Loading...
1994 08-09 MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AGENDA TUESDAY, AUGUST 9, 1994 - 7:30 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD JULY 12, 1994: (APPROVED) TABLED AT JULY 12, 1994 MEETING: RAMBLE WOOD SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT BY DAN HARDEE: (APPROVED) 2. TABLED AT JULY 12, 1994 MEETING: THUNDER CREEK SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT BY FARWEST DEVELOPERS: (APPROVED) 3. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR BRANDON CREEK ESTATES REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING WITH A PRELIMINARY PLAT BY PIONEER INVESTMENTS, INC: (APPROVED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW; RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT) 4. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR BRANDON CREEK ESTATES REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BY PIONEER INVESTMENTS, INC: (APPROVE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW) 5. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR JOSEPH AND MARY daROSA REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: (APPROVED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW) 6. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR GROVE RUN SUBDIVISION REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING BY JLG BUILDERS: (APPROVE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW) 7. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR MERIDIAN MOBILE ESTATES REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING BY TROY GREEN AND ASSOCIATES: (APPROVE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW) FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR MERIDIAN MOBILE ESTATES REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BY TROY GREEN AND ASSOCIATES: (ACTION TAKEN UNDER ITEM #7) 9. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR RED CANYON CORPORATION REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: (APPROVE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW) 10. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR PINE STREET DEVELOPMENT REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING: (APPROVE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW) 11. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR RONALD VAN AUKER REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING: (APPROVE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW) 12. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR REZONE FROM R-15 TO C-C BY MARTELL PROPERTIES: (CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW) 13. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY/FINAL PLAT FOR CENTRAL VALLEY CORPORATE PARK BY RON NAHAS: (RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO CITY COUNCIL) MERIDIAN PLANNING $~ ZONING COMMISSION AGENDA TUESDAY, AUGUST 9, 1994 - 7:30 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS ,~P~rcd- MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD JULY 12, 1994: TABLED AT JULY 12, 1994 MEETING: RAMBLE WOOD SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT BY DAN HARDEE: cc~p~orovecf.~ 2. TABLED AT JULY 12, 1994 MEETING: THUNDER CREEK SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT BY FARWEST DEVELOPERS: a~n/~~/~~ 3. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR BRANDON CREEK ESTATES REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING WITH A PRELIMINARY PLAT BY PIONEER INVESTMENTS, INC: ~///'r®ac ~~G fc~ ~crSS ax rKBr,..+..c~,.a°a ti`v- ~v C~C, ~PCOn.A.O~ li~OP~o/a.{ a~~~`.Gl ~Q,f- 4. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR BRANDON CREEK ESTATES REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BY PIONEER INVESTMENTS, INC: aP/~.-e,.~ F/Ff c/L, iJa Jr m~ .-at o;+~, s+..e ,r ce~:.tl v,- ~ L' /c ~ 5. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR JOSEPH AND MARY daROSA REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: !///~/ark ~~F f ~lL. ~ ~¢tJ on vGCar~. h..~-,.da from,. fx C~c. 6. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR GROVE RUN SUBDIVISION REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING BY JLG BUILDERS: qF~"°~~ F/F ~ C'/~ ~Ja J,f vvc ve c o-,~..-.,_.~..-c'l an ~- fv L' ~~ 7. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR MERIDIAN MOBILE ESTATES REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONIJVG BY TROY Q, GREEN AND ASSOCIATES: ~~~~w-~ ~~~ ~' ~~L- ~TJ~ rpaSs crn r~eco~•~r•.-~-~.aH<cfiu~ ~v ~'/~ 8. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR MERIDIAN MOBILE ESTATES REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BY TROY GREEN AND ASSOCIATES: 9. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR RED CANYON CORPORATION REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: ~~~pifi/C f/~;'L°~L.~ fall~6m rete~r,, .,-~.r-7.-cCa.~`i~., fo C~~ 10. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR PINE STREET DEVELOPMENT REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING: G , G(~~rr'vlit. / /~ :" ~/L- ~ s!~R.fJan- !'~?cvi..-.~-s,_.~("tz¢i,L--..;Ta' ~ °L. 11. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR RONALD VAN AUKER REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING: a~~rv/~ G~~ ¢ ~'~L- 12. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR REZONE FROM R-15 TO C-C BY MARTELL PROPERTIES: 13. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY/FINAL PLAT FOR CENTRAL VALLEY CORPORATE PARK BY RON NAHAS: /Yc-eG a~o~rav..e. ~.