2006 07-20n
A
11 l;\H(l 1'
I
MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING
REGULAR MEETING
AGENDA
City Council Chambers
33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho
Thursday, July 20, 2006 at 7:00 p.m.
`Although the City of Meridian no longer requires sworn testimony,
all presentations before the Mayor and City Council are expected
to be truthful and honest to best of the ability of the presenter. "
Roll -call Attendance:
Keith Borup X Wendy Newton-Huckabay
_X David Moe _X David Zaremba
_X Michael Rohm - chairman
2. Adoption of the Agenda:
3. Consent Agenda:
A. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP
06-015 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for retail use as
determined by Development Agreement for Meridian Gateway —
Walgreens by White -Leasure Development — 1601 S. Meridian
Road: Approve
B. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP
06-018 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a daycare facility
for 6-12 children for Shelley Fournier by Shelley Fournier — 2567
N. Black Bear Way: Approve
C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP
06-017 Request for a Conditional Use Permit to move liquor license
from 127 E. Idaho Avenue to 126 E. Idaho Avenue for Top Shelf,
LLC by Douglas and Stephanie Beehler — 126 E. Idaho Avenue:
Approve
4. Continued Public Hearing from July 6, 2006: CUP 06-019 Request for
a Conditional Use Permit to construct 10,072.5 square foot addition for
company offices, truck, equipment and material storage facilities on 3.68
Meridian Planning and Zoning commission Meeting Agenda — July 20, 2006 Page 1 of 3
All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing,
please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting.
acres in a C -G zone for H & H Utility Contractors, Inc. by H & H Utility
Contractors, Inc. — 225 West Franklin Road: Approve
5. Public Hearing: MCU 06-001 Request for a Conditional Use Permit
Modification for residential home built two feet into five foot setback (sold
prior to discovery of mistake) for Fulfer Subdivision No. 5 (Lot 4, Block
5) by Russell Dunstan — 2593 W. Ditch Creek Drive: Approve
6. Public Hearing: AZ 06-029 Request for Annexation and Zoning of
10.39 acres from RUT to an R-4 zone for Silversprings Subdivision by
Reed Kofoed — south side of McMillan Road and west of Locust Grove
Road: Continue Public Hearing to August 17, 2006
7. Public Hearing: PP 06-029 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 29
single-family residential lots and 4 common / other lots on 9.88 acres in a
proposed R-4 zone Silversprings Subdivision by Reed Kofoed — south
side of McMillan Road and west of Locust Grove Road: Continue Public
Hearing to August 17, 2006
8. Public Hearing: AZ 06-028 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 4.43
acres to an R-15 (Medium High -Density Residential) zone for Touchstone
Place Subdivision by Horizon Development — 1187 East Fairview
Avenue: Recommend Approval to City Council
9. Public Hearing: PP 06-028 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 2
residential lots (proposed to contain 48 Multi -Family units) and 2 common
lots on 4.43 acres in a proposed R-15 zone for Touchstone Place
Subdivision by Horizon Development — 1187 East Fairview Avenue:
Recommend Approval to City Council
10. Public Hearing: CUP 06-021 Request for Conditional Use Permit
approval to construct a multi -family development consisting of 48 multi-
family dwelling units (8 plexes) on 2 lots totaling 4.43 acres in the
proposed R-15 zone Touchstone Place Subdivision by Horizon
Development — 1187 East Fairview Avenue: Recommend Approval to
City Council
11. Public Hearing: AZ 06-032 Request for Annexation and Zoning of
29.31 acres from RUT to an R-8 zone for Trilogy Subdivision by Conger
Management Group — south side of Chinden Boulevard and east of Black
Cat Road: Continue Public Hearing to August 31, 2006
12. Public Hearing: PP 06-032 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of
148 single-family lots and 14 common / other lots including 2 private street
lots on 28.17 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Trilogy Subdivision by
Conger Management Group — south side of Chinden Boulevard and east
of Black Cat Road: Continue Public Hearing to August 31, 2006
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda — July 20, 2006 Page 2 of 3
All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing,
please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting.
13.
•
Public Hearing: AZ 06-031 Request for Annexation and Zoning of
290.87 acres from RUT to an R-8 (Medium Density Residential (115.91
acres), R-4 (Medium Low -Density Residential) (69.92 acres), TN -R
(Traditional Neighborhood Residential) (51.36 acres), TN -C (Traditional
Neighborhood Center) (34.65 acres) and R-2 (Low Density Residential)
(26.02 acres) for South Ridge Subdivision by James L. Jewett — south
side of Overland Road between Linder Road and Ten Mile Road:
Continue Public Hearing to September 7, 2006
14. Public Hearing: PP 06-031 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of
233 lots including: 206 residential lots, 11 commercial / other lots and 16
common / open space lots on 290.87 acres in the proposed TN -C, TN -R,
R-8, R-4 and R-2 zones for South Ridge Subdivision by James L. Jewett
— south side of Overland Road between Linder Road and Ten Mile Road:
Continue Public Hearing to September 7, 2006
Adjourned at 8:40 P.M.
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda — July 20, 2006 Page 3 of 3
All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing,
please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting.
CITY OF
IDAHO Y�
F
TREA URV.. V1U'�Y 5f!!CE
', 199i
CI
MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING
REGULAR MEETING
AGENDA
City Council Chambers
33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho
Thursday, July 20, 2006 at 7:00 p.m.
"Although the City of Meridian no longer requires sworn testimony,
all presentations before the Mayor and City Council are expected
to be truthful and honest to best of the ability of the presenter."
1. Roll -call Attendance:
Keith Borup Y Wendy Newton-Huckabay
X David Moe k- David Zaremba
/rMichael Rohm - chairman
2. Adoption of the Agenda:
3. Consent Agenda:
A. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP
06-015 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for retail use as
determined by Development Agreement for Meridian Gateway -
Walgreens by White -Leasure Development - 1601 S. Meridian
Road: ,-y -D Uti:
B. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP
06-018 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a daycare facility
for 6-12 children for Shelley Fournier by Shelley Fournier - 2567
N. Black Bear Way: rrul-L�
C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP
06-017 Request for a Conditional Use Permit to move liquor license
from 127 E. Idaho Avenue to 126 E. Idaho Avenue for Top Shelf,
LLC by Douglas and Ste hanie Beehler -126 E. Idaho Avenue:
Ste
rV �Z�
4. Continued Public Hearing from July 6, 2006: CUP 06-019 Request for
a Conditional Use Permit to construct 10,072.5 square foot addition for
company offices, truck, equipment and material storage facilities on 3.68
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda — July 20, 2006 Page 1 of 3
All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing,
please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting.
acres in a C-GRne for H $ H UtilityContractors
Contractors, Inc. —225 West Franklin Road: ,r1� Inc. by H & H Utility
5. Public Hearing: MCU 06-001 Request for a Conditional Use Permit
Modification for residential home built two feet into five foot setback (sold
prior to discovery of mistake) for Fulfer Subdivision No. 5 (Lot 4, Block
5) by Russell Dunstan — 2593 W. Ditch Creek Drive:
6. Public Hearing: AZ 06-029 Request for Annexation and Zoning of
10.39 acres from RUT to an R-4 zone for Silversprings Subdivision by
Reed Kofoed — south side of McMillan Road and west of Locust Grove
Road: I'mf. P/1 -i 1—o , �f nj
7. Public Hearing: PP 06-029 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 29
single-family residential lots and 4 common / other lots on 9.88 acres in a
proposed R-4 zone Silversprings Subdivision by Reed Kofoed — south
side of McMillan Road and west of Locust Grove Road:
C 0' +. jell I -t, ,A4 S CcSf l -7 , � CIO
8. Public Hearing: AZ 06-028 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 4.43
acres to an R-15 (Medium High -Density Residential) zone for Touchstone
Place Subdivision by Horizon Development — 1187 East Fairview
Avenue: 1+
9. Public Hearing: PP 06-028 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 2
residential lots (proposed to contain 48 Multi -Family units) and 2 common
lots on 4.43 acres in a proposed R-15 zone for Touchstone Place
Subdivision by Horizon Development —1187 East Fairview Avenue:
10. Public Hearing: CUP 06-021 Request for Conditional Use Permit
approval to construct a multi -family development consisting of 48 multi-
family dwelling units (8 plexes) on 2 lots totaling 4.43 acres in the
proposed R-15 zone Touchstone Place Subdivision by Horizon
Development — 1187 East Fairview Avenue:
rDI Cz-C , "_ ff) C °_a
11. Public Hearing: AZ 06-032 Request for Annexation and Zoning of
29.31 acres from RUT to an R-8 zone for Trilogy Subdivision by Conger
Management Group — south side of Chinden Boulevard and east of Black
Cat Road: �; �,A4 ,
12. Public Hearing: PP 06-032 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of
148 single-family lots and 14 common / other lots including 2 private street
lots on 28.17 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Trilogy Subdivision by
Conger Management Group — south side of Chinden Boulevard and east
of Black Cat Road:
13. Public Hearing: AZ 06-031 Request for Annexation and Zoning of
290.87 acres from RUT to an R-8 (Medium Density Residential (115.91
acres), R-4 (Medium Low -Density Residential) (69.92 acres), TN -R
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda — July 20, 2006 Page 2 of 3
All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing,
Please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting.
t
hp
,
(Traditional Neihbor hood Residential) (51.36 acres), TN -C (Traditional
,xz
Neighborhood Center) (34.65 acres) and R-2 (Low Density
Residential)
(26.02 acres) for South Ridge Subdivision by James L. Jewett — south
side of Overland Road between Linder Ro'j]d and Ten Mile Road:
_
14. Public Hearing: PP 06-031 Request for Preliminary Plat approval
of
233 lots including: 206 residential lots, 11 commercial / other lots and 16
Yr ,
common / open space lots on 290.87 acres in the
proposed TN -C, TN -R,
R-8, R-4 and R-2 zones for South Ridge Subdivision by James
L. Jewett
k h
south side of Overland Road between Linder Road and Ten Mile Road:
{
t
3"
Y t
i„ 13
1 V 4 ^ V
C,o ✓L �'V' UV�
I
i
f
i'
k
� Y
4
F t .
fl
u d
S
§
i, 1
,
4
5 �
. K
�4Ydq
j
t„
M§
iv^
Y`
4�
>f
e°
.K `
Y
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission MeetingAgenda Jul
9 — y 20, 2006 Page 3 of 3
All materials presented at public meetings shall become
property of the City of Meridian.
Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to
documents and/or hearing,
please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 least
at 48 hours prior to the public meeting.
,q
„� 0.
m,
` y ¢
+xi Fes">+'F�
I'M
F
,F
y
A4' , ��33rw2
C'
yAy kis „b
PleGsc
CITYOF
�j IDAHOV. SINCE
y�
1903
MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING
REGULAR MEETING
AGENDA
City Council Chambers
33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho
Thursday, July 20, 2006 at 7:00 p.m.
`Although the City of Meridian no longer requires sworn testimony,
all presentations before the Mayor and City Council are expected
to be truthful and honest to best of the ability of the presenter. "
1. Roll -call Attendance:
Keith Borup
David Moe
2. Adoption of the Agenda:
3. Consent Agenda:
Wendy Newton-Huckabay
David Zaremba
Michael Rohm - chairman
A. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP
06-015 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for retail use as
determined by Development Agreement for Meridian Gateway —
Walgreens by White -Leasure Development — 1601 S. Meridian
Road:
B. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP
06-018 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a daycare facility
for 6-12 children for Shelley Fournier by Shelley Fournier — 2567
N. Black Bear Way:
C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP
06-017 Request for a Conditional Use Permit to move liquor license
from 127 E. Idaho Avenue to 126 E. Idaho Avenue for Top Shelf,
LLC by Douglas and Stephanie Beehler —126 E. Idaho Avenue:
4• Continued Public Hearing from July 6, 2006: CUP 06-019 Request for
a Conditional Use Permit to construct 10,072.5 square foot addition for
company offices, truck, equipment and material storage facilities on 3.68
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda — July 20, 2006 Page 1 of 3
All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing ,
please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting.
> iS
J z
ii
i
4,3
Y
� s
r
_
"gg'F
> iS
4
i
Y
acres in a C -G Se for H & H Utility Contractors,* by H & H Utility
Contractors, Inc. — 225 West Franklin Road:
5. Public Hearing: MCU 06-001 Request for a Conditional Use Permit
Modification for residential home built two feet into five foot setback (sold
prior to discovery of mistake) for Fulfer Subdivision No. 5 (Lot 4, Block
5) by Russell Dunstan — 2593 W. Ditch Creek Drive:
6. Public Hearing: AZ 06-029 Request for Annexation and Zoning of
10.39 acres from RUT to an R-4 zone for Silversprings Subdivision by
Reed Kofoed — south side of McMillan Road and west of Locust Grove
Road:
7. Public Hearing: PP 06-029 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 29
single-family residential lots and 4 common / other lots on 9.88 acres in a
proposed R-4 zone Silversprings Subdivision by Reed Kofoed — south
side of McMillan Road and west of Locust Grove Road:
8. Public Hearing: AZ 06-028 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 4.43
acres to an R-15 (Medium High -Density Residential) zone for Touchstone
Place Subdivision by Horizon Development — 1187 East Fairview
Avenue:
9. Public Hearing: PP 06-028 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 2
residential lots (proposed to contain 48 Multi -Family units) and 2 common
lots on 4.43 acres in a proposed R-15 zone for Touchstone Place
Subdivision by Horizon Development —1187 East Fairview Avenue:
10. Public Hearing: CUP 06-021 Request for Conditional Use Permit
approval to construct a multi -family development consisting of 48 multi-
family dwelling units (8 plexes) on 2 lots totaling 4.43 acres in the
proposed R-15 zone Touchstone Place Subdivision by Horizon
Development —1187 East Fairview Avenue:
11. Public Hearing: AZ 06-032 Request for Annexation and Zoning of
29.31 acres from RUT to an R-8 zone for Trilogy Subdivision by Conger
Management Group — south side of Chinden Boulevard and east of Black
Cat Road:
12. Public Hearing: PP 06-032 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of
148 single-family lots and 14 common / other lots including 2 private street
lots on 28.17 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Trilogy Subdivision by
Conger Management Group — south side of Chinden Boulevard and east
of Black Cat Road:
13. Public Hearing: AZ 06-031 Request for Annexation and Zoning of
290.87 acres from RUT to an R-8 (Medium Density Residential (115.91
acres), R-4 (Medium Low -Density Residential) (69.92 acres), TN -R
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda — July 20, 2006 Page 2 of 3
All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing,
please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting.
(Traditional Nell*orhood Residential) (51.36 acres , TN -C (Traditional
Neighborhood Center) (34.65 acres) and R-2 (Low Density Residential)
(26.02 acres) for South Ridge Subdivision by James L. Jewett — south
side of Overland Road between Linder Road and Ten Mile Road:
14. Public Hearing: PP 06-031 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of
233 lots including: 206 residential lots, 11 commercial / other lots and 16
common / open space lots on 290.87 acres in the proposed TN -C, TN -R,
R-8, R-4 and R-2 zones for South Ridge Subdivision by James L. Jewett
— south side of Overland Road between Linder Road and Ten Mile Road:
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda — July 20, 2006 Page 3 of 3
All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing,
please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting.
t
_
k'�"
k
�
+.. �aS $ d r -fit F4F 4'1 �
y igi
y�M144
. '*L
Y,
-12
t
_
3kk? 6t i
+.. �aS $ d r -fit F4F 4'1 �
, y'
y�M144
. '*L
3
-12
4.4
w
��.w�'_
' Y
# '^ s°13
z li.,S $ <w3 i
,5,.,y ,� ;i yh%
_
5
fit, y
i t$ Y
** TX CONFIOON REPORT ** AS OF JUL 17 106 &
PAGE. 01
CITY OF MERIDIAN
01
DATE TIME TO/FROM
07/17 1635 2083776449
MODE
MIN/SEC PGS
CMD#
STATUS
02
07/17 1636 3886924
EC—S
01'10" 003
205
OK
03
07/17 1638 P–AND–Z
EC --S
00'57" 003
205
OK
04
07/17 16:39 FIRE DEPT
EC—S
00'57" 003
205
OK
05
07/17 1641 208 888 2682
EC—S
EC—S
00'57" 003
00'58" 003
205
OK
06
07/17 1643 208 387 6393
EC—S
00'58" 003
205
205
OK
OK
07
07/17 1644 ADA CTY DEVELMT
EC—S
00'58" 003
205
OK
08
07/17 1646 2088885052
EC—S
00'58" 003
205
OK
09
07/17 16:47 LAKEVIEW GOLFCOU
G3—S
01'57" 003
205
OK
10
07/17 1650 IDAHO ATHLETIC C
EC—S
00'58" 003
205
OK
11
07/17 16:51 ID PRESS TRIBUNE
EC—S
00'59" 003
205
OK
12
07/17 16:53 2088886701
EC --S
00'58" 003
205
OK
�lec�x ros-r
IN 01.
t
-or >VwbUC ma-rict --
MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING
REGULAR MEETING
AGENDA
City Council Chambers
33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho
Thursday, July 20, 2006 at 7:00 p.m,
`A though the City of Meridian no longer requires swom testimony,
ap presentations before the Mayor and City Council are expected
to be truthful and honest to best of the ability of the presenter."
1. Roll -call Attendance:
Keith Borup Wendy Newton-Huckabay
David Moe David Zaremba
Michael Rohm - chairman
2. Adoption of the Agenda:
3. Consent Agenda:
A. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP
06.015 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for retail use as
determined by Development Agreement for Meridian Gateway —
Walgreens by White -Leasure Development — 1601 S. Meridian
Road:
B. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP
06-018 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a daycare facility
for 6-12 children for Shelley Fournier by Shelley Fournier — 2567
N. Black Bear Way:
C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP
06.017 Request for a Conditional Use Permit to move liquor license
from 127 E. Idaho Avenue to 126 E. Idaho Avenue for Top Shelf,
LLC by Douglas and Stephanie Beehler-126 E. Idaho Avenue:
4• Continued Public Hearing from July 6, 2006: CUP 06.019 Request for
a Conditional Use Permit to construct 10,072.5 square foot addition for
company offices, truck, equipment and material storage facilities on 3.68
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda – July 20, 2006 Page 1 of 3
All materials presented at public meetings Shap become property of the City of Meridian.
Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing,
please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting.
V„
� k..
$a
x xx,
��z'i3
RIP
x xx,
��z'i3
y F �'
'^3 -.j`
YY
a'
n Ays G
M.
x
R `�".K^"�JN� t
t
��$
"did
�cX q
** TX CONFIAN REPORT > AS OF JUL 17 '0**34 PAGE.01
CITY OF MERIDIAN
� I�Gx rU�T --fir
CU(:I lye OF
t'I an
l kkk
IUAHO /�
4••,e,�F_VN12`Y
City Council Chambers
33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho
it/1419PC /V`011(t- 1 tjaA,4.,� /
MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING
REGULAR MEETING
AGENDA
Thursday, July 20, 2006 at 7:00 p.m.
`Although the City of Meridian no longer requires swom testimony,
all presentations before the Mayor and City Council are expected
to be truthful and honest to best of the ability of the presenter."
1- 11011 -call Attendance:
Keith Borup Wendy Newton-Huckabay
David Moe David Zaremba
Michael Rohm - chairman
2. Adoption of the Agenda:
3. Consent Agenda:
A- Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP
06-015 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for retail use as
determined by Development Agreement for Meridian Gateway —
Walgreens by White -Leasure Development — 1601 S. Meridian
Road:
B. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP
06-018 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a daycare facility
for 6-12 children for Shelley Foumier by Shelley Fournier — 2567
N. Black Bear Way.
C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP
06.097 Request for a Conditional Use Permit to move liquor license
from 127 E. Idaho Avenue to 126 E, Idaho Avenue for Top Shelf,
LLC by Douglas and Stephanie Beehler —126 E. Idaho Avenue:
4. Continued Public Nearing from July 6, 2006: CUP 06-019 Request for
a Conditional Use Permit to construct 10,072.5 square foot addition for
company offices, truck, equipment and material storage facilities on 3.68
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda —July 20, 2006 Page t of 3
All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing,
please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888..4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting.
.A�
;n.. An - x49;
r
DATE TIME TO/FROM
MODE
MIN/SEC PGS
CMD#
STATUS
26
07/17 16:24 3810160
EC --S
01'37" 003
205
OK
27
07/17 1626 PUBLIC WORKS
EC --S
00'57" 003
205
OK
28
07/17 1627 WATER DEPT
EC --S
00'58" 003
205
OK
29
07/17 1629 2088840744
EC --S
01'00" 003
205
OK
30
07/17 1630 POLICE DEPT
EC --S
00'58" 003
205
OK
31
07/17 16:32 8985501
EC --S
00'56" 003
205
OK
32
07/17 1633 LIBRARY
EC --S
00'57" 003
205
OK
� I�Gx rU�T --fir
CU(:I lye OF
t'I an
l kkk
IUAHO /�
4••,e,�F_VN12`Y
City Council Chambers
33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho
it/1419PC /V`011(t- 1 tjaA,4.,� /
MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING
REGULAR MEETING
AGENDA
Thursday, July 20, 2006 at 7:00 p.m.
`Although the City of Meridian no longer requires swom testimony,
all presentations before the Mayor and City Council are expected
to be truthful and honest to best of the ability of the presenter."
1- 11011 -call Attendance:
Keith Borup Wendy Newton-Huckabay
David Moe David Zaremba
Michael Rohm - chairman
2. Adoption of the Agenda:
3. Consent Agenda:
A- Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP
06-015 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for retail use as
determined by Development Agreement for Meridian Gateway —
Walgreens by White -Leasure Development — 1601 S. Meridian
Road:
B. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP
06-018 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a daycare facility
for 6-12 children for Shelley Foumier by Shelley Fournier — 2567
N. Black Bear Way.
C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP
06.097 Request for a Conditional Use Permit to move liquor license
from 127 E. Idaho Avenue to 126 E, Idaho Avenue for Top Shelf,
LLC by Douglas and Stephanie Beehler —126 E. Idaho Avenue:
4. Continued Public Nearing from July 6, 2006: CUP 06-019 Request for
a Conditional Use Permit to construct 10,072.5 square foot addition for
company offices, truck, equipment and material storage facilities on 3.68
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda —July 20, 2006 Page t of 3
All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing,
please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888..4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting.
.A�
;n.. An - x49;
r
** TX CONFIRMATIONPDRT ** 0
AS OF JUL 20 106 22:08 PAGE.01
CITY OF MERIDIAN
10
DATE TIME
07/20 21:29
TO/FROM
PUBLIC WORKS
MODE
MIN/SEC PGS
CMD#
STATUS
11
07/20
21:31
8848723
EC --S
01'02"
003
231
OK
12
07/20 21 33
WATER DEPT
EC --S
EC --S
01'02"
003
231
OK
13
07/20
21:34
2088840744
EC --S
01'02"
01'04"
003
003
231
OK
14
07/20
21:36
POLICE DEPT
EC --S
01,02-
003
231
231
OK
15
16
07/20
07/20
2137
21:39
8985501
EC --S
01'00"
003
231
OK
OK
17
07/20
21:40
LIBRARY
2083776449
EC --S
01'02"
003
231
OK
18
07/20
21:42
3886924
EC --S
01'01"
003
231
OK
19
07/20
21:43
P -AND -Z
EC --S
01'02"
003
231
OK
20
07/20
21:45
FIRE DEPT
EC --S
01'02"
003
231
OK
21
07/20
21:47
208 888 2682
EC --S
EC --S
01'01"
003
231
OK
22
07/20
21:48
208 387 6393
EC --S
01'03"
01'01"
003
003
231
OK
23
07/20
21:50
ADA CTY DEVELMT
EC --S
01'01"
003
231
231
OK
24
25
07/20
21:51
2088885052
EC --S
01'02"
003
231
OK
OK
26
0?/20
21 53
LAKEVIEW GOLFCOU
G3 --S
01'58"
003
231
OK
27
07/20
07/20
21:56
21:58
POST OFFICE
IDAHO
EC --S
01'42"
003
231
OK
28
07/20
22 00
ATHLETIC C
ID PRESS TRIBUNE
EC --S
01'00"
003
231
OK
29
07/20
22 02
2088886701
EC --S
01'07"
003
231
OK
30
07/20
22:06 3810160
EC --S
01'01" 003
231
OK
EC --S
01'42" 003
-----------------------------------
231
OK
4
CVCITY OF l�
61'IG�1G�'1?
v
IDAHO
MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING
REGULAR MEETING
AGENDA
City Council Chambers
33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho
Thursday, July 20, 2006 at 7:00 p.m.
`Although the City of Meridian no longer requires swom testimony,
all presentations before the Mayor and City Council are expected
to be truthful and honest to best of the ability of the presenter. "
1. Roll -call Attendance:
Keith Borup — Y Wendy Newton-Huckabay
David Moe David Zaremba
--I-_ Michael Rohm - chairman
2- Adoption of the Agenda:
3. Consent Agenda:
0
COMMUNICATIONS REPORT
R0
AS OF JUL 21 106 05:00 PAGE.01
CITY
OF MERIDIAN
TOTAL PAGES
TOTAL TIME
SEND 0066
RECEIVE 0012
SEND
00"24'54"
RECEIVE
00004'58"
01
DATE TIME TO/FROM
07/20 11:08
MODE
MIN/SEC PGs CMD# STATUS
02
07/20 12:01 8985501
EC --R
00'3111 001
222
OK
03
07/20 12:06 1 208 3457650
EC --R
EC --R
00'2511 001
223
OK
04
07/20 14:10
01'18" 004
224
OK
05
07/20 14:51 WATER DEPT
EC --R
00'59" 003
225
OK
06
07/20 15:04
EC --S
00'57" 003
226
OK
07
07/20 15:51 8985501
EC --R
00'17" 001
228
OK
08
07/20 16:29 208 846 7372
EC --R
EC --R
00'25" 001
229
OK
09
07/20 16:55
00'33" 001
230
OK
10
07/20 21:29 PUBLIC WORKSINC
G3 --R
00'3011 000
11
07/20 21:31 8848723
EC --S
01'02" 003
231
OK
12
07/20 21:33 WATER DEPT
EC --S
01'02" 003
231
OK
13
07/20 21:34 2088840744
EC --S
01'02" 003
231
OK
14
07/20 21:36 POLICE DEPT
EC --s
01'04" 003
231
OK
15
07/20 21:37 8985501
EC --S
01'02" 003
231
OK
16
07/20 21:39 LIBRARY
EC --S
01'00" 003
231
OK
17
07/20 21:40 2083776449
EC --S
01'02" 003
231
OK
18
07/20 21:42 3886924
EC --S
01'01" 003
231
OK
19
07/20 21:43 P -AND -Z
EC --S
01'02" 003
231
OK
20
07/20 21:45 FIRE DEPT
EC --S
01'0211 003
231
OK
21
07/20 21:47 208 888 2682
EC --S
01'01" 003
231
OK
22
07/20 21:48 208 387 6393
EC --S
01'03" 003
231
OK
23
07/20 21:50 ADA CTY DEVELMT
EC --S
EC --S
01'01" 003
231
OK
24
07/20 21:51 2088885052
01'01" 003
231
OK
25
07/20 21:53 LAKEVIEW GOLFCOU
G3 --S
01'02" 003
231
OK
26
07/20 21:56 POST OFFICE
EC --s
01'58" 003
231
OK
27
07/20 21:58 IDAHO ATHLETIC C
EC --S
01'42" 003
231
OK
28
07/20 22:00 ID PRESS TRIBUNE
EC --S
01'00" 003
01'07"
231
OK
29
07/20 22:02 2088886701
EC --S
003
231
OK
30
07/20 22:06 3810160
01,01,, 003
231
OK
EC --S
01'42" 003
231
OK
r
_Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting
July 20 2006
Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
of July 20, 2006, was called
to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Michael Rohm.
M,
Members Present: Michael Rohm, David Zaremba, Wendy Newton-Huckabay, and
David Moe.
$r
Members Absent: Keith Borup.
