Loading...
1989 11-14 A G E N D A MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING NOVENIDER 14, 1989 ITEM: MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING BEND OCTOBER 10, 1989: l: FINDIIVGS OF FACT' AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW ON REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BY PETER COVIIQO & AMYX FAMILY LTD: (APPROVED - RECOMMENDATION MADE TO COUNCIL) 2: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BY SANDY BRADEN:(FINDINGS OF FACT TO BE PREPARED) 3: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERD7IT BY TERRY MOORE: (FINDINGS OF FACT TO BE PREPARED) 4: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION & ZONING W/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BY SCHULTZ & OLSON: (FINDINGS OF FACT TO BE PREPARED) 5: PUBLIC HEARING: AMENDMENTS TO THE ZONING & DEVEUJPMENT ORDINANCE: (APPROVED) MERIDIAN PLANNING 8 ZONING NOV. 14 198y Regular Meeting of the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission called to order by Chairman Jim Johnson at 7:30 p. m.: Members Present: Jim Shearer, Charlie Rountree, Tim Hepper: Members Absent: Moe Alid~ani: Others Present: Jerry Teal, D.R. Lynn Stutzman, Vonda Yerby, Rene' Yerby, Phil Yerby, Pete Covino, Sandy Braden, Terry Moore, Larry Chetwood, Art Finnell, Dale Ownby, Richard Robertson, William H. Olson, Wayne Crookston: The Motion was made by Shearer and seconded by Rountree to approve the Minutes of the previous meeting held October 10, 1989 as written: Motion Carried: All Yea: ITEM #1: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW ON RE9UEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BY PETER COVINO 8 AMYX FAMILY LTD: Chairman Johnson: Is there any questions or discussion. There was no response. The Motion was made by Rountree and seconded by Shearer to hereby adopt and approve of these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as written: Roll Call Vote: Hepper - Yea; Rountree - Yea; Shearer - Yea; Motion Carried: All Yea: The Motion was made by Rountree and seconded by Shearer that the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council of the City of Meridian that the Council either table this matter or deny it until such time as a Certificate of Zoning Compliance can be issued for the premises and if such is obtained by the Applicants the Commission then could recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit requested by the Applicant for the property described in the application, subject to the conditions stated herein. Motion Carried: All Yea: ITEM #2: PUBLIC HEARING: RE9UEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BY SANDY BRADEN: Chairman Johnson: Is Sandy Braden present, please come forward and be sworn by the Attorney. MERIDIAN PLANNING 8 ZONING NOVEMBER 14, 1989 PAGE #2 Sandy Braden, 524 E. State Ave., Meridian, was sworn by the Attorney. Chairman Johnson: Are there any Commission members with questions of Sandy. Hepper: Did you get the comments from the City Engineer and the Ada County Highway District? Do you have any problems with those? Braden: Are they saying that I have to put in a curb and a sidewalk? Johnson: What that is is a standard response to a Conditional Use Permit Request. It's been the policy of the City in the past that we do not require those until which time the entire area is improved. Braden: So are there any immediate changes I need to make to my property. Johnson: Not with respect to the County, no. Hepper: How many children are you going to be watching. Braden: Probably no more than 8 but I want to be licensed to have up to twelve. Hepper: Is there any problem with traffic congestion? Braden: Right now they arrive and are picked up at different times so there is no problem. Johnson: This property is located at 524 E. State not 534 as we've used several times. The area in the back appeared to me to be all fenced, is that right. Braden: Yes that is correct. Johnson: I will now open the Public Hearing on this request. Is there anyone present who wishes to testify on this request. There was no response. The Public Hearing was closed. The Motion was made by Hepper and seconded by Shearer to have the Attorney prepare the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for a Conditional Uae Permit for Sandy Braden. Motion Carried: All Yea: MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING NOVEMBER 14, 1989 PAGE k:3 The Motion was made by Rountree and seconded by Shearer to include with the Findings and Facts a recommendation to the City Council for approval. Motion Carried: All Yea: ITEM #~3: PUBLIC HEARING: REBUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BY TERRY MOORE: Chairman Johnson: Is Mr. Moore present, please come forward and be sworn by the Attorney. Mr. Chairman, if it is permissible I am Mr. Moore's architect and he has asked me to represent him. Jerry Teal, 4090 West State, Boise, was sworn by the Attorney. Teal: I have with me a drawing to show. The structure will be a 48x48 foot building constructed 1n the SE corner of the lot, we have a concrete block structure painted with similar graphite ae to what is on the existing building now which they will be using as a office structure. We have no objections to the comments that were made except Item #tl on the comments which they would like to ask for some alleviation. The site is totally paved and grated et this time and to change it to meet those particular requirements would mean tearing up the pavement and creating considerable additional expense. Shearer: I don't have a problem with this project but in the past the vehicle repair shops and auto body shops and so on and we seem to end up with almost a wrecking yard in some of these and I would really like to have some assurance from your client that we are not going to have that kind of effect here. Teal: They have the shop apace right now to keep the vehicles inside and if there should become a point in the future that there would be a need for additional storage, then it was there concern to construct a site obscuring enclosure for impound. Rountree: I just reinforce those same concerns as Mr. Shearer. Was it ever a service station before? Moore: There are no underground tanks and there is sufficient vegetation growing around the outside. Basically, the only way we make any money is working on fairly new cars and we are not interested in having any type of junky operation. MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING NOVEMBER 14, 1989 PAGE #4 Attorney