~G /"*'l, plat ~ ~n~P~4-f 7~a C°lC. MERIDIAN PLANNING i3<ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 9. 1994 The regular meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairman Jim Johnson at 7:30 P.M.: Members Present: Jim Shearer, Tim Hepper, Moe Alidjani: Members Absent: Charlie Rountree: Others Present: Will Berg, Wayne Crookston, Gary Smith, Shari Stiles, Marlene Ebom, Bob Jones, Bob Nahas, Terry Harper: MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD JULY 12, 1994: Johnson: Are there any correction, additions or deletions to these minutes? Alidjani: Mr. Chairman I make a motion that we approve these minutes held July 12, 1994. Hepper: Second Johnson: It is moved and seconded to approve the minutes as written, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #1: TABLED AT JULY 12, 1994 MEETING: RAMBLE WOOD SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT BY DAN HARDEE: Johnson: This was tabled as I understand until some concerns of the staff were satisfied. Is there a representative from Ramble Wood here. We have already had a public hearing do you have anything to add. (Inaudible) Johnson: We would like a comment from staff then concerning the issues that were in question and the reason that we tabled it last time. If we could have something for the record please. Smith: Mr. Chairman, Commission members, I guess the issue that I had was the location of the sewer line as it leave the property near the northwest corner. In discussions with the applicant the property owner to the west is not interested in having an all weather access road over the sewer line through his property. He feels as though it will be a connecting link between this subdivision and the Hartford Subdivision to the west which it may well be. The applicant has proposed a need to either install a sewer line and an easement without the access road or exit this subdivision at its northwest corner and get Meridian Planning & Zoning August 9, 1994 Page 2 onto the Five Mile Creek Right of Way and then go west with the sewer. I haven't reached any decision yet. One or the other would be acceptable to me. It is just a matter of deciding assuming the property owner is agreeable to an easement across his property without the access road. Johnson: Any questions of Gary? Thanks Gary, any comments Shari Stiles? Stiles: Chairman Johnson and Commissioners, we have been having an ongoing conversation with the developer and his engineer. I think they have addressed most of the comments I had. They will be requesting that deed restrictions be placed on 2 lots with the landscape easement in lieu of a homeowners association and that will be up to the Commission here and to the Council if they deem that appropriate. They will continue to work with them to have some kind of a bike path provided either some help with financing or actual grading and construction of that. We haven't worked that out (inaudible) the property to the north of this that will be coming in the next month or two. It will be a much larger parcel, probably about 300 acres and hopefully they can work together on that to get that done. That is all I have. Johnson: Any questions of Shari? I know one of the concerns was that the applicant did not want to create a homeowners association and there is some common ground. That he would address that by deed restriction as my understanding, is that correct? (Inaudible) Johnson: And that is something we have had problems with in the past and it is just something for you to consider. Is there any further discussion? What action would you like to take on this? Shearer: I move we approve the preliminary plat. Hepper: Second Johnson: We have a motion for approval of the preliminary plat and a second, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #2: TABLED AT JULY 12, 1994 MEETING: THUNDER CREEK SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT BY FARWEST DEVELOPERS: Johnson: This was tabled last, as I recall at the request of the developer. Is the Meridian Planning & Zoning August 9, 1994 Page 3 developer here this evening, would you like to come forward please. Jones: I am Bob Jones with Roylance and Associates representing the developer. We have submitted a revised preliminary plat to the staff and tried to address their comments and we are here to answer any questions that you might have. Johnson: Thank you, I think it is appropriate at this time that we talk with staff and reserve the right to talk to you. Would you like to be the spokesperson Gary? Smith: Mr. Chairman, Commission members, one of the issues that I had with the plat was and I guess it really came down to a definition of a flag lot. The Lot 13 of Block 1 the applicants engineer redesigned the subdivision at least along that block that is adjacent to Eight Mile Lateral and in order to maintain where the sewer line exits this subdivision to provide service to the east it doesn't look like the lot arrangement can be manipulated such that we have a different configuration of that flag lot them what they had proposed. In order to maintain the sewer line at the northerly most comer or northeasterly most comer of this subdivision which would provide the best service to the adjacent land to the east. It would be my proposal that we accept the flag lot configuration that they have proposed for Lot 13 and Block 1. 