Others Present: Bill Nary, Sharon Smith, (Craig) Caleb Hood, Mike
Justin Cole, Jenny Veatch,
Lucas, Amanda Hess and Dean Willis.
t .
Item 1: Roll -Call Attendance:
Roll -call
X Wendy Newton-Huckabay O Keith Borup
X David Moe - Vice Chairman X David Zaremba
`
X Michael Rohm - Chairman
Rohm: Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. At this time I'd like
to call the regularly
scheduled meeting of the Meridian Planning
and Zoning Commission to order and begin
with the roll call of attendance.
r
r
Item 2: Adoption of the Agenda:
Rohm: And I'd like to start with the adoption of the agenda and there
ttto
are a few changes
the agenda this evening and before we adopt it I like
would to just make note of the
changes that will occur as we work our way through the agenda. The Public Hearing for
.
the annexation and zoning of Silver Springs Subdivision be
will continued to the 17th of
August. The annexation and zoning for Trilogy Subdivision be
will continued to August
31st. And the annexation and zoning of South Ridge Subdivision
will be continued to
September
V =k
7th. Those three items, including other attachments to those
projects, will
all be heard on those dates. So, if there is anybody here tonight to those items,
they will
not be heard tonight.
Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Chair? We are not going to be opening the South Ridge at all
for discussion as stated in the staff report, we are just going to open it and continue it?
Rohm: Open to continue it, yes.
0. a
Newton-Huckabay: With no discussion?
y
Rohm: That's correct.
Newton-Huckabay: Okay.
.:y'
d 1
3 �Y
y;
r
+
g
q)' #"Oltx 20k
a
L 5 +�
'
,:.
✓C45 ro:3 v . :tr
•'",': ,: $ %
f
€ y f
r k; v
ar,. }.
$
5
r
.4
WP 1
3f
't7
`yi{9K
. ifi '��
v kF
`k
14111;
n
f
}#yzTi i r h°%`;r;Y %,
$ a
mom
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 20, 2006
Page 2 of 34
Rohm: Okay. With that being said could I get a motion to adopt the agenda?
Moe: So moved.
Zaremba: Second.
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to adopt the agenda. All those in favor say aye.
Opposed same sign? Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 3: Consent Agenda:
A. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP
06-015 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for retail use as
determined by Development Agreement for Meridian Gateway —
Walgreens by White -Leasure Development — 1601 S. Meridian
Road:
B. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP
06-018 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a daycare facility
for 6-12 children for Shelley Fournier by Shelley Fournier — 2567
N. Black Bear Way:
C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP
06-017 Request for a Conditional Use Permit to move liquor license
from 127 E. Idaho Avenue to 126 E. Idaho Avenue for Top Shelf,
LLC by Douglas and Stephanie Beehler —126 E. Idaho Avenue:
Rohm: Okay. The first item on our agenda is the Consent Agenda and we have three
items on this and the first one is Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for approval
of CUP for Meridian Gateway at Walgreens, Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
for approval of CUP for Shelley Fournier, and the third one is Findings of Facts and
Conclusions of Law for approval of CUP for Top Shelf, LLC. Could we get a motion to
approve the Consent Agenda?
Moe: So moved.
Zaremba: Second.
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to approve the Consent Agenda. All those in
favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT.
it
x' }
�Z
V",
'
.+r,8 � ;W
� l h
k
€ Y
f.
Meridian Planning & Zoning •
July 20, 2006
Page 3 of 34
Item 4: Continued Public Hearing from July 6, 2006: CUP 06-019 Request for
a Conditional Use Permit to construct 10,072.5 square foot addition for
company offices, truck, equipment and material storage facilities on 3.68
acres in a C -G zone for H & H Utility Contractors, Inc. by H & H Utility
Contractors, Inc. — 225 West Franklin Road:
Rohm: Okay. At this time I'd like to open the continued Public Hearing from July 6,
2006, for CUP 06-019 related to H&H Utility Contractors, Incorporated, and begin with
the staff report.
Hood: Mr. Chair, thank you. Did you want to run through maybe just real quick the
hearing procedure that you usually do at the beginning or --
Rohm: Well, you know, I think I'll do that.
Hood: If not, I can proceed, but --
Rohm: That's all right. I'll do that. And we had just talked about this about five minutes
ago. Basically, for those of you that do not attend these public hearings on a regular
basis, the procedure that we go through is, first of all, we have the staff present the
project as it relates to city code and the Comprehensive Plan. Once the staff has made
their report, then, the applicant has an opportunity to sell the project to the Commission,
point out the strengths of their project, and once these two presentations have
concluded, then, anybody from the audience has an opportunity to get up and speak as
well. Once that portion of the procedure is concluded, the applicant has an opportunity
to speak to any concerns brought up by other testimony and once that's concluded we
will close the public hearing and theoretically render a decision tonight. There are
occasions that we would continue it, but, generally speaking, if we have taken all the
public testimony, we will decide the direction of that project at that time. With that being
said, I will turn it over to our staff with the staff report.
Hood: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. As you mentioned, this
is a Conditional Use Permit for H&H Utility Contractors located on the south side of
Franklin Road, just west of Meridian Road. The subject site is currently zoned C -G, as
are most of the properties around the subject property. There is the trailer park to the
east and some other residences and the apartments further south of those along
Meridian Road. Here is an aerial view of the subject property. It has -- the site has
recently been used as a car dealership. Actually, I think there were two car dealers that
were -- that had their license on this site. The applicant is proposing to convert this site
into an equipment rental service outdoor storage and their commercial office for their
building -- for their business. Here is the proposed site plan. I think I'm going to -- it
pretty well speaks for itself. I'm going to touch on a couple of things, I guess, in the staff
report. One is the landscape buffers. As I mentioned, there are residential uses to the
east, which is down on the site plan here, but to the east there are residences. A
variance was previously approved on this site to allow that buffer along this property line
adjacent to the parking lot to go down to ten feet. Staff is recommending that additional
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 20, 2006
Page 4 of 34
landscape materials be placed within that substandard buffer, the variance approved
buffer, to provide a better screening of the residential uses to the parking lot on this site.
Also, along the frontage of Franklin Road a 20 foot wide landscape buffer has been
constructed and previously reviewed and approved by the city as well with no changes,
but I thought I would touch on the existing land use there to the east side. In the staff
report it is talked about there are gates to the back side, essentially, of the storage side
of the use here. The large parking area will be paved, striped with parking, planters are
installed, all landscaping, et cetera. Then, when you get to the backside of the gates,
this will be at least improved with recycled asphalt or some other dust abatement
material to keep the dust down within that storage area. I think the only real issue -- I
did talk with the applicant just before the last hearing. I have not touched base with him
in the past couple weeks. The only thing that I'm aware of that was an issue is the
perimeter fencing. There are -- some of it is existing. There is an existing chain link
fence with slats adjacent to the RV park that is just to the south of this site. They are
proposing to install a six foot solid fence around the perimeter of their storage area.
fence around the perimeter of the outdoor storage area, which the appThe staff report in condition 1.3 of Exhibit B talks to constructing a six foot tall solid
licant
proposing to do. It goes on, though, to state that no equipment shall be storeis
the screening fence and all equipment shall be fully screened from view. That's the part d above
that the applicants discussed with me. I think they have a fleet of trucks -- I can't
remember how many is in the feet, but they stand somewheres in the neighborhood of
13 feet tall, just their trucks. In this zone you would be allowed to construct up to an
eight foot tall solid fence, screening fence, and that's allowed by ordinance. I'm not
quite sure how you want to approach the storage of the fleet vehicles any differently
than the materials that are stored on site, but that is just a concern. I'm sure the
applicant will touch on that some more for you and I just wanted to get you thinking
about it anyways. They are converting some of the existing buildings. There is an
existing building here and I think I have got the -- yeah, this is the -- the front view. So,
if you are looking at the site from Franklin Road straight on, this will be an addition that
they are building to -- on the north side of that existing building for some office and
some shop area. There are some other existing buildings and future proposed buildings
on the site. I think I will let the applicant maybe touch on some of those if they choose.
And I will stand for any questions you may have.
Rohm: Thank you, Caleb. Any questions of staff?
Moe: Mr. Chairman?
Rohm: Commissioner Moe.
Moe: Caleb, basically, in your summary -- you may have already touched on this and I
might not have heard you, but it is noted that along with them operating their business
here, they are also going to have an equipment rental area in this facility as well?
Hood: Mr. Chair, Commissioner Moe, that's not exactly true. What they do is they rent -
- they rent their services out more than anything. It's not an equipment rental facility, it,
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 20, 2006
Page 5 of 34
i
essentially, functions more like a contractor's yard. However, they are kind of a hybrid
use that mixes a little bit and we -- the director has determined that this is an outdoor
storage sales rental facility and those are a Conditional Use Permit in this zone. So, not
for sale necessarily to the public or for rental to the public, but some in between use.
Moe: Okay. I just wanted some clarification there based upon a rental facility that we
had here a few meetings back and the restrictions we put on that project So thak
you.
Rohm: Any other questions of staff? At this time would the applicant like to come
forward, please?
McKeegan: My name is Patrick McKeegan, I'm the architect representing H&H Utilities
in this Conditional Use Permit that's before you and representatives from H&H are also
here and would like to reserve some time for them if they want to embellish any of my
comments. As indicated, the -- H&H Utility is a heavy utility contractor. Their primary
customer is Idaho Power, so all those big trucks you see driving down the road with the
booms on them and stuff, that is, basically, what they -- what they do. The good news
is they are busy enough that most of those trucks are not here. It's kind of hard to drive
those all over the state and bring them back every time, so most of those are left on
site. The only vehicles and equipment that are really left here on the stuff that is not
currently being used. So, at any given time you're not going to have a yard full of 60
vehicles, you're going to have, you know, three or four vehicles, maybe a few trailers
and that sort of thing. The reason I'm bringing that up is in regards to the height issue is
that if you think about how tall a six foot fence is and you think about other things that
would be behind that, a standard four wheel truck is over six feet high. So, in theory, we
couldn't even have a four wheel drive pickup there. What we would propose is to keep -
- when we do have material or trucks that are there, that would be an excessive height,
is to keep those away from the perimeter of the building and store them up -- or
perimeter of the site and store them up closer to the buildings and stuff. You also see
on there that we are proposing in the future some enclosed storage for those -- for
those vehicles, just basically when they are there, to keep them out of the sun and
protect them in the winter, so they aren't getting iced up and that when they are there.
We don't know if that's going to become an absolute. It's basically we are going to see
how the project develops over time. We wanted to bring in -- I advised the clients that if
they wanted to do it, it was a good idea to bring it before you, so at least it's there, it's on
the table, it's been acknowledged and we don't have to be coming back and asking for
things on a piecemeal basis. I'd like to address some of the -- the conditions of
approval as it relates to the application and the first one is item 1.2 concerning the
landscape buffer to the residences on the -- on the east. We were just out at the site
before the hearing began, because I wanted to refresh myself of what was actually
there, because my recollection when I was out measuring where the trees were and
where that fence was, is that I was in some pretty dense stuff and if you go and look at
the property, if you go to the property and you look towards the east from our property,
what you will find is for about the first two-thirds of that front area where the residents
are, where the current parking lot is, is there is already on their side -- on their -- there is
Meridian Planning & Zoning •
July 20, 2006
Page 6 of 34
already an existing six foot wood fence. On the other side of that wood fence they have
planted mature vegetation that is anywhere from -- you know, I'd estimate from ten to 12
to 14 feet high. On our side of the fence all along there we have planted vegetation -- or
the previous owners planted vegetation, which is now in a mature state. So, you have
pine trees you have evergreen trees that are literally reaching their -- you know, they
have six or eight years of growth on them and they are actually starting to touch each
other. So, to come in and put any additional trees between them, they are already at,
you know, 20 feet on center. To put trees in between those are really not going to be of
any benefit, because they won't grow and that. Because we are putting in the -- the six
foot wood fence, we'd request that, you know, we might put in some lower landscape
materials, but, again, it's not going to benefit the neighbors, because they have so much
landscaping on their side and they have a fence on their side that they really aren't -- it
isn't really going to -- to benefit or screen them. So, we would just ask that maybe we
have some flexibility to work with staff on a one-to-one basis on what they determine is
appropriate and fair once we get the -- once we get the fence up and they can look at
the other side of the -- of that fence and see what's already there. And so we aren't --
you know, I don't want to put in any plants that are just going to die or just putting in
plants to have plants in there. What's there I think is mature. We don't show them at
full maturity here, they are really much larger than what's there. These things are
probably -- you know, most of them are four to five inch caliper trees that are -- you
know, have a canopy of 16 to 18 feet. Regarding the parking lot and all of the -- and the
landscape islands and that, we are showing 38 parking spaces on site. We are only
required to have 21 and so what we would request is that we be -- just provide the
minimum amount of parking. We really don't even need that many, because the people
-- they come -- usually they are going to work where the equipment is and not coming to
on site. They may come to pick up materials and stuff, but, generally, they are driving
their personal vehicles to the -- to the work site and, then, working and, then, going
home. There is not going to be even a need for it. We will never use the 21 vehicles on
the site. So, we have requested the condition be modified to where we can -- we
provide the 21 spaces that are required by the ordinance and we landscape those in
accordance with the ordinance and, then, the rest of the lot would just remain the vacant
stripped area. To that means, the -- on the west side there is two islands showing
there. There is, actually, a third one that goes back beyond where the existing fence is
and we would request that we be allowed to leave that fence back where the face of the
existing building is -- I'm going to point that out. Which is pretty much along this line.
There is an existing -- there is an existing planter here and that would give us 18 spaces
along here and the landscape -- the landscape planters there are eight foot six inches
wide and already have trees in them and, then, we just provide two spaces in front of
the building for our -- one for our handicap access and, then, one for a visitor's space
and we would put some landscape islands there. Again, there is a -- we don't want to,
you know, have to build the islands for the -- just because we are adding additional
parking. We don't want to run -- have the expense of doing that. The six foot tall solid
perimeter fence, that's really not a problem. We are already extending that down the --
down the east and the west property lines. What I'd like to do is give an exhibit that
shows a photograph that was taken today of the back area and, then, once you've had a
chance to look -- I'm going to circulate that, then, you can -- I'll discuss that. What that
Meridian Planning & Zoning •
July 20, 2006
Page 7 of 34
photograph shows is our chain link fence -- existing chain link fence in the foreground
and, then, there is about a six foot wide irrigation canal which is overran with brush and
shrubs and that, which is not on our property. And, then, beyond that is the fence that
was constructed by the RV park behind us. Because of the difference in elevation that
fence for the RV park -- it actually sits about -- in relation to our elevation the top of that
actually sits about seven to seven and a half feet above our grade. It's probably six feet
above their grade. But you can look through and you can see where they -- they built
up that part of the property primarily to -- I think, probably, to hold any irrigation water
and also for their drainage. As you can see, that fence already has vinyl slats in it.
What we would like to propose is on the -- on that south property line -- is in lieu of
taking down our chain link fence and, then, building another wood fence or solid vinyl
fence, which is going to completely encase the weeds that are there, would be is to
allow us to take our -- our fence down, the the drain ditch -- enclosed drain ditch and,
then, get the weeds out of there and have something that we can -- that we can
maintain and the vinyl fence, again -- it's about seven feet above our property. It would,
then, provide screening from the -- from the residential side. Again, just a way of not
having to build redundant fences and having this no man's land in the middle that is
going to become a -- could potentially be a problem in the future and we think that the
vinyl slats will, you know, provide the same intent as the wood or the vinyl. Just wanted
to clarify item 1.4 is that they are going to do routine maintenance on their vehicles,
which is things like, you know, lubrication and oil filters, stuff like that, but it's not a
service shop in the sense of they are not going to be
are not going to be changing tires, ,you know, even changing -- they
9 9 they are not going to be replacing batteries, they are
not going to be taking parts off and rebuilding components. If the
leased and they are very expensive. If they need that stuff done they these II end them
down to a shop and have it done. This is just for like routine stuff, washing them off and
the routine things like you do on your automobile, but it's not intended to be a service
garage or anything like that. The final thing I would like to address is the -- under fire
department -- fire department comments, 1 was out before the hearing measuring
location for the fire hydrants and stuff and what we found is directly across the street
from our property there is a fire hydrant. However, if you measure from that fire hydrant
down to our property, the 400 feet mentioned in the item 3.7 ends up between the back
of the two existing buildings. So, what we'd like to do is we are going to -- there is the
statement there, it says on site fire hydrants and main shall be provided where required
by the code officials. So, what we would like to do is we are going to meet with the fire
marshal and see if he -- if he wants us to place one on our side of the street, which
would, then, place -- would give us the 400 feet to the back of the furthest building or if
he will let the ones that are there go. But I just wanted to let you know that we are -- we
have read that and we are acknowledging it and we are going to work with the fire
marshal on the location of that. And at this time I'd stand for an
questions
have anything you want to add? And I will be available for quest ons after Mr. rHeath ou
Heath: My name is Gordon Heath, 9700 Cartwright Road in Boise, Idaho, is where I
live. And Janie and I own H&H Utility Contractors. I just wanted to say that on the
fencing, we have a lot of newer Idaho Power type trucks,
they have booms on them, they are all white, and they do stick above the six digger
f nce.c That's
`
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 20, 2006
Page 8 of 34
one thing, we just wanted to make sure that you understood we are not piling things or
doing anything else. When we pull a truck in there,
you can see the top of it I'm sure
and we are constructing a new six foot fence around thero e
p p rtY
a half feet. And the other thin now. Actually, six and
g -- if you understand
�.
that. Then, the other -- the only
other issue I had about the ditch in the back is that that ditch is dead. No one on the
other side is
..`f y}x
using it anymore and there is pressurized irrigation over there and that
other ground is going to be developed and so the water runs in lot.
our So, if we didn't
have that ten foot distance between us and the next new fence and we could maintain
that and control those weeds. We can't get in there with anything now
and it runs over
on our place. So, that's what the picture was for. And thank you.
McKeegan: Okay. Anybody have any questions?
"Ga 104,
Zaremba: Mr. Chairman?
r#2kr+
Rohm: Commissioner Zaremba.
Zaremba: Mr. McKeegan --
M- k'Sky
e 1 .. ,n
McKeegan: Yes, sir.
Zaremba: -- the area between the two fences, do you know who has ownership of that?
McKeegan: We have not done a survey on our property. It's appears from where all
the fence lines and everything, that our fence line is probably set in
about a foot into our
property. If you look at the -- at the residential trailer court next door --
p
Zaremba: Uh-huh.
McKeegan: -- at that location their fence projects to the south about a foot and then
g
heads -- and, then, heads east. There is a fence that goes from that location
- that goes south and, then, a that goes
approximately six to -- I didn't measure it -- six to ten feet is
where the park -- the fence for the
new RV heads in an east -west direction. And I am
presuming that they just placed it there because they did not -- the irrigation ditch was
there and they didn't know if it was on theirs.
t
I don't know if it's been surveyed. But we
are -- based on how -- we haven't surveyed it, so I don't know exactly where it is at.
Before we probably did anything to
anybody else's property we'd probably want to --
want to find out if it is an easement or if it is part of our property or if it's their
property
and, then, they grant us an easement to go on there and maintain it. But I certainl
we just found out about this. y
Zaremba: If something needs to be done and can be done, you would do it?
McKeegan: Yeah. We'd work with them and meet with them and do whatever we need
to do. I'm sure they won't complain about us getting rid of a fire hazard behind their --
behind their fence. And if it turns out to be that it's on our property, then, it's an issue.
9 S ki .;,•,� �"-0 , 4' '4"T i 1� #� 7" +iY
�.
.'-� t�
..`f y}x
44,
"Ga 104,
r#2kr+
�.tr7 Vn 3
' �
M- k'Sky
e 1 .. ,n
n in�E.
p
F
t
31
t ' y
ed
e
J1
` ""
a
4a :��r5 dpxs
r511
s
,{�
�
r
L %�%a
N R -b
x
Rin
�#3 g Y 'kk zj
h' [ r f`
kn h
M
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 20, 2006
Page 9 of 34
•
Zaremba: But if you can get an easement for it and maintain it, that would probably --
McKeegan: Yeah.
Zaremba: If it keeps water off of your property, that's probably worth it to you.
McKeegan: Exactly. Yes, sir.
Zaremba: Second question, if I may. And perhaps Commissioner Moe was going to
ask this, but we were thinking the same thing about the property down street hats a
rental and I think I have heard that you are going to have vehicles that have lifts and
things like that, booms or whatever.
McKeegan: Yes, but they will be --
Zaremba: Cherry pickers or --
McKeegan: Yeah. They will be in the down position.
retracted at all times when they are Zaremba: The restriction that we placed on the other property was that they must be
McKeegan: Yes.
Zaremba: -- on the site and would be comfortable with that same restriction?
McKeegan: Okay. I'll have Mr. Heath -- yes, that would be acceptable, although, you
know, occasionally we would have to raise a boom to unload something and that, but it
wouldn't be like where you have a lift thing up there with a flag on it that says --
Zaremba: If it's physically in use I think that wouldn't be a problem.
McKeegan: Right. But normally it's not -
lockedMcKe down an - yeah, they would want to keep them down --
yway, so I don't see that being a restriction.
Zaremba: Great. Thank you. Then, one other question. I forget whether you
mentioned item 1.7 in the planning department requirement, conditions of approval on
Exhibit B, but it says that the -- material shall be used and said that the applicant will
Propose what they are going to use during this hearing.
McKeegan: Or with the CZC submittal. I'm sorry, I'm not being flippant, but I -- I 'ust
chance to talk about it,
actually noticed that tonight when I was -- before I came here and we hadn't had a
we --
so we were -- we haven't looked at our options yet, but I think
s
4{'
i
a „t
s
t:t �
4F sm�'T 1^3'1
i
+X
1i�"'.={..."4L a'
ia
..
s
t
S
N��'#k.
.. c : • ..
4
ix
�r
t d `
IR5
4,
u.
r 5
kn h
M
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 20, 2006
Page 9 of 34
•
Zaremba: But if you can get an easement for it and maintain it, that would probably --
McKeegan: Yeah.
Zaremba: If it keeps water off of your property, that's probably worth it to you.
McKeegan: Exactly. Yes, sir.
Zaremba: Second question, if I may. And perhaps Commissioner Moe was going to
ask this, but we were thinking the same thing about the property down street hats a
rental and I think I have heard that you are going to have vehicles that have lifts and
things like that, booms or whatever.
McKeegan: Yes, but they will be --
Zaremba: Cherry pickers or --
McKeegan: Yeah. They will be in the down position.
retracted at all times when they are Zaremba: The restriction that we placed on the other property was that they must be
McKeegan: Yes.
Zaremba: -- on the site and would be comfortable with that same restriction?
McKeegan: Okay. I'll have Mr. Heath -- yes, that would be acceptable, although, you
know, occasionally we would have to raise a boom to unload something and that, but it
wouldn't be like where you have a lift thing up there with a flag on it that says --
Zaremba: If it's physically in use I think that wouldn't be a problem.
McKeegan: Right. But normally it's not -
lockedMcKe down an - yeah, they would want to keep them down --
yway, so I don't see that being a restriction.
Zaremba: Great. Thank you. Then, one other question. I forget whether you
mentioned item 1.7 in the planning department requirement, conditions of approval on
Exhibit B, but it says that the -- material shall be used and said that the applicant will
Propose what they are going to use during this hearing.
McKeegan: Or with the CZC submittal. I'm sorry, I'm not being flippant, but I -- I 'ust
chance to talk about it,
actually noticed that tonight when I was -- before I came here and we hadn't had a
we --
so we were -- we haven't looked at our options yet, but I think
s
4{'
�r
04
x s
i
1i�"'.={..."4L a'
ia
s
t
S
N��'#k.
.. c : • ..
4
�r
t d `
t
4,
F
Vt k
�4 kid
r
t o
kn h
M
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 20, 2006
Page 9 of 34
•
Zaremba: But if you can get an easement for it and maintain it, that would probably --
McKeegan: Yeah.
Zaremba: If it keeps water off of your property, that's probably worth it to you.
McKeegan: Exactly. Yes, sir.
Zaremba: Second question, if I may. And perhaps Commissioner Moe was going to
ask this, but we were thinking the same thing about the property down street hats a
rental and I think I have heard that you are going to have vehicles that have lifts and
things like that, booms or whatever.
McKeegan: Yes, but they will be --
Zaremba: Cherry pickers or --
McKeegan: Yeah. They will be in the down position.
retracted at all times when they are Zaremba: The restriction that we placed on the other property was that they must be
McKeegan: Yes.
Zaremba: -- on the site and would be comfortable with that same restriction?
McKeegan: Okay. I'll have Mr. Heath -- yes, that would be acceptable, although, you
know, occasionally we would have to raise a boom to unload something and that, but it
wouldn't be like where you have a lift thing up there with a flag on it that says --
Zaremba: If it's physically in use I think that wouldn't be a problem.
McKeegan: Right. But normally it's not -
lockedMcKe down an - yeah, they would want to keep them down --
yway, so I don't see that being a restriction.
Zaremba: Great. Thank you. Then, one other question. I forget whether you
mentioned item 1.7 in the planning department requirement, conditions of approval on
Exhibit B, but it says that the -- material shall be used and said that the applicant will
Propose what they are going to use during this hearing.
McKeegan: Or with the CZC submittal. I'm sorry, I'm not being flippant, but I -- I 'ust
chance to talk about it,
actually noticed that tonight when I was -- before I came here and we hadn't had a
we --
so we were -- we haven't looked at our options yet, but I think
^P1yD'Y t
4{'
D
.40,0z"',
04
2<
i
1i�"'.={..."4L a'
ia
#"
t
N��'#k.
.. c : • ..
4
t d `
^P1yD'Y t
4{'
D
.40,0z"',
A
£t�"
4
Zm
N��'#k.
.. c : • ..
4
16
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 20, 2006
Page 10 of 34
Zaremba: You're aware of that requirement?
McKeegan: We are aware of the requirement and we will agree to do what we need to
abate it.
Zaremba: Okay. Thank you.
Rohm: Commissioner Moe, did you -- Commissioner Zaremba took your question.
He's like that, I tell you. Okay. Thank you.
McKeegan: Thank you.
Rohm: There is no others signed up for this project, but at this time if there is anybody
that would like to come forward and speak, now is the -- now is your time. Seeing none,
discussion?
Moe: Caleb, I'm curious of your opinion in regards to the landscaping on the east side
in regard to the explanation. 1 mean I assume you guys probably didn't go out there and
look at it before you -- you did go out there? Okay. Was that coming from the city
forester or whatever for requirements or --
Hood: No. The UDC requires that on this site -- and you can take into account, you
know, other properties when buffering a property, but it requires it to be on the more
intense site. There is nothing saying that the trailer park can't take down the
landscaping that's on their side and, then, you're left with materials. It is fairly dense.
guess this condition -- it probably only entails a couple few arborvitae. The way the
code reads is that at maturity you need to have a full screen to your property line,
essentially. So, it's a pretty fairly full landscape buffer along there. Granted, it's been
awhile since I have looked at it, but if the applicant was out there today and it's going to
take -- we don't want them to die either. I mean we are not looking for a temporary --
throw some trees in here and they are going to kill each other off. I mean we want a
permanent screen for that site with landscaping and I don't think it's anything too
cumbersome. Like I said, it may just entail just a couple of additional plantings and we
are there. What I do have a little bit more heartburn over, if you will, is the -- them
wanting to change the site layout and only do 21 parking stalls and some of those being
behind the gate and really changing the flavor that was proposed with this Conditional
Use Permit. In the C -G zone we are kind of -- we are right on that line, I think, of saying
you're not a contractor's yard, this is what you are, and you can even go in here. Now,
with wanting to, you know, not even improve the parking lot that's adjacent from Franklin
Road, a major street through the city, I have some real concerns over what's been
proposed here during testimony tonight know the site plan -- no revised site plan has
been provided to staff, it's just something that at this hearing they are proposing to do
and, again, I have some serious concerns over that request.
Moe: Okay. Thank you.
Yom'
ti°"
Meridian Planning & Zoning .