Crookston: What type of automotive work, body repair or are we talking engine repair? Teal: Body repair. Johnson: I have a question concerning the fencing, particular in the south side area, there is an inadequate fence there now which is probably a fence that was put up by the property owner behind the south there. That area has to be fenced as I understand it. Crookston: What kind of chemicals, paints or thinners, things like that, what kind of precautions are you going to have so that those don't get into the ground or the atmosphere. Teal: As far as the particulates from the overspray and that sort of thing, those are swept up and of course floors are hosed down to. Crookston: Which building is going to be the paint building? Teal: The one we are going to construct will be used for painting. Hepper: Will this building have a separate paint booth or will the whole building be used for painting. Teal: One half of the building in affect be a booth. There will be a concrete wall down the middle. Chairman Johnson: I will now open the Public Hearing, is there anyone present who wishes to testify on this issue? If so please come forward and be sworn in by the Attorney. Renee'Yerby, 1620 2 1/2 Street, Meridian, was sworn by the Attorney. Yerby: I am the owner of the house to the south of the proposed construction and we would like to know specifically what kind of barrier will be put up between us and the new buildings. We plan on having a vegetable garden and we have two kids that play outside. We just have concerns about our kids getting into chemicals or anything that might be spilled or whatever. Rountree: Do you have anything in mind in terms of the area or are you just wondering what might be put in there. Yerby: I would like to see a solid type fence that would keep out a paint spill or chemical. I feel there needs to be a visual barrier between also to keep our kids out of that area. MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING NOVEMBER 14, 1989 PAGE #~5 Shearer: What kind of a fence do we have there now? Johnson: A picket fence about 3 feet high. Is there anyone else from the public who wishes to testify. Being no response, the Public Hearing was closed. Shearer: If they are doing body work and painting in the building then overspray would not be a problem. Rountree: I'm trying to recall the response from Mr. Moore about a fence. Terry Moore, 4763 Ridgeview, Meridian, was sworn by the Attorney. Johnson: We will now re-open the Public Hearing so that this testimony can be heard. Moore: He has a legitimate concern. What we would propose along that line would be a chain link fence, maybe a 48" foot chaln link. For our benefit we would probably put 1n a 5 or 6 foot chain link and if mandatory then we would put in the slats and that would the visual buffer. Rountree: The other concern is about a potential spill. Moore: Very low risk. With the new rules that are in effect we will probably one of the cleaner neighbors to be by. Johnson: Would you object if we made the fence part of our recommendation. Moore: The fence will go down the dividing line, from 2 1/2 Street to Bodine's property. Hepper: Do you do any spraying outside or are the doors open while you are spraying. Moore: No. Doors are always closed when spraying. Johnson: We will close the Public Hearing, is there anyone else who wishes to say anything, being no response, the Public Hearing was closed. The Motion was made by Rountree and seconded by Shearer to have the Findings and Facts and Conclusions of Law prepared by the Attorney. Motion Carried: All Yea: MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING NOVEMBER 14, 1989 PAGE #6 The Motion was made by Rountree and seconded by Shearer to recommend approval by the City Council with the stipulation that a chain link fence be installed with a minimum of 60" high. Crookston: Did you want to address the slats in the fence in your recommendation. Shearer: Is that a commercial piece of property. The Motion was amended by Rountree and seconded by Hepper to include that the chain link include slats to provide visual barrier. Motion Carried: All Yea: ITEM #4: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION & 20NING W/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BY SCHULT2 8 OLSON: Chairman Johnson: Is there a representative present, please come forward and be sworn by the Attorney. Dale Ownby, 1195 East Overland, Meridian, was sworn by the Attorney. Ownby: This is a unique piece of property. There is approximately 45 feet of frontage on Locust Grove Road and it widens out to a point of 95 feet wide, as the applicatlon indicates he plans on putting modular homes are here for sale. As far as water and sewer, these modular homes not being permanent probably would use one of these chemical toilets for any use of their customers or sales people. Assume in time we would probably drill a well. It was dust fenced about four years ago. The property does not have a water right. Shearer: Is this contiguous with our existing City limits. Ownby: Yes, it is. Property zoned Commercial on the North aide of the street. Shearer: Why did you want to annex into the City of Meridian. Ownby: They said that's completely up to the City. Crookston: What's the access to the property for emergency vehicles. Ownby: It would be the 45 ft. along Locust Grove, what Mr. Olson proposed to do would be to set a new fence back probably anywhere i • MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING NOVEMBER 14, 1989 PAGE N7 from 50 to 100 ft. back off of Locust Grove so that the 45 foot plus the 60 foot road would be adequate for 60 & 70 foot trailers to be pulled in. Crookston: What's the closest property on the south side of the freeway. Ownby: It would be the E1 Peso Natural Gas Company. Rountree: We haven't received any comments from the Ada County Highway District yet, but I anticipate them having the same concerns I have and that's there is not enough room down at the end of Locust Grove to turn around, it looks like there needs to be a T-type turn around or a minimum of 40 or 50 foot radius type turning circle at the end of the street in order to accommodate Ownby: I think that would be taken care of by that somewhere between 50 and 100 feet setback back into the property so that any customers, clients or emergency vehicles, it would be very easy. Rountree: There is also a comment from the Nampa Meridian Irrigation District, I couldn't tell by looking at the parcel about any irrigation that went through the