1 have talked to Shari and Shari feels like that would be appropriate in this particular case. Also Shari had requested that the landscape area adjacent to Ten Mile Road be designated as 20 feet which they have shown as a 20 foot strip as a designated common lot area for landscape purposes. Those are 2 issues that I know about. I don't know if there is anything else, nothing else from Shari's standpoint. think from that Shari and I are in agreement with what they have proposed. Johnson: Okay, let's see if the commissioners have anything questions for you Gary. Anything at all for staff? Thanks a lot Gary. This is also a preliminary plat so we need a motion. Alidjani: Mr. Chairman I make a motion that we approve this preliminary plat for Thunder Creek subdivision. Hepper: Second Johnson: Moved and seconded that we approve the preliminary plat for Thunder Creek subdivision, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #3: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR BRANDON CREEK ESTATES REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING WITH A PRELIMINARY PLAT Meridian Planning & Zoning August 9, 1994 Page 4 BY PIONEER INVESTMENTS, INC: Johnson: Any discussion regarding the findings of fact and conclusions of law that you have before you. We need a motion concerning the findings of fact. Hepper: Mr. Chairman I move the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts and approves these findings of fact. Alidjani: Second Johnson: its moved and seconded to approve the findings of fact and conclusions of law as prepared by the City Attorney, roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: Hepper -Yea, Rountree -Absent, Shearer -Yea, Alidjani -Yea MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Johnson: Is there a recommendation that you wish to pass onto the City Council at this time? Hepper: Mr. Chairman, I move the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council of the City of Meridian that they approve the annexation and zoning as stated above for the property described in the application with the conditions set forth in the findings of fact and conclusions of law. And that the applicant and owners be specifically required to the all ditches, canals and waterways and install a pressurized irrigation system as a condition of annexation and that the applicant meet all of the ordinances of the City of Meridian specifically including the development time requirements and entering into the required development agreement and the conditions of these findings of fact and conclusions of law and that if the conditions are not met that the property be de-annexed. Alidjani: Second Johnson: It is moved and seconded to pass a recommendation onto the City Council as stated all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Johnson: We should address the preliminary plat. Hepper: Mr. Chairman, I move we recommend approval of the preliminary plat for the Meridian Planning & Zoning August 9, 1994 Page 5 Brandon Creek Estates. Alidjani: Second Johnson: It is moved and seconded to recommend approval to the City Council on the preliminary plat by Pioneer Investments Inc., all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #4: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR BRANDON CREEK ESTATES REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BY PIONEER INVESTMENTS, INC: Johnson: Any discussion regarding these findings of fact and conclusions of law. Is there a motion? Alidjani: Mr. Chairman I make a motion that the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission hereby adopts and approves these findings. Hepper: Second Johnson: Moved and seconded to approve the findings of fact and conclusions of law as prepared by the City Attorney, roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: Hepper -Yea, Rountree -Absent, Shearer -Yea, Alidjani -Yea MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Johnson: Any recommendation for the City Council you wish to make at this time? Alidjani: Mr. Chairman I make the motion that the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council of the City of Meridian that they approve the conditional use permit for the planned unit development, that the conditions set forth and the findings of fact and conclusions of law. And that the applicant and the owners be specifically required to submit the final development plan and meet all of the requirements of the section 11-9-607 and all of the ordinances of the City of Meridian. Shearer: Second Johnson: It has been moved and seconded to pass a recommendation onto the City as stated, all those in favor? Opposed? Meridian Planning & Zoning August 9, 1994 Page 6 MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #5: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR JOSEPH AND MARY daROSA REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: Johnson: Any items you wish to discuss concerning those findings of fact you have before you? We need a motion on the findings of fact? Hepper: Mr. Chairman I move the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts and approves these findings of fact. Alidjani: Second Johnson: Moved and seconded to approve the findings of fact and conclusions of law as prepared by the City Attorney, roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: Hepper -Yea, Rountree -Absent, Shearer -Yea, Alidjani -Yea MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Johnson: Decision or recommendation for the City Council. Hepper: Mr. Chairman, I move the Meridian Planning & 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 