July 20, 2006
Page 11 of 34
Rohm: So, are we to conclude from that that you want them to put the number of
parking stalls that were part of the original proposal?
Hood: Mr. Chair, it's not necessarily the number of parking stalls, its more the
improvement made to the front of the building and if it's 37, 21, 50 parking stalls, the
number of parking isn't important. What is important,
that can come -- should they stay -- I hope they stay for man is that we can get a user
they are
very successful. But should they leave, that we can have another C -G usyears here e dump in
there and not have to construct a new parking lot, that it is constructed so that someone
else that maybe does need a couple more than what's required by ordinance, which I
think anyone will tell you is very very low, you aren't going to find any commercial users
that are providing one per 500. But you can have a site that is transferable in the future
should they decide to leave. And, again, with Franklin being so visible, I think that's --
that's an important aspect to this site.
Rohm: Okay. Thank you, Caleb. Would the applicant like to come back up, please?
And it can be you, Gordon, or your representative, it doesn't make any difference.
Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Chair? Mr. Chair, can I make a comment first?
Rohm: Absolutely.
Newton-Huckabay: I would like to see also a revised site plan, because as he went
through his explanation of what would or wouldn't be there, I wasn't really able to follow
and visualize that. So, although I'm very much in favor of seeing something go into this
particular -- where this car lot used to be, I would like to get a little better visual on what
they are talking about regarding the parking proposal, because I'm not seeing it when
you're just discussing it.
Heath: Really, I don't see anything in that drawing that we don't already have, to be
honest about it. One deal here. I believe that's the only divider that's missing is this --
and, then, these two, I guess. So, it's probably not a big deal. It wouldn't be a big deal
to put them in, it's just -- we got an acre of parking and we don't have that many people
parking there. There already is good vegetation stuff -- this is a fence where there is
good vegetation. We are putting up a new six foot fence around here, between us and
the bar, and there is vegetation and already planters in here last from the people. This
doesn't extend probably out this far, but other than that it's -- I think we could live with it.
Thank you.
Rohm: Okay. What I was looking for there is a commitment from the applicant that they
would go ahead and go along with the findings of the staff report as it related to the
parking and it sounds like they are in agreement with that and so I think the issue of the
landscape buffer to the east is maybe a little bit less in question, but I think -- again, the
fact that there is an existing buffer there currently and as long as they fill in those gaps
between the existing trees, so that at such time that it's fully matured, that that would be
�p,
¢
7
S2.
f ?
�p,
¢
7
Meridian Planning & Zoning •
July 20, 2006
Page 12 of 34
a complete screened buffer, I think that it works for me. Any other discussion?
Commissioner Moe?
Moe: Not really. Quite frankly, I -- the project is very nice. I'm glad to see something
different going in there. I think it's going to be a definite plus to the neighborhood over
there. The only other thing I would make comment on, I guess, Caleb, is -- and when
the discussion came up on the fire department under 3.7, that will be a code official from
the fire department making that call anyway, it's not -- so that will be done at that point;
correct? Okay. Other than that, as per the staff report, I would be in favor of this
project.
Rohm: Commissioner Newton-Huckabay, do you have any final comments on this?
Newton-Huckabay: Just to clarify the landscape plan, it looks like the landscape plan
we have -- or the actual landscape will look like the plan.
Rohm: Would you be comfortable with the applicant working with staff to fulfill that
requirement?
Newton-Huckabay: Yes, I would, because I -- oh, I did have one other question. On the
front -- the addition of the building, the one that's there now is particularly tall. Is this
addition as tall as the current building. It isn't, is it?
McKeegan: Patrick McKeegan. Yes, it's the same height. The top eave line is the
same eave line as what is there. It just seemed to us to make sense to keep that eave
line, rather than trying to drop it down and have that little band of metal stuff to deal
with. It's a cleaner way to flash off the roof and everything to prevent --
Newton-Huckabay: Oh, I'm thrilled. I think that big metal yellow gold building is very
ugly. So, thank you.
Rohm: Commissioner Zaremba?
Zaremba: Mr. Chairman, I actually have a question for Mr. Hood and that is the closer I
look at this landscape discussion -- I'm on Exhibit B
, paragraph 1.2, the third bullet.
Landscape planter shall be added to and modified within the proposed internal parking
lot. Are you meaning what would be south of the fence or -- by internal I'm thinking not
the area along Franklin.
Hood: I believe -- and --
Zaremba: My first interpretation -- we were only talking about the Franklin fronting
parking lot, but the word internal would lead me to think differently.
Hood: A couple of things are going on here, I guess. First, the planters are okay. What
isn't there -- a tree is required in this area here. The other thing -- and I can't remember
Meridian Planning & Zoning 40 10
July 20, 2006
Page 14 of 34
sentence to the end of that saying that all lifts, extensions, risers, et cetera, shall be fully
retracted to their down position while stored on the premises. Then, in paragraph 1.7
on that same page, I would modify the last sentence to say: The applicant shall work
with staff to find some agreeable dust abatement and will finalize that before the CZC
submittal. And I further move to direct staff to propose an appropriate findings
document to be considered at the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing of -- not
this one.
Newton-Huckabay: What about item 1.4? The applicant -- when it clarified that they do
intend to do routine maintenance and et cetera? Do we need to make a change to that?
Zaremba: Okay. On 1.4 --
Newton-Huckabay: Craig said we were okay.
Zaremba: I would add to that -- in automotive terms there is a difference between minor
maintenance and major maintenance. If we said -- if we added a sentence to that that
said minor maintenance may be conducted. That doesn't include repairs or --
Hood: It would make me maybe a little bit more comfortable if it says on the fleet
vehicles or vehicles -- the intent behind that condition is they are not bringing in other
things --
Zaremba: Outside business.
Hood: Correct. So, some language like that.
Zaremba: All right. So, on paragraph 1.4 1 would add a sentence that says it is
permissible for them to do minor maintenance on their own vehicles. Is that what you
were thinking? Okay. If that's acceptable, then, finishing the motion: I further move to
direct staff to prepare an appropriate findings document to be considered at the
Planning and Zoning Commission hearing on August 3rd, 2006.
Moe: Sir, would you also note that the hearing was continued to the 20th of July?
Zaremba: Oh, yes. The reason for changing that date is that this hearing was
continued to this date from an earlier hearing.
Hood: Mr. Chair, maker of the motion, can I ask one point of clarification. The applicant
asked me to ask you -- the fencing along the north boundary -- and I guess it's kind of
an odd time to do this, but I didn't chime in on that, so -- there is no required buffer
between those uses, they are both zoned C -G, so by ordinance there would not be any
required screening fencing to that site. So, if the applicant's agreeable to possibly
entering into a license agreement with Nampa -Meridian or is willing to do what they can
to keep the weeds down, however, you want there, I don't -- that was their question is
F
Y` x
gtw.00
i
tr
"cw p:i.
q� S
p
.ar�:rt fi
tai
7
Wo
{
{
Y
3 @
5 � �
S,
41*"
i
d�
t �<
4
i tp"
dq.x'
Meridian Planning & Zoning 40 10
July 20, 2006
Page 14 of 34
sentence to the end of that saying that all lifts, extensions, risers, et cetera, shall be fully
retracted to their down position while stored on the premises. Then, in paragraph 1.7
on that same page, I would modify the last sentence to say: The applicant shall work
with staff to find some agreeable dust abatement and will finalize that before the CZC
submittal. And I further move to direct staff to propose an appropriate findings
document to be considered at the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing of -- not
this one.
Newton-Huckabay: What about item 1.4? The applicant -- when it clarified that they do
intend to do routine maintenance and et cetera? Do we need to make a change to that?
Zaremba: Okay. On 1.4 --
Newton-Huckabay: Craig said we were okay.
Zaremba: I would add to that -- in automotive terms there is a difference between minor
maintenance and major maintenance. If we said -- if we added a sentence to that that
said minor maintenance may be conducted. That doesn't include repairs or --
Hood: It would make me maybe a little bit more comfortable if it says on the fleet
vehicles or vehicles -- the intent behind that condition is they are not bringing in other
things --
Zaremba: Outside business.
Hood: Correct. So, some language like that.
Zaremba: All right. So, on paragraph 1.4 1 would add a sentence that says it is
permissible for them to do minor maintenance on their own vehicles. Is that what you
were thinking? Okay. If that's acceptable, then, finishing the motion: I further move to
direct staff to prepare an appropriate findings document to be considered at the
Planning and Zoning Commission hearing on August 3rd, 2006.
Moe: Sir, would you also note that the hearing was continued to the 20th of July?
Zaremba: Oh, yes. The reason for changing that date is that this hearing was
continued to this date from an earlier hearing.
Hood: Mr. Chair, maker of the motion, can I ask one point of clarification. The applicant
asked me to ask you -- the fencing along the north boundary -- and I guess it's kind of
an odd time to do this, but I didn't chime in on that, so -- there is no required buffer
between those uses, they are both zoned C -G, so by ordinance there would not be any
required screening fencing to that site. So, if the applicant's agreeable to possibly
entering into a license agreement with Nampa -Meridian or is willing to do what they can
to keep the weeds down, however, you want there, I don't -- that was their question is
F
Y` x
gtw.00
i
k
{
F3 �s n
1� !
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 20, 2006
Page 15 of 34
are they required, because the condition right now requires a six foot solid fence on
their property line. So, just to address it, anyways, would be --
Zaremba: We are talking about Exhibit B
, paragraph a six
foot tall solid fence around the perimeter, meaning the 3entire perimeter., which says Wet didn't
discuss that. I personally would be willing to go with the applicant's suggestion. If the
can discover that they own it all or if they discover somebody else does and they can
have a maintenance easement or something like that. I have no problem with them
taking their fence down.
Moe: I have no problem if, in fact, they do that other property that --
Zaremba: Or can get a maintenance easement.
Moe: Exactly.
Zaremba: If somebody will let them maintain it, even if they don't own it. Okay. So,
let's incorporate into paragraph 1.3, the first sentence, construct a six foot tall solid
fence along the east and west perimeters of the outdoor storage area. New sentence
following that sentence exactly, applicant may remove the existing chain link fence
across the south boundary and maintain the area from there to the neighbor's fence, if
either the applicant can find that they own that piece of property or can get an easement
to maintain it from whoever does own it. Then that paragraph continues on with what's
already there, plus the sentence I added at the end. So, the question is do we need to
restate the motion or can I just add that to it?
Rohm: I think that it should have been captured in -- in its entirety, so I think we can
move forward.
Zaremba: The intention is to have all of those elements that were discussed included in
the motion.
Rohm: Could we get a second?
Moe: Second.
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded that we approve
report and the aforementioned amendments to that staff report. All those infavor say
aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carried. Thank you for coming in. y
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Rohm: Before we open the next Public Hearing there are people here now that weren't
here when we started the meeting and there are three projects that are
continued and they are Silver Springs Subdivision to August 17th, Trilo S bd vi to be
9Y to
to
�2 �
}
Meridian Planning & Zoning •
July 20, 2006
Page 16 of 34
August 31st, and South Ridge Subdivision to September 7th. So, anybody that may be
here to hear any one of those three items, they will not be heard tonight.
Item 5: Public Hearing: MCU 06-001 Request for a Conditional Use Permit
Modification for residential home built two feet into five foot setback (sold
prior to discovery of mistake) for Fulfer Subdivision No. 5 (Lot 4, Block
5) by Russell Dunstan — 2593 W. Ditch Creek Drive:
Rohm: With that being said, I'd like to now open the Public Hearing on MCU 06-001,
Conditional Use Permit modification for Fulfer Subdivision No. 5, Lot 4, Block 5. And
begin with the staff report.
Veatch: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. This application is for
a modification of a conditional use. It's located here on Ditch Creek in the Fulfer No. 5
Subdivision. The exact address is 2593 West Ditch Creek and it's Lot 4, Block 15. This
is a residential area. The home here has already been built and it was discovered after
several inspections had gone through and passed, that the applicant had been given
the wrong plat. The plat that he was given was a 76 foot width and the house
specifications were built to that and, then, it was discovered later on that it is a 74 foot
width and so the house has been built two feet into the five foot setback. The original
Conditional Use Permit was through Havasu Subdivision back in 2003 and City Council
approved that. It is, though, within your jurisdiction to modify that CUP without it having
to go back, then, to City Council. 1 just wanted to clarify that. The applicant will be also
applying for a vacation of the easements of that two feet and the neighbors have
submitted a letter saying that they are not opposed to the encroachment into the
setback between the home. It still meets fire code for the building department as it
stands. And if you have any questions I will be happy to answer them.
Rohm: Thank you very much. Any questions of staff?
Zaremba: Mr. Chairman, just one and this may include Mr. Nary possibly. On page two
of the staff report, paragraph 5-13, you made it clear that this Commission can hold a
Public Hearing and approve it, but I would like Mr. Nary, who is our legal department, to
clarify that we can change the wording.
Veatch: This actual sentence was carred over from a previous report and so it may be
modified or completely eliminated.
Zaremba: Okay. With Mr. Nary's approval, I would modify the end of that sentence to
say a Public Hearing before the Planning and Zoning Commission. I'm watching him for
a nod of the head.
Hood: I may well -- while legal counsel is reviewing that, the first part of that sentence I
think is key, because it refers to a miscellaneous application, which this is not. So, if
You're going to modify it, you should modify the first part of it, too, to say a modification
zy
y
mfrNotn
� 't
ti
zy
y
� 't
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 20, 2006
Page 17 of 34
to a Conditional Use Permit, because that is, actually, referencing another type of
application altogether. YP
Zaremba: Let's make that change, too. B is changed to say a modification to
Conditional Use Permit at the beginning and the end is a Public Hearing before the
Planning and Zoning Commission.
Nary: And, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, Commissioner Zaremba that
probably is the critical amendment, because a development agreement would have to
be amended by the City Council, a Conditional Use Permit does not. Th
implementation of the Uniform Development Code allows this Commission to, then
make those final decisions on Conditional Use Permits, so, therefore, you can hear this
and make that modification.
Zaremba: Great. I appreciate that. I just didn't want somebody to read the record ten
years from now and say we didn't do it right.
Rohm: Okay. Good. With all that being said, would the applicant like to come forward,
,
Dunstan: Hi, I'm Russell Dunstan on behalf of the owners, the Keltons, and m self, I'
going to ask that you guys would approve this and answer an Y m
have. Y questions you might
Rohm: Could we get you to state your address, too, please?
Dunstan: Oh, I'm sorry. 17 South Dewey Lane, Nampa.
Rohm: I'm not sure I have any questions. It's a pretty cut and dried application for --
Dunstan: But I'm here anyway.
r Rohm: Okay. Thank you.
Dunstan: Thank you.
Rohm: Is there anybody --
I
Zaremba: Mr. Chairman? I'm comfortable with staffs assessment. The building was
built in good faith and that the applicant and owner shouldn't have the penalty of havin
to move it. I'm in favor of approving this. g
Rohm: Okay. Before we move forward, is there a Russell --
Zaremba: Oh, I'm sorry.
X:
,
,
f
a -%r
se'
a r,
i�
d
a v4
ah4 a
r'
_ . ,
yq
dry„#db''k�AzYfi3!
} s''-�vi �;z
t '.� L
h -✓fs , 'i1`,.vt�. 4 is k # "m' t�
� 't- 1
'" j
,Y -0FY`zFtq..y �'5f eta•"
4
"A5i4
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 20, 2006
Page 18 of 34
Rohm: Are you Russell? Okay. I'm sorry. Okay.
Zaremba: I'm sorry, I didn't wait for public testimony.
Rohm: Well, that's all right. Is there anybody else that would like to testify on this
application? Okay. Thank you. You're on, Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I have said my opinion.
i'
Rohm: Okay. Good. Then, could we get a motion to close the Public Hearing, if
nobody else has comment?
Zaremba: So moved.
' Newton-Huckabay: Second.
4.:
Rohm: Moved and seconded to close the Public Hearing on MCU 06-001. All those in
favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT.
x
Zaremba: Mr. Chairman, after considering all staff, applicant, and
testimony,
move to approve file number MCU 06-001, as presented in the
public
staff report for the
hearing date of July 20, 2006, with no modifications to the conditions. I further to
2`
direct staff to prepare an appropriate findings document to be
move
considered at the
�
Planning and Zoning Commission hearing on August 3rd, 2006.
Rohm: Could I get a second?
Newton-Huckabay: Second.
R F
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to --
Newton-Huckabay: Oh, wait.
'
Zaremba: We may have discussion.
Newton-Huckabay: Did you have to like strike the --
_
.4
t ;
Zaremba: Well, the change that I suggested isn't in the conditions --
00-4
x
Newton-Huckabay: Oh, it's not a condition.
r�
Zaremba: -- for the applicant.
Newton-Huckabay: Oh, got you.
x
s }
�, e t i �w
d d
"'ei'
.:
YL � � S eF;l � v'� 1 : h +•
.+7,� f
"N P1 :y � ,� f .)F }
Vt 4`?Slm� � E rn Rz' fi .i {,3� t
tt
`fiit�—
1Sy'9.°fk"^6Yn�� £' x is
r ➢°dkD`�`
k.,
x
k
M ,
nga ry ?,�qq i ' .Zl i y. 9 J �' M('44( ,
4
M
�
i
X 'sT`4i
y A
.. }3 Fy 5�t #gS fitfl5 ��3'9X`X,b s; MAN
..
.'�`
1�� �*'} a'• ` ,. L P x. 2 'tt 'k.4 'Y
i
n
t
00
e`
}
t
14
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 20, 2006
Page 19 of 34
L'
Zaremba: Really, just in the documentation. And I believe that change has been made,
so --
Rohm: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to approve the MCU 06-001. All those in
favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 6: Public Hearing: AZ 06-029 Request for Annexation and Zoning of
10.39 acres from RUT to an R-4 zone for Silversprings Subdivision by
Reed Kofoed — south side of McMillan Road and west of Locust Grove
Road:
Item 7: Public Hearing: PP 06-029 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 29
single-family residential lots and 4 common / other lots on 9.88 acres in a
proposed R-4 zone Silversprings Subdivision by Reed Kofoed — south
side of McMillan Road and west of Locust Grove Road:
Rohm: Thank you, sir. Okay. At this time I'd like to open the Public Hearing on AZ 06-
029 and PP 06-029, both for the sole purpose of continuing them to the regularly
scheduled meeting of August 17th. Could I get a motion to that effect?
Newton-Huckabay: So moved.
Moe: Second.
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded that we continue AZ 06-029, PP 06-029, to the
regularly scheduled meeting of August 17th. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same
sign? Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT
Item 8: Public Hearing: AZ 06-028 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 4.43
acres to an R-15 (Medium High -Density Residential) zone for Touchstone
Place Subdivision by Horizon Development — 1187 East Fairview
Avenue:
Item 9: Public Hearing: PP 06-028 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 2
residential lots (proposed to contain 48 Multi -Family units) and 2 common
lots on 4.43 acres in a proposed R-15 zone for Touchstone Place
Subdivision by Horizon Development —1187 East Fairview Avenue:
Item 10: Public Hearing: CUP 06-021 Request for Conditional Use Permit
approval to construct a multi -family development consisting of 48 multi-
family dwelling units (8 plexes) on 2 lots totaling 4.43 acres in the
Meridian Planning & Zoning is
July 20, 2006
Page 20 of 34
11
proposed R-15 zone Touchstone Place Subdivision by Horizon
Development —1187 East Fairview Avenue:
Rohm: At this time I'd like to open the Public Hearing on AZ 06-028, PP 06-028, and
CUP 06-021, all related to Touchstone Place Subdivision and begin with the staff report.
Lucas: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners. As stated, this application refers to
a parcel located on Fairview Avenue, south -- south of Fairview Avenue. It's about
approximately 1,300 feet west of Locust Grove Road and it's currently zoned in Ada
County, R-1 M. It's an L-shaped parcel, so it has a small access on Fairview and, then,
goes back and gets large in the rear -- to the rear of the property. As you can see, it's
mostly surrounded by land zoned R-8 in the city limits, but there are also a couple
parcels that are adjacent to this property that is zoned C -G and also the property across
Fairview were also zoned C -G. The City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan designates
this parcel as -- in the commercial district, but -- and the applicant's requesting a zone of
R-15. The commercial district in the definition in the Comprehensive Plan does allow
for multi -family development in the commercial district for the Comprehensive Plan, so
staff finds that it is consistent with that definition. We can move on to the site plan to get
a better idea of exactly what the applicant is proposing. Here is the -- we will start --
actually, this is the -- the preliminary plat. The preliminary plat includes two buildable
lots. As I said, this is a multi -family development, so there is only two buildable lots with
multiple units on each lot. The access is off of Fairview Avenue and it continues
through this -- through the two lots and connects with the existing Sandlin Avenue in the
Danbury Fair Subdivision. We can move on to the site plan to get a better idea of what
is proposed here. The applicant is proposing 48 multi -family units in eight-plexes, so it
would be six eight-plexes on this site and each of the eight-plexes proposes to have --
well, all but one of the eight-plexes has underground -- or garage parking on the bottom
floor and, then, detached garages for -- to make up for the other parking. And the -- one
of the eight-plexes is, actually, only three stories and it has all detached parking and
that's the one in the southern most piece of the property. In general staff looked at the
design and it's favorable for this area and the only issues that came up as we reviewed
this application were -- the first was an issue of setbacks, which on the northernmost
property in the -- the lot -- the lines adjacent to the C -G zone on the north, the applicant
was proposing a four foot setback and staff found that -- as consistent with the UDC,
that a ten foot setback would be required on that -- in that location. And on all other
property lines that setback is met or exceeded. The other issue that staff calls out in the
report is a perimeter fencing being required along all exterior -- along all perimeter
property lines where it is not currently fenced. As stated earlier, much of this property is
adjacent to residential properties that currently have financing. So, we, obviously,
wouldn't -- that would suffice. But in the areas that are not fenced we do call out for
fencing on those areas. I think the applicant may also discuss that the -- there was a
property boundary dispute on this -- on this site that has recently been resolved and so
there may be some adjustment to the actual acreage at annexation, but that will be
resolved before it goes to City Council. And I stand for any questions.
Rohm: Thank you. Any questions of staff?
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 20, 2006
Page 21 of 34
Zaremba: Mr. Chairman, just an observation if I may. The materials provided by the
applicant indicate that the entry road to this project would be South Jericho Road. It
does align with North Jericho Road on the other side of Fairview, but in Meridian
Franklin is, actually, the dividing line between north and south, so even on this property
it would be north -- North Jericho Road. In the staff report that appears on page four,
paragraph L, page 11, private streets at the bottom and Exhibit B, page one, paragraph
1.1.6. And, then, throughout the applicant stuff that this would, in fact, be North Jericho
Road.
Lucas: Chairman and Commissioners that change will be made in the staff report.
Rohm: Okay. Thank you for that observation. At this time would the applicant like to
come forward, please?
Whitehead: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, hello and good evening. For
the record, my name is Sabrina Whitehead and I'm here of behalf of the developer
Horizon Development and Briggs Engineering. My business address is 1800 West
Overland Road, Boise, Idaho. 83705. 1 am here before you this evening concerning
our annexation, zoning, Conditional Use Permit and preliminary plat for a 48 unit multi-
family development, which will be Touchstone Place. Before I begin my presentation,
we do still have an issue concerning lot lines. That will be addressed before we have
City Council and the developer will kind of speak on behalf of any questions that you
may have. Unfortunately, I wasn't there from the beginning, so I would not be best to
answer any questions you may have. The current zoning is R1 -M within Ada County
and we are requesting the zoning of R-15 to medium high density. We feel that this is a
great location to have medium high density for the City of Meridian with commercial
adjacent to the north and to the south of the property having zoning R-8. We feel it's
only a logical transition to have R-15 between single family residences and commercial.
As staff has commented on page five of the staff report, they believe that there is a
strong argument for saying that the policy set forth in the Comprehensive Plan supports
multi -family residential use on this site. Now, while the Comprehensive Plan supports
multi -family for this area, it should be noted while this a multi -family development, this
development we are going to have it as a condo. Therefore, it will not be rentals, it will
be individual homeowners. By having this development be retained as condos it is also
going to help allow the City of Meridian to offer its citizens a wider variety of housing
options. Instead of having the traditional yard and garage, you're offering the citizens
kind of a different lifestyle opportunity for Meridian. Our development not only offers
many amenities, such as green space, meandering walking trails, community
clubhouse, bike racks, playgrounds, and designated barbecue and patio areas, it is also
going to allow the residents of Meridian a great quality of life. Now, I'd like to note the
developer has taken great time and consideration with the layout, as well as the product
and quality of the buildings themselves. Originally, the developer was planning on
having two story four-plexes that would be placed around the perimeter of the subject
site. We held a neighborhood meeting on January 5th of '96, this year, and the
neighbors concerns were the following: One, having the houses so close to their own
Meridian Planning & Zoning is
July 20, 2006
Page 22 of 34
0
homes. Two, privacy, wanting a six foot solid privacy fence. Karalee -- I'm going to
mispronounce her last name -- Blau -- is that correct? Okay. Suggested nonwood,
since it distorts, and she's wanting to see fencing that would be solid and secure for her
dogs, as well as berming and landscape around the perimeter just to provide privacy to
the residents. The developer took all these concerns into consideration and went back
to the drawing board. He revised the layout to provide a landscape buffer, garages, and
service drives, placing the homes separated from the residents a total of 62 feet,
instead of the original 25. The developer also modified the four story condos that is
adjacent to Stonehenge Subdivision to a three story building, instead of four story,
helping to secure the privacy of the residents. And if we could maybe take a look at the
layout, I can just point out those changes that we had made. As I noted, these are all
going to be four stories and I believe this is where the -- the carport, car sales -- car
sales place is. Over here we have all residents, as well as down here. This is where
we have all the R-8. The developer decided to change this four stories into three stories
with having the service drive garages and, then, a landscape buffer to help buffer and
secure the residents privacy and I just measured this today and it's a total of 62 feet. As
well as having a landscape strip buffering here with fencing to secure the privacy for
these residents as well. On April 6 of '06 we held another neighborhood meeting with
the revised layout and it had much more favorable responses in comparison to our other
layout. The 48 unit layout will be offering two to three bedroom units, with each unit
having a two car detached garage. This development is also offering diverse
architectural characteristics by including features such as offsetting walls, recessed
entrances, sloped roof, and a variety of building materials that allows this development
to have a character and multi -dimension. Now, not only does this development offer
options in architecture, it's offering a great variety in landscaping, with both entryways
landscaped, including landscaping throughout the entire development for our open
space. We are hoping that Touchstone will be a highly desirable place for residents for
the City of Meridian and, just to summarize, we feel that this would be a great
opportunity for another alternative housing option. We have reviewed the staff report.
We agree with the recommendation and agree to meet all conditions and I will stand for
any requests and I thank you for your time.
Rohm: Thanks very much. My question is is it the intent of the developers to build all
the units at one time or is this going to be one unit --
Whitehead: I'll have to defer that to the developer. I'm not sure on that. And he will
speaking, so --
Rohm: Okay. Any other questions of this applicant at this time?
Zaremba: Mr. Chairman?
Rohm: Commissioner Zaremba.
Meridian Planning & Zoning e
July 20, 2006
Page 23 of 34
Zaremba: Ms. Whitehead, just to get a scope of the boundary problem where you're
discussing where the boundary line is, are you discussing feet or tens of feet or how big
or small is that problem?
Whitehead: It would just be -- and, again, I can't really delve into all the issues while the
developer can. We have been in discussion with Gordon Anderson, he was the
surveyor that was supposed to have remedied the problem and when we last checked
with Ada County, the record of survey actually gives us more land than what we have.
And so our attorneys are in contact with their attorneys. They promised me -- well, they
promised me it would be fixed for my hearing tonight, but they promised me that it would
be fixed by City Council for sure, so --
Zaremba: I guess my question was directed at -- it's not really enough land change --
Whitehead: No.
Zaremba: -- that you would redesign the project?
Whitehead: Oh, no. No.
Zaremba: Thank you.
