,i i i f •q .rav.Ya a ~' a .~ ••/ 4'•• ~Ria . .; ~ ; '. f `.. 1 $ X 11 1 ~ . a ~ , a .•, a ~ . 0 g ~ g ..__- -__-~ -__._-. F` .. _ - ~i •• t/ ° S • i t IR I % T t -•,I 9 pp N. W. 12TH `a c• ~a I~ .. y. t2TH ST. 4 ~ ~ ` ar nr + 1 a 1 ;_ ~ 9 n« . f 4 O a.. f i ." t• s, .«EI ..» , , i .• i '1 i ~ . w-:. - ai. r _ •_. ~ ml.c~ _ :a_ s>r. s~ s+t i• - O .a.u. ~~ _ . i ~ S Y 'E: i y i• . . . • N D i i i ~• • •N.W. » AVE. Ith r_. w W~ Ei ~ C • ~ • • a ~ ° , ~7 • ^ ° ~ 1 _ B~ - • . ~ w r » p• « a ++n. •+a•R N.W. I1 f h n ~ - - +» s a O e i . a a . - • • C d S ' i¢ ! 3t • V i t _ a1 ~! t . "' FA a i e m .a = • ~ _ - • ( •• ` l m ~ STREET ~ ' L aanwa+aa i r a N.W. IOIh AVE. i •' E !~?: E •• : ~ a D ' t a s • - 1A/ I . 1 > ~ M R g+•j , ~ GN.M . ~ i~i ~~~ + . m ° ~ g n p fl fl ~ ~ a i ~~ i~ • P L • <r t a ~ ~ J ~ as +vn. aat C ; ~ ees 0~ ~ 6 i I ~ 4 C ~• ` ` _ _ » ~ a~ ~ x < m y o I - The below listed citizens of Meridian Idaho are opposed to the rezoning of Misty Meadows Subdivision from R4 to RS as well as the proposed preliminary plat of this subdivision. We are concerned that the lowering of the zoning to R8 will solicit the type of houses that will significantly decrease our property value. We are concerned that these lower priced homes will not be of the type of construction nor maintained as well as the existing homes pride themselves in. Request the Planning and Zoning Commission consider our desires and concerns and disapprove this rezoning request. ~i~ ~ ~(l~Kt~~~) %'%/ J~~~~))~~z~ -~i; x'0`5 - «`~C= ~`~~ ~i~Ylll~' I,L.iJ L_ ~~1~1 AMA E ADDRESS TELEPHONE NUMBER STGNATIIR: i NUMBER ~ ~ ~ \ ~ s i.~ : t %~tY~. ,. ~,C:,1 , NAMFr~ ~ ADD~tES3 cci~ ~T ~ C=~. ,~.(~ /~. , NAME ADDRESS ~.. Ci-> i ~ NAME ~ ADDRESS /~,, ~ ADDRESS "_'ELEPHONE NUMBER t~Y~ ~ ~. Cj "-. 1'-~VI-AJl TELEPHONE NUMBER ~~ ~- ~i~ TELEPHONE NUMBER ~~ ~~~'~ ~V~ ~~~'~ --A TELEPHONE NUMBER S1 A ~ _. SIGNATURE ~r ~:~~C .~, ~ ~i`~~ SIGNATURE ~ti ~ 9_~.~/~l~ ~ ~'~ vU ~,/ / ~ ~~i :~ ~ _~~~ d" % i )~'i i~', ~', if NAME ADDRESS TELEPHONE NUt4BER SIGNATURE .. NOTICE OF HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN pursuant to the Ordinances of the AMBROSE, iTZGERI1lD CROOIfSTON nanM uy cw~~«w. '.o. eo. u~ .now, ~e.no paz onon.eeeas~ City of Meridian and the laws of the State of Idaho, that the Planning and Zoning .Commission of the City of Meridian will hold a public hearing at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho, at the hour of 7:30 o'clock p.m., on May 8, 1990, for the purpose of reviewing and considering the Application of Alice Culver for a rezone of a portion of the _ - - N.E. 1/4 of S. W. 1/4 of Section 1 T. 3 N. R. 1 W., Boise Meridian, Misty Meadows Subdivision, Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, from R-4 Residential to R-8 Residential. Hearing will also be held on Applicant's requests approval of a preliminary plat of Misty Meadows-Sub0i:Jision--which is to be located on the above described property, which requested approval is of approximately 12.89 acres for- R-8 Residential for 58 single family building lots. The property is generally located at NW --°° . - - _ 8th Street 1/4 mile--North of Cherry Lane. - A more particular legal description is on file in the office of the Ga=ty--~1--e~k-~-f---tie-i;ity of Meridian and is available upon rega-est -- ---- - - - ---- - - ----- ~_ _ _ - - Public commen-t is we~cs~r~-and-w#al _be-taken sand heard.' _ -- - - , DATED thi~~_- day~of April, 1990. - d~fK N3fMAN CITY CLERK -- ~_ ._.. . . i "~ O . __ h E a a p1 _ s . ~ D wu t~ u qlf u i -.. - si• ' -- -- ~ ~zt is ~ r t ° ~ a ~ ~ . •. _ .I ~ ~ ~ I o Z ^ I A _. , a .~ ~ R -_ ~ , ^ _ ~ • i O v tl ~ U k µ' a a t t N.W.15 ST. t ~_ __. • = N N D ^ ~ __ __ S• ~ __ _ ! ° • i O f ° t T O {I t_ D :~ .r w" 97 _ 7t S v ~ ~ t d l ~ m • ^ ^ ^ ~ m ~ i ° . ° ~. ll ~. R . a 14 N. W t TH SL t ~ q a 1 t ~_ ~ .« .. ~ V -J .• at t v ~ P a ai ~ • ai i^l .Y91 1u ~VL ~ ~ I i ~ ~ ~ • • • - . _i .a ..a ~ rv !~ ° ^ n• r t1 .. rd ~' e °' ~•~~ tl - as tl o°r it Sr 7 I Lt + y P ..y1 • o w f i , e/ ~ °' t 9 U ' ~ r. I' °. p ~ • SI t i C• ~° !q`i~~° e to ~~ ti.~. .. O }•~ ~ i a tl N fl ' ° I ..__' _..___-.'_ ' a . a ° fa ' . «. t i tl " i li bs • ff '. " ~ i e • . e a~ ! ~ °~ f r ~ `I a It ~t 4 q !1 Z 1 ~ ~. 4 ~ a. H "`~~~ • / 12T ST ~ / r a ° 4 .. 1 a' i I ~ , N.W. @TH ~~w y . y H I .. nr ti aw' s. ~ r 1 a t a 1 • 1 S^ jj .