with the conditions set forth in the findings of fact and conclusions of law. Alidjani: Second Johnson: It has been moved and seconded to pass a recommendation onto the City Council as stated all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #ti: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR GROVE RUN SUBDIVISION REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING BY JLG BUILDERS: Johnson: Same scenario, any discussion regarding the findings of fact and conclusions of law? Alidjani: Mr. Chairman I make a motion that the Meridian Planning and Zoning Meridian Planning & Zoning August 9, 1994 Page 7 Commission hereby adopts and approves these findings of fact and conclusions. Shearer: Second Johnson: It has been moved and seconded to approve the findings of fact and conclusions of law, roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: Hepper -Yea, Rountree -Absent, Shearer -Yea, Alidjani -Yea MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Johnson: Is there a recommendation? Alidjani: Mr. Chairman I make a motion that the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council that if the applicant does not consent to having this application tabled and elects to submit the plans as suggested in the conclusions and give not~gtion in writing to the City of his consent and desire to submit the plans that the application be denied. Shearer: Second Johnson: Its been moved and seconded to pass a recommendation onto the City Council as written and stated, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Johnson: For the record and for the public anyone wishing copies of findings of fact and conclusions of law once they are ailed on you can get those from the City Council anytime after 8:00 tomorrow morning there is a charge of $.10 per sheet per copy. ITEM #7: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR MERIDIAN MOBILE ESTATES REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING BY TROY GREEN AND ASSOCIATES: Johnson: Is there any discussion regarding these findings of fact by the Commission? No discussion I will entertain a motion. Crookston: Mr. Chairman, items 7 and 8 which both pertain to Meridian Mobile Estates are dealt with in the one set of findings of fact. Johnson: Good point, we will take those 2 items together then, we can do that can't we? Meridian Planning & Zoning August 9, 1994 Page 8 Crookston: Yes Johnson: So we have annexation, zoning and a conditional use permit, is that what you are telling me? Crookston: Yes Johnson: I will entertain a motion on the findings as prepared by our City Attorney. Shearer: I move the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission hereby adopts and approves these findings of fact and conclusions of law. Alidjani: Second Johnson: It has been moved and seconded to approve the findings of fact and conclusions as prepared, roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: Hepper -Yea, Rountree -Absent, Shearer -Yea, Alidjani -Yea MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Johnson: Is there a recommendation you would like to pass onto the City Council? Shearer: I move the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommend to the City Council of the City of Meridian that the property should not be annexed and zoned and due to the recommendations of these findings and conclusions of law on the application for the annexation and zoning should be considered to be findings of fact and conclusions of law on the application for conditional use for a mobile home park because if the land is not annexed and zoned there is no ability to grant a conditional use. And the conditional use will have to be recommended to be denied for failure to meet the requirements of 3- 502.2b of the Revised and Compiled Ordinance of the City of Meridian. Alidjani: Second Johnson: It has been moved and seconded to pass the recommendation onto the City Council as stated all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #9: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR RED CANYON CORPORATION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: Meridian Planning & Zoning August 9, 1994 Page 9 Johnson: Is there any discussion regarding the findings of fact and conclusions of law as prepared and that you have before you? I will entertain a motion for approval. Alidjani: Mr. Chairman I make a motion that the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission hereby adopt and approve these findings. Hepper: Second Johnson: It is moved and seconded to approve the findings of fact and conclusions of law as prepared, roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: Hepper -Yea, Rountree -Absent, Shearer -Yea, Alidjani -Yea MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Johnson: Any recommendation you would like to pass onto the City Council at this time? Alidjani: Mr. Chairman I make a motion that the Meridian Planning & 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 with the conditions set forth in the findings of fact and conclusions of law. Shearer: Second Johnson: It is moved and seconded to pass the recommendation onto the City Council all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #10: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR PINE STREET DEVELOPMENT REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING: Johnson: Any discussion regarding these findings of fact that you have had plenty of time to