Mach: My name is Jeff Mach. I live at 7129 Snohomish, Boise, Idaho. 83719. Just
want to touch on the property line adjustments that took place. Approximately 16 feet
would be on the west side of the property line on Jericho, which at this time will not
affect us in any way on this project. Like Sabrina said, they -- at this point they gave us
more land once again, but it was a fence line agreement from the '40s and when we
were preparing to proceed on. this project all of a sudden it came up, so we had to
adjust the three parcels approximately 16 feet, because they encroached into the car
lot, which at this point I believe it's -- all parties agree, we just need to get the legal
description. Do you guys have any questions on the development I can answer?
Newton-Huckabay: I have none.
Rohm: I think that's it. Thank you.
Mach: Thank you.
Rohm: Would Karalee Blau like to come forward, please? You signed up and this is
your opportunity to speak.
Blau: Oh. Okay. The first time I --
Rohm: You need to state your name and your address.
Nx
i R a } u 3 R.
y.-
xc c
!(' ,
04-0 { x
i R a } u 3 R.
xc c
!(' ,
t
`t i3
�„++
1
l
4N
3a
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 20, 2006
Page 24 of 34
11
Blau: Oh. Karalee Blau, 1595 North Penrith Place in Meridian. The first layout I saw
these were two story condos. I didn't realize they were doing four stories. My house
does border the entryway, but all the houses down my street will be subject to those
four story buildings along that -- the east side of that strip there. I'm just concerned --
you know, they are going to put up fencing and screening and that, but, you know, it's
not going to take the five years or ten years to build these buildings and in the meantime
all the neighbors are still subjected to four stories. I mean that's two stories -- those are
all one story houses bordering in Danbury Fair, those are all one story homes. There
are no two story homes touching that property line. So, I'm just -- four stories seems a
little extreme to me and I know that they are going to be here in droves to complain
when they find out, so -- but that's my big concern is just -- I saw two at the beginning
and now they are four and I'm -- they are getting bigger.
Rohm: Thank you very much. Lorinda Williams.
Williams: Good evening, Commissioners. My name is Lorinda Williams, I reside at
1456 North Sandlin in Meridian, on the comer, just kitty corner from this development, in
a home that my mother owns that I have rented from her for the last seven years. I
have four children. My concerns are about congestion, traffic, and safety. We have a
lot of people racing from Pine on Stonehenge through to Fairview already. The traffic
control people, the animal control folks bring out their little portable trailer with the radar
speed indications on it on a regular basis at our request. But there are lots of kids, lots
of pets, people strolling in the neighborhood in the evenings and I see people going 60
or 70 miles per hour in the evening, early in the morning, when kids are walking to the
buses. So, I'm concerned about traffic congestion and safety for our kids at bus stops.
I'm also concerned about our property values. My mother did buy this home as an
investment. We have a lot of student loans, so we can't buy right now, so, we have
been in this home for seven years and we consider it our neighborhood. So, I'm
concerned about the impact of development and I am glad it is not rental property. I'm
glad that it will be condominium ownership. But I would like to see the affects on our
neighborhood mitigated. There will be problems. I know there will be. The fence that
aligns it now is an electric fence, a horse fence. It is not a solid fence. Most of those
homes adjacent do not have back fences. They have been open to horse pasture for
the last seven years that I have been there. So, those are my concerns. I would be
willing to talk with the developer with some ideas. I'd like to see speed bumps in our
subdivision, but we don't seem to have the priority that some of the newer
developments do. We are single family starter homes and a lot of change going on right
now. I believe in high density development. I don't think we should keep spreading out
towards the Oregon border, but I'm very concerned about the implications from my
neighborhood, our schools, and our kids. So, thank you for your time.
Rohm: Thank you. Greg Vastobin.
Vastaben: Thank you, Commissioners. My name is Greg Vastaben. I live at 1101
North Shreveport Avenue, Meridian, Idaho. 83642. That is in the Danbury Fair
Subdivision, this R-8 zoning that borders the project. I'm also speaking as the treasurer
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 20, 2006
Page 25 of 34
of the homeowners association to voice some of the other concerns that have been
raised to us by homeowners in the subdivision regarding this project. Our concerns are
related to two main areas. One which is traffic and the other which is site and visibility
of the project and its affects on the neighborhood. First of all, for traffic, we are
concerned about the continuance of South Jericho into Sandlin, which would, then,
connect the subdivision to the neighborhood. We have heard in the past that the city
plan does encourage these kinds of neighboring developments to be attached to
provide better egress and path for the cars. However, we have had projects that were
built adjoining to our subdivision where they did not take advantage of the stub streets
and that has provided a lot better containment of additional projects or different housing
and this extra traffic, which could be a problem of people coming into the subdivision or
using the subdivision to cut through to get to Pine or other locations south of our
neighborhood. The one major concern is the fact that there will be 48 units in this
project which will be -- could be an increase of 48 cars getting out and coming back
during the rush hours. Currently the only egress for this section of the neighborhood is
just slightly to the east of where this will be, which is the exit of Stonehenge onto
Fairview where there is no traffic light, makes it very difficult for people to get out of the
subdivision, especially if they are going west against the flow of traffic on that street.
So, a concern would be that these would add an additional load to that street and more
trouble for the neighbors -- or for the homeowners to get in and out of the subdivision.
In addition to the fact that as has been previously mentioned that there are no speed
bumps or any other types of speed deterrents in our subdivision and Stonehenge is the
primary access from two points -- or two of the three entrances into our subdivision, so it
tends to be a street that is frequently speeded on and we would like to limit any new
problems on that road. Additional concerns has been -- has also been previously
mentioned that these will be four story properties butting up against single story homes.
I do appreciate that the developer has made an effort to move the home -- or move
these buildings as far back as feasible from the existing single family homes, but I would
like to mention that the businesses where they did mention that it was a nice transition
from the commercial to residential and I would disagree with that in that most of the
commercial properties along Fairview in this area of Meridian are all single story
buildings. So, what you would see when this project would be complete would be single
story buildings along Fairview, which would be -- which would have behind them four
story apartment buildings and, then, a drop right back down to single family homes. So,
I don't see that as a nice transition. I do understand that we need more high density in
Meridian, but I do think four stories is an extreme amount and would not provide a good
transition between the two other zoning areas. The positioning of the buildings does
seem to be well suited to preventing balcony -type issues where you have people on the
second or third floor looking down into neighbors' yards and we do appreciate that those
-- that the larger buildings are going to be back towards the commercial areas as noted
in this item. But, again, the one building that is close that is still three stories and it is
perpendicular -- I mean it is lined up with the property where all of those units would be,
then, looking down into the neighboring backyards. We do see that they have
mentioned some landscaping, I believe, on -- here where we see on the lower -- on the
south border between the garages, which is something we do appreciate that there will
be some kind of a landscaping break. However, I do notice that on the east side of this
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 20, 2006
Page 26 of 34
where we have the south Jericho entrance there is no visible landscaping for trees or
anything else, other than the described fence that would be any kind of a break between
the traffic and the noise of people coming in and out of this development along these
people's backyards. Another concern I have is that as people are coming up and down
this main comer, the south -- the corner here from Jericho onto Touchstone Way, that
as they do that at night, all of their -- all the headlights will be swinging back and forth
across this fence. If it is any kind of a flat fence or something that is not solid, there
would be no break there for the homeowners. Another concern that I have with the --
another apartment complex that was built next to the subdivision, the Pen Station
Apartments, that those buildings were bordered with mercury vapor lights, which are on
every night all night, and there was no effort made by the developer to put in any kind of
screening or any kind of light abatement on these to prevent those lights from shining
into everyone's backyards and windows all night all the time. That has been a constant
grievance for those homeowners along that border with this other apartment complex.
So, we'd like to hear some commentary about how the parking lots or the buildings
would be illuminated and if there would be any efforts made to prevent those from
bothering the neighboring homes, if we do see -- if you look at how Wal-Mart was put in,
all of their street lights along the R-8 development on the side are all screened to
prevent any of that flood lighting from reaching into the neighboring properties. To
conclude, I would also agree that there is very few homes that have any kind of an
existing solid fence and it would probably be preferable for all homeowners if the entire
project was encircled in a new consistent fence, rather than having a mismatched fence
based on which homeowners have fences or not. I mean I'm sure there could be an
agreement made with the existing homeowners as to how those fences could be
replaced. And one final comment is that we have had problems in our neighborhood
and our neighborhood parks caused by nearby residents. For example, the Pen Station
Apartment Complex, we have traced several vandalism and damage claims to people
that do not live in our subdivision who have come in, because it's a nearby accessible
park with amenities, slides, and swings. And we would love to hear if there would be
any way to provide protection for our interests. We do believe that it would be
wonderful if the Sandlin entrance is not connected where this subdivision -- or this entire
complex would be its own little area with its access out to Fairview and not be joined to
our neighborhood, if that would be possible. Thank you.
Rohm: Thank you. One comment to your testimony. We do have ordinances in the
City of Meridian that addresses the light issue and just as the Wal-Mart development
screened all that lighting, so that it doesn't spill over to the adjacent property, this
development will be subject to that same lighting ordinance that you have seen on the
Wal-Mart site.
Vastaben: Could I ask, then, if that ordinance would -- or should have been applied to
the Pen Station Apartments complex when it was put in?
Rohm: I don't know when Pen Station --
Vastaben: It's been probably four years. Is it six?
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 20, 2006
Page 27 of 34
•
Rohm: Six years ago? I'd have to ask staff, but I know that our current ordinance
addresses that issue very clearly.
Vastaben: If the current ordinance was in effect at the time, would there be a means to
readdress this issue with that development?
Rohm: Absolutely.
Vastaben: Okay.
Rohm: And you can stop by Planning and Zoning and I'm sure they can give you that
information. Might even be able to answer that tonight. I don't know.
Hood: Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission, that section of code regarding lighting
and not spilling onto adjacent properties or the right of way is fairly new. It's newer than
Pen Station is. I can't remember exactly when it was enacted. It was enacted under the
previous Meridian City Code, not just with the UDC, but it was a text amendment done
to the Meridian City Code. I just don't know that ordinance or when it was adopted. It's
fairly new, though. But, yeah, if this gentleman wants to come in we can sure talk.
Someone could even call the developer and if there is something they can do to hood
those lights, shield them somehow, so they are directed more down. If you want to
come in, though, we can talk to you some more.
Vastaben: Great. Thank you.
Rohm: Thank you. Is there anybody else that would like to testify on this application?
Okay. With that being said, would the applicant like to come back -- come up? Okay.
Mach: I was listening to their concerns here and --
Rohm: Could you restate your name, please.
Mach: Oh, I'm song. Jeff Mach. And, for starters, you can see in our elevations here
these are not starter condos. We are planning to put granite counter tops, hardwood
floors. I have been building homes around here for the last four years and we build an
Energy Star home, we are certified Energy Star builders, and we plan to cavy those into
this complex here. I also heard about the speeding and street issue. If you can put the
plat up there. See, we have a crosswalk -- the other site plan. I'm song. A crosswalk
right there in the center where -- at the S shape. We have already planned to raise that,
which would create a speed bump. Now, the -- some of the garages -- the access onto
the road we believe is going to eliminate --
Rohm: Right here?
Meridian Planning & Zoning is
July 20, 2006
Page 28 of 34
is
Mach: Yeah. Right there. By having the accesses come from the back of these units,
we believe it's going to create -- eliminate some of the issues they have with the cars
speeding around there. We have an access to the -- I'm not sure how this thing works.
There it is. And we figure that people are going to go out Jericho that way. We also
have people from the subdivision that will use this as an access to Fairview. Now, with
the S-shaped road there, we definitely believe that people are not going to be doing 60
through there, if anything, it's going to slow people down. Now, the concerns with
people looking into yards, we started this project as a four-plex project with a 20 -foot
setback from these -- the houses along this fence line here and here, which -- with the
concerns of the people living in the subdivision and them being mainly rentals, we put
together this project, spent a lot of time, and by having the garages here, which would
be a buffer to these houses and being 63 feet -- and I think Sabrina mentioned 62 feet
back, we exceed any setbacks that are required on this project. As you can see we
have buffered all the way around here with the garages here, here, and with the three
story units the line of sight into their backyards, which they showed at the neighborhood
meeting, was less that the two story unit with a 20 -foot setback and I explained -- that
was the number one concern at the neighborhood meeting and I had it all drawn up and
showed them the line of sight was less. And with 62 feet back versus 20 feet looking in
the backyards, this is a much more desirable project. The required fence -- I believe we
are required to put a fence in on this project and I'm sure it will be put in as a vinyl
fence. The lighting -- there is no parking lots here and these units along here -- these
units, the garages are approximately 34 feet deep, which also offers, you know, a place
to -- for the sportsman to park their trailers and things like that, keep them off the
roadways, which -- I mean in most cases most houses don't have a garage and storage
like this. So, once again, this project becomes a more desirable project and that's why
we went to a four story unit. I think that's about -- answers about all the questions.
Moe: Mr. Chairman?
Rohm: Commissioner Moe.
Moe: As far as lights -- I have read this a few times. Do you know your height on your
three story and four story?
Mach: The four story is 42 feet high and the three story -- sorry, I don't remember.
Moe: You did not address the east side of Jericho as far as it just being a fence, no
landscaping or anything; is that correct?
Mach: Over here? Along here?
Moe: Yes.
Mach: Oh, that would be a fence there and landscaping all along there. You can see
that's -- it shows it up there, it's a landscape buffer. There will be required trees there.
And you can see that. Right now it's grass and we are going to use it for drainage. We
,M.
Meridian Planning & Zoning O
July 20, 2006
Page 29 of 34
are going to have some drainage in there and, of course, we will put some -- whatever
we can fit in the area at the time.
Moe: Okay.
Rohm: Any other questions for this applicant? Okay. Thank you.
Mach: Thank you.
Moe: Mr. Chairman, I do have a question of staff, if I might.
Rohm: Absolutely.
Moe: Commercial buildings, what's our height limits on commercial buildings?
Lucas: On commercial buildings? I believe the height is -- it's per the zone. Are you
referring directly to the height limit in this development or the --
Moe: Yes, I am.
Lucas: Okay. The height limit in this development is 40 feet. He said 42. That's a --
we need to clarify. The revised elevations he had submitted are 39.5. So, 39.5 is the
correct height for the four story complexes in this -- in this development.
Moe: But if it went commercial it could be 40 -foot high? That's what I'm trying to get at
is --
Lucas: If this was zoned C -G, they could go up to 65 feet high on this site. That's the
answer.
Moe: No more questions.
Rohm: No more questions? Thank you. Discussion? Commissioner Zaremba, any
comment?
Zaremba: Yes. To begin with, let me comment on the fact that this is going to be
condominiums. I realize that that's a fairly new thing in this area, that there aren't very
many examples locally of condominiums. I have either lived or worked in many areas
where it is a familiar product and they work out very well and I'm surprised there haven't
been more of them here. I'm surprised this is one of the first. I think we have had one
commercial condominium project or two, maybe. I think this is our first residential
condominium project. Some people sometimes have heard that there are big problems
with them. Almost exclusively the ones that have problems are existing apartment
buildings that have been apartment buildings for a long time and somebody converts
them to condos. Those are very difficult. But when they are built to begin with as a
condo, as this project appears to be, I think it can be a fine addition to the city. I am
s
r;
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 20, 2006
Page 30 of 34
concerned about many of the things that the neighbor brought up, but I do feel that with
the distance of the setbacks and the garages, that the applicant has addressed them to
my satisfaction and I think this would be a fine addition to the city.
Rohm: Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner Newton-Huckabay, do you have any
comment?
Newton-Huckabay: Actually, I forgot to ask the developer what their -- I was just curious
what your target market is, who are you marketing this type of development to, if you
could --
Mach: Excuse me. What was the question?
Newton-Huckabay: What was your target market for this type of home?
Mach: We have two bedroom units, which are flats, and we have two bedroom
townhouse style, which -- with a loft. And, then, we also have three bedroom
townhouse styles. So, we kind of spread it all over where it could be, you know, a
family in there, the professional couple, want an office, and have a loft area upstairs or,
you know, the single mother that's raising, you know, kids on a single -- our target price
at this point we are looking at approximately 200,000 to about 239,000 for the
townhouse style.
Newton-Huckabay: Okay. I was just curious is you're marketing families --
Mach: Family development.
Newton-Huckabay: Okay.
Mach: We have -- there is a clubhouse there.
Newton-Huckabay: Right. Right. Okay. Great. Thank you.
Rohm: Okay. Any other questions?
Newton-Huckabay: Actually, I may have missed it in the staff report. Was there like --
is this a development where there is a homeowners association that takes care of all of
the -- okay.
Rohm: From the audience the applicant said yes. It appears as if the discussion's
pretty much over. Could I get a motion to close the public hearings?
Zaremba: Mr. Chairman, I move we close the public hearings for AZ 06-028,
PP 06-028, and CUP 06-021.
Moe: Second.
b
Meridian Planning & Zoning
r
July 20, 2006
Page 31 of 34
""N P ,
,=a.
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to close the hearings
public on AZ 06-028, PP
06-028, and CUP 06-021. All those in favor say aye. Opposed
same sign? Motion
4
carried.
x .
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Zaremba: Mr. Chairman, discussion. I don't remember anything that would modify the
staff report. Am I remembering correctly?
�t �
MR
Newton-Huckabay: I did have one, Mr. Chairman, if I may?
Rohm: Absolutely.
'
Newton-Huckabay: Item 1.1.7 was the six-foot high solid fencing shall be constructed
along any portion of the perimeter property lines that are not currently fenced. I agree
with Mr. Vastaben that a consistent perimeter fencing
`
of one material would look better,
even if you are replacing some of your exterior fencing. So, I would rather see
a
consistent fence around the entire thing, a new fence, myself. I would like the rest
a
k
your opinion on that. of
Zaremba: That's a good point and if I remember correctly, the applicant did mention
F
that they intended to put a continuous fence.
Newton-Huckabay: A continuous fence and replace -- okay.
Zaremba: Yeah we would change the sentence a little bit. I would just take any portion
�
of out -- the words any portion of.
Lucas: Chairman Rohm, Commissioners --
Zaremba: Oh, I'm sorry. Along the perimeter property lines period and take: That
x
are
not currently fenced out.
Lucas: I also wanted to include that staff processed this application and wrote the staff
report as a multi -family development and the fact that it will be -- is to be
planned
converted into condominiums is not mentioned in the staff report, so that
-- or the
development agreement as proposed. So, that may be something that, from the
discussion, you may want to consider.
F
,NiVM.
Rohm: Boy, I -- personally, I kind of think that the structures kind of stand for
N
z>
themselves, as long as the lay of the development addresses the primary concerns of
f {
the neighborhood, whether it's an apartment or a condominium doesn't change it's
reference to the adjacent property. Just leave the application as it is and if they
condominiumize it, all the better.
s
NV
01,
a
#1++3X
. _
a7 X
4
7 � �
eS ?
ng* nk
u"9'
-jam 4 ti H u'4l+rt 3M. T',Yk z4 t
.vwYSFY.-�" r�
'4 1}-r `•z � s r�� k fi Sk �k�'i y N
t i
t
g§
Yh,
xxi4 n
a ,•8 fi+"+�'S" ' + 4 L s r .%'+� _
z,t.„a
yt
f M33` y sG i i s
33'IM-
J
i r �.g
Kt -
tkski M C F y�,y' r"+,'`,>R`Y.`�
4 .S3 fir
44
l
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 20, 2006
Page 32 of 34
Zaremba: That would be my opinion
condominiums that's even better.
Rohm: Right. That makes sense.
0
It's fine as a multi -family unit and if it's
Zaremba: I don't think that changed the form or function of it necessarily. I'm happy to
hear that's what they are planning.
Newton-Huckabay: I would just suggest that for the sake of the public that just gave
testimony, we might address the four story question. I know, myself, personally, given
that most of it's moved into the interior and the line of sight that the four stories -- I don't
believe -- I don't believe that they would be an invasion, being able to look down into
somebody's property, from my own experience, and these elevations are great, they are
a lot better than a lot of four-plexes that we see. These are going to be a -- a nice
home, I believe. Care to add anything?
Rohm: I think that pretty well captures the discussion related to the height of the
development. Thank you. Commissioner Zaremba.
Zaremba: Mr. Chairman, if we are ready for a motion, I'm ready to propose one.
Rohm: I think we are ready.
Zaremba: Okay. After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to
recommend approval to the City Council of file numbers AZ 06-028, PP 06-028, and
CUP 06-021, as presented during the hearing of July 20, 2006, with all the conditions in
the staff report for July 20, 2006, with one modification and that is Exhibit B, page one,
paragraph 1.1.7, the first sentence shall be modified to read: Six foot high solid fencing
shall be constructed along the perimeter property lines. Period. That's the only change.
End of motion.
Moe: Second.
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded that we forward onto City Council recommending
approval of AZ 06-028, PP 06-028, and CUP 06-021. All those in favor says aye.
Opposed same sign? Motion carded.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 11: Public Hearing: AZ 06-032 Request for Annexation and Zoning of
29.31 acres from RUT to an R-8 zone for Trilogy Subdivision by Conger
Management Group — south side of Chinden Boulevard and east of Black
Cat Road:
Item 12: Public Hearing: PP 06-032 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of
148 single-family lots and 14 common / other lots including 2 private street
R� t
x'
a"MIR ?..
; N ti Fi
t'Ws
p "
9 yV"I36
TI
5
Wit}
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 20, 2006
Page 32 of 34
Zaremba: That would be my opinion
condominiums that's even better.
Rohm: Right. That makes sense.
0
It's fine as a multi -family unit and if it's
Zaremba: I don't think that changed the form or function of it necessarily. I'm happy to
hear that's what they are planning.
Newton-Huckabay: I would just suggest that for the sake of the public that just gave
testimony, we might address the four story question. I know, myself, personally, given
that most of it's moved into the interior and the line of sight that the four stories -- I don't
believe -- I don't believe that they would be an invasion, being able to look down into
somebody's property, from my own experience, and these elevations are great, they are
a lot better than a lot of four-plexes that we see. These are going to be a -- a nice
home, I believe. Care to add anything?
Rohm: I think that pretty well captures the discussion related to the height of the
development. Thank you. Commissioner Zaremba.
Zaremba: Mr. Chairman, if we are ready for a motion, I'm ready to propose one.
Rohm: I think we are ready.
Zaremba: Okay. After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to
recommend approval to the City Council of file numbers AZ 06-028, PP 06-028, and
CUP 06-021, as presented during the hearing of July 20, 2006, with all the conditions in
the staff report for July 20, 2006, with one modification and that is Exhibit B, page one,
paragraph 1.1.7, the first sentence shall be modified to read: Six foot high solid fencing
shall be constructed along the perimeter property lines. Period. That's the only change.
End of motion.
Moe: Second.
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded that we forward onto City Council recommending
approval of AZ 06-028, PP 06-028, and CUP 06-021. All those in favor says aye.
Opposed same sign? Motion carded.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 11: Public Hearing: AZ 06-032 Request for Annexation and Zoning of
29.31 acres from RUT to an R-8 zone for Trilogy Subdivision by Conger
Management Group — south side of Chinden Boulevard and east of Black
Cat Road:
Item 12: Public Hearing: PP 06-032 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of
148 single-family lots and 14 common / other lots including 2 private street
x'
a"MIR ?..
; N ti Fi
t'Ws
p "
9 yV"I36
TI
5
Wit}
kC..
P�
p "
9 yV"I36
mat
N
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 20, 2006
Page 33 of 34
- t" lots on 28.17 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Trilogy Subdivision b
Conger Management Groupy
— south side of Chinden Boulevard and east
of Black Cat Road:
..........
f
Rohm: Thank you all for coming in. At
z
this time I'd like to open the Public Hearin for
AZ 06-032 and PP 06-032, g
both for the sole purpose of continuing
them to the
scheduled meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission
Y
Could I get a motion to that of August 31st 2006
effect?
r
>ti
d'g
Zaremba: So moved,
-�
Moe: Second.
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to
continue AZ 06-032 and PP 06-032
regularly scheduled meeting to the
of August 31st, 2006. All those in favor say
same sign? Motion y aye. Opposed
carried.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES.
ONE ABSENT.
Moe: Mr. Chairman, the boards they
presented tonight, are they to take those?
f
Hood: Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission,
I believe we have all those in a smaller
version. They are just blown u So,
we do have hard copies of the same thin
eight and a half by 11. p p g, just an
fi
s
Moe: Just checking.
,.,
nz
f'
Item 13: Public Hearing: AZ 06-031 Request for Annexation
and Zoning
290.87 acres from RUT to an R-8 (Medium Density
Residential (115.91
acres), R-4 (Medium Low -Density Residential)
(69.92 acres), TN -R
(Traditional Neighborhood Residential)
(51.36 acres), TN-CTradition)
Neighborhood Center) (34.65
acres) and R-2 (Low Density Residential)(26.02 acres) for South Ridge Subdivision
by James L. Jewett — south
side of Overland Road between
�
K
Linder Road and Ten Mile Road:
r:
Item 14: Public Hearing: PP 06-031 Request for Preliminary Plata royal
233
of
lots including: 206 residential lots, 11
commercial /other lots and 16
common / open space lots
}
on 290.87 acres in the proposed TN -C, TN -R,
R-8, R-4 and R-2
x m
zones for South Ridge Subdivision by Jae
Jewett — south side of Overland Road
between Linder Road and Ten Mile
Road:
Rohm: All right. At this time I'd like to open the Public
Hearing of and PP
06-031, both related to the South Ridge
Subdivision for the solepurpose of c
to the regularly scheduled meeting of continuing
of September 7, 2006.
r
t r;
y
X,
}
k � 4
5
..
- �k�,9!'S9X
i S +}`�e8}''4j
L+
ft1i�
SK. i � }„,M S f'$%y4
b.0 A
r
'4 014
7=
y x,
n e , t
x- y„
,
,
Al
rtf
e
'i .:AE-„'tM' k•�43 xral t re`s.} Y'�" }i4'e }-„i pig'SU.A
;ytp;
"1 f j"�`
L,
> - .
r,
a
r'wt''','".4
tt
s' v.f P YN k,.Y f
4,.K+
3
f�ti' Siy
Y
,
r,
{
«f r`
y
t b
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 20, 2006 0 10
Page 34 of 34
Moe: So moved.
Zaremba: Second.
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to continue AZ 06-031 and PP 06-031, to the
regularly scheduled meeting of September 7th, 2006. All those in favor say aye.
Opposed same sign? Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Zaremba: Mr. Chairman?
Rohm: Commissioner Zaremba.
Zaremba: I move we adjourn.
Moe: Second.
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to adjourn. All those in favor say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:45 P.M.
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.)
--7
I A,1L4Y&.v Z 1-C I r7
MI HALL ROHM - CHAIRMAN OX"I / I�`� "
DATE APPR( YY , F;�,",,;
ATTESTED: hal 0 ZZ f;
WILLIAM G. BERG JR. CLE
v
C1C, V JV
V
p,�g
MM
CJ
July 17, 2006 CUP 06-015
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING July 20, 2006
APPLICANT White -Leasure Development ITEM NO. 3-A
REQUEST Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for approval: Request for a
Conditional Use Permit for retail use as determined by Development Agreement for
Meridian Gateway - Walgreens - 1601 South Meridian Road
AGENCY COMMENTS
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICES:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS' IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
OTHER:
Contacted:
Emailed:
See Attached Findings
Phone:
Vl� ��14°iaP,-I�asUr�,•d®� Staff Initials:
presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of
•� �.. i' �
{ t 9 �'.
t`i
�I}�'��+
Ns r,
<, y
z.*
i
CITY OF MERIDIAN
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF
LAW AND DECISION & ORDER
.zA
JUL I 1 2006
Otl Of TO ,.
Tx v 'd1' k _ei � 1 r _'' �•+
In the Matter of Conditional Use Permit for a 14,820= ,a
square foot drive-through pharmacy, by White -Leasure Development Company.
Case No(s).: CUP -06-015
For the Planning & Zoning Commission Hearing Date of. June 1, June 15, and July 6, 2006
(findings approved on July 20, 2006 Commission agenda)
A. Findings of Fact
1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of July 6, 2006 incorporated
by reference)
2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of July 6, 2006 incorporated
by reference)
3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of July 6,
2006 incorporated by reference)
4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the
hearing date of July 6, 2006 incorporated by reference)
B. Conclusions of Law
1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the "Local Land Use
Planning Act of 1975," codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code (I.C. §67-6503).