~.. .. .. ... , .a ,. ! + 1• • t ° ~ s I i 'I i; t: . _ r • s wrra. ~ b.. tl ` ' . l . C~sl . O ~rt S tt 'E ^ _ • y V - ~~N.W. Ith AVE. 1 F _ f f • •' ... r ~1 • ~ % -a ~ a - • f y j _I ~ ? kr • ~ • O Y 1 a tt C • p 0 0 p r. » w a nnr ewa^ NW. Illh t • . y n y y \ 1 • a . ., a , ~ y • . a4 a a i a s i 6 a 2 F I i N 7! ~ ° ! = ° y ! a 1 r p 1 ~ ' - ~ ce • 7 . C a C S ° ^ ~ .~ • a ` Y e "' ~ . .. ....... ~ a g @ SR R E E T ~' wa tr. araa /m. t i4m N.W. 10th AVE. ~ a e 3 ~ ~ s"' ~ i a • ~ ~ S • ~ _ - i v ~' ~ t ~ • _ a6- E:~ ~n ~ = ~ • n ~ i. O m P . • w ° +fy ~ sa/.l - y .~i 3k C ~~~ .. .. ~ c t ^ i '~ s ~ •r tt n is ~• ° ~ (^(rr:c i^j6it t ,PLC S rta roar aaat t: O~ o= !i 1 ;- f r `• ` t t _ ~ i m a„ ^' • _ 0 ~ I ~, BEFORE THE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION CITY OF MERIDIAN'S APRIL 1990 APPLICATION TO AMEND THE MERIDIAN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AMSROSE, FITZGERAI.D d CROOKSTON Attorneys ano Counaelon P.O. Boz 42] McMCian, IEMo 83842 TelepMne 8884481 The above entitled application to amend the Meridian Comprehensive Plan having come on for public hearing on May 8, 1990, at 7:30 o'clock p.m., and the Planning and Zoning Commission having heard any and all testimony that was submitted, including judicial knowledge, and including its knowledge of existing plans for the areas under consideration and having duly considered all the evidence, officially noticed evidence and the facts of the Comprehensive Plan itself, the Local Planning Act of 1975, the Planning and Zoning Commission makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. That the Application was submitted by the Planning and Zoning Commission and is an amendment proposed by the commission. 2. That there are two parcels of property specifically involved in this Application which are i) the area between Ustick Road and One Quarter Mile North of Ustick Road, FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1 basically extending from Blackcat Road to Eagle Road, and 2) the Northeast Quadrant of the intersection of Eagle Road and Interstate I-84; that there are other changes being proposed which do not relate to any specific parcel of property, but are text amendments; that the Application of the Planning and Zoning Commission to amend the Meridian Comprehensive Plan is hereby incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 3. That the two specific parcels of property to which the Application applies are contained within the Meridian Area of Impact, are not contained within the City Limits of the City of Meridian, and are zoned by the County and not by the City of Meridian. 4. That there has been developed in the City of Boise a AMBROSE, FITZG ERAID A OROOKSTON Allorneye ene Counealon D.o. eo..v MerlGlen, IENo S38/S TeIaDKOne e8B~M81 Regional Shopping Center; that a Regional Shopping Center has very little likelihood, if any, of being developed at the intersection of Eagle Road and I-84. 5. That the specific property to which the Application deals with regarding the Urban Service Planning Area boundary change is between Ustick Road and One Quarter Mile North of Ustick Road is used for residential acreages, pasture land and farm ground. 6. The reasons for the proposed amendments are stated in the Application. 7. That there are factual changes within the area covered by the Comprehensive Plan and they include 1) that the Eagle Road Interchange at I-84 is completed and is not just planned or FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 2 encouraged, 2) that a Regional Shopping Center has been constructed in Boise and is a fact and it is therefore quite likely that no Regional Shopping Center will be constructed in the City of Meridian or within its Area of Impact for some years in the future, 3) that Ada County has changed its rural area policies and now allows for some five (5) acre developments; 4) the City Hall complex has been completed and it includes a new police station, 5) that it is likely that there will be no branch office of the Ada County Prosecutors Office and not likely to have a separate judge with chambers in Meridian, and there was in fact no jail Constructed in the new City Hall, and the City uses the Ada County Jail; 6) that Eagle Road is planned for and is presently being constructed and improvement to a five and six lane road from Overland Road to Fairview Avenue and will be continued to be improvement through to Chinden Blvd., 7) that it is likely that development will continue around the Interchange of Eagle Road and Fairview Avenue and will continue North, 8) that residential development is pushing westward from Boise into the areas between Cloverdale Road and Eagle Road, and 9) that there is an Application presently pending for development for a commercial facility at an intersection where one corner is already zoned as a commercial development. 