property. Are there any? Ownby: No there are none. Hepper: Would he be parking the trailers on the grass? Ownby: No, the top soil will have to be taken off and gravel put in. Hepper: Would that also be sterilized, or the weeds maintained. Johnson: What kind of signage would you propose. Ownby: The signage proposed would be a Bonner Type such as canvas or a temporary type on each home. Johnson: How about hours of business. Are we talking new and used. Ownby: Hours would be only daylight hours. Primarily new units, with the possibility of some used. Johnson: What would you anticipate the total number of units you would have there. NOVEMBER 14, 1989 PAGE A~8 Ownby: It's 1320 feet long, and you would have to leave something like 100 feet off the west end and 100 feet off of the east end, so approximately 1100 feet of useable property to display those. As high as ten (10) units at one time. Crookston: Modular Home are we talking mobile homes or pre- manufactured homes. Ownby: Pre-manufactured modular homes. Olson: Manufactured houses, most of these will be doubles. They' 11 meet the new codes of any of the zoning of the new HUD codes. The footing and foundation will become a piece of real property. Crookston: This is dust a sales operation, right. Ownby: Strictly sales, no repair. Chairman Johnson: The Public Hearing is now open. If there is anyone who wishes to testify please come forward and be sworn by the attorney. Richard Robertson, 1495 S. Locust Grove Rd., Meridian, was sworn by the Attorney. Robertson: I have two concerns, one is the kind of fences that will be used around the perimeter and when you elevate the ground. Through my irrigation what's going to happen to my piece of property, because right now everything that I got dumps right into it. Johnson: They both run into that ditch. Robertson: Not on the irrigation. Ownby: It is not possible for Mr. Olson to use this property for what he is proposing without raising it up to a level so that no water will come on it. Rountree: What about the fencing issue. Ownby: The fence that is there is a barb wire fence that was put in sometime in the last six years. William H. Olson, 3204 S. Indianna, Caldwell, Idaho, was sworn by the Attorney. NOVEMBER 14, 1989 PAGE #9 Olson: On the water situation with Mr. Robertson, we'd be glad to work with him. When we build our base up, I will bring a tractor over and ditch a smell waste ditch down to where it flows to the waste ditch. I don't think we'd have any problem with crime in that area. In Caldwell we do have a six foot high fence because we are in a high crime area. I think barb wire fence would be enough. We'll be glad to work with Mr. Robertson as far as the water. Johnson: Is there anyone else who wishes to testify, being no response the Public Hearing was closed. The Motion was made by Rountree and seconded by Shearer to have the attorney prepare the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. Motion Carried: All Yea: The Motion was made by Hepper and seconded by Rountree to recommend to the Meridian City Council that they approve of the annexation and zoning for the Conditional Use Permit by Schultz & Olson. Motion Carried: All Yea: ITEM #5: PUBLIC HEARING: AMENDMENTS TO THE 20NING & DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE. Johnson: I will now open the Public Hearing, is there anyone who wishes to testify, being no response the Public Hearing was closed. Rountree: I have one comment, it relates to the Kennel definition #11. We again get ourselves in conflict with another section of the Ordinance, so is there some way to correct this to affect all other sections. Shearer: I was wondering where we came up with 2 dogs, normally they have three in Ada County and Boise before they go into a kennel permit, isn't it. Why are we going 10 ft. with a 45 and 9 ft. with the rest of it for the parking. There was further discussion on this. The Motion was made by Rountree and seconded by Shearer to have the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law prepared and recommend approval to the City Council with the corrections that were discussed. Motion Carried: All Yea: NOVEMBER 14, 1989 PAGE: #10 Being no further business to come before the Commission the Motion ryas made by Hepper and seconded by Rountree to adjourn at 8:30 p. m. . APPROVED: J611-M-~JOrH+ SON, CHAIRMAN ATTEST: JAC19 AIE4fANN/ CITY CLERK May6r & Council P & Z Members, Atty, Eng., Bldg, Fire, Stuart, Ward, Gase, Police, ACRD, Valley News, Statesman, NIMD, Hallett, CDH, ACC MAIL (4) FILE (4) ~ Y i • BEFORE THE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SANDY BRADEN CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 524 EAST STATE MERIDIAN, IDAHO AMBROSE, FITZG ERALD S CROOKSTON Attomeyn end Couneelore P.O. Boz 127 Meritllan, IEeho 89812 TBIeDhonl888~/081 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS The above entitled matter having come on for public hearing November 14, 1989, 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 Conditional Use Permit was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to the said public hearing scheduled for November 14, 1989, the first publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly considered at the November 14, 1989, 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 is owned by Petitioner and is described in the application which description is incorporated herein. 3. That the property is zoned R-8 Residential, which requires a conditional use permit for the operation of a group child care home, caring for less than 13 children, which is the use the application requests; that such use requires a conditional use permit in any zone where allowed. 4. That the R-8 District is described in the Zoning Ordinance, 11-2-408 6. 2 as follows: (R-8) MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT: The purpose o~the (R- District 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. 5. That the day car use proposed by Applicant is an allowed conditional use in the R-8 district if it does not violate subdivision covenants or deed restrictions, which according to the application submitted by the Applicant, it does not. 6. That the other property in the area is used residentially. 7. That proper notice has been given as required by law AMBR08E, FITZG ERALD S CROONSTON Allorneya 6nE Counealora P.O. Box R7 MariElan, IEMo 83862 TeIeDIIDna 8886681 and all procedures before the Planning and Zoning Commission have been given and followed. 