2. The Meridian City Council takes judicial notice of its Unified Development Code
codified at Title 11 Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof. The City of
Meridian has, by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Amended
Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, which was adopted August 6, 2002,
Resolution No. 02-382 and Maps.
3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code §
11-5A.
4. Due consideration has been given to the comments) received from the governmental
subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction.
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER
CASE NO(S). CUP -06-15 - PAGE 1 of 4
•
L'J
5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not
impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed.
6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this Decision, which
shall be signed by the Commission Chair and City Clerk and then a copy served by the
Clerk upon the applicant, the Planning Department, the Public Works Department and
any affected party requesting notice.
7. That this approval is subject to the Site Plan and the Conditions of Approval in the
attached Staff Report for the hearing date of July 6, 2006 incorporated by reference. The
conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements
as a condition of approval of the application.
C. Decision and Order
Pursuant to the Planning & Zoning Commission's authority as provided in Meridian City
Code § 11-5A and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein
adopted, it is hereby ordered that:
1. The applicant's Site Plan as evidenced by having submitted the Site Plan dated March
15, 2006, labeled S1.0; and,
2. The following modifications to site specific conditions were made at the Planning &
Zoning Commission hearing: Condition 1.2 was modified to allow the applicant to
request alternative compliance for the width of the landscape buffer along Meridian
Road, where the deceleration lane will be constructed; Condition 1.2 was modified to
defer the construction of the land use buffer to the south, until another building is
constructed on this site; and, Condition 3.9 was modified to allow the trash compactor
to not be separated from the building by 5 feet (a Fire Department requirement).
3. The site specific and standard conditions of approval are as shown in the attached Staff
Report for the hearing date of July 6, 2006 incorporated by reference.
D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits (as applicable)
1. Notice of Eighteen (18) Month Conditional Use Permit Duration
Please take notice that the conditional use permit, when granted, shall be valid for a
maximum period of eighteen (18) months unless otherwise approved by the City.
During this time, the applicant shall commence the use as permitted in accord with the
conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval,
and acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or
structures on or in the ground. For conditional use permits that also require platting, the
final plat must be recorded within this eighteen (18) month period. For projects with
multiple phases, the eighteen (18) month deadline shall apply to the first phase. In the
event that the development is made in successive contiguous segments or multiple
phases, such phases shall be constructed within successive intervals of one (1) year
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER
CASE NO(S). CUP -06-15 - PAGE 2 of
0
from the original date of approval. If the successive phases are not submitted within the
one (1) year interval, the conditional approval of the future phases shall be null and
void. Upon written request and filed by the applicant prior to the termination of the
period in accord with 11 -5B -6.G.1, the Director may authorize a single extension of the
time to commence the use not to exceed one (1) eighteen (18) month period. Additional
time extensions up to eighteen (18) months as determined and approved by the
Commission may be granted. With all extensions, the Director or Commission may
require the conditional use comply with the current provisions of Meridian City Code
Title 11.
E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis
The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, a denial of a plat
or conditional use permit entitles the Owner to request a regulatory taking analysis.
Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than
twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request
for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for
Judicial Review may be filed.
2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of
Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has
an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the issuance or denial of
the conditional use permit approval may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of
this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho
Code.
F. Attached: Staff Report for the hearing date of July 6, 2006
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER
CASE NO(S). CUP -06-15 - PAGE 3 of 4
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLAN* DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HIWG DATE OF JULY 6, 2006
STAFF REPORT Hearing Date: 7/6/2006 �' Pr ' `� R� � O � !l
TO: Planning &Zoning Commission
0�61
FROM: Caleb Hood, Current Planning Manager'
SUBJECT: Meridian Gateway Walgreen's_ja�#'
I'Ye
CUP -06-015
Conditional Use Permit for a 14,820 square foot drive-through pharmacy, by
White -Leasure Development Company.
1. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST
The applicant, White -Leasure Development Company, has applied for Conditional Use Permit approval
for a drive-through pharmacy. The subject property is currently zoned C -G (General Retail and Service
Commercial District.) Although drive-throughs and pharmacies are principally permitted uses in the C -G
zone, the Development Agreement in effect for this site requires all uses on this site to obtain Conditional
Use Permit approval. The subject site is located on the southwest corner of Meridian Road and Overland
Road. Concurrent to the CUP application, the applicant is requesting design review approval, as this
property is located on Meridian Road, an Entryway Corridor.
2. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION
Staff has provided a detailed analysis of the requested CUP and Design Review (DR) applications below.
NOTE: Design Review applications only require administrative review. Staff has included the DR
analysis within the subject staff report. However, the Commission does not have to make a formal action
on the applicant's DR request. Staff recommends approval of CUP -06-015 for Meridian Gateway
Walereen's as presented in the Staff Report for the hearing date of July 6 2006 subject to the conditions
listed in Exhibit B. On July 6, 2006 the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission voted to approve
the subiect application with the modified conditions in Exhibit B
a. Summary of Public Hearings:
i. In favor: Jeff Huber (Applicant)
ii. In opposition: None
iii. Commenting: None
iv. Staff presenting application: Caleb Hood
v. Other staff commenting on application: None
b. Key Issues of Discussion by Commission:
i. Expected traffic and access to this site and to the west;
ii. Landscape buffers along Meridian Road and to the south.
c. Key Commission Changes to Staff Recommendation:
i. Allowed applicant to submit alternative compliance for the landscape buffer
width on Meridian Road adjacent to the deceleration lane,•
ii. Allowed the land use buffer to the south to be constructed with the next
commercial business on this site.
3. PROPOSED MOTIONS
Approval
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number CUP -
06 -015 as presented in the Staff Report for the hearing date of July 6, 2006, with the following
modifications to the conditions of approval: (add any proposed modifications). I further move to
Meridian Gateway Walgreen's (CUP -06-015) —Page 1
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNO DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE H40NG DATE OF JULY 6, 2006
direct staff to prepare an appropriate findings document to be considered at the next Planning and
Zoning Commission hearing on July 20, 2006.
Denial
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number CUP -06-
015 as presented during the hearing of July 6, 2006, for the following reasons: (you must state
specific reason(s) for the denial of the conditional use permit.) I further move to direct Legal
Department Staff to prepare an appropriate findings document to be considered at the next
Planning and Commission hearing on July 20, 2006.
Continuance
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to continue File Number
CUP -06-015 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following
reason(s): (you should state specific reason(s) for continuance.)
4. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS
a. Site Address/Location: 1601 S. Meridian Road; southwest comer of Meridian Road and
Overland Road; Section 24, T3N Rl W
b. Owners:
William & Mary Howell
497 White Cloud Drive
Boise, ID 83709
c. Applicant:
White -Leasure Development Company
416 S. 8a' Street, Ste. 200
Boise, ID 83702
d. Representative: Jeff Huber, White -Leasure Development Company
e. Present Zoning: C -G
f. Present Comprehensive Plan Designation: Commercial
g. Description of Applicant's Request: The applicant is requesting Conditional Use Permit
approval for a 14,820 square foot pharmacy with a drive-through.
1. Date of CUP Site Plan (attached in Exhibit A): March 15, 2006
2. Date of Landscape Plan (attached in Exhibit A): March 15, 2006
5. PROCESS FACTS
a. The subject application will in fact constitute a conditional use as determined by the
Development Agreement in effect for this site. By reason of the provisions of UDC 11-5B-6, a
public hearing is required before the Planning and Zoning Commission on this matter.
b. Newspaper notifications published on: May 19t` and May 29t', 2006
c. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: May 2006
d. Applicant posted notice on site by: June 20", 2006
6. LAND USE
Meridian Gateway Walgreen's (CUP -06-015) — Page 2
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLAN* DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HIONG DATE OF JULY 6, 2006
a. Existing Land Use(s): Convenience store and some temporary uses
b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area: Single family residential, highway -
oriented services, rapidly urbanizing
c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning:
1. North: Mr. Sandman Subdivision #2 and Interstate Center Subdivision, zoned C -G
with an existing convenience station
2. West: Unplatted/vacant, zoned C -G
3. South: Elk Run Subdivision, single-family residential, zoned R-8
4. East: Southern Springs Subdivision #2, future commercial, zoned C -G
d. History of Previous Actions: File AZ -04-031, Annexation and Zoning for Meridian
Gateway. The subject property was annexed and zoned to General Retail and Commercial (C-
G) with a Development Agreement on August 25, 2005. On June 6, 2006 the Meridian City
Council approved VAR -05-027 by allowing one right-in/right-out only driveway to Meridian
Road for this property.
e. Existing Constraints and Opportunities:
1. Public Works
Location of sewer: Extension of mains in Overland Road
Location of water: Extension of mains in Overland Road
Issues or concerns: None
2. Vegetation: N/A
3. Flood plain: N/A
4. Canals/Ditches Irrigation: N/A
5. Hazards: There is/was a clean up in process at this site for gasoline contaminated soils.
6. Size of Property: 9.08 acres
7. Description of Use: Proposed 14,820 square foot retail pharmacy with a drive-
through
f. Summary of Proposed Streets and/or Access (private, public, common drive, etc.):
The applicant is proposing one new access point to Meridian Road/SH69 at
approximately 500 -feet south of Overland Road. The applicant is proposing two
driveways to Overland Road located approximately 260 -feet west of Meridian Road, and
at the west property line. ACHD has approved the driveway locations to Overland Road;
ITD's approval of the access point to Meridian Road is still pending. However, the City
Council has granted the applicant a variance to allow one right-inhight-out access to
Meridian Road located approximately 500 -feet south of Overland Road.
7. AGENCY COMMENTS On April 28, 2006, a joint agency and departments meeting was held with
service providers in this area. The agencies and departments present include: Meridian Fire Department,
Meridian Parks Department, Meridian Public Works Department, Meridian Police Department, and the
Sanitary Services Company. Staff has included comments, conditions and recommended actions in
Exhibit B below.
8. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS This property is designated
Meridian Gateway Walgreen's (CUP -06-015) — Page 3
CITY OF MERIDIAN PL DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE H40NG DATE OF JULY 6, 2006
"Commercial" on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. In Chapter VII of the Comprehensive
Plan, "Commercial" areas are anticipated to provide a full range of commercial and retail to serve area
residents and visitors. Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this
property and apply to the proposed development (staff analysis in italics):
• Require that development projects have planned for the provision of all public services.
(Chapter VII, Goal III, Objective A, Action 1)
When the City established its Area of City Impact, it planned to provide City services to the
subjectproperty. The City of Meridian plans to provide municipal services to the lands in the
following manner.-
Sanitary
anner:Sanitary sewer and water service will be extended to the project at the
developer's expense.
• The subject lands currently lie within the jurisdiction of the Meridian City Fire
Department, who currently shares resource and personnel with the Meridian
Rural Fire Department.
• The subject lands will be serviced by the Meridian Police Department (MPD).
• The roadways adjacent to the subject lands are currently owned and maintained
by the Ada County Highway District (ACRID) and ITD. This service will not
change.
• The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian School District #2. This
service will not change.
• The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian Library District. This
service will not change and the Meridian Library District should suffer no
revenue loss.
Municipal, fee -supported, services will be provided to this site by the Meridian Building
Department, the Meridian Public Works Department, the Meridian Water Department, the
Meridian Wastewater Department, the Meridian Planning Department, Meridian Utility
Billing Services, and Sanitary Services Company.
• "Require all commercial businesses to install and maintain landscaping." (Chapter V, Goal
III, Objective D, Action 5)
Staff is conditioning approval of the subject CUP upon the applicant installing and
maintaining landscaping on this site. Please see the CUP Analysis in Section 10 below for
more information on landscaping this site.
• "Require appropriate landscape and buffers along transportation corridors (setback,
vegetation, low walls, berms, etc.)." (Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective D, Action 4)
Please see bullet above and Section 10 below for information regarding landscaping on this
site. A 35 foot wide landscape buffer is required adjacent to Meridian Road; a 25 foot wide
landscape buffer is required adjacent to Overland Road; and, a 25 foot wide landscape
buffer is required between C -G zoned properties and residentially zoned properties.
• "Plan for a variety of commercial and retail opportunities within the Impact Area." (Chapter
VII, Goal 1, Objective B)
Staff believes that the proposed use does contribute to the variety of uses in this area.
Meridian Gateway Walgreen's (CUP -06-015) —Page 4
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNNODEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEWG DATE OF JULY 6, 2006
Staff also finds the following 2002 Comprehensive Plan text policies to be applicable to this application:
"The capacity of arterial. ..roadways can be greatly diminished by excessive driveway
connections to the roadways. The City should cooperate with ACHD to minimize access points
on arterial ... roadways as development applications are reviewed." (Chapter VI, page 72)
"Develop methods, such as cross -access agreements, frontage roads, to reduce the number of
existing access points on to arterial streets." (Chapter VI, Goal II, Obj. A, #12, page 79).
"Restrict curb cuts and access points on ...arterial streets." (Chapter VII, Goal IV, Obj. D, #5,
page 107)
9. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE
a. Zoning Schedule of Use Control: UDC 11-2B-2 lists a drive-through as a
Permitted/Conditional use in the C -G zone. However, the applicant is required to obtain CUP
approval because the recorded Development Agreement for this site requires it.
b. Purpose Statement of Zone: The purpose of the Commercial Districts is to provide for the
retail and service needs of the community in accord with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan.
Four Districts are designated which differ in the size and scale of commercial structures
accommodated in the district, the scale and mix of allowed commercial uses, and the location
of the district in proximity to streets and highways. C -G General Retail And Service
Commercial District: The purpose of the C -G district 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, and shall not
constitute strip commercial development and encourage clustering of commercial
development.
10. ANALYSIS
a. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation: Staff is generally supportive of the
proposed site design as presented in the CUP site plan labeled as Sheet S1.0, dated March 15,
2006, and the landscaping proposed, with the following comments:
Existing Development Agreement: There is a Development Agreement (DA) in effect for
this property. Section 5B5 of the recorded DA, recorded with instrument #105134293,
requires all future uses on this site to be approved through the Conditional Use Permit
process. In accordance with the DA, the applicant has submitted a CUP for the proposed
drive-through pharmacy.
Section 5B6 of the recorded DA for this site states that prior to the issuance of any building
permit on the subject property, all existing uses shall be properly abandoned or brought into
compliance with the Meridian City Code, Meridian Fire Department, and subject to the
Conditions of ACHD and ITD. Currently, there are several uses on this site. Staff has
carried this DA provision over as a condition of the subject CUP.
Development along Federal and State Hi wa s: Unified Development Code (UDC) 11-3H-
1, Purpose. One of the three purpose statements is to "limit access points to state highways in
order to maintain traffic flow and provide better circulation and safety within the community
Meridian Gateway Walgreen's (CUP -06-015) — Page 5
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLAN* DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HWG DATE OF JULY 6, 2006
and for the traveling public." See Access below for analysis.
UDC 11 -3H -4B3 states: "The applicant shall construct a street, generally paralleling the state
highway, be designed to accommodate future connectivity and access to all properties
fronting the state highway that lie between the applicant's property and the nearest section
line road and/or half mile collector road." The property to the south has already been
developed for residential use. Staff believes that this requirement does not apply to the
subject site.
The submitted site plan shows a 5 -foot wide detached sidewalk adjacent to Meridian
Road/SH-69. UDC 11 -3H -3C4 requires a 10 -foot wide multi -use pathway with a public use
easement along Highway 69. The applicant should be required to construct a 10 -foot wide
multi -use pathway with a public use easement along the frontage of Meridian Road/SH-69.
Access: The original submitted site plan shows two access points to Meridian Road, a state
highway. The applicant has since submitted a revised plan with a driveway shown at 500 -
feet south of Overland Road. The UDC limits access points to state highways to the mid -
mile. However, on June 6, 2006 the Meridian City Council voted to approve a variance
request on this site, granting one right-in/right-out driveway to the subject property, located
no closer than 500 -feet south of the centerline of Overland Road. A City Council provision
of approving this access to Meridian Road was that it directly stub to the property to the
west, so that property could also use the access. This access, if permitted by ITD, shall be
the only access to Meridian Road for this property.
The submitted site plan depicts two access points to Overland Road, a principal arterial
street. The ACHD has approved one right-in/right-out driveway to Overland Road, located
approximately 260 -feet west of Meridian Road. The ACHD has approved a second, full
access, driveway to Overland Road at the west property line. City Staff is supportive of the
two driveways. However, because the western most driveway is being required/allowed at
the west property line, staff recommends that the subject applicant grant a cross -access,
ingress -egress to the undeveloped property to the west. Except for the accesses approved by
ACHD, no additional access to Overland Road should be approved for this site.
The UDC and the Comprehensive Plan have policies and goals that limit access points to
arterial streets (see Section 8 above) and staff believes that this is a situation where shared
accesses to Overland Road and Meridian Road are consistent with the City's and ACHD's
goals and policies. When the property to the west develops, City Staff should condition that
that property owner reciprocate the cross -access easement for the subject property to use
any drive aisles and access points they may receive approval to construct on their property.
Landscaping: The landscape plan prepared by The Land Group, Inc., dated March 15,
2006, labeled Sheet L1.0 and L1.1 is not approved. The following modifications/notes shall
be made to the submitted landscape plan and submitted with the CZC application:
• UDC Table 11-2B-3 requires a 35 -foot wide landscape street buffer along entryway
corridors. Meridian Road is designated as an Entryway Corridor. Some of the
landscape buffer adjacent to Meridian Road on the submitted landscape plan is 35 -feet
wide, some of it is less than 35 -feet wide. Staff realizes that ITD may require a
deceleration and/or acceleration along Meridian Road, where the right-in/right-out
driveway is proposed. However, if the applicant does not believe that they are able to
Meridian Gateway Walgreen's (CUP -06-015) — Page 6
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLAN* DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HIONG DATE OF JULY 6, 2006
construct a full 35 -foot wide street buffer, located entirely outside of the right-of-way,
along the entire length of Meridian Road, then an Alternative Compliance application
should be submitted and approved by the Meridian Planning Department. Said
application should be submitted concurrent to the CZC application, or before.
Installation of the landscaping adjacent to Meridian Road should comply with UDC 1I -
3B -7.
• UDC Table 11-2B-3 requires a 25 -foot wide landscape street buffer, located entirely
outside of the right-of-way, along arterial streets. Overland Road is an arterial street.
The submitted landscape plan shows a wider -than -required landscape buffer adjacent to
Overland Road. Installation of the landscaping adjacent to Overland Road should
comply with UDC 11-3B-7.
• UDC Table 11-213-3 requires a 25 -foot wide land use buffer between C -G zoned
property and residentially zoned property. There are single-family homes directly south
of the subject site. In accordance with UDC Table 11-213-3, a 25 -foot wide land use
buffer shall be constructed along the southern boundary of this property. NOTE: Staff
has discussed this requirement with the applicant. There is a pretty significant elevation
change at the south property line of this site - the homes are elevated. Alternative
Compliance is an option for the applicant. However, staff recommends that the
Commission consider any testimony that may be presented during the subject public
hearing on this issue.
• UDC 11 -3B -8C2 requires a landscape planter to be constructed to break up long rows
of parking stalls. A maximum of 12 parking stalls shall be allowed in a row, until a
landscape planter is constructed. Landscape planters are also required on the ends of
rows to prevent cross -space driving. Said landscape planters shall contain a minimum
of 50 square feet of are and be at least 5 -feet wide, measured inside curbs. At least one
tree and vegetative groundcover should be placed with said landscape planters. Several
landscape planters should be added to and modified within the proposed internal
parking lot, spaced and landscaped in accordance with UDC 11-313-8C2.
• Approximately two-thirds of the subject site is not proposed for development at this
time. Therefore, the area shown for future site development should be maintained free
of combustible vegetation (weeds). NOTE: On a similar project, the Commission has
required the applicant only developing a portion of the site to install grass on the
remaining portion. Staff recommends that the Commission determine if planting the
future site development area is appropriate in this instance or not.
• A written certificate of completion should be prepared by the landscape architect,
designer, or qualified nurseryman responsible for the landscape plan and submitted
prior to occupancy of the building. All standards of installation shall apply as listed in
UDC 11-311-14.
Submit a revised landscape plan, with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application.
Parkins: The applicant is proposing to construct 116 parking stalls for this use; 30 parking
stalls are required by Ordinance. UDC Table 11-3C-1 requires 90 -degree parking stalls to
be 19 -feet long, adjacent to 25 -foot wide drive aisles. UDC 11 -3C -5B4 allows parking stall
dimensions to be reduced by 2 feet in length if 2 feet is added to the width of the sidewalk
or landscape area. Compact stalls may be reduced in depth by an additional two feet. UDC
11 -3A -17A requires sidewalks to be at least 5 -feet wide. All parking should comply with
the standards of the UDC.
Meridian Gateway Walgreen's (CUP -06-015) — Page 7
CITY OF MERIDIAN PL DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HIONG DATE OF JULY 6, 2006
One bicycle parking space shall be provided for every 25 vehicle parking spaces (UDC 11-
3C -6G). Provide a minimum of 5 park bicycle rack on this site.
Drive-through Design: Staff is supportive of the proposed drive-through configuration, and
finds that it meets the requirements set forth in UDC 114-3.11, which states that "a site
plan shall be submitted that demonstrates safe pedestrian and vehicular access and
circulation on the site and between adjacent properties. At a minimum, the site plan shall
demonstrate compliance with the following standards:
• Stacking lanes shall have sufficient capacity to prevent obstruction of the public
right-of-way by patrons;
• The stacking lane shall be a separate lane from the circulation lanes needed for
access and parking;
• The stacking lane shall not be located within ten feet (10') of any residential district
or existing residence;
• Any stacking lane greater than one hundred feet (100') in length shall provide for an
escape lane.
• A letter from the Transportation Authority indicating the site plan is in compliance
with the authority's standards and policies shall be required.
Staff finds that the site plan submitted with this application complies with the drive-through
standards set forth in UDC 114-3.11.
Certificate of Zoning Compliance: The purpose of a Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC)
permit is to ensure that all construction, alterations and/or the establishment of a new use
complies with all of the provisions of the UDC before any work on the structure is started
and/or the use is established (UDC 11 -5B -1A). To ensure that all of the conditions of
approval listed in Exhibit B are complied with, the applicant should be required to obtain a
CZC permit and occupancy from the Planning Department.
Design Review Standards (UDC 11-3A-19)• This project is adjacent to Meridian Road, and
Entryway Corridor. UDC 11-3A-19 requires Design Review approval for uses/buildings
along Entryway Corridors. The applicant has submitted a Design Review application
concurrently with the CUP application. Staff finds that the subject site should comply with
the standards for uses along entryway corridors as follows:
1. Architectural Character:
a. Facades: Facades visible from a public street shall incorporate modulations in the facade,
roof line recesses and projections along a minimum of twenty percent (20%) of the length of
the facade.
b. Primary public entrance(s): The primary building entrance(s) shall be clearly defined by
the architectural design of the building. Windows, awnings, or arcades shall total a minimum
of thirty percent (30%) of the facade length facing a public street.
c. Roof lines: Roof design shall demonstrate two or more of the following: a) overhanging
eaves, b) sloped roofs; c) two (2) or more roof planes; d) varying parapet heights; and e)
cornices.
d. Pattern variations: At least two (2) changes in one (1) or a combination of the following
shall be incorporated into the building design: color, texture and/ materials.
Meridian Gateway Walgreen's (CUP -06-015) — Page 8
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNI&DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE H*G DATE OF JULY 6, 2006
e. Mechanical equipment: All ground -level and rooftop mechanical equipment shall be
screened to the height of the unit as viewed from the property line.
2. Color and materials: Exterior building walls shall demonstrate the appearance of high-
quality materials of stone, brick, wood or other native materials. Acceptable materials include
tinted or textured masonry block, textured architectural coated concrete panels, tinted or
textured masonry block, or stucco or stucco -like synthetic materials. Smooth -faced concrete
block, tilt -up concrete panels, or prefabricated steel panels are prohibited except as accent
materials.
3. Parking Lots: No more than seventy percent (70%) of the off-street parking area for the
structure shall be located between the front fagade of the structure and abutting streets, unless
the principal building(s) and/or parking is/are screened from view by other structures,
landscaping and/or berms.
4. Pedestrian walkway
a. A continuous internal pedestrian walkway that is a minimum of eight feet (8') in width
shall be provided from the perimeter sidewalk to the main building entrance. The walkway
width shall be maintained clear of any outdoor sale displays, vending machines, or temporary
structures.
b. The internal pedestrian walkway shall be distinguished from the vehicular driving surfaces
through the use of pavers, colored or scored concrete, or bricks.
c. Walkways at least eight feet (8') in width, shall be provided for any aisle length that is
greater than one -hundred fifty (150) parking spaces or two hundred feet (200') away from the
main building entrance.
d. The walkways shall have weather protection (including but not limited to an awning or
arcade) within twenty feet (20') of all customer entrances.
The building elevations prepared by BRS Architects (Drawing E1.0) are approved, as they
comply with the Design Review standards contained in UDC 11-3A-19. Further, BRS
Architects has submitted a memo to the Meridian Planning Department, dated April 14, 2006,
stating that the proposal meets the Design Review Standards listed above. Staff believes that
the subject DR application generally complies with the DR standards and is hereby approved,
except for the 8 -foot wide pedestrian walkway requirement from the perimeter sidewalk. A
continuous internal pedestrian walkway that is a minimum of eight feet in width should be
provided from the perimeter sidewalk to the main building entrance (5 -feet currently shown).
The internal pedestrian walkway should be distinguished from the vehicular driving surfaces
through the use of pavers, colored or scored concrete, or bricks. The walkway width shall be
maintained clear of any outdoor sale displays, vending machines, or temporary structures.
b. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of CUP -06-015 for Meridian
Gateway Walii-ii reen's as presented in the Staff Report for the hearing date of Julv 6 2006
based on the Findings of Fact as listed in Exhibit C and subject to the conditions of approval
as listed in Exhibit B. On July 6, 2006, the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
voted to approve the subject application with the conditions in Exhibit B
Meridian Gateway Walgreen's (CUP -06-015) — Page 9
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLAN*DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HUNG DATE OF JULY 6, 2006
11. EXHIBITS
A. Drawings
1. CUP Site Plans (Original Site Plan (dated March 15, 2006) and Alternative Site Plan
with revised access location)
2. CUP Landscape Plan (dated March 15, 2006)
3. Building Elevations (Sheet E1.0)
B. Conditions of Approval
1. Planning Department
2. Public Works Department
3. Fire Department
4. Police Department
5. Parks Department
6. Sanitary Service Company
7. Idaho Transportation Department
8. Central District Health
9. Ada County Highway District
C. Required Findings from Zoning Ordinance
Meridian Gateway Walgreen's (CUP -06-015) — Page 10
� ry
f
j
S 3E+
� ry
f
j
O1 t
£ V
# a
0i
� ry
to -
j
y,
�r
#
( }5 Y
fl
�yf
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNSDEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE&G DATE OF JULY 6, 2006
A. Drawings
1. CUP Site Plan (dated March 15, 2006)
Exhibit A — Page 1
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNODEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HIOVG DATE OF JULY 6, 2006
Exhibit A — Page 2
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLA"o DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HIWG DATE OF JULY 6, 2006
2. Landscape Plan (dated March 15, 2006)
Seg �Q
Rif RP11
011p ify
Frmfullk ot!,di 11
Exhibit A - Page 3
MERIDIAN GATEWAY CENTER
COndiftnal Use Landscape plan
mwWan. fdaho V,
Z,
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNODEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEOIG DATE OF JULY 6, 2006
Exhibit A — Page 4
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNODEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEWG DATE OF JULY 6, 2006
3. Building Elevations (prepared by BRS Architects, Drawing E1.0)
Exhibit A — Page 5
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLAN* DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE H4WG DATE OF JULY 6, 2006
B. Conditions of Approval
1. PLANNING DEPARTMENTS
1.1 The Site Plan labeled as S 1.0, prepared by The Land Group, Inc., dated March 15, 2006 is not
approved. A revised Site Plan, depicting the conditions listed herein, shall be submitted with the
Certificate of Zoning Compliance application for the subject retail pharmacy. Comply with all
previous requirements of this site associated with AZ -04-031, Development Agreement
Instrument #105134293, and VAR -05-027. All future uses on this site shall be approved through
the Conditional Use Permit process.