study? Hepper: Question Mr. Chairman, on page 2 the last line on item 3, it states that the land was not adjacent to a wrecking yard. It was my understanding that the north side of that property was adjacent. Isn't that correct. Alidjani: I heard the ditch was in between. Meridian Planning & Zoning August 9, 1994 Page 10 Hepper: (Inaudible) the ditch that separates the two. Alidjani: How do you interpret that? The ditch is in between them (inaudible). Shearer: Who owns the ditch either they do or the wrecking yard does? Johnson: I don't know, I know it is owned because the one adjacent to it is owned by the new purchaser clear to the south of the ditch. Crookston: It was my understanding that there was a parcel of property that was between the 2. Johnson: Maybe we need to recognize Gary Smith since he has his hand in the air. Gary did you have a comment regarding that? (Inaudible) Johnson: There are 2 ditches there? (Inaudible) Smith: Typically unless there is an (inaudible) for a ditch, the ditch either belongs to one person or another. (Inaudible) Johnson: How would you like to correct that or a question then Mr. Hepper? Hepper: I am not sure it was just a question. I just wanted to make sure there wasn't a third party in between these 2. Johnson: Well I think we need to condition that with a motion we make then (inaudible) that would be my recommendation. Is there any other discussion? Shearer: On page 2 on the description of the property at the top of the page line 3, it says West of Danbury Fair Subdivision shouldn't that be east? No, that is right, it is right the way it is. Crookston: No, it is east of Danbury. Shearer: Right, West of Locust Grove and East of Danbury Fair. Johnson: So that should be a correction then. That is line 3 of page 2. Any other Meridian Planning & Zoning August 9, 1994 Page 11 corrections? Any other discussion. If not them I will entertain a motion on these findings of fact for Pine Street. Shearer: I move the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission hereby adopts and approves these findings of fact and conclusions of law with the corrections. Johnson: Just a point of correction, does your corrections include clarifying that it is adjacent or not? Shearer: Yes Johnson: Okay, we have a motion. Hepper: Second Johnson: It is moved and seconded to approve the findings of fact and conclusions of law as prepared with those 2 items in question to be clarified, roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: Alidjani -Yea, Shearer -Yea, Hepper -Yea, Rountree -Absent MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Johnson: Any recommendation for the City Council. Shearer: I move the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission hereby recommend to the City Council of the City of Meridian that they approve the annexation and zoning as stated in the findings of fact and conclusions of law for the property described in the application with the conditions set forth in the findings of fact and conclusions of law that if the applicant does not consent to these findings and conclusions and does not give his consent in writing prior to the City Council hearing that it is recommended that the property not be annexed. Hepper: Second Johnson: Moved and seconded to pass a recommendation as stated onto City Council, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #11: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR RONALD VAN AUKER REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING: Meridian Planning 8 Zoning August 9, 1994 Page 12 Johnson: Any discussion regarding the findings of fact on this annexation? Hearing none then I will entertain a motion for approval. Hepper: Mr. Chairman I move the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission hereby adopts and approves these findings of fact. Shearer: Second Johnson: Moved and seconded to adopt the findings of fact and conclusions of law as prepared by the City Attomey, roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: Hepper -Yea, Rountree -Absent, Shearer -Yea, Alidjani -Yea MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Johnson: Any recommendation to the City Council at this time? Hepper: Mr. Chairman, I move the Meridian Planning 8 Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council of the City of Meridian that the property set forth in the application be approved for annexation and zoning under the conditions set forth in these findings of fact and conclusions of law, including that the applicant enters into a development agreement or that that land be de-annexed. And that if the applicant is not agreeable to these findings of fact and conclusions and is not agreeable with entering into a development agreement, the property should not be annexed. Shearer: Second Johnson: Moved and seconded to pass a recommendation as read by Commissioner Hepper onto the City Council, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #12: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR REZONE FROM R-15 TO C-C BY MARTELL PROPERTIES: Johnson: Is there a representative from Martell Properties that would like to address the Commission at this time please do so. Marlene Eborn, 9010 Burnett, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Eborn: I have no comments unless you have questions. Meridian Planning & Zoning August 9, 1994 Page 13 Johnson: Are there any questions of Marlene? Hepper: Do you have any specific thing that you plan on