8. That the subject property is presently used as a residence and and family home. 9. Traffic will not be a problem. 10. That sewer and water is already connected to the property, but the use may require additional charges or fees. Also, the City Engineer submitted comments which are incorporated herein as if set forth in full herein. 11. That the applicant has obtained the required 75% of the signatures of owners of lots within 300 feet of the subject property showing approval of the application. 12. That there was no testimony submitted in opposition to the application. 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; including obtaining the consent of 75% 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 Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian; and 3. That the City of Meridian has authority to place AMBROSE, FIT2GERALD B CROOKSTON Atmrneya end Coonaelora P.O. Boa ~2T MarlElan, IEaKo 838a2 Teleplwrie BBBJ~S1 conditions on a conditional use permit and the use of the property pursuant to 67-6512, Idaho Code, and pursuant to 11-2- 418(D) of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian, Idaho; 4. That ii-2-418(C) of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian sets forth the standards under which the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council shall review applications for Conditional 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, constituted a conditional use and a conditional use permit would be required by ordinance. b. The use would be harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan but the Zoning Ordinance requires a conditional use permit to allow the use. c. The use apparently would be designed and constructed, to be harmonious in appearance with the intended character of the general vicinity. d. That the use would not be hazardous nor should it be disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses. e. The property has sewer and water service available. f. The use would not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and the use would not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. g. The use would not involve a use, activity, process, material, equipment or conditions of operation that would be detrimental to person, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic or noise. gMBROSE, FITZG ERALO dCROOKSTON gllomeye and Counselors G.O. Boz e2T Merldlen, Itla~o BJBeY Telephone 88&1181 h. That sufficient parking for the property and the proposed use will be required. i. The development and uses will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of major importance. 5. It is further concluded that the comments, recommendations and requirments of the City Engineer wilt have to met and complied with. 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 VOTED ~ _ COMMISSIONER ROUNTREE VOTED qq %`Ifi~~l~~~ COMMISSIONER SHEARER VOTED X ~~ COMMISSIONER ALIDJANI VOTED CHAIRMAN JOHNSON (TIE BREAKER) VOTED ~~ DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby AMBROSE, FIT2GERALD SCROOKSTON A~torneya antl Couneelora P.O. Bov l27 Marltllen, IEeAo BJ814 TBIaDIIORa BBBMeI recommends to the City Council of the City of Meridian that they approve the Conditional Use Permit requested by the Applicant for the property described in the application with the conditions set forth in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and that the property be required to meet the water and gMBROSE, FIIZG ERALO B CROOKSTON sewer requirements, the fire and life safety codes, and the Uniform Building Code, and other Ordinances of the City of Meridian. MOTION: APPROVED: gltorneys end Couneelon pG~„~„ FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Mer~alen. ltleftp P a g e - 6 ex~x Telspflone BBBJMI DISAPPROVED: BEFORE THE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MOORE, WURST & CHETWOOD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 225 EAST FAIRVIEW AVENUE MERIDIAN, IDAHO FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The above entitled matter having come on for public hearing November 14, 1989, 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 of Law: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. That a notice of public hearing on the Conditional Use AMBROBE, FITZGERALD BCROOKSTON Altorneyn AnE Counselors F.G. BoY 121 MerlElen, IOeno 83812 TeleDlane 888-181 Permit was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to the said public hearing scheduled for November 14, 1989, the first publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly considered at the November 14, 1989 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 S tdtlOnS; 2. That this property is located within the City of AMBROSE, FITZG ERALO d CROOKSTON Atlomeye enE Counselors P.O. ear ~Y] MerlElen, IEeho &YU] Teleplrone BBBJ~81 Meridian and is owned by the Applicant, Larry Chetwood, and is described in the application, which description is incorporated herein as if set forth in full; the property is generally described as at the southeast corner of East 2 1/2 Street and Fairview Avenue; that the property fronts on Fairview Avenue; the proposed use of the property is to operate an auto body and recreational vehicle repair business. 3. That the property has been used for commercial businesses for some period of time in the past, and particularly as an automobile sales lot. The parcel is apparently zoned R-8 according to the present zoning maps but this zoning also appears to have been an over sight as when the 1984 Zoning Ordinance was passed the property was then in use as an automobile sales lot which, under the 1984 Zoning Ordinance, the parcel should have been zoned (C-G) General Retail and Service Commercial. The surrounding property is zoned either Community Commercial or General Retail and Service Commercial and the property surrounding was so zoned at the time of the passage of the 1984 Zoning Ordinance to conform the zoning to the then existing use of the property. Since the property was being used as an Automobile sales lot at the time of the passage of the 1984 Zoning Ordinance, it should have been zoned (C-G), General Retail and Service Commercial which is the only zone that allows automobile sales lots under a conditional use. That the City of Meridian has in the past stated that the particular piece of property was commercially zoned and the property is taxed as commercial property according to the official tax records of Ada County. 