1.2 The Landscape Plan labeled Ll .0 and Ll. 1, prepared by The Land Group, Inc., dated March 15,
2006 is not approved as submitted. The following modifications/notes shall be made to the
submitted landscape plan and submitted with the CZC application:
• UDC Table 11-2B-3 requires a 35 -foot wide landscape street buffer along entryway
corridors. Unless otherwise approved by the City, construct a full 35 -foot wide street
buffer, located entirely outside of the right-of-way, along the entire length of Meridian
Road. Installation of the landscaping adjacent to Meridian Road shall comply with UDC
11-3B-7. The applicant shall be allowed to submit an alternative compliance
application to the Planning Department, requesting that the landscape buffer area
be reduced adjacent to the deceleration lane on Meridian Road.
• UDC Table 11-2B-3 requires a 25 -foot wide landscape street buffer, located entirely
outside of the right-of-way along arterial streets. Construct a minimum 25 -foot wide
street buffer, located entirely outside of the right-of-way, along the entire length of
Overland Road. Installation of the landscaping adjacent to Overland Road shall comply
with UDC 11-3B-7.
• UDC Table 11-2B-3 requires a 25 -foot wide land use buffer between C -G zoned
property and residentially zoned property. In accordance with UDC Table 11-2B-3, and
unless otherwise approved by the City, construct a 25 -foot wide land use buffer along
the southern boundary of this property. The subject land use buffer shall be
constructed when the next CUP building is constructed on this site.
• In accordance with UDC 11 -3B -8C2, construct landscape planters to break up rows of
parking in excess of 12 in a row. Landscape planters shall also be constructed on the
ends of rows to prevent cross -space driving. Said landscape planters shall contain a
minimum of 50 square feet and be at least 5 -feet wide, measured inside curbs. At least
one tree and vegetative groundcover shall be placed with said landscape planters.
Landscaping within said planters shall be installed in accordance with UDC 11 -3B -8C2.
• Approximately two-thirds of the subject site is not proposed for development at this
time. The area shown for future site development shall be maintained free of
combustible vegetation (weeds) and other nuisances (signs, junk cars, etc.).
• A written certificate of completion shall be prepared by the landscape architect,
designer, or qualified nurseryman responsible for the landscape plan and submitted
prior to occupancy of the building. All standards of installation shall apply as listed in
UDC 11-3B-14.
Submit a revised landscape plan, with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application.
1.3 Provide a minimum of a 5 -bike rack on this site.
1.4 Construct a 10 -foot wide multi -use pathway along Highway 69, located outside of the right-of-
way, with a public use easement.
Exhibit B
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANN*DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEONG DATE OF JULY 6, 2006
1.5 Construct one right-in/right-out only driveway to Meridian Road/SH-69, if permitted by ITD.
Said driveway shall be located no closer than 500 -feet south of the centerline of Overland Road,
and shall directly continue/stub to the undeveloped parcel to the west. Construct two driveways to
Overland Road, as approved by ACHD. Provide a copy of a recorded cross -access, ingress/egress
easement for the property to the west to use the westernmost driveway to Overland Road for
access. Construct all driveways into/out of this site as allowed by ACRD, ITD and VAR -05-027.
1.6 The subject drive-through design is approved as proposed, as it complies with the standards set
forth in UDC 11-4-3.11. Submit a letter from the Transportation Authority (ACRD) indicating
the site plan is in compliance with the authority's standards and policies.
1.7 To ensure that all of the conditions of approval for CUP -06-015 and the existing Development
Agreement in effect for this site are complied with, the applicant shall be required to obtain a
Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) permit, and occupancy, from the Planning Department
prior to operation of the pharmacy. All existing uses shall be properly abandoned or brought into
compliance with the Meridian City Code, Meridian Fire Department, and subject to the
Conditions of ACHD and ITD.
1.8 The building elevations prepared by BRS Architects (Sheet E1.0) are approved, as they generally
comply with the Design Review standards contained in UDC 11-3A-19.
1.9 A continuous internal pedestrian walkway that is a minimum of eight feet in width should be
provided from the perimeter sidewalk to the main building entrance (5 -feet currently shown). The
internal pedestrian walkway should be distinguished from the vehicular driving surfaces through
the use of pavers, colored or scored concrete, or bricks. The walkway width shall be maintained
clear of any outdoor sale displays, vending machines, or temporary structures.
1.10 All required improvements must be complete prior to obtaining a Certificate of Occupancy for the
proposed development. A temporary Certificate of Occupancy may be obtained by providing
surety to the City in the form of a letter of credit or cash in the amount of 110% of the cost of the
required improvements (including paving, striping, landscaping, and irrigation). A bid must
accompany any request for temporary occupancy.
1.11 No signs are approved with this CUP application. All business signs require a separate sign
permit in compliance with the sign ordinance.
1.12 The applicant shall have a maximum of 18 months to commence the use as permitted in accord
with the conditions of approval listed above.
2. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
2.1 Sanitary sewer service to this development is being proposed via service lines from existing
mains next to this property. If the need arises to install sewer mains, the applicant shall be
responsible to install any mains necessary to provide service; applicant shall coordinate main size
and routing with the Public Works Department, and execute standard forms of easements for any
mains that are required to provide service. Minimum cover over sewer mains is three feet, if
cover from top of pipe to sub -grade is less than three feet than alternate materials shall be used in
conformance of City of Meridian Public Works Departments Standard Specifications.
2.2 Water service to this site is being proposed via extension of mains W. Overland Road. The
applicant shall be responsible to install all water mains necessary to serve this development,
coordinate main size and routing with Public Works.
2.3 The applicant shall coordinate fire hydrant placement with the Public Works Department during
plan review.
2.4 During plan review a looped system may be required to achieve adequate fire flows.
Exhibit B
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNO DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HIWG DATE OF JULY 6, 2006
2.5 The applicant has indicated that City Water will be the main source for the irrigation system in
this development. Prior to plan approval the applicant shall submit evidence that they have no
existing water rights from an irrigation district. If they do have existing irrigation rights the
applicant shall be required to install a pressure irrigation system using the available surface water.
If they do not have existing water rights and City Water is used as the main source the applicant
shall be responsible for the payment of Well Development Fees prior to occupancy.
2.6 The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round
source of water (UDC 11-3A-6). The applicant should be required to use any existing surface or
well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single -point
connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single -point connection is utilized,
the developer will be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to
signature on the final plat by the City Engineer.
2.7 There shall be a 10 -foot separation between all water mains and the high water mark of any
drainage swale.
2.8 The applicant shall provide a 20 -foot easement for all public water/sewer mains outside of public
right of way (include all water services and hydrants
2.9 All development improvements, including but not limited to sewer, fencing, micro -paths,
pressurized irrigation and landscaping shall be installed and approved prior to obtaining
certificates of occupancy.
2.10 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction
inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to signature on the final plat.
2.11 It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that all development features comply with
the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act.
2.12 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with and NPDES Permitting that
may be required by the Environmental Protection Agency.
2.13 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting
that may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers.
2.14 Compaction test results shall be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building
pads receiving engineered backfill, where footing would sit atop fill material.
3. FIRE DEPARTMENT
3.1 Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Fire Department and
water quality by the Meridian Water Department for bacteria testing.
3.2 Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department.
a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 '/2" outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle.
b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it.
c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works specifications.
d. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on corners when spacing permits.
e. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'.
f. Fire hydrants shall be place 18" above finish grade.
g. Fire hydrants shall be provided to meet the requirements of the IFC Section 509.5.
h. Show all proposed or existing hydrants for all new construction or additions to
existing buildings within 1,000 feet of the project.
3.3 All entrance and internal roads and alleys shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside
Exhibit B
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLA4N4DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEONG DATE OF JULY 6, 2006
radius.
3.4 All driveways shall be straight or have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside and
shall have a clear driving surface which is 20' wide.
3.5 For all Fire Lanes, provide signage "No Parking Fire Lane".
3.6 Building setbacks shall be per the International Building Code for one and two story construction.
3.7 Commercial and office occupancies will require a fire -flow consistent with the International Fire
Code to service the proposed project. Fire hydrants shall be placed per Appendix D.
3.8 The fire department requests that any future signalization installed as the result of the
development of this project be equipped with Opticom Sensors to ensure a safe and
efficient response by fire and emergency medical service vehicles. This cost of this
installation is to be borne by the developer.
3.9 Maintain a separation of 5' from the building to the dumpster enclosure if the compactor is
not used.
3.10 Provide a Knox box entry system for the complex prior to occupancy.
3.11 Operational fire hydrants, temporary or permanent street signs and access roads with an all
weather surface are required before combustible construction is brought on site.
3.12 All aspects of the building systems (including exiting systems), processes & storage
practices shall be required to comply with the International Fire Code.
3.13 All portions of the buildings located on this project must be within 150' of a paved surface
as measured around the perimeter of the building.
3.14 Provide exterior egress lighting as required by the International Building & Fire Codes.
3.15 There shall be a fire hydrant within 100' of all Fire Department connections.
4. POLICE DEPARTMENT
4.1 The south facade shall be modified to include windows that look onto the loading areas.
5. PARKS DEPARTMENT
5.1 The Parks Department has no concerns related to the application.
6. SANITARY SERVICES COMPANY
6.1 Please contact Bill Gregory at SSC (888-3999) for detailed review of your proposal and
submit stamped (approved) plans with your certificate of zoning compliance application.
7. IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT
7.1 An access application (Permit Number 3-06-083) has been submitted to ITD for the
subject development. The permit application has not been approved at this time. ITD is
currently waiting for information from the City of Meridian regarding this development.
8. NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT
8.1 If all storm drainage is retained on-site there will be no impact on Nampa & Meridian Irrigation
District an no further review will be required. However, if any surface drainage leaves the site,
the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District requires that a Land Use Change Application be filed,
Exhibit B
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLAN4DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEWG DATE OF JULY 6, 2006
for review, prior to final platting. Please contact Donna Moore at 466-7861 for further
information.
8.2 All municipal surface drainage must be retained on site. If any municipal surface drainage leaves
the site, the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District must review drainage plans.
8.3 The developer must comply with Idaho Code 31-3805.
8.4 It is recommended that irrigation water be made available to all developments within the Nampa
& Meridian Irrigation District.
9. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT
SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS
1. Dedicate 65 -feet of right-of-way (tapering to 63.5 -feet of right-of-way at the west property line,
see intersection design plans) from the centerline of Overland Road abutting the parcel by means
of a warranty deed. The right-of-way purchase and sale agreement and deed must be completed
and signed by the applicant prior to scheduling the final plat for signature by the ACHD
Commission or prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever
occurs first. Allow up to 30 business days to process the right-of-way dedication after receipt of
all requested material. The owner will be paid the fair market value of the right-of-way dedicated
which is an addition to existing ACHD right-of-way if the owner submits a letter of application to
the impact fee administrator prior to breaking ground, in accordance with the ACHD Ordinance
in effect at that time (currently Ordinance #200), if funds are available. This right-of-way
dedication should facilitate the necessary improvements noted in the Five Year Work Program
and Capital Improvements Plan; however, the applicant should consult with District Staff
regarding the construction, design, and timeframes of the aforementioned projects.
2. Construct a 5 -foot detached concrete sidewalk abutting the site on Overland Road OR provide the
District with a road trust for the approximate cost of the sidewalk $9,000 ($20 a lineal foot, 450 -
feet). If the applicant chooses to construct the detached concrete sidewalk, they shall coordinate
with District Development Review and Design staff on the location of the sidewalk.
3. Locate the first proposed driveway on Overland Road located approximately 260 -feet west of the
intersection with SH 69. This driveway shall be constructed as a maximum 36 -foot wide curb
return driveway with 15 -foot radii. This driveway is restricted to right-in/right-out movements
only. The applicant should locate the island for this approach outside of the public right-of-way,
in compliance with Meridian City and Meridian Fire Dept. requirements. Appropriate signage
will be required indicating the right-in/right-out restriction for this access.
4. Locate the second proposed driveway on Overland Road at the west property line. This access
should be constructed as a maximum 36 -foot wide curb return driveway with 15 -foot radii. This
driveway may be utilized for full access; however it may be restricted to right-in/right-out only in
the future.
Consult with District Staff regarding construction timelines and right-of-way purchase due to the
fact that the site's development will likely occur during or near the time of improvement for
Overland and Meridian Roads.
Comply with requirements of ITD for State Highway 44 frontage and access. Submit to the
District a letter from ITD regarding said requirements prior to District approval of the final plat or
Exhibit B
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLAN4DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE H*G DATE OF JULY 6, 2006
7
Exhibit B
issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. Contact District
III Traffic Engineer Dan Coonce at 334-8340.
Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval.
.G•.?�, �i>,3 .M<i .w x` `� .M t+.}�{ w,T"Y y.a y S �� MFi
V ix,.�
k
J,
4
eF,
may£,
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLAN4DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE H*G DATE OF JULY 6, 2006
7
Exhibit B
issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. Contact District
III Traffic Engineer Dan Coonce at 334-8340.
Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval.
.G•.?�, �i>,3 .M<i .w x` `� .M t+.}�{ w,T"Y y.a y S �� MFi
V ix,.�
k
J,
4,
k
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANT* DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HWG DATE OF JULY 6, 2006
C. Required Findings from Zoning Ordinance
Conditional Use Permit Findings:
CUP Findings:
The Commission shall base its determination on the Conditional Use Permit request upon
the following:
1. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the
dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located.
The proposed building and use on this site can accommodate and meet all dimensional and
development regulations of this district. The Commission finds that the subject property is large
enough to accommodate the required yards (setbacks), parking, landscaping and other features
required by the ordinance. The Commission should rely on Staff's analysis, and any oral or
written public testimony provided when determining if this site is large enough to accommodate
the proposed use.
2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and
in accord with the requirements of this Title.
The Commission finds that the designated Comprehensive Plan designation for this property is
"Commercial." The proposed use is generally harmonious with the requirements of the UDC (see
Section 8 above for more information regarding the requirements for this use.)
3. That the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other
uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the
general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of
the same area.
The Commission finds that if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report,
the general design, construction, operation, and maintenance of a pharmacy with a drive-through
should be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing and
intended character of the area.
4. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will
not adversely affect other property in the vicinity.
The Commission finds that if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report,
the proposed uses will not adversely affect other property in the area. The Commission should
rely upon any public testimony provided to determine if the development will adversely affect the
other property in the vicinity.
5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and
services such as highways, streets, schools, parks, police and fire protection, drainage
structures, refuse disposal, water, and sewer.
The Commission finds that sanitary sewer, domestic water, refuse disposal, and irrigation are
currently available to the subject property. Please refer to any comments prepared by the
Meridian Fire Department, Police Department, Parks Department, Sanitary Services Corporation,
TTD and ACRD. Based on comments from other agencies and departments, the Commission
Exhibit C
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLAN46 DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE H*NG DATE OF JULY 6, 2006
finds that the proposed use will be served adequately by all of the public facilities and services
listed above.
6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and
services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community.
If approved, the applicant will be financing any improvements required for development. The
Commission finds there will not be excessive additional requirements at public cost and that the
proposed use will not be detrimental to the community's economic welfare.
7. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment and
conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general
welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors.
The Commission recognizes that traffic and noise will increase with the approval of a pharmacy
with a drive-through use in this location; however, the Commission does not believe that the
amount generated will be detrimental to the general welfare of the public. The Commission does
not anticipate the proposed use will create excessive noise, smoke,fumes, glare, or odors. The
Commission finds that the proposed uses will not be detrimental to people, property or the
general welfare of the area.
8. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural,
scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance.
The Commission finds that there should not be any health, safety or environmental problems
associated with this use. The Commission finds that the proposed use will not result in the
destruction, loss or damage of any natural, scenic or historic feature of major importance.
Exhibit C
i
E
July 17, 2006
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING July 20, 2006
0
CUP 06-018
APPLICANT Shelley Fournier ITEM NO. 3-B
REQUEST Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: Request for a
Conditional Use Permit for a daycare facility for 6-12 children for Shelley Fournier -
2567 N. Black Bear Way
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICES:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS' IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
OTHER:
COMMENTS
See Attached Findings
No comment
Contacted: Date: a(p Phone: _ q �?
Emailed:,�� Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
q
T,
•
CITY OF MERIDIAN
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF
LAW AND DECISION & ORDER
In the Matter of Conditional Use Permit for a Group -
Childcare Facility out of her Home in the R-8 District, by Shelley Fournie ,rte
TA T
Case No(s).: CUP -06-018
-; _ , +.`
For the Planning & Zoning Commission Hearing Date of: July 6, 2006
City t)C'IVI_.yiaar�:
A. Findings of Fact Cify ("Ierk 'O f! C ,
1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of July 6, 2006 incorporated
by reference)
2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of July 6, 2006 incorporated
by reference)
3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of July 6,
2006 incorporated by reference)
4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the
hearing date of July 6, 2006 incorporated by reference)
B. Conclusions of Law
1- The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the "Local Land Use
Planning Act of 1975," codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code (I.C. §67-6503).
2. The Meridian City Council takes judicial notice of its Unified Development Code
codified at Title 11 Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof. The City of
Meridian has, by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Amended
Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, which was adopted August 6, 2002,
Resolution No. 02-382 and Maps.
3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code §
11-5A.
4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental
subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction.
5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not
impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed.
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER
CASE NO(S). CUP -06-18 -PAGE 1 of 4
•
6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this Decision, which
shall be signed by the Commission Chair and City Clerk and then a copy served by the
Clerk upon the applicant, the Planning Department, the Public Works Department and
any affected party requesting notice.
7. That this approval is subject to the Site Plan and the Conditions of Approval in the
attached Staff Report for the hearing date of July 6, 2006 incorporated by reference. The
conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements
as a condition of approval of the application.
C. Decision and Order
Pursuant to the Planning & Zoning Commission's authority as provided in Meridian City
Code § 11-5A and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein
adopted, it is hereby ordered that:
1. The applicant's CUP Site Plan as evidenced by having submitted the undated Site Plan
with the application is hereby conditionally approved;
2. The following modifications to site specific conditions were made at the Planning &
Zoning Commission hearing: Condition 1.1 should read: "The applicant shall be
allowed to care for up to eight children." and,
3. The site specific and standard conditions of approval are as shown in the attached Staff
Report for the hearing date of July 6, 2006 incorporated by reference.
D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits (as applicable)
1. Notice of Eighteen (18) Month Conditional Use Permit Duration
Please take notice that the conditional use permit, when granted, shall be valid for a
maximum period of eighteen (18) months unless otherwise approved by the City.
During this time, the applicant shall commence the use as permitted in accord with the
conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval,
and acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or
structures on or in the ground. For conditional use permits that also require platting, the
final plat must be recorded within this eighteen (18) month period. For projects with
multiple phases, the eighteen (18) month deadline shall apply to the first phase. In the
event that the development is made in successive contiguous segments or multiple
phases, such phases shall be constructed within successive intervals of one (1) year
from the original date of approval. If the successive phases are not submitted within the
one (1) year interval, the conditional approval of the future phases shall be null and
void. Upon written request and filed by the applicant prior to the termination of the
period in accord with 11 -5B -6.G.1, the Director may authorize a single extension of the
time to commence the use not to exceed one (1) eighteen (18) month period. Additional
time extensions up to eighteen (18) months as determined and approved by the
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER
CASE NO(S). CUP -06-18 - PAGE 2 of 4
•
Commission may be granted. With all extensions, the Director or Commission may
require the conditional use comply with the current provisions of Meridian City Code
Title 11.
E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis
1. The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, a denial of a plat
or conditional use permit entitles the Owner to request a regulatory taking analysis.
Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than
twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request
for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for
Judicial Review may be filed.
2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of
Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has
an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the issuance or denial of
the conditional use permit approval may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of
this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho
Code.
F. Attached: Staff Report for the hearing date of July 6, 2006
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER
CASE NO(S). CUP -06-18 - PAGE 3 of 4
0 O
By action of the Planning & Zoning Commission at its regular meeting held on the
day of vud'v 2006.
COMMISSIONER MICHAEL ROHM VOTED
(CHAIR) 61
COMMISSIONER DAVID MOE VOTED
COMMISSIONER WENDY NEWTON-HUCKABAY VOTED_410 a
COMMISSIONER KEITH BORUP VOTED ,,qbs 1pnt
COMMISSIONER DAVID ZAI
D
Attest:
Tara Green, Depuryy Ci lerk
bvTyQ��
\ems
Copy served upon Applfe;��1nY'YIg Department, Public Works Department and City
Attorney.
By: �%lz'' 0--1 Zz
Dated:
City Clerk
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER
CASE NO(S). CUP -06-18 - PAGE 4 of 4
t
s,
r sa
aux. tY L 6 .J' x„ 3 Pfi
Js
fi
a !
k
LL
t
�a
c;
3
$Y�,e
01 s`;
k
0 O
By action of the Planning & Zoning Commission at its regular meeting held on the
day of vud'v 2006.
COMMISSIONER MICHAEL ROHM VOTED
(CHAIR) 61
COMMISSIONER DAVID MOE VOTED
COMMISSIONER WENDY NEWTON-HUCKABAY VOTED_410 a
COMMISSIONER KEITH BORUP VOTED ,,qbs 1pnt
COMMISSIONER DAVID ZAI
D
Attest:
Tara Green, Depuryy Ci lerk
bvTyQ��
\ems
Copy served upon Applfe;��1nY'YIg Department, Public Works Department and City
Attorney.
By: �%lz'' 0--1 Zz
Dated:
City Clerk
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER
CASE NO(S). CUP -06-18 - PAGE 4 of 4
t
r sa
aux. tY L 6 .J' x„ 3 Pfi
Js
fi
a !
k
t
i
c;
AN
01 s`;
d
0��"'32ya'i�} �5� � i&`*c �`�."
V�E°�+
u£' i
f }
3
�
p� 3
x z
11
STAFF REPORT Hearing Date: July 6, 2006
TO: Planning & Zoning Commission
FROM: Kristy Vigil, Assistant City Planner
SUBJECT: Shelley Fournier Childcare
CUP -06-018
&C 1:�s
-�
Ulan
h )Afic l
Conditional Use Permit for a Group Childcare Facility for Six to Twelve (6-
12) Children in an R-8 zone.
1. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST
The applicant, Shelley Fournier, has applied for Conditional Use Permit approval to operate a group
childcare facility out of her home. The subject site is located at 2567 N. Black Bear Way, within Tract
Subdivision No.3. The site is currently zoned R-8. A group childcare facility in the R-8 zone requires
CUP approval (UDC 11-2A-2).
2. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION: The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission heard the
item on July 6, 2006. At the public hearing they moved to recommend approval.
a. Summary of Public Hearing:
i. In favor: Shelley Fournier
ii. In opposition: Jessica Fastabend
iii. Commenting: None
iv. Staff presenting application: Caleb Hood
v. Other staff commenting on application: Bill Nary
b. Key Issues of Discussion by Commission:
i. Number of children allowed;
ii. Additional traffic in the area.
c. Key Commission Changes to Staff Recommendation:
i. Modify Condition 1.1 of Exhibit B by changing the number of children allowed
from 12 to 8.
Below, staff has provided detailed analysis and recommended conditions of approval for the requested
Conditional Use Permit application. The Planning & Zoning Commission voted to approve the subiect
application, CUP -06-18, with the conditions contained in Exhibit B.
3. PROPOSED MOTIONS
Approval
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number CUP -
06 -018 as presented in the Staff Report for the hearing date of July 6, 2006, and the submitted site
plan with the following modifications to the conditions of approval: (add any proposed
modifications). I further move to direct staff to prepare an appropriate findings document to be
considered at the next Planning and Zoning Commission hearing on July 20, 2006.
Denial
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number CUP -06-
018 as presented during the public hearing of July 6, 2006, for the following reasons: (you must
state specific reason(s) for the denial of the conditional use permit.) I further move to direct Legal
Department Staff to prepare an appropriate findings document to be considered at the next
Exhibit A
0 0
Planning and Zoning Commission hearing on July 20, 2006.
Continuance
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to continue File Number
CUP -06-018 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following
reason(s): (you should state specific reason(s) for continuance.)
4. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS
a. Site Address/Location: 2567 N. Black Bear Way; Lot 12, Block 8 of Tract Subdivision No. 3;
Section 6, T3N R1E
b. Owners:
Shelley and James Fournier
2567 N. Black Bear Way
Meridian, Idaho 83642
c. Applicant:
Shelley Fournier
2567 N. Black Bear Way
Meridian, Idaho 83642
d. Representative: Shelley Fournier
e. Present Zoning: R-8
f. Present Comprehensive Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential
g. Description of Applicant's Request: The applicant is requesting Conditional Use Permit
approval for a group childcare care facility for six to twelve (6-12) children to be run out of the
existing single-family residence.
1. Date of CUP Site Plan (attached in Exhibit A): Undated
2. Date of Landscape Plan (attached in Exhibit A): Undated
h. Applicant's Justification Statement (from application materials): "I will be using my home to
continue my home childcare. There will be no changes made to the structure of my home"
(see applicant's letter).
5. PROCESS FACTS
a. The subject application will in fact constitute a conditional use as determined by City
Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of UDC 11-5B-6, a public hearing is required before
the Planning and Zoning Commission on this matter.
b. Newspaper notifications published on: June 19, 2006 and July 3, 2006
c. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: June 9, 2006
d. Applicant posted notice on site by: June 26, 2006
6. LAND USE
a. Existing Land Use(s): Residential
b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area: Single-family residences.
Exhibit A
0 0
c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning
1. North: Residential, zoned R-8.
2. East: Residential, zoned R-8.
3. South: Residential, zoned R-8.
4. West: Residential, zoned R-8.
d. History of Previous Actions: On May 30, 2006, Planning Staff approved an Accessory Use
Permit for a family daycare for six or fewer children on this site.
e. Existing Constraints and Opportunities
1. Public Works
Location of sewer: There are existing stubs to this property.
Location of water: There are existing stubs to this property.
Issues or concerns: None.
2. Vegetation: Existing landscaping installed by the owner (s).
3. Floodplain: NA
4. Canals/Ditches Irrigation: No major facilities.
5. Hazards: None.
6. Proposed Zoning: N/A
7. Size of Property: 0.15 acres
£ Conditional Use Information:
1. Non-residential square footage: N/A
2. Proposed building height: N/A
g. Off -Street Parking:
1. Parking spaces required: The UDC does not specify a required number of parking
spaces for a childcare facility. Parking requirements are based on the underlying
zoning district. In this case, the R-8 zone requires each house to provide at least a 20'
by 20' garage and a 20' by 20' parking pad area. The existing structure/lot complies
with this requirement of the UDC.
2. Parking spaces proposed: 3 on site spaces.
h. Proposed and Required Non -Residential Setbacks (NOTE: No new construction is being
proposed):
R-8 Standard
Front 20/15 feet
Side 4 feet
Rear 12 feet
Max. Building Height 35 feet
Min. Lot Size 5,000
Exhibit A
;i
fit+
7
i
r
zu p ev i rx'.s y
c i�
�r
.., r
RL`,
t
v �ixua ,
1
v .¢cz^
4
v �ixua ,
v .¢cz^
4
v IP
i,(y,s"r
� r
i
Min. Street Frontage 50
7. COMMENTS MEETING
On June 16, 2006 Planning Staff held an agency comments meeting. The agencies and departments
present include: Meridian Fire Department, Meridian Public Works Department, and the Sanitary
Services Company. Staff has included all comments and recommended actions as Conditions of Approval
in the attached Exhibit B.
8. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS
This property is designated "Residential" on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. Staff finds
the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this property and apply to the proposed
development (staff analysis in italics):
• Require that development projects have planned for the provision of all public services.