doing with this property, or are you just asking for a rezone? Ebom: We have an office, we would like to have an office in there for Martell Properties. We have food storage and it is mostly like mail order, it is not a lot of traffic or anything. And then we have a cleaning business. Hepper: What does Martell Properties do? Eborn: We just buy and sell properties, buy tow sell high. Johnson: Any other questions of the Commission? Shearer: Is this a mistake on this thing, this is R-15 currently? Ebom: Yes we are the first house that is R-15. Shearer: R-15? Eborn: Everything north. Alidjani: That is what the school is. Ebom: Everything north of us is C-C and the karate school is C-C and everybody else is R-15. Johnson: Thank you very much Marlene. This is a public hearing does anyone else from the public want to address the Commission at this time? Seeing no one then I will close the public hearing. Any discussion, and what is your recommendation, what is your pleasure at this point Commissioners. Hepper: Mr. Chairman, I move we have the City Attorney prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law. Alidjani: Second Johnson: It is moved and seconded that we have the City Attorney prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law on the application for rezone from R-15 to C-C for Martell Properties, all those in favor? Opposed? Meridian Planning & Zoning August 9, 1994 Page 14 MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Johnson: Do you understand our process, the next step we go through what you sat through tonight actual findings of fact and conclusions of law prepared by the City Attorney and he addresses your application from a legal standpoint and makes a recommendation for approval or disapproval. And it goes onto City Council from there and then there is another public hearing at the City Council level. So this is the first step and about 3 more steps for you. With no opposition the findings of fact will reflect no opposition and it will probably just be passed onto City Council. You are welcome to have a copy of the findings of fact and conclusions of law but we can't give you those until after they are official which means after the approval. Our next regular meeting is scheduled for the second Tuesday in September at which time we will address those findings of fact. {Inaudible) Johnson: Then it goes onto City Council when they can get it on their agenda they will have to re-notice the public and when they do that is another 15 days later. So they will probably meet the, it just falls that way, probably not until the first meeting in October. It is a speedy process. We only meet once a month, they meet twice a month, unless we have special meetings. That is just how long it takes. (Inaudible) ITEM #13: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY/ FINAL PLAT FOR CENTRAL VALLEY CORPORATE PARK BY RON NAHAS: Johnson: I will now open the public hearing, Mr. Nahas or his representatives would like to address the Commission please do so at this time. Bob Jones, 4619 Emerald, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Jones: I am here representing the developer, Bob and Ron Nahas, Bob Nahas is here with me. This tract of land is approximately 11 acres located just north of the Interstate and East of (inaudible). Basically it isjust a re-subdivision of Central Valley Corporate Park No. 3 which had 4 lots and then another small strip of land so we are subdividing this into 2 lots for Unit No. 4. We have submitted the preliminary an final plats. We are addressing concerns that staff had and submitted and responded to those today with revised drawings. It would be the same as this drawing. Johnson: Were there any substantial changes? Meridian Planning & Zoning August 9, 1994 Page 15 Jones: Most of them were miscellaneous, only some calls and bearings, benchmarks, items concerning ground water levels, different things like that. Johnson: Do you have anything further to add? Thank you very much. Are there any questions from the Commission for the applicant? Hepper: Have you seen the comments from Ada County Highway District? Jones: (Inaudible) Hepper: They have a comment here that they would tike to see a traffic study. Jones: They indicated they would like to have a traffic study when something is done with the property when there is a user. And that is understood. Hepper: Would this fall under a conditional use permit? Would these gentlemen be back to see us before they can build on that? Crookston: I don't think so, it is not a planned unit development. I'm not sure. Hepper: How would a traffic study be implemented then? Crookston: Unless there is some further requirement it wouldn't come up again. Hepper: What we are wondering is how a traffic study would be brought up if there are no further hearings or anything. Johnson: Are you kind of saying, I don't mean to put words in your mouth that depending upon the actual development that takes place there the occupancy would a traffic study at that time be conducted, or am I putting words in your mouth? Hepper: I don't know, it says here the Ada County Highway District would like to see a traffic study if we pass this as it is then as soon as they have a business to go in there they can pick up a building permit and go to work. So a traffic study would not, when is a traffic study done and who looks at it? Jones: ACRD indicated to me that they would have another shot at it when it comes up for