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~
------------ - ----------------- -- ---------------------------------------------