(Chapter VII, Goal III, Objective A, Action 1)
When the City established its Area of City Impact, it planned to provide City services to the
subject property. The City of Meridian plans to provide municipal services to the land in the
following manner:
• The land is under the jurisdiction of the Meridian City Fire Department, who
currently shares resource and personnel with the Meridian Rural Fire
Department.
• The land will be serviced by the Meridian Police Department (MPD).
• The roadways adjacent to the subject lands are currently owned and maintained
by the Ada County Highway District (ACHD) and ITD. This service will not
change.
• The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian School District #2. This
service will not change.
• The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian Library District. This
service will not change.
Municipal, fee -supported, services will be provided by the Meridian Building Department,
the Meridian Public Works Department, the Meridian Water Department, the Meridian
Wastewater Department, the Meridian Planning Department, Meridian Utility Billing
Services, and Sanitary Services Company.
• Protect existing residential properties from incompatible land use development on adjacent
parcels. (Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective C, Action 1)
The applicant is proposing a child care facility adjacent to existing residentially zoned
properties. Staff finds that impacts to the existing residential properties can be limited
through design as to be compatible with the proposed development, if appropriate fencing,
landscaping, and other conditions related to hours of operation and restrictions on the
outdoor play area are imposed on this project.
Staff did receive a letter regarding the proposed application. Among the concerns addressed
was "Change to the residential character of the development. " The applicant has stated in
her letter "There will be no changes made to the structure of my home. "
Stafffinds that the proposal is harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan.
Exhibit A
17A
9. ZONING ORDINANCE
11
a. Zoning Schedule of Use Control: UDC 11-2B-2 lists a group day care as a Conditional Use in
the R-8 zone.
b. Purpose Statement of Zone: The purpose of the Residential Districts is to provide for a range
of housing opportunities consistent with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Five Districts are
designated which are distinguished by the allowable density of dwelling units per acre and
corresponding housing types that can be accommodated within the density range.
c. No dimensional modifications are being requested for the proposed development. There are
several day care standards listed in UDC 11-4-3.9. Analysis of these specific use standards are
provided in Section 10 below.
10. ANALYSIS
a. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation
UDC 11-4-3.9 lists the following standards for all Day Care Facilities (staff analysis in italics):
1. In determining the type of day care facility, the total number of children cared for during the
day and not the number of children at the facility at one time, is the determining factor. The
operator's children are excluded from the number.
The applicant is proposing to have up to 12 children per day. Because no more than 12
children will be at the facility, this is a group day care facility.
2. On-site vehicle pickup, parking and turnaround areas shall be provided to ensure safe
discharge and pickup of clients.
The applicant is proposing the drop off/pick up area in the existing driveway area and the
area on the street in front of her home. The driveway is large enough to accommodate three
parking stalls.
3. The decision-making body shall specify the maximum number of allowable clients and hours
of operation as conditions of approval.
Staff recommends that the Commission allow up to 12 children to use the subject facility, as
requested. Staff further recommends that the hours of operation for this business be limited
from 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. NOTE. The applicant stated that the hours of operation are
expected to be from 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Staff recommends that an additional hour be
allowed to account for any parents/guardians that may run a little late.
4. The applicant or owner shall secure and maintain a Basic Day Care License from the State of
Idaho Department of Health and Welfare — Family and Children's Services Division.
Staff is including this condition within Exhibit B.
5. In residential districts or uses adjoining an adjacent residence, the hours of operation shall be
between 6:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. This standard may be modified through approval of a
Conditional Use Permit.
See Standard #2 above.
Additional standards for day care facilities that serve children:
1. All outdoor play areas shall be completely enclosed by minimum six-foot (6') non -scalable
fence to secure against exit/entry by small children and to screen abutting properties. The
fencing material shall meet the swimming pool fence requirements of the Building Code in
accord with Title 10 of the Meridian City Municipal Code.
Exhibit A
U
The existing dwelling is fenced with a six-foot (6 ) wood fence.
2. Outdoor play equipment over six feet (6') high shall not be located in a front yard or within
any required yard.
Although no play equipment over six feet in height is being proposed, staff is including this
restriction within Exhibit B. Further, because the proposed play area backs -up to residential
properties, staff recommends that no outdoor play equipment over six feet high be allowed on
the west side of the building.
3. Outdoor play areas in residential districts adjacent to an existing residence shall not be used
after dusk.
Staff is including this condition within Exhibit B.
Site Plan: The UDC does not establish minimum play area requirements for day care
facilities. Staff feels there is ample outdoor play area provided for 12 children.
Parkins: The applicant is proposing the drop off/pick up area in the existing driveway area
and the area on the street in front of her home. The driveway is large enough to
accommodate three parking stalls. Staff believes that this parking and drop-off area is
adequate for the number of children proposed.
b. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of CUP -06-018 for Shelley Fournier
as presented in the Staff Report for the hearing date of July 6 2006 based on the
Findings of Fact as listed in Exhibit D and subiect to the conditions of approval as listed
in Exhibit B.
11. EXHIBITS
A. Drawings
1. CUP Site and Landscape Plan (undated)
2. Floor plan (undated)
B. Conditions of Approval
1. Planning Department
2. Public Works Department
3. Fire Department
4. Sanitary Service Company
5. Ada County Highway District
6. Central District Health
C. Legal Description
D. Required Findings from Zoning Ordinance
Exhibit A
0
Site Landscape Plan (undated)
ej
Hs 4
k��� ��
.6 cc
�,,Toi 43
71 ir, 64 N
Exhibit A
11
t
I
2. Floor Plan (undated)
r
0
0
Cl -
5
.9
9
C6
co
77
Exhibit A
a
B. Conditions of Approval
1. PLANNING DEPARTMENTS
1.1 The applicant shall be allowed to care for up to 4-2 8 children per day.
1.2 On-site vehicle pickup, parking and turnaround areas shall be provided to ensure safe discharge
and pickup of clients.
1.3 The hours of operation for this business shall be limited from 6:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m.
1.4 Prior to operation of the day care facility, the applicant or owner shall secure and maintain a
Basic Day Care License from the State of Idaho Department of Health and Welfare — Family and
Children's Services Division. Proof of said license shall be provided to the Planning Department
prior to release of occupancy of this building for a day care use.
1.5 The applicant should be required to construct a 6 -foot tall, non -scalable, solid fence, along the
west and south side of the outdoor play area. The fencing material used on the west and the south
side of the play area shall meet the swimming pool fence requirements of the Building Code in
accord with Title 10 of the Meridian City Municipal Code. Fencing on the north and east sides of
the outdoor play area shall be 6 -feet tall, open -vision, and a non -climbable material. All fencing
shall secure against exit/entry by small children.
1.6 Outdoor play equipment over six feet (6') high shall not be located in a front yard or within any
required yard. Further, no play equipment over six
the building. feet high shall be located on the west side of
1.7 Outdoor play area(s) shall not be used after dusk.
1.8 To ensure that all of the conditions of approval for CUP -06-018 are complied with, the applicant
shall be required to obtain a Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) permit, and occupancy,
from the Planning Department prior to operation of the day care facility.
1.9 The applicant shall have a maximum of 18 months to commence the use as permitted in accord
with the conditions of approval listed above. If the business has not begun within 18 months of
approval, a new conditional use permit must be obtained prior to operation.
2. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
2.1 Public Works has no comments on this application.
3. FIRE DEPARTMENT
3.1 All Daycares with 7 or more children must pass an inspection using the criteria of the Idaho State
Fire Marshal. If the applicant has concerns about meeting the State Fire Marshal criteria an
inspection will be completed at a cost of $20.
4. SANITARY SERVICES COMPANY
4.1 Provide a minimum 28' inside and 48' outside radius for all driveways, where they
intersect a public street.
5. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT
5.1 Ada County Highway District does not require Commission review of the proposed
application. However, ACHD receives many calls from neighbors concerning the volume
of traffic near day care facilities. The Institute of Transportation Engineers data shows
that typical day care creates 4.52 vehicle trips per day per student and the proposed 12
Exhibit B — Page 1
0
student facility can be expected to generate 54 vehicle trips per day.
6. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT
6.1 Contact Susan Simmons at CDHD for licensure requirements.
Exhibit B — Page 2
0
C. Legal Description
J
AnA COUNTY RECORDER
J, O.M1'd!D I]la�dARRO
t994me Loom.MIR —2 PM 1r 56
UI IllflNQIIINfI�te �IIIIlII0111NIIIIINI�illlf II(flf�IfflONllf Il�if IIIINI
0
RECORDED -REQUEST OF
FEE3O DEPUTY
99020870
610 005575700 D2 001 002 ?j� �) C)
SIA -d27 RFs •- toe � � ��` � < r �•
(SPaoe Above This Une For Recording Data]
LOAN NO. 3025.40 DEED OF TRUST
NOTICE: THIS LOAN IS NOT ASSUMABLE
WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS OR
ITS AUTHORIZED AGENT.
THIS DEED OF TRUST ("Security Instrument") Is made on February 26, 1999 The grantor is
JAMES R. FOURNIER, JR. and SHELLEY M. FOURNIER, HUSBAND AND WIFE
('Borrower'). The trustee Is FIRST AMERICAN TITLE
("Trustee'). The beneficlary is REPUBLIC MORTGAGE CORP., A UTAH CORPORATION
which Is organized and existing under the laws of UTAH STATEand whose
address is 921 SOUTH ORCHARD, SUITE A, BOISE, ID 83705
("Lender"). Borrower owes Lender the principal sum of One Hundred Forty Eight Thousand Six Hundred
Thirty Nine and no/10o
Dollars (U.S. $ 148, 639.00 ). This debt Is evidenced by Borrower's note dated the same date as this
Security Instrument(°Note° , which provides for monthly payments, with the full debt, If not paid earlier, due and
payable on March �, 2029 . This Security Instrument secures to Lender a the re
evidenced by the Note, with Interest, and all renewals, extensions and modifications of the Note; bathe paymentof the debt
other sums, with Interest, advanced under paragraph 7 to protect the security of this Security Instrument; nc) the
performance of Borrower's covenants and agreements under this Security Instrument and the Note. For this purpose,
Borrower Irrevocably grants and conveys to Trustee, In trust, with power of sale, the following described property
located in ADA County, Idaho:
LOT 12 IN BLOCK 8 OF TRACT SUBDIVISION NO. 3, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT
THEREOF, FILED IN BOOK 62 OF PLATS AT PAGES 6249 AND 6250, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ADA
COUNTY, IDAHO.
which has the address of 2567 NORTH BLACK BEAR WAY, MERIDIAN
Idaho 83642 (ZIP code] Property Address';
IDAHO -Single Family-FNMA/FHLMC UNIFORM INSTRUMENT
Page 1 a17
ELF-6V(ID)
(92upi MECTF40W LASER FORMS. INC. -(4i 327.050
Exhibit C
Istreet, city],
Form 9013 8/90 Amended 5/91
Ianrel"A
C
•
D. Required Findings from Zoning Ordinance
1. Conditional Use Permit Findings:
CUP Findings:
The Commission shall base its determination on the Conditional Use Permit request upon
the following:
1. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the
dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located.
The applicant has shown a parking plan that adequately accommodates the proposed use. The
proposed site plan shows a 31' x 23' paved driveway area; standard parking stalls are 9'x 191
.
The driveway would accommodate the three (3) parking stalls. The adjacent street is not an
arterial or collector street. The Commission fords that the site is large enough to accommodate the
proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations of the R-8 zone.
2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and
in accord with the requirements of this Title.
The Commission fords that the designated Comprehensive Plan designation for this property is
"Residential." The proposed use is generally harmonious with the requirements of the UDC (see
Sections 8 and 10, above for more information regarding the requirements for this use.)
3. That the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other
uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the
general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of
the same area.
The site plan shows the yard is fenced with a 6' high wooden fence and maintained and gated in
working condition. There is existing vegetation which has been maintained in healthy condition.
The Commission fords that the site is of a sufficient size for the requested number of children,
but the applicant should be required to comply with Idaho State Department of Health and
Welfare, Childcare Licensing Division and acquire an occupancy certificate and/or building
permit to certify the building and play area.
It is often difficult to ford an ideal location for a daycare center. Residents often oppose daycares,
and commercial businesses often have concerns about having children in close proximity to their
business, but childcare facilities are a very valuable resource. Therefore, site design is critical for
finding a successful location. Staff recommends that the Commission rely upon any public
testimony, staff analysis, and other agency comments when determining if the proposed use is
compatible with the neighborhood residential uses in the area and if the use will adversely change
the existing and intended character of the area.
4. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will
not adversely affect other property in the vicinity.
The Commission finds that if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report,
the proposed uses will not adversely affect other property in the area. The Commission should
rely upon any public testimony provided to determine if the development will adversely affect the
other property in the vicinity.
Exhibit D
5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and
services such as highways, streets, schools, parks, police and fire protection, drainage
structures, refuse disposal, water, and sewer.
The Commission finds that sanitary sewer, domestic water, refuse disposal, and irrigation are
currently available to the subject property. Please refer to any comments prepared by the
Meridian Fire Department, Police Department, Parks Department, Sanitary Services Corporation
and ACRD. Based on comments from other agencies and departments, the Commission finds that
the proposed use will be served adequately by all of the public facilities and services listed above.
6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and
services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community.
If approved, the applicant will be financing the installation of any required upgrades to the
building necessary to serve the project. The Meridian Fire and Police Departments currently
provide service to the site. The Commission finds there will not be excessive additional
requirements at public cost and that the proposed use will not be detrimental to the community's
economic welfare.
7. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment and
conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general
welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors.
The Commission recognizes that traffic and noise from vehicles coming to and going from this
site will increase; the Commission does not believe that the amount of traffic and noise generated
will be detrimental to the general welfare of the public. The Commission finds that the proposed
use should not be detrimental to neighboring properties because the use will not generate
excessive traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors.
8. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural,
scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance.
The Commission finds that there should not be any health, safety or environmental problems
associated with this subdivision that should be brought to the Commission's attention. The
Commission finds that the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any
natural, scenic or historic feature of major importance.
Exhibit D
EM
0
July 17, 2006
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING July 20, 2006
0
CUP 06-017
APPLICANT Douglas and Stephanie Beehler ITEM NO. 3-C
REQUEST Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: Request for a
Conditional Use Permit to move liquor license from 127 E. Idaho Avenue to 126 E. Idaho
Avenue for Top Shelf, LLC - 126 E. Idaho Avenue
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICES:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS' IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
OTHER:
COMMENTS
See Attached Findings
No Comment
Contacted: &X"P.�, Date: ® Phone: �,®-- ?�I
Emailed: a. ne�- S aff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
3, k
i a k
a
i
f
�d
e
5 s
+.3r
t_
A ;
d
i,
4�
_ i".
�a 7-1
0
July 17, 2006
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING July 20, 2006
0
CUP 06-017
APPLICANT Douglas and Stephanie Beehler ITEM NO. 3-C
REQUEST Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: Request for a
Conditional Use Permit to move liquor license from 127 E. Idaho Avenue to 126 E. Idaho
Avenue for Top Shelf, LLC - 126 E. Idaho Avenue
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICES:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS' IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
OTHER:
COMMENTS
See Attached Findings
No Comment
Contacted: &X"P.�, Date: ® Phone: �,®-- ?�I
Emailed: a. ne�- S aff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
3, k
i a k
a
i
e
0, 7g�a
+.3r
RECEIVED
JUL 1d 7 2006 yq
A . y
(C,ity Of Meridian
'City Clerk 1� _ r �6
CITY OF MERIDIAN y g
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF
LAW AND _
as
DECISION & ORDER —
In the Matter of a Request for a Conditional Use Permit for the moving of a liquor license
to 126 E. Idaho Avenue, by Doug and Stevie Beehler dba Top Shelf, LLC.
Case No(s). CUP -06-017
For the Planning & Zoning Commission Hearing Date of. July 6, 2006
A. Findings of Fact
1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of July 6, 2006 incorporated
by reference)
2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of July 6, 2006 incorporated
by reference)
3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of July 6,
2006 incorporated by reference)
4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the
hearing date of July 6, 2006 incorporated by reference)
B. Conclusions of Law
1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the "Local Land Use
Planning Act of 1975," codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code (I.C. §67-6503).
2. The Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission takes judicial notice of its Unified
Development Code codified at Title 11 Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps
thereof. The City of Meridian has, by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the
Amended Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, which was adopted August 6,
2002, Resolution No. 02-382 and Maps.
3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code §
11-5A.
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER
CASE NO(S). CUP -06-017 - PAGE 1 of 4
0 •
4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental
subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction.
5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not
impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed.
6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this Decision, which
shall be signed by the Commission Chair and City Clerk and then a copy served by the
Clerk upon the applicant, the Planning Department, the Public Works Department and
any affected party requesting notice.
7. That this approval is subject to the Legal Description, Site Plan, and the Conditions of
Approval all in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of July 6, 2006
incorporated by reference. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the
applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application.
C. Decision and Order
Pursuant to the Planning & Zoning Commission's authority as provided in Meridian City
Code § 11-5A and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein
adopted, it is hereby ordered that:
1. The applicant's CUP Site Plan as evidenced by having submitted the Site Plan dated
January 22, 2005 is hereby conditionally approved; and,
2. The following modifications to site specific conditions were made at the Planning &
Zoning Commission hearing:
a. This CUP -06-017 shall not run with the land, but shall be specifically granted
to the applicant, Top Shelf, LLC, at the site location of 126 E. Idaho Avenue.
If the corresponding catering business, Phoenix Catering Company, no longer
operates at this location then this permit is extinguished and the applicant
must re -apply. If the applicant moves from this location there is no waiver
established to allow for the alcohol establishment to be located in this space.
b. The applicant must comply with all State and City requirements for the
serving of alcohol and the maintenance of a liquor license.
c. The applicant must serve food at all times when alcohol is being served at this
location.
3. The site specific and standard conditions of approval are as shown in the attached Staff
Report for the hearing date of July 6, 2006 incorporated by reference.
D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits (as applicable)
1. Notice of Eighteen (18) Month Conditional Use Permit Duration
Please take notice that the conditional use permit, when granted, shall be valid for a
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER
CASE NO(S). CUP -06-017 - PAGE 2 of 4
0 0
maximum period of eighteen (18) months unless otherwise approved by the City.
During this time, the applicant shall commence the use as permitted in accord with the
conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval,
and acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or
structures on or in the ground. For conditional use permits that also require platting, the
final plat must be recorded within this eighteen (18) month period. For projects with
multiple phases, the eighteen (18) month deadline shall apply to the first phase. In the
event that the development is made in successive contiguous segments or multiple
phases, such phases shall be constructed within successive intervals of one (1) year
from the original date of approval. If the successive phases are not submitted within the
one (1) year interval, the conditional approval of the future phases shall be null and
void. Upon written request and filed by the applicant prior to the termination of the
period in accord with 11 -5B -6.G.1, the Director may authorize a single extension of the
time to commence the use not to exceed one (1) eighteen (18) month period. Additional
time extensions up to eighteen (18) months as determined and approved by the
Commission may be granted. With all extensions, the Director or Commission may
require the conditional use comply with the current provisions of Meridian City Code
Title 11.
E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis
1. The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, a denial of a plat
or conditional use permit entitles the Owner to request a regulatory taking analysis.
Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than
twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request
for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for
Judicial Review may be filed.
2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of
Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has
an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the issuance or denial of
the conditional use permit approval may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of
this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho
Code.
F. Attached: Staff Report for the hearing date of July 6, 2006
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER
CASE NO(S). CUP -06-017 - PAGE 3 of 4
• 0
By action of the Planning & Zoning Commission at its regular meeting held on the
day of , 200$
COMMISSIONER MICHAEL ROHM VOTED LG'�
COMMISSIONER DAVID MOE VOTED _/ L14c,
COMMISSIONER WENDY NEWTON-HUCKABAY VOTED
COMMISSIONER KEITH BORUP VOTED—,4k!S("i
COMMISSIONER DAVID ZAREMBA VOTED--��
(CHAIR)
ir
CHAIRMAN
Attest:
Tara Green, Deputy City Clerk
Copy served upon Applicant, tf&,P Wjn� 'Department, Public Works Department and City
Attorney.
By: �Ci1 fi'� Z�`�-
Z Dated: 0 7
r
City Clerk
A�+
da
V�
d
1
do }
3�� z
CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER
CASE NO(S). CUP -06-017 - PAGE 4 of 4
a
MIX
� i
c�
{
e
�.f t;�� H `t � C3 F 7 z
��
,.�'�et$-%"�
k'Sf`*k.�,h �.z rNZR"dx?�"t •Y^'�"� rd' `'� ,g .3�
,
t Tr"
tk304$00
Y
x3�` 'g4'Z' f
?"131ea N',gW
fimc
iyhIA<we
'4
S
- WW, -a i
'�?t
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLAN# DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE KING DATE OF JULY 6, 2006
STAFF REPORT Hearing Date: 7/6/2006
TO: Planning & Zoning Commission
FROM: Jenny Veatch
Associate City Planner
208-884-5533
SUBJECT: Top Shelf
• CUP -06-017
Conditional Use approval to move liquor license in Old Town, by Doug and
Stevie Beehler dba Top Shelf, LLC
1. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST
The applicant, Top Shelf, LLC., is requesting a Conditional Use (CUP) approval to move their liquor
license from 127 E. Idaho Avenue to the site address of 126 E. Idaho Avenue. Top Shelf, LLC will
operate as the liquor catering arm of Phoenix Catering Company which also resides at 126 E. Idaho
Avenue.
2. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION
Below, star has provided detailed analysis for the requested Conditional Use application. Staff
recommends denial of the subiect application because it does not specifically comply with the provisions
of the UDC. However, we feel that the Commission may be able through the public hearing process)
better determine whether the proposed use is ap roropriate or not Therefore we have provided conditions
of approval in Exhibit B. On July 6, 2006 the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission voted to
approve the subject application with the modified conditions in Exhibit B
a. Summary of Public Hearings:
i. In favor: Stevie Beehler (Applicant)
ii. In opposition: None
iii. Commenting: MaryBeth LaVelle (Phoenix Catering Company)
iv. Staff presenting application: Jenny Veatch
v. Other staff commenting on application: Bill Nary
b. Key Issues of Discussion by Commission:
i. Unique character of the business and the applicant's use of a liquor license;
ii. In the case of this particular CUP, it should run with the user and the associated
catering company, and not with the land as standard.
c. Key Commission Changes to Staff Recommendation:
i. This CUP -06-017 shall not run with the land, but shall be specifically granted to
the applicant, Top Shelf, LLC, at the site location of 126 E. Idaho Avenue. If the
corresponding catering business, Phoenix Catering Company, no longer operates
at this location then this permit is extinguished and the applicant must re -apply. If
the applicant moves from this location there is no waiver established to allow for
the alcohol establishment to be located in this space.
ii. The applicant must comply with all State and City requirements for the serving
of alcohol and the maintenance of a liquor license.
iii. The applicant must serve food at all times when alcohol is being served at this
location.
Top Shelf, LLC CUP -06-017 PAGE I
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLAN* DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE H&G DATE OF JULY 6, 2006
3. PROPOSED MOTIONS
Approval
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number CUP -
06 -017 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of July 5, 2006, and the site plans
labeled The Phoenix Catering Company, 1 of 1, dated revised January 22, 2005 with the
following modifications to the conditions of approval: (add any proposed modifications). I further
move to direct staff to prepare an appropriate findings document to be considered at the next
Planning and Commission hearing on July 20, 2006.
Denial
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number CUP -06-
017 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of July 5, 2006, for the following reasons:
(you must state specific reasons for denial.) I fiuther move to direct staff to prepare an
appropriate findings document to be considered at the next Planning and Commission hearing on
July 20, 2006.
Continuance
I move to continue File Number CUP -06-017 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing
date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.)
4. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS
a. Site Address/Location:
126 E. Idaho Avenue /on the north side of E. Idaho Avenue, between N. Main Street. and
E. 2nd Street, Section 7, Township 3 North, Range 1 East
b. Owner:
Doug and Stevie Beehler dba Top Shelf, LLC
556 W. Knob Hill Court
Eagle, ID 83616
c. Applicant:
Doug and Stevie Beehler dba Top Shelf, LLC
556 W. Knob Hill Court
Eagle, ID 83616
d. Representative: Stevie Beehler
e. Present Zoning: Old Town
f. Present Comprehensive Plan Designation: Old Town
g. Description of Applicant's Request: The applicant, Top Shelf, LLC., is requesting a
Conditional Use (CUP) approval to move their liquor license from 127 E. Idaho Avenue to 126 E.
Idaho Avenue, which is the address for The Phoenix Catering Company. Top Shelf, LLC will
operate as the liquor catering arm of Phoenix Catering Company.
1. Date of CUP/Elevation site plan (attached in Exhibit A): January 22, 2005
h. Applicant's Statement/Justification: Top Shelf, LLC would like to move their liquor license
from 127 E. Idaho Avenue to 126 E. Idaho Avenue which is the address of The Phoenix Catering
Top Shelf, LLC CUP -06-017 PAGE 2
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANT* DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE H&G DATE OF JULY 6, 2006
Company. Top Shelf would operate as the liquor catering arm to The Phoenix Catering Company.
Drink(s) would be served on the premises to meet the required statute that "premises be approved
to serve a drink." However, hour(s) of operation would be by appointment only from 4 p.m. to 7
p.m., excluding Wednesday and Sunday.
5. PROCESS FACTS
a. The subject application will in fact constitute a conditional use as determined by City
Ordinance. By reason of the provisions of UDC 11-5B-6, a public hearing is required before
the City Council on this matter.
b. Newspaper notifications published on: June 19' and July 3�, 2006
c. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: June 9`", 2006
d. Applicant posted notice on site by: June 26`", 2006
6. LAND USE
a. Existing Land Use(s): Commercial, Old Town.
b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area: This area is in the downtown core area zoned
Old Town. The area consists of existing buildings, the majority of which are commercial,
parking lots, and a few single family residences.
C. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning:
I. North: Existing commercial buildings and parking lots, and single family residence,
zoned O -T
2. East: Existing commercial buildings, zoned O -T
3. South: Existing commercial buildings, zoned O -T
4. West: Existing religious organization (Christian Science Reading Room) and
commercial buildings, zoned O -T
d. History of Previous Actions: None
e. Existing Constraints and Opportunities
1. Public Works
Location of sewer: Services already run to this building pad.
Location of water: Services already run to this building pad.
Issues or concerns: None.
2. Vegetation: N/A
3. Flood plain: N/A
4. Canals/Ditches Irrigation: N/A
5. Hazards: N/A
6. Existing Zoning: O -T
7. Size of Property: 1,400 square feet (Phoenix Catering Company)
f. Conditional Use Information:
Non-residential square footage: 300 square foot area within building
2. Existing building height: N/A
Top Shelf, LLC CUP -06-017 PAGE 3
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLAN* DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE H&G DATE OF JULY 6, 2006
3. Number of Residential units: 0
g. Off -Street Parking:
1. Parking spaces required: 2
2. Parking spaces proposed: 0
3. Compact spaces proposed: 0
4. Off-site parking proposed: 0
h. Summary of Proposed Streets and/or Access (private, public, common drive, etc.): The access
to the building will be from the front entrance facing E. Idaho Avenue. The site is an existing
building and commercial business (Phoenix Catering Company). Top Shelf, LLC is not
expected to generate enough traffic to warrant adding additional parking. There is on street
parking and a two -hour -maximum public parking lot available adjacent to the property.
7. COMMENTS MEETING
On June 16, 2006 Planning Staff held an agency comments meeting. The agencies and
departments present include: Meridian Fire Department, Meridian Police Department, Meridian
Parks Department, Meridian Public Works Department, and the Sanitary Services Company. Staff
has included all comments and recommended actions as Conditions of Approval in the attached
Exhibit B.
8. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS
This property is designated "Old Town" on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. Old
Town is defined as follows: "This includes the historic downtown and the true community center.