their approval. And also if the property has to be rezoned for any reason you would get another shot at it there. Johnson: A rezoning we would but I don't see how it would surtace again if they just went Meridian Planning & Zoning August 9, 1994 Page 16 ahead. Hepper: If it wasn't rezoned (inaudible) business or somebody in there that was happy with the layout the way it is. You could potentially just go in and pick up a building permit and start building. I am just wondering how this works so that Ada County. Crookston: Shari has a comment. Shari Stiles, 33 East Idaho, was sworn by the City Attorney. Stiles: I talked to Ada County Highway District and no they normally don't comment on anything that comes in when it is permitted use. Depending on the magnitude of what would go in there we would run those plans by them and make sure they were satisfied and (inaudible) also to make sure that is done and it is in everyone's best interest to do that. Hepper: Would you see those plans before any construction will get started? Stiles: Yes I will. Hepper: (Inaudible) where they would go down and pick up a building permit and start building on a permitted use. Stiles: They can typically, Intermountain Arms has gone in and ACRD has indicated they don't want to comment on it and that they can't but I think in this case it is in everybody's best interest that it be done. Mr. Nahas certainly doesn't want a tenant to be in there that can't accommodate the traffic. I would also like to add if you would recommend approval of this that it be sent onto City Council as a final plat for the 16th which is next week in accordance with the ordinance that is how apreliminary/ final plat would be sent on if it is your desire. Bob Nahas, 9340 West Hubble Brook, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Nahas: We are not sure how to proceed on this either, we have a contract right now with WareMart stores. They don't know at this time how big the store is even going to be it may 60,000 feet it may be 80,000 feet. It is kind of hard to say how much traffic will be generated. Also we are going to need to put in for street improvements which would be coming in this area right here. At that time I think ACHD would have input and maybe that would be the appropriate time to talk about traffic generation. Johnson: Well the other thing we can do is we are going to ask for, oh that is right we Meridian Planning & Zoning August 9, 1994 Page 17 don't ask for them on preliminary plats do we? Crookston: No Shearer: We are going to get rid of this baby in one night. Johnson: I see your concerns but there has to be a way of getting that into the discussion. Shearer: When they come in for a building permit Shari look at it and send it on, no problem. Johnson: Satisfied with that Mr. Hepper? Hepper: Yes Johnson: Any other questions for Mr. Nahas or his representative? This is a public hearing is there anyone else from the public that would like to testify at this time. Seeing no one then I will close the public hearing. This is a preliminary plat. Shearer: I move we recommend approval of the preliminary/ final plat to the City Council. Alidjani: Second Johnson: Moved and seconded to recommend approval of the preliminary plat and final plat for Central valley Corporate Park, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: Aff Yea Johnson: Is there any other discussion or any other items of business? Any other motions you would like to make? Hepper: I make the motion that we adjourn. Shearer: Second Johnson: Moved and seconded that we adjourn, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:15 P.M. Meridian Planning & Zoning August 9, 1994 Page 18 (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) ATTEST: WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., CITY CLERK • • ORlGiNAL BEFORE TBE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MARTELL PROPERTIES REZONE APPLICATIOR 1233 E. 1ST STREET MERIDIAN, IDAHO FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS The above entitled matter having come on for public hearing August 9, 1994, at the hour of 7:30 o'clock p.m., the Petitioner appeared through a representative, 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 Application was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to the said public hearing scheduled for August 9, 1994, the first publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly considered at the August 9, 1994, 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 Eric L Martell, and which property is described in the application which description is incorporated herein; that the property is presently zoned R-15 Residential; the area in which FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW/MARTELL Page 1 Applicant's property is located is developed as a residential area but several of the properties have been rezoned to commercial. 3. That the Applicants propose to have the property zoned (C-C) Community Commercial. 4. That the C-C District is described in the Zoning Ordinance, 11-2-408 B. as follows: (C-Cl Community Business District: The purpose of the (C-C) District is to permit the establishment of general business uses that are of a larger scale than a neighborhood business, and to encourage the development of modern shopping centers with adequate off- street parking facilities, and associated site amenities to serve area residents and employees; to prohibit strip commercial development and encourage the clustering of commercial enterprises. All such districts shall have direct access to transportation arterial or collectors, be connected to the Municipal Water and Sewer systems of the City of Meridian. 