4. It is therefore found that the zoning of the parcel should be General Retail and Service Commercial and the parcel shall be so treated. The C-G General Retail and Service Commercial District requires a conditional use permit for the operation of the use the application requests. 5. That the C-G District is described in the Zoning Ordinance, 11-2-408 B. 9 as follows: (C-G) GENERAL RETAIL AND SERVICE COMMERCIAL: The purpose o the - istrictis to provide for commercial uses which are customarily operated entirely or almost entirely within a building; to provide for a review of the impact of proposed commercial uses which are auto and service oriented and are located in close proximity to major highway or arterial streets; to fulfill the need of travel-related services as well as retail sales for the transient and permanent motoring public. All such districts shall be connected to the Municipal Water and Sewer systems of the City of Meridian, and shall not constitute strip commercial development and encourage clustering of commercial development. 6. That the use proposed by the Applicant is an enumerated allowed conditional use in the C-G District. 7. That the property to the west is a self-service AMBROSE, FITZG ERALD ECROONSTON Auomeys and Counselors P.O. Boz t27 MsM81an, IENo 83812 TelepMns BBN/61 gasoline station and a self-service car wash and is zoned Community Commercial; the property to the east is a bulk gasoline and oil distributor business and is zoned R-8 but the property has grandfather rights for the existing operation and like th subject property should have been zoned in 1984 to fit the then current use; the property to the south is a single family residence but is zoned R-8 rather than R-4; the property to the north is Fairview Avenue and the property north of Fairview Avenue is partially vacant ground, a seat cover business, a automobile transmission business, a tire shop, and other service and general retail operations largely automotive related and the property is zoned either Community Commercial or General Retail and Service Commercial. 8. That the immediate past use was for an automobile sales lot but the property is not being used at this time. 9. That proper notice has been given as required by law and all procedures before the Planning and Zoning Commission have been given and followed. 10. That the Applicant has submitted the names of the people owning property within 300 feet of the property but their approval of the use of the property is not required because the property is not a residential district. 11. That the occupant of the residence south of the parcel AMBROSE, FITZG ERALO &CROOKSTON Atlorneya and Counaelore P.O. Box ~Ry MerlAlen, Itlaho 87N2 TelaDllone BBBJ~Bt appeared at the hearing and voiced concerns over noise, fumes, both from chemicals and paints, and possible unsightliness that could result from the proposed business and was concerned about his small children being able to gain access to the parcel; that the Applicant agreed to place a 60 inch chain link with slats so that the view would be cut off from the house to the subject parcel and such that his children could not gain access; the Applicant further testified that there would be no paint or chemical fumes that would spread over to the house as those would used exclusively indoors and in accordance with applicable regulations; that applicant did not address the possible noise pollution that could result if not properly operated other than to say that the operation would be conducted indoors. 12. That the Zoning Ordinance does address specific provisions for commercial and industrial uses in Section 11-2- 413 of the Revised and Complied Ordinances of the City of Meridian and that section is incorporated herein as if set forth in full and is attached hereto for the Applicants' notice and information. CONCLUSIONS 1. That all the procedural requirements of the Local AMBROBE, FITZGERALD BCROOKBTON Attorneys and Counaelora P.O. Boa 12] MBhEISn, IEa~o B78/2 TBIpMne BBBJ~81 Planning Act and of the Ordinances of the City of Meridian have been met; including the mailing of notice to owners of property within 300 feet of the external boundaries of the Applicant's property. 2. That the City of Meridian has authority to grant conditional uses pursuant to 67-6512, Idaho Code, and, pursuant to 11-2-418 of the Revised and Complied Ordinances of the City of Meridian, Idaho; 3. That the City of Meridian has authority to place conditions on a conditional use permit and the use of the property pursuant to 67-6512, Idaho Code, and pursuant to 11-2- 418(D) of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian, Idaho; 4. That 11-2-418(C) of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian sets forth the standards under which the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council shall review applications for Conditional 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 preliminarily concludes as follows: a. The use, would in fact, constitute a conditional use and a conditional use permit is required by ordinance. b. The use, if operated in compliance with applicable building code, fire code, life safety code, and other applicable codes for the type of operation and materials and supplies used in the operation, would be harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan but the Zoning Ordinance requires a conditional use permit to allow the use. c. The use apparently would be designed and constructed, to be harmonious in appearance with the intended character of the general vicinity, such being designated as set forth in the definition of C-G as contained in Section 11-2-408 B 9. d. That from a zoning standpoint, the use should not be hazardous nor should it be disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses, if operated in accordance with the conditions contained herein. e. The sewer and water service availability is in doubt and something will have to be done to provide sewer and water. f. The use would not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and the use would not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. g. The use should 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, if operated in accordance with the requirements contained herein. AMRROSE, FIT2G ERALO BCROONSTON Atlorneye anE Gouneeloro P.O. eoe 62T MerlEian, IEetto 83861 TeleDNOne BBBa681 h. Sufficient parking for the property and the proposed use must be provided. i. The development and uses will not result in the AMBROSE, FITZOERALD B CROOKSTON Attorneys ane Couneelore P.O. BoM l27 MeriCien, IEMo &7812 Teleplwne 8884181 destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of major importance. 