8. That the Comprehensive Plan itself recognizes that if AMBROSE, FITZGERALD B CROOKSTON Attomeya and Coonaelora P.O. Boy 027 MeriElen, IEeho 838x2 Telephone BBB-N81 it is to be useful and effective it should not be filed away and should be continually reviewed and updated. The recommendations within the Comprehensive Plan should not be interpreted as FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 3 unalterable commitments, but rather as a reflection of the best foreseeable direction at a given point in time. It is recommended by the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission that at least a yearly review shall be held of the Comprehensive Plan to update and/or reaffirm the Plan to fit the changing needs as well as unforseen planning problems and opportunities. 9. That Ada County's change of rural development now allowing five (5) acre tracts poses substantial possibilities for adverse impact upon ground water from private septic systems as evidenced by development in the southwestern portion of the Boise Metropolitan Area; that to avoid sewer effluent's adverse impacts it is necessary to plan and require sewer and water plans and facilities in areas where possible and likely residential development will occur in the hopes of preventing adverse sewer impacts in the five (5) acre tract development areas. 10. That there are a substantial number of text amendments AMBROSE, FITZG ERALO B CROONBTON Attorneys and Counselors P.O. Box ~~l Marl0len, Idaho &'1812 Talepftone 888-t,Bl of a clerical or typographical error nature and no specific findings or conclusions need to be made regarding them. 11. That there are areas within the City Limits of the City where more than one commercial development has occurred at an intersection, and the refusal to allow commercial development in the future on more than one corner of an intersection may not be preferable, and there are other ways of limiting strip development than just allowing only one development at an intersection. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 4 12. That under Economic Policies it states in part as follows: 1) The City of Meridian shall make every effort to create a positive atmosphere which encourages industrial and commercial enterprises to locate in the City of Meridian. 2) It is the policy of the City of Meridian to set aside areas where commercial and industrial interests and activities are to dominate. 5) Stripping of industrial and commercial uses are not in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. 6) It is the policy of the City of Meridian to support shopping facilities which are effectively integrated into existing residential areas and plan for new shopping centers as growth and development warrant. 13) With regard to Commercial Activity Centers and their locations the Plan states at Page 20 as follows: In all cases, the locations of Commercial Activity Centers should be guided by performance and development standards. These standards consider, among other aspects: Traffic Volume and Type Trip Generation Impacts on Arterial Street System Proximity to Other Commercial Development Impacts on Neighborhood Residential Areas Accessibility of Site Parking Demands Pedestrian Circulation Available Utility Systems Aesthetics (Design Considerations) Use Impacts Upon Other Adjacent Uses Internal Circulation Design Drainage 14) That the Plan also states at Page 22 that Neighborhood Commercial Centers should not be located at more than one corner of an intersection. AMBROSE, FITZG ERALD 80ROOKSTON Albrneyn enC Couneelom P.O. Bo. ~P1 MsrlElen, IEe~o BSB12 Te1ePKOne BSe~l~81 CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 5 1. That the procedural requirements of the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, hereafter referred to as the "Plan", and of the Local Planning Act, Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, including all notice and hearing requirements have been met; that the Planning and Zoning Commission has authority to amend the Comprehensive Plan. 2. That the Application was initiated by the Planning and Zoning Commission and not by any individual or private entity. 