Uses would include offices, retail and lodging, theatres, restaurants, and service retail for
surrounding residents and visitors. A variety of residential uses could include reuse of existing
buildings for residential uses, new construction of multi -family residential over ground floor
retail or office uses. In order to provide and accommodate preservation of the historical character,
specific design requirements may be imposed. Pedestrian amenities would be emphasized. Public
investment to ensure that Old Town becomes a centralized activity center with public, cultural,
and recreational structures would be encouraged. The boundary of the Old Town district
predominantly follows Meridian's historic plat boundaries. In several areas, both sides of a street
were incorporated into the boundary to encourage similar uses and complimentary design of the
facing houses and buildings." Staff finds that the proposed Conditional Use complies with the
applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan and furthers the goals and objectives set forth
therein.
Staff fords the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this property and apply
to the proposed development (staff analysis in italics):
Develop programs to attract customer oriented businesses and encourage pedestrian uses
downtown. (Chapter V Goal lI Objective A Action 1.)
• Staff finds that the transfer of the liquor license to a catering company does not attract
high customer traffic or pedestrian use to Old Town. It is intended more for off-site use at
the customer's discretion. The transfer does supplement the existing catering use.
Although the catering use does not specifically attract customers to its location, it can be
a useful addition to the types of business in Old Town. For example, it could cater events
in office buildings or other venues.
• Support compatible uses which will attract a high daytime and nighttime population to the
downtown area. (Chapter V Goal H Objective A Action 3.)
Top Shelf, LLC CUP -06-017 PAGE 4
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANS DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HWG DATE OF JULY 6, 2006
• Staff finds that this use cannot attract large numbers of people to its site because Top
Shelf, LLC will be conditioned to limit its hours due to its proximity to a religious
organization. Again, the liquor license supplements the existing catering use which can
attract numbers to other venues in Old Town.
Develop and support downtown cultural activities and events. (Chapter V Goal II Objective A
Action 4.)
• Staff finds that the catering business with associated liquor license can support
downtown cultural activities and events.
• Adopt policies that will promote the downtown district as a prime location for a mixed
residential/commercial living opportunity. (Chapter V Goal II Objective A Action 11.)
• The proposed use shares facilities on the ground floor structure. Commercial uses are
appropriate on the ground floor level.
• Staff has included conditions within Exhibit B that should make this use more compatible
with the surrounding uses.
• Staff believes that the proposed transfer of the liquor license is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council rely on any
verbal or written testimony that may be provided at the public hearing when determining
if the applicant's request is appropriate for this property.
9. ZONING ORDINANCE
a. Zoning Schedule of Use Control: UDC Table 11-2D-2 lists the permitted, accessory, and
conditional uses in the O -T zoning district. Liquor licenses (drinking establishments) are a
conditional use in the O -T zone.
b. Purpose Statement of Zone: The purpose of the O -T District is to accommodate and
encourage further intensification of the historical city center in accord with the Meridian
Comprehensive Plan. The intent of the OT District is to delineate a centralized activity center and
to encourage its renewal, revitalization and growth as the public, quasi -public, cultural, financial
and recreational center of the City. Public and quasi -public uses integrated with general business,
and medium-high to high-density residential is encouraged to provide the appropriate mix and
intensity of activities necessary to establish a truly urban city center.
c. General Standards: No new construction or exterior modifications are being requested for the
proposed development, therefore it is not subject to an Administrative Design Review. There are
drinking establishment standards listed in UDC 11-4-3.10. Analysis of these specific use
standards are provided in Section 10 below.
10. ANALYSIS
a. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation
APPLICABLE CODE
Specific Use Standards for Drinking Establishments:
UDC 11-4-3. 10 lists the following standards for Drinking Establishments:
A. The facility shall comply with all Idaho Code regulations regarding the sale,
manufacturing, or distribution of alcoholic beverages.
B. The drinking establishment shall not be located within 300 feet of a property used for
a church or education service. Nor shall the drinking establishment be located within
1,000 feet of an adult entertainment establishment.
Top Shelf, LLC CUP -06-017 PAGE 5
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLAN# DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HWG DATE OF JULY 6, 2006
C. For properties abutting a residential district, no outside activity or event shall be
allowed on the site, except in accord with Chapter 3 Article E TEMPORARY USE
REQUIREMENTS of this Title.
Other UDC provisions:
Certificate of Zoning Compliance: The purpose of a Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC)
permit is to ensure that all construction, alterations and/or the establishment of a new use
complies with all of the provisions of the UDC before any work on the structure is started and/or
the use is established (UDC 11 -5B -1A). To ensure that all of the conditions of approval listed in
Exhibit B are complied with, the applicant should be required to obtain a CZC permit and
occupancy from the Planning Department.
Standards in the Old Town District (O -T) (UDC 11 -2D -4D3) This application does not trigger
the need for design review because it is not new construction or exterior modifications
Idaho State Statutes for Alcoholic Beverages, Title 23:
23-942 CHAPTER 9: RETAIL SALE OF LIQUOR BY THE DRINK- DEFINITIONS
The following definitions shall apply in the interpretation of the enforcement of this act:
(a) "Licensee" shall mean any person licensed to sell liquor by the drink at retail
pursuant to the provisions of chapter 9, title 23, Idaho Code, and any person licensed to
sell beer for consumption on the premises where sold pursuant to the provisions of
chapter 10, title 23, Idaho Code, or county or municipal ordinance.
(b) "Place," as used in this act, means any room of any premises licensed for the sale of
liquor by the drink at retail wherein there is a bar and liquor, bar supplies and equipment
are kept and where beverages containing alcoholic liquor are prepared or mixed and
served for consumption therein, and any room of any premises licensed for the sale of
beer for consumption on the premises wherein there is a bar and beer, bar supplies and
equipment are kept and where beer is drawn or poured and served for consumption
therein.
(c) "Restaurant," as used in this act, means any restaurant, cafe, hotel dining room,
coffee shop, cafeteria, railroad dining car or other eating establishment having kitchen
and cooking facilities for the preparation of food and where hot meals are regularly
served to the public.
23-913 CHAPTER 9: RETAIL SALE OF LIQUOR BY THE DRINK- LICENSEE NOT
ALLOWED NEAR CHURCHES OF SCHOOLS-- EXCEPTIONS
No license shall be issued for any premises in any neighborhood which is predominantly
residential or within 300 feet of any public school, church, or any other place of worship,
measured in a straight line to the nearest entrance to the licensed premises, except with
the approval of the governing body of the municipality; provided, that this limitation shall
not apply to any duly licensed premises that at the time of licensing did not come within
the restricted area but subsequent to licensing same [came] therein.
23-1011B. CHAPTER 10: BEER- BARS OR TAVERNS NOT ALLOWED NEAR
CHURCHES OR SCHOOLS—EXCEPTIONS
No license shall be issued for any place where beer is sold or dispensed tp be consumed
on the premises, whether conducted for pleasure or profit, that is within three hundred
Top Shelf, LLC CUP -06-017 PAGE 6
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLAN* DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE H&G DATE OF JULY 6, 2006
(300) feet of any public school, church, entrance to the licensed premises, except with the
approval of the governing body of the municipality; provided, that this limitation shall
not apply to any duly licensed premises that at the time of licensing did not come within
the restricted area but subsequent to licensing same came therein.
Idaho State Statutes for Revenue and Taxation, Title 63:
63-602B. CHAPTER 6: EXEMPTIONS FROM TAXATION- PROPERTY EXEMPT FROM
TAXATION—RELIGIOUS CORPORATIONS OR SOCIETIES
The following property is exempt from taxation: property belonging to any religious
corporation or society of this state, used exclusively for and in connection with public
worship, and any parsonage belonging to such corporation or society and occupied as
such, and any recreational hall belonging to and used in connection with the activities of
such corporation or society; and this exemption shall extend to property owned by any
religious corporation or society which is used for any combination of religious worship,
educational purposes and recreational activities, not designed for profit.
b. Staff Recommendation: Staff is limited in the ability to make use determinations. In this
instance, we have a liquor license transfer that must be treated like a new drinking establishment
use. We also have a Christian Science Reading room that must be treated like a religious
organization. Neither use fits its respective designation very well, but they are the closest
designation. The UDC does not allow a drinking establishment to be established within 300 feet
of a church; therefore staff is recommending denial.
However, as a quasi-judicial organization, the Planning and Zoning Commission has greater
latitude in making use determinations. The transfer of the liquor license of Top Shelf, LLC to 126
E. Idaho will subsequently place it within 300 feet of the Christian Science Reading Room. The
intentional use of the license is to work in conjunction with the Phoenix Catering Company and
not as a drinking establishment. If the Phoenix Catering Company qualified as a restaurant, then
there would not be a separation standard. Because Phoenix catering does not regularly serve
meals to the public at that location, it does not qualify as a restaurant.
The state language gives more latitude in approving a drinking establishment next to a church; it
allows such "with the approval of the governing body of the municipality." (Idaho State Statute
Title 23 Chapter 9 (23-913) and Chapter 10 (23-1011B). Our UDC separation standard is actually
based on the Idaho State Statutes as noted above. However, the UDC approved by City Council
revised the state law by removing the exception.
On July 6, 2006, the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission voted to approve the subiect
application, with the modified conditions in Exhibit B
11. EXHIBITS
A. Drawings
1. Date of CUP/Elevation Site Plan: January 22, 2005
B. Conditions of Approval
1. Planning Department
2. Public Works Department
3. Fire Department
4. Police Department
Top Shelf, LLC CUP -06-017 PAGE 7
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLAN* DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HONG DATE OF JULY 6, 2006
5. Sanitary Services
6. Ada County Highway District
C. Required Findings from Unified Development Code
Top Shelf, LLC CUP -06-017
PAGE 8
� 4
1
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLAN41D DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HWG DATE OF JULY 6, 2006
A. Drawings
1. CUP (Phoenix Catering Co.) Site/Elevation Plan (dated revised January 22, 2005)
�a✓
a a
A q
n
i
T
4
4h
V4
`XAL
L
Exhibit A Page 1
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLAN* DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE H*G DATE OF JULY 6, 2006
B. Conditions of Approval
1. PLANNING DEPARTMENT
1.1 The hours of operation for this business shall be limited to the minimum required by Idaho
Statute to maintain a liquor license. The applicant has proposed minimal business hours and by
appointment only. The applicant has also stated that Top Shelf, LLC will not operate on
Wednesdays and Sundays, as well as any other days or hours the law does not allow the sale of
alcohol. Those commitments shall be conditions of approval for this application. The auplicant
must comply with all State and City requirements for the serving of alcohol and the
maintenance of a hauor license
1.2 The applicant must serve food at all times when alcohol is being served at this location
1.3 This CUP -06-017 shall not run with the land, but shall be specifically granted to the
applicant, Top Shelf, LLC at the site location of 126E Idaho Avenue If the corresponding
catering business, Phoenix Catering Company, no longer operates at this location then this
permit is extinguished and the applicant must re -apply. If the applicant moves from this
location there is no waiver established to allow for t
this space. he alcohol establishment to be located in
1.4 To ensure that all of the conditions of approval for CUP -06-017 are complied with, the applicant
shall be required to obtain a Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC), and occupancy, from the
Planning Department prior to operation.
1.5 The applicant shall have a maximum of 18 months to commence the use as permitted in accord
with the conditions of approval listed above. If the business has not begun within 18 months of
approval, a new conditional use approval must be obtained prior to operation.
2. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
2.1 Public Works Department has no comments related to the site design submitted with the
application.
3. FIRE DEPARTMENT
3.1 All aspects of the building systems (including exiting systems), processes & storage practices
shall be required to comply with the International Fire Code. Site must pass fire inspection.
4. POLICE DEPARTMENT
4.1 The transfer of the liquor license does not create a use that serves the best interest of the City.
The Police Department would prefer a more traditional use that would serve the public better.
5. SANITARY SERVICES
5.1 Provide a minimum 28' inside and 48' outside radius for all alleys and private streets, where they
intersect a public street.
6. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT
6.1 Prior to final approval you will need to submit plans to the ACHD Development Review
Department.
6.2 A traffic impact fee may be assessed by ACHD and will be due prior to issuance of a building
Permit. Contact ACHD Planning and development Services at 387-6170 for information
regarding impact fees.
Exhibit B Page 1
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANIO DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HWG DATE OF JULY 6, 2006
C. Required Findings from Unified Development Code
CUP Findings:
The Commission shall base its determination on the Conditional Use request upon the
following:
1. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the
dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located.
. The Commission
finds that the proposed use is more of an accessory use to the catering business, and the proposed
use on this site can accommodate and meet all dimensional and development regulations for the
transfer of a liquor license. Since the license will be used as the liquor catering arm for a catering
business and not for a drinking establishment the site does not require a large site. Liquor will be
stored in a locked cabinet on site.
Parking stalls are required at the ratio of one space per 500 square feet of gross floor area in Old
Town (UDC 11-3C-6). Per this requirement, one stall would be required. The Commission finds
that the project should have adequate existing parking available and no additional parking is
necessary for this use.
2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and
in accord with the requirements of this Title.
The Commission finds that the designated Comprehensive Designation for this property is Old
Town. The property is existing O -T and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan for this area.
The proposed use is generally harmonious with the requirements of the UDC (see Section 10,
Analysis above for more information regarding the requirements for drinking establishments in
City Code.)
3. That the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other
uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the
general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of
the same area.
The Commission is supportive of the site plan design; this is an existing building and no
construction or modifications are proposed. The intended use of the liquor license is not for a
drinking establishment, will only serve the minimum required to maintain the license by state
statute, and will have minimal hours of operation.
4. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will
not adversely affect other property in the vicinity.
The Commission finds that if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report,
the proposed liquor license transfer will not adversely affect other property in the area. By Idaho
State Statute Title 23 Chapter 9 (23-913) and Chapter 10 (23-101113), the governing body of the
municipality may approve the transfer of the liquor license to the site, though the entrance to the
site is within 300 feet of a religious organization. The Commission should rely upon any public
Exhibit C Page 1
CITY OF MERIDIAN PLAN10 DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HWG DATE OF JULY 6, 2006
testimony provided to determine if the development will adversely affect the other property in the
vicinity.
5. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and
services such as highways, streets, schools, parks, police and fire protection, drainage
structures, refuse disposal, water, and sewer.
The Commission finds that sanitary sewer, domestic water, refuse disposal, and irrigation are
currently available to the subject property. Please refer to any comments prepared by the
Meridian Fire Department, Sanitary Services Corporation and ACRD. Based on comments from
other agencies and departments, the Commission finds that the proposed use will be served
adequately by all of the public facilities and services listed above.
6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and
services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community.
The Commission finds there will not be excessive additional requirements at public cost and that
the proposed use will not be detrimental to the community's economic welfare.
7. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment and
conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general
welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors.
The Commission finds that traffic will not increase with the approval of the liquor license transfer
to this location and does not believe that any amount generated will be detrimental to the general
welfare of the public. The Commission does not anticipate the proposed use will create excessive
noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. The Commission finds that the proposed use will not be
detrimental to people, property or the general welfare of the area.
8. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural,
scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance.
The Commission finds that there should not be any health, safety or environmental problems
associated with the transfer of this liquor license. The Commission finds that the proposed use
will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of any natural, scenic or historic feature of major
importance.
Exhibit C Page 2
a
July 17, 2006
CUP 06-019
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING July 20, 2006
APPLICANT H&H Utility Contractors, Inc. ITEM NO. 4
REQUEST Continued Public Hearing from July 6,2006: Conditional Use Permit to construct 10,072.5 so
10,072.5 square foot addition for company offices, truck, equipment and material storage facilities
on 3.68 acres in a C -G zone for H&H Utility Contractors - 225 W. Franklin Road
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT.
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICES:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS' IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
OTHER:
Contacted:
Emailed:
COMMENTS
See Previous Item Packet / Attached Minutes
See Attached Comments
See attached Affidavit of Posting
Date: Phone:
Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
July 17, 2006 MCU 06-001
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING July 20, 2006
APPLICANT Russell Dunstan ITEM NO. 5
REQUEST Public Hearing - Conditional Use Permit Modification for residential home
built two feet into five foot setback (sold prior to discovery of mistake) for
Fulfer Subdivision No. 5 (Lot 4, Block 5) - 2593 W. Ditch Creek Drive
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICES:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS' IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
COMMENTS
See Attached Staff Report
No Comment
See Attached Comments
No Comment
No Comment
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
OTHER: See Attached Affidavit of Sign Posting
Contacted: Date: Phone:
Emailed: Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
�r
i aarc
k7y
}
Y
hx
a
}
f$
i
3
7"
F'
July 17, 2006 MCU 06-001
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING July 20, 2006
APPLICANT Russell Dunstan ITEM NO. 5
REQUEST Public Hearing - Conditional Use Permit Modification for residential home
built two feet into five foot setback (sold prior to discovery of mistake) for
Fulfer Subdivision No. 5 (Lot 4, Block 5) - 2593 W. Ditch Creek Drive
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICES:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS' IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
COMMENTS
See Attached Staff Report
No Comment
See Attached Comments
No Comment
No Comment
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
OTHER: See Attached Affidavit of Sign Posting
Contacted: Date: Phone:
Emailed: Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
l�
July 17, 2006
AZ 06-029
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING July 20, 2006
APPLICANT Reed Kofoed ITEM NO. 6
REQUEST Public Hearing - Annexation and Zoning of 10.39 acres from RUT to an R-4
zone for Silversprings Subdivision'- south side of McMillan Road & west of Locust Grove
Road
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICES:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS' IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
COMMENTS
No Comment
See Attached Comments
No Comment
See Attached Comments
OTHER: See Attached Affidavit of Sign Posting
Contacted: Date:
Phone:
Emailed: Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
s
e
� July 17, 2006
PP 06-029
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING
July 20, 2006
APPLICANT Reed Kofoed ITEM NO. 7
REQUEST Public Hearing - Preliminary Plat approval of 29 single-family residential lots
and 4 common / other lots on 9.88 acres in a proposed R-4 zone for Silversprings
Subdivision - south side of McMillan Road and west of Locust Grove Road
AGENCY
COMMENTS
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: See AZ Packet
CITY ATTORNEY
b
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING
DEPT:
x• t '
CITY WATER DEPT:
q
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICES:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
fQ
'
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS' IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
INTERMOUNTAIN
r F.a
GAS:
OTHER:
Contacted:
Date: Phone:
Emailed:
Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become
property of the City of Meridian.
A
Oil�.
WNW d?Y
,�g A '�
, .r •,� #§ i 'c ✓kgs* &� M w , u'
•:X kt '1'. t36 �s� +f z�'3r i" i� ff�y ,
1F
}
g41�•
s 'F 4 f� i�rh �"�y�' �j '� 7 t u4 f .5. � �"^� � � �"� y"'b"P'.
i
: z', it Sid 3' •#
10 5f,
¢.k �
.,3 � Tl X41• �T�Fil � awl. �.}� � && �
d
2
^ r
a, S i •
i :. . , `-.' -.. i b '. is s,). e"z `.
.: N s
C, `'gi q
�
�
f
S
• 0
July 17, 2006
AZ 06-028
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING July 20, 2006
APPLICANT Horizon Development ITEM NO. 8
REQUEST Public Hearing - Annexation and Zoning of 4.43 acres to an R-15 (Medium
High -Density Residential) for Touchstone Place Subdivision - 1187 East Fairview Avenue
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICES:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS' IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
COMMENTS
See Attached Staff Report
No Comment
See Attached Comments
See Attached Comments
See Attached Comments
OTHER: See Attached Affidavit of Sign Posting
Contacted: Date: Phone:
Emailed: Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
v
k
S4
ssk 3
.1
FC' kq a° 4r 3� 01, .Y!,V40 " .3J . i,.� ��
st
kv R5
10", ""81
,a
NA e �
r
8bx
fa3r
t�
" t
vn
iNYV
w,
9
}
� L
• 0
July 17, 2006
AZ 06-028
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING July 20, 2006
APPLICANT Horizon Development ITEM NO. 8
REQUEST Public Hearing - Annexation and Zoning of 4.43 acres to an R-15 (Medium
High -Density Residential) for Touchstone Place Subdivision - 1187 East Fairview Avenue
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICES:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS' IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
COMMENTS
See Attached Staff Report
No Comment
See Attached Comments
See Attached Comments
See Attached Comments
OTHER: See Attached Affidavit of Sign Posting
Contacted: Date: Phone:
Emailed: Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
v
k
S4
ssk 3
.1
FC' kq a° 4r 3� 01, .Y!,V40 " .3J . i,.� ��
kv R5
10", ""81
,a
NA e �
r
8bx
t y G '�
^.. a Lv s ,a s
t�
" t
vn
iNYV
w,
9
}
� L
_
fY��
{{ �� ��,,,
1��4� �9�'g
�. � §q
Y�^
r
47»''�47
�
t 4,j�4i
`3 4 'N� Y F aM1- ?!i ti
44's,'wf' . F•.4's"T SRu'v }: A' . .{ , a
0
July 17, 2006
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING July 20, 2006
0
APPLICANT Horizon Development ITEM NO. 9
REQUEST Public Hearing - Preliminary Plat approval of 2 residential lots (proposed to contain
48 multi -family units) and 2 common lots on 4.43 acres in a proposed R-15 zone for Touchstone
Place Subdivision - 1187 E. Fairview Avenue
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICES:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS' IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
OTHER:
Contacted:
Emailed:
COMMENTS
See AZ Packet
Date: Phone:
Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian.
Aws
h
"Y
it v
t ,
6
titsF
w.
4
E
3 i
in
...
''.,.`.
ux x *�.',,'•
..: "�#''� Yeas �a e +` ` "F"' A
,iKYvi
.. �'� .'k� ,
r
fiq 3 �
7 y.
S }
M.#..kct
+f,,y
:j
S 3 h.els�.r`�`i3,->'z•*
rt.„
•l� _•
:�Dt
{ qb
S 7i A -
k.
3 hu. ,+ v"� x
�kOt�r'yi+rw`�md4^'t'tlM1i-'{'im
i '>
,14
r"
°d"s+
d
{
iz
J,Y. y,x i. r7ti�l
"@� fig �•
I.4�
"..� `"� k ��sp } 5 �4
.
-'�
,� ,� r `€+_ f'� �� R
'7.0 4. 1 . 3 _Z}1.5 ;'1t,- •# v" �'.j";!=t Y�#^ 3�'
-t as
p E4�'
F a 3 , �w asr.
�fi.'...._6
0
July 17, 2006
0
CUP 06-021
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING July 20, 2006
APPLICANT Horizon Development ITEM NO. 10
REQUEST Public Hearing - Conditional Use Permit approval to construct a multi -family develop-
ment consisting of 48 multi -family dwelling units (8-plexes) on 2 lots totaling 4.43 acres in a proposed
R-15 zone for Touchstone Place Subdivision - 1187 E. Fairview Avenue
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICES:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS' IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
OTHER:
See AZ Packet
COMMENTS
Contacted: Date: Phone:
Emailed: Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
a�r
r
a;
x
0
July 17, 2006
0
CUP 06-021
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING July 20, 2006
APPLICANT Horizon Development ITEM NO. 10
REQUEST Public Hearing - Conditional Use Permit approval to construct a multi -family develop-
ment consisting of 48 multi -family dwelling units (8-plexes) on 2 lots totaling 4.43 acres in a proposed
R-15 zone for Touchstone Place Subdivision - 1187 E. Fairview Avenue
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICES:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS' IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
OTHER:
See AZ Packet
COMMENTS
Contacted: Date: Phone:
Emailed: Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
e
July 20, 2006
0
AZ 06-032
MERIDIAN PLANNING 8, ZONING MEETING July 20, 2006
APPLICANT Conger Management Group ITEM NO.
REQUEST Public Hearing - Annexation and Zoning of 29.31 acres from RUT to an R-8
zone for Trilogy Subdivision - south side of Chinden Boulevard and east of Black Cat Rd
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICES:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS' IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
OTHER:
Contacted:
Emailed:
COMMENTS
See Attached Staff Report
No Comment
See Attached Comments
No Comment
See Attached Affidavit of Sign Posting
Date: Phone:
Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
yf
WIN
�m
b'
r
�h
t
s„
z k
q { fi .
�w
eN
e
July 20, 2006
0
AZ 06-032
MERIDIAN PLANNING 8, ZONING MEETING July 20, 2006
APPLICANT Conger Management Group ITEM NO.
REQUEST Public Hearing - Annexation and Zoning of 29.31 acres from RUT to an R-8
zone for Trilogy Subdivision - south side of Chinden Boulevard and east of Black Cat Rd
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICES:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS' IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
OTHER:
Contacted:
Emailed:
COMMENTS
See Attached Staff Report
No Comment
See Attached Comments
No Comment
See Attached Affidavit of Sign Posting
Date: Phone:
Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
CJ
July 17, 2006
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING July 20, 2006 PP 06-032
APPLICANT Conger Management Group ITEM NO. 12
REQUEST Public Hearing - Preliminary Plat approval of 148 single-family lots & 14
common/other lots including 2 private streets lots on 28.17 acres in a proposed R-8
zone for Trilogy Subdivision - south side of Chinden Boulevard & east of Black Cat Rd
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT.
SANITARY SERVICES:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS' IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
See AZ Packet
COMMENTS
OTHER:
Contacted: Date:
Phone:
Emailed: Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
s
41
J
Fri t
t�
t r
r «�
n
^
x L
NSA+ L
,v
411
f
rr
( f
S.. k
A
a�Ss
x'�.,.
yi Y�
r
"
f �
tib+
CJ
July 17, 2006
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING July 20, 2006 PP 06-032
APPLICANT Conger Management Group ITEM NO. 12
REQUEST Public Hearing - Preliminary Plat approval of 148 single-family lots & 14
common/other lots including 2 private streets lots on 28.17 acres in a proposed R-8
zone for Trilogy Subdivision - south side of Chinden Boulevard & east of Black Cat Rd
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT.
SANITARY SERVICES:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS' IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
See AZ Packet
COMMENTS
OTHER:
Contacted: Date:
Phone:
Emailed: Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
s
41
,v
411
f
( f
S.. k
A
a�Ss
x'�.,.
yi Y�
r
,
f �
tib+
is
July 17, 2006
MERIDIAN PLANNING 8, ZONING MEETING July 20, 2006 AZ 06-031
APPLICANT James L. Jewett
ITEM NO. 13
REQUEST Public Hearing - Annexation & Zoning of 290.87 acres from RUT to R-8 (115.91 acres), R-4
(62.92 acres), TN -R (51.36 acres), TN -C (34.65 acres) & R-2 (26.02 acres) zones for South Ridge
Subdivision - south side of Overland Road between Linder Road and Ten Mile Road
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICES:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS' IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
COMMENTS
See Attached Staff Report
No Comment
See Attached Comments
See Attached Comments
OTHER: See Attached Affidavit of Sign Posting
Contacted:
Date: Phone:
Emailed:
Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the city of Meridian.
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
"
3 ,
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
•
tib'*.
S„
g-
July 17, 2006
SETTLERS' IRRIGATION:
PP 06-031
MERIDIAN PLANNING 8, ZONING MEETING JUIy 20, 2006
APPLICANT James L. Jewett ITEM NO. Q
1 `
IDAHO POWER:
REQUEST Public Hearing - Preliminary Plat approval of 233 lots including: 206 residential lots, 11
3
commercial/other lots 8,16 common/open space lots on 290.87 acres in the proposed TN -C, TN -R,
R-8, R-4 & R-2 zones for South Ridge Subdivision - south side of Overland Rd between Linder Rd & Ten Mile RD
v
AGENCY COMMENTS
OTHER:
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: See AZ Packet
CITY ATTORNEY
Date: Phone:
CITY POLICE DEPT:
Emailed:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become
CITY SEWER DEPT:
Property of the City of Meridian.
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICES:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
"
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
g-
SETTLERS' IRRIGATION:
..
1 `
IDAHO POWER:
5
3
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
v
OTHER:
Contacted:
Date: Phone:
Emailed:
Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become
Property of the City of Meridian.
—r n
71
�i
a 2 y
i
�'
�Y , F-
R� 4 - y # �t �4
{.d'*
,
{
rg.
i 3'
.
A
s i
41A w6%
g
R4 :£aye f.""1 9�x
A}"M`
4k.
ffi4
t»hF�b`. PC