5. That comments may be submitted by the Ada County Highway District, the Idaho Transportation Department, the Central District Health Department, the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District, and the City Engineer; that those comments are incorporated herein and shall be a requirement for issuance of the conditional use permit at this time. 6. That all applicable fire, life safety, building codes, and other codes and regulations that pertain to the paints and chemicals and other associated materials and supplies that will be used in the business be met prior to occupancy and thereafter. 7. That due to the nature of the business and the closeness of the residential use on the south, it is concluded that the conditional use, if granted, will have to comply with, and be subject to, the requirements of Section i1-2-413 and the fire, life safety, building codes, and other regulations that may apply to the business and the materials and supplies that are used in the business; that the conditional use may be revoked for violation of any of these conditions including the failure to construct, and then maintain, the fence as above agreed to by the Applicant. 8. That also as a condition of issuance of the conditional use permit, if granted, the fence shall have to be constructed prior to occupancy. 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 Voted ~_ Commissioner Alidjani Voted~_ Commissioner Rountree Voted!i .CSC-L'~' Commissioner Shearer Voted~_ Chairman Johnson (Tie Breaker) Voted~_ DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION AMBROSE, FITZG ERALD 8 CROOKSTON 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, subject to the conditions stated herein. MOTION: APPROVED:~_ DISAPPROVED: Attorneys end G°""'°'°r' FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW R.o.eexazT P A G E - 8 Merltllen, ICelw BJNP Telepftone BBdd.181 d. The conversion is in compliance with all other relevant codes and ordinances. Z, Temporary Buildings: Temporary buildings, construction trailers, equipment, andermitted lonly einlanyo district dur'ng therperiod work may be p ro ress; however, such temporary the construction work is in p 9 facilities shall be removed upon completion of the construction work. Storage of such facilities or equipment beyond the -1 completion date of the project shall require a Certificate of Zoning Compliance authorized by the Administrator. 3. Required Trash Areas: All trash and/or garbage collection areas for commercial, industrial, and multi-family residential uses shall be enclosed on at least three (3) sides by a solid wall or fence of at least four (4) feet in height or within an 'ldin or structure. Adequate vehicular access to closed bui g arba e en of trash or g 9 ion and from such area or areas for collect as determined by the Administrator shall be provided. ~~j 2-413 B PROVISIONS FOR COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL USES 1. No land or building in any district shall be used or occupied in any manner creating dangerous, injurious, noxious, or other- wise objectionable conditions which could adversely affect the ~ surrounding areas or adjoining premises except that any use permitted by this Ordinance may be undertaken and maintained if acceptable measures and safeguards to reduce dangerous and objectionable conditions to acceptable limits as established by I', the following performance requirements: a. Fire Hazards: Any activity involving the use or storage of flammable or explosive materials shall be protected by adequate fire-fighting and fire-prevention equipment and by such safety devices as are normally used in the handling of any such material. SUCK hazards shall be kept removed from adjacent activities to a distance which is compatible with the potential danger involved as specified in the Uniform Fire Code and the National Safety Foundation publications; b. Radioactivit or Electrical Disturbances: No activity shall emit harmful radioactivity at any point adversely affecting the operation of any equipment at any point other than that of the creator of such disturbance; c. Noise: Objectionable noise which is due to volume, fre- quency, or beat shall be muffled aratuseCUSed solelyllfor Air-raid sirens and related app public purposes are exempt from this requirement; -54- 2-413 d. Vibration: No vibration shall be permitted which is discernible without instruments on an adjoining lot or property. e. Air Pollution: Air pollution shall be subject to the requirements and regulations established by the Health Authorities; f. Glare: No direct or reflected glare shall be permitted which is visible from any property outside an industrial district or from any street; g- Erosion: No erosion by man, wind, or water shall be permitted which will carry objectionable substances onto neighboring properties; h. Water Pollution: Water pollution shall be subject to the requirements and regulations established by the Health Authorities; 2. Enforcement Provisions: The Administrator, prior to [he issuance of a Certificate of Zoning Compliance, may require the submission of statements and plans indicating the manner in which dangerous and objectionable elements involved in the processing and in equipment operations are to be eliminated or reduced to accepta- ble limits and tolerances; 3. Measurement Procedures: Methods and procedures for the determi- nation of the existence of any dangerous and objectionable elements shall conform to applicable standard measurement procedures published by the American Standards Institute, New York, the Manufacturing Chemists' Association, Inc., Washington, D.C., the United States Bureau of Mines, and the Health Author- ity; Section 13.03. C PROVISIONS FOR UNIQUE LAND USES Certain unique land uses pose special problems that may have detrimen- tal influences on surrounding land uses. The following performance standards for such unique land uses shall be adhered to in addition to all other provisions of this ordinance. 