3. That the Commission may take judicial or official notice of existing conditions in the City, County and State, and of governmental actions, policies and ordinances and of its own prior findings in other land use Applications and those of the City Council. 4. That the function of adopting, amending, or repealing AM BROSE, F1T2G ERAlD S CROOKSTON Attornaya antl Counaelora P.O. Box d]] Meritlian, Itla~o B3Sd2 TelepNOne BBB~dd81 a Comprehensive Plan is a legislative function. Burt vs. The City of Idaho Falls, 105 Idaho 65, 665 P.2d 1075 (1983). That even though this is a legislative function, the Local Planning Act requires that Findings of fact and Conclusions be made for any Application provided for in the Act. 5. That the Application itself is concluded to meet the requirements of the Amendment Provision and Procedures of the Plan; that it is concluded that the Application does not affect all components of the Comprehensive Plan and therefore those components other than land use and economic development are concluded not to be relevant to this Application. 6. That it was previously concluded in prior FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 6 Comprehensive Plan Amendments that the Plan can be amended to reflect "Good Planning" and the desires and goals of the citizens and the City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission, as the citizens representatives. 7. That the Plan is what it says it is. It is a Plan. The Plan itself states that it "Summarizes Policies and Proposals and does not develops detailed site plans". The comment to the Policy Diagram indicates that the Diagram " is to be used as a general guide for land use decision-making, not as a legalistic or literal and definitive map". The Plan therefore should be liberally construed but still maintained as the functional guideline for land use decisions; i.e., the Plan policies and objectives cannot be willingly disregarded when there is an apparent conflict between the Plan and the proposed use. The City has the duty to continually plan; that the Commission treats amendments proposed either by private entities or the City itself as part of the planning duty and function. 8. That there has been significant changes in the area AMSROSE, FITZG ERALD B CROO KSTON Attorneys enE Counselors P.O. Box dZ] MatlEian, IESho 83862 Telephone BeS~<det warranting changes in the Comprehensive Plan; that one of those changes is the fact that a regional shopping center has been constructed in Boise and it is concluded to be very unlikely that an additional one will be constructed at the specific site location dealt with in the Application. That another significant change is the change by the Ada County Commissioners to allow development of five (5) acre tracts within the unincorporated areas of Ada County; also the changes along Eagle FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 7 ~~. r • • AM BROSE, FITZGERALD B CROOKSTON Attorneys and Counselors P.O. Boa lZ] MerlElan, ICMo e3esi TeleOAOne BBe-a81 Road also constitute substantial and significant changes in the area warranting changes in the Comprehensive Plan. 9. That it is concluded that the current statement in the Plan that no more than one corner of an intersection should be developed commercially with a neighborhood center is too restrictive, that each intersection development must be treated on a case by case basis; and that the location guidelines for Activity Centers on Page 20 of the Plan are sufficient to guide location of all types of Activity Centers; it is further concluded that development of more than one corner of an intersection commercially does not necessarily lead to strip development, but may reduce tendency for strip development. 10. That the Commission concludes that the facts presented and the officially noticed facts are sufficient to amend the Plan. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 8 r r L u 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 Hepper Commissioner Rountree Commissioner Shearer Commissioner Alidjani Chairman Johnson (Tie Breaker) RECOMMENDATION Voted~_ Voted i~r~` Voted Voted Voted The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council that the Planning and Zoning Commission's proposed Amendments to the Meridian Comprehensive Plan should be approved and adopted. MOTION: APPROVED: /' DISAPPROVED: AMBROSE, FITZGERAID B CROOKSTON Attorneys antl Counselors P.O. Boz a2T Marltlian, Itlaho BBBa2 Telephone BBB-NB1 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 9