5. That the property has frontage on East First Street and is adjacent to Accent Funeral Home. 6. That the uses of the properties surrounding the subject property are for single family dwellings but many of the properties have been rezoned to commercial zones. 7. That there was no testimony at the hearing objecting to the Application; that the Applicant's representative testified that the Applicant desire to use the property for an office, quick cleaning and for a real estate office. 8. That sewer and water is available and are connected to the property, but the use may require additional charges and fees. 9. That comments may be submitted by the City Engineer, FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW/MARTELL Page 2 • Nampa Meridian Irrigation District, Meridian Police Department, Ada County Highway District, Meridian Fire Department, Meridian Planning Director and the Meridian Sewer Department and other agencies and those comments will be incorporated herein as if set forth in herein. 10. That Section 11-6-606 B 14, requires pressurized irrigation. 11. There were no comments given at the public hearing objecting to the application. 12. That proper notice has been given as required by law and all procedures before the Planning and Zoning Commission have been followed. 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 Applicants' property. 2. 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. 3. That the City of Meridian has authority to place conditions upon granting a zoning amendment. 4. That the City has judged this Application for a zoning amendment upon the basis of guidelines contained in Section 11-2- FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW/AIARTISLL Page 3 • 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. 5. That 11-2-416 (R) of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian sets forth standards under which the 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 property is in an area where commercial and office uses are likely to desire to locate and many of the properties in the area have been rezoned to commercial. The new zoning should be harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and no Comprehensive Plan amendment is required. (b) The area is on the main street of Meridian where substantial commercial property is located. A rezone of the subject property is in line with that use. (c) The area around the proposed zoning amendment is developed in a residential fashion but has had several properties rezoned. The new zoning of C-C Commercial should not be contrary to the other uses in the area. (d) There has been a change in the area which dictates that the property should be rezoned and the area is very likely to be developed in an office or commercial fashion. (e) That the property is designed and constructed to be harmonious with the surrounding area. (f) Commercial uses should 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 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAH/NARTELL Page 4 • sewer and water is required. (h) Commercial uses should 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. (i) The proposed use should not involve any detrimental activity to any person's property or the general welfare. (j) Development should not cause a significant increase in vehicular traffic and should not interfere with surrounding traffic patterns in that the property has good street frontage. (k) That this rezone will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any natural or scenic feature of major importance. (1) The proposed zoning amendment is in the best interest of City of Meridian. 6. It is further concluded that the comments, recommendations and requirements of City of Meridian Departments and other governmental agencies will have to be met and complied with. 7. That any signs placed on the property shall meet the Meridian Sign Ordinance and shall not be lighted so as to shine in the eyes of vehicles traveling on East First Street. 8. That since the uses of the properties are not specifically known, any uses and the properties shall be subject to design review. ~~ l'A,~.~ ~~ 9. That the Applicant and all users of the property shall comply with all of the ordinances of the City of Meridian, specifically including the water and sewer requirements, the Fire and Life Safety codes, and the Uniform Building, Electrical, and Plumbing Codes. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW/MARTELL Page 5 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 SHEARER ALIDJANI VOTED CHAIRMAN JOHNSON (TIE BREAKER) VOTED y DECISION AND RECOM~[ENDATION The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council of the City of Meridian that they approve the Rezone 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 comments of the Meridian Departments and the other ~~ governmental agencies, and shall be subject to design review. MOTION: APPROVED: DISAPPROVED: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW/MARTELL Page 6 AUG 0 9 19S~t CE'rY lli' ME~'.J1ri;'v NAME: S ~/~hn.h~ PUBLIC MEETING SIGN-UP SHEET r z~,>7~ ~~ PHONE NUMBER: -7~fa.~,P~-n-e-~~~'_~__o_~~==---~r~k Pa~P..~N~ ~s8`I -3~oC~ ------------ - ----------------- -- ---------------------------------------------