1. Accessory Buildings: a. All parts of an accessory building shall be located within the lot of ownership. Where an alley has been vacated, permitted accessory uses may be located at the centerline of such alley, provided: (1) Proof of ownership is established; ti 4 -55- BEFORE THE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SCHULTZ & OLSON. ANNEXATION, ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE SCHULTZ & OLSON ANNEXATION MERIDIAN, IDAHO FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The above entitled annexation, and zoning and conditional use application having come on for consideration on November 14, 1989, at the hour of 7:30 o'clock p.m, on said date, at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho, and the Commission having heard and taken oral and written testimony and the applicants appearing and having duly considered the matter, the Planning and Zoning Commission makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. That notice of public hearing on the annexation, zoning and conditional use was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to the said public hearing scheduled for November 14, 1989, the first publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly considered at the November 14, 1989 hearing; that the public was given full opportunity to express comments and submit evidence; and that AMSROSE, copies of all notices were available to newspaper, radio and FITZG ERAlO E CROOKSTON television stations. Attorneys sn0 Counselors F DINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW p.o. eo. azT P e - 1 Meridian, IOMo 838/2 Telaplwne 886M81 2. That the property included in the application for annexation, zoning and conditional use is described in the application, and by this reference is incorporated herein; that the property is approximately 1.55 acres in size; that it is a long narrow strip of land with irregular boundaries; it has forty-five feet of frontage along Locust Grove Road; it is 45 feet wide at its narrowest point and 95 feet at its widest point and is 1,320 feet long; it is on the south side of Interstate I- 84 and is west of Locust Grove Road. 3. That the property is presently zoned by the county as AP-2 and is used for pasture; the proposed use would be for General Retail and Service Commercial (C-G) with a conditional use permit for a modular and pre-fabricated home sales lot. 4. The general area surrounding the property is used in a agriculturally fashion with a kennel in the area also; the property to the immediate west is also agriculturally used but generally west is being developed industrially; the property to the north is Interstate I-84 and across the freeway are residential areas with a minimum lot size of one acre. 5. That the property is adjacent and abutting to the present City limits across the freeway but is not abutting at any point south of the freeway. 6. The Applicant, Schultz, is the owner. 7. That the property included in the annexation and AMBROSE, FITZGERALD B CROOKSTON Attorneys antl Counselors P.O. Boz 12T Merltllan, Itleho 83812 Talepirone 8881181 zoning application is within the Area of Impact of the City of F~NDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW P ae - 2 AM BROSE, j iITZGERALD 'I BCROOKSTON I Attorneys ena F I Counselors P d P.O. eoe KIl MxlAlan, IOeno e]es1 Telsplgne BB6ee81 Meridian. 8. That the 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. The parcel is included in the area designated by the Comprehensive plan as the Mixed-Use Area between I-84 and Overland Road. 9. That the Application requests that the parcel be annexed and zoned as General Retail and Service Commercial and requests a conditional use permit to allow a pre-fabricated and modular homes sales facility. 10. That if the land were annexed at this time the City would be obligated to provide, at a minimum, police and fire protection services. 11. That the property cannot be serviced with City water and sewer at this time and such are not available. If annexed the parcel would have to connected to City sewer and water when they become available pursuant to the Ordinances of the City. 12. Ada County Highway District and the Department of Health may submit comments and such shall be incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 13. That the City Engineer and irrigations districts may submit comments and such shall be incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 14. That the (C-G) General Retail and Service Commercial district is described in the Zoning Ordinance, 11-2-408 B. 9 as DINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW e - 3 follows: (C-G) GENERAL RETAIL AND SERVICE COMMERCIAL: The purpose of the C-G) istrict is to provide for commercial uses which are customarily operated entirely or almost entirely within a building; to provide for a review of the impact of proposed commercial uses which are auto and service oriented and are located in close proximity to major highway or arterial streets; to fulfill the need of travel- related services as well as retail sales for the transient and permanent motoring public. All such districts shall be connected to the Municipal Water and Sewer systems of the City of Meridian, and shall not constitute strip commercial development and encourage clustering of commercial development. 15. That 11-2-409 C. allows Sales Lots only under a conditional use permit in the C-G zone. 16. That proper notice was given as required by law and all procedures before the Planning and Zoning Commission were given and followed. 17. That the Applicant has requested a conditional use permit and submitted the names of personas owning property within 300 feet of the external boundaries of the property; That the applicant is not required to have a petition signed by 75% of those personas since the land is not contained in a residential district. 18. That there was testimony that indicated that no building or sign or any other type of construction or structure of any kind could be located within 20 feet of the boundary line AMBROSE, F1T2GERALD d CROOKSTON Attorneys ana F Gounaalon P.O. Boz l27 P MerlClan, IENo B38It TeleONOns BB&H81 between the Interstate and the parcel in question. [IN DINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW ge - 4 • • 19. That there was on person, Richard Robertson, appearing at the hearing and he voiced concern as to how his own property would be able to drain and whether there would be raising of the land level on the subject parcel; his other concerns were over the irrigation is the area and how the property would be fenced. 20. That there was also concern of the amount of space that was available for turn around purposes at the north end of South Locust Grove Road. CONCLUSIONS 1. That all the procedural requirements of the Local Planning Act and of the Ordinances of the City of Meridian have been met; including the mailing of notice to owners of property within 300 feet of the external boundaries of the Applicant's property. 2. That the City of Meridian has authority to annex land pursuant to 50-222, Idaho Cade, and pursuant to 11-2-417 of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian; that exercise of the City's annexation authority is a Legislative function. 3. That the Planning and Zoning Commission has judged this annexation and zoning use application by the standards contained in Section 50-222, Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, the Meridian City Ordinances, Meridian Comprehensive Plan and the record submitted to it and things of which it can take AMBROSE, FIRGERALO judicial notice. BCROOKSTON Albmeyn end °o°""'°° F NDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW F.o. ao. ~xr p g e _ 5 MarlElAn, ItlBlto 83MY telBpMne BBBJ,SI 4. That all notice and hearing requirements set forth in Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian have been compiled with. 5. That the Commission may take judicial notice of government ordinances, and policies, and of actual conditions existing within the City and State. 6. That the land within the proposed annexation is contiguous to the present City limits of the City of Meridian, and the annexation would not be a shoestring annexation. 7. That the annexation application has been initiated by the Applicant and the owners, and the annexation is not upon the initiation of the City of Meridian. 8. That since the annexation and zoning of land is a legislative function the City has authority to place conditions upon the annexation of land pursuant to 67-6512, Idaho Code, and Section 11-2-418(D) of the City Zoning Ordinances. 9. That the development of annexed land must meet and AMRROSE, FITZG ERALO 6 CROOKSTON Allureeye .ne F Counselors P P.O. Bos ~2l Merltllen, Itleho 83612 Telephone BSB~N81 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, at his own cost, will be required to connect to Meridian water and sewer when they become available; that the property will be subject to Site Planning Review; that the property will be subject to the requirements of the Ada County Highway District, the Central District Health Department requirements, the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District, and the comments of the City Engineer. ~NDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW ge - 6 10. That proper and adequate access to the property is available and will have to be maintained; that sufficient turn around space will have to be constructed on Locust Grove Road adjacent to the parcel. 11. That at the hearing the applicant agree to construct a waste ditch so that the Robertson property could be adequately;y drained and such waste ditch is a requirement. 12. That since the Applicant's property is in the Mixed Use Area between the Interstate and Overland Road as designated in the Comprehensive Plan, the annexation and zoning Application is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and does not conflict with the Rural Areas policies. 13. That it is concluded that the annexation and zoning would be in the best interests of the City of Meridian. 14. Therefore, based on the Application, the testimony and AM BROSE, FITZGERALD d CROOKSTON A~~orneys Antl Counaeloro P.O. Box l1T MariElan, IUBNo B384S TelepMne B88-p81 evidence, these Findings of Fact and Conclusions, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian, it is ultimately concluded that Applicant's property should be annexed and zoned as requested; that the conditions should be those stated above and other conditions to be explored at the City Council level; that such annexation would be orderly development and reasonable if the conditions are met. 15. That in regards to the conditional permit for the Planned unit developments it is hereby found that 11-2-418(C) of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian sets forth the standards under which the Planning and Zoning F~NDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW P qe - 7 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 preliminarily concludes as follows: a. The use, would in fact, constitute a conditional use and a conditional use permit is required by ordinance. b. The use would be harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan but the Zoning Ordinance requires a conditional use permit to allow the use. c. The use apparently would be designed and constructed, to be harmonious in appearance with the intended character of the general vicinity. d. That from a zoning standpoint, the use should not be hazardous nor should it be disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses. e. The property does not have sewer and water service available and such will have to be provided on site; however when the sewer and water becomes available the property will have to be connected as required by the Ordinances of the City of Meridian. f. The use would not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and the use would not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. g. The use would not involve a use, activity, process, material, equipment or conditions of operation that would be detrimental to person, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic or noise. h. Sufficient parking for the property and the proposed use must be provided. AM BROSE, FITZGERALD B CROOKSTON Allomeye and Couneelora F.O. Boz 12] MsrlElan, Kano 89!12 Tsleptrone 8881181 i. The development and uses will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of major importance. F~NDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW P oe - 8 APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adapts and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions. ROLL CALL: Commissioner Hepper Voted Commissioner Rountree Voted ,h;<~,j Commissioner Shearer Voted Commissioner Alidjani Voted~_ Commissioner Johnson (Tie Breaker) Voted DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council of the City of Meridian that they approve the annexation and zoning requested by the Applicant for the property described in the application, subject to the conditions stated herein and recommend approval of the conditional use upon the conditions set forth in the findings of fact and the conclusions of law. MOTION: APPROVED:~___ DISAPPROVED: AMBROSE, FIT2GERALD B CROOKSTON Attorneys and Counselors P.O. BoK s27 Merltl{en, Itlello 838aY Telepfwne BBBis81 F~NDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW P ge - 9