The URL can be used to link to this page

2006 08-03'4 f'-~ l.: Z1;f (.1IY ()1' Ny4~~I tl iii',: ~~' ~,~j~r~lc~ r . <~ ,; ,, I I,.-.. ,.I i. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING REGULAR MEETING AGENDA City Council Chambers 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho Thursday, August 3, 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: _X Keith Borup _X Wendy Newton-Huckabay X David Moe _O David Zaremba X Michael Rohm -chairman i, '~'~ 2. Adoption of the Agenda: Approve `x 3. Consent Agenda: .,, A. Approve Minutes of July 6, 2006 Planning & Zoning Commission ~,T, '<- Meeting: Approve B. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: 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: Approve r~. C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: 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 4. Public Hearing: AZ 06-034 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 2.95 acres from R4 (Ada County) to L-O (Limited Office District) for Ashtyn I ; Park Annexation by David N. Price -- 201 W. Ustick Road: Recommend Approval to City Council Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda - August 3, 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. '.t.. nq<i4t i~(•'y•e'-~~': s,i.. ] II111 +~IIIIII Il-1 I1 I.. ~ppF~ I`N I1 ~ I ...~ I ,~>i.°,eWe. Yi~a .....V,'~'•~'~'~~'sr~~'.,,~~... ~.•.9y~' ~.il, i.. ; 1. ,.. I I tlkl ~~l` ~ .. I Nom: :~ ~ ~I 1,:~~ ~..t~s.F ~V*'P~l~. ~1..r1MP }T'. .<t ~~ 4~ p :K.• ~ 1'.tir t :. r, _ '~•M ryA f.'' f; f S ~ ` , F. I , +`~ k ,1 , I, Ir. `.. ~ i .:!.~: .1. , ~ ` . I .,\: i Y. -.- - £. : •:1 v.J: S . r Y ) r ~1 I~ 1 1f4X '~ .""n i..y'. ` f .d ~ ' L S; '~ , r ~~ ~~ ' j'r~` ' ,rl '~:Y~'j' T3.`r': i~;t. '/~ ~ x I ~ ! F ' t ~,-r ' :~ ... ,.,. ; .... .. a I . ti .~ 2r ,•' ,;o- :~,x y`•' .L Yr~:;'-,}! ' . ~ t ~ is ~~ `; ~tt, ~.: f . y< .. . ~ ~ ~ I ! F' :3.~ ~'h~'7Ao- i ~ AA '"i y ' } . ~ 6`t~,f:', i<'~ ' 1.' r 3:3 t y~~ , { ~ .k. }.. ?9i . ~ '~ '~ ; r 'r <~ mot ~Frt 9 ~~: ! ~ I sl iR ~ . t ~ t ~ ~ ~ • •r' y ' „z:: ~ u :.:;.. . ~ .1 .t ~• y-. '~~;. L 4 4 ,. . , ... ~, ~ d '.s}= >,.;Ra,^1~ .s/~ , ~ r• ~ ~~. f+ _ y i.; , ~5 ~, :~~atrZ ,n.,<L~' . ,'y':,• ; : Sa. . 1-f. ,,%rq. t ~ ~ • ~ ~ '~ . ~ , ~ . a~3 .~ . ,.; I~.' !. ~ ~ , ..,. .i,. . `..: ~ . , ' ~ i 'l. ~ '.s M 4 ' >. . ~;. . _ ~e -: ~r • ,~,.. .• a ii~ .. ..~~~ -w;~ • 'A.~. ~. , . .. ;:: . ~'.~~:. ... . 0.~ ,~... ,., t.. ; ..:' t ,:.: "` , M}q.~,,- r ., .I ~~Ifj(. 1'i ~.~ • 5. Public Hearing: AZ 06-033 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 7.6 `''~z acres from RUT (Ada County) to 6 acres of R-4 (Medium Low-Density Residential) and 1.6 acres of R-8 (Medium Density Residential) for Benelli - Springs Subdivision by Rob Godsill - 3420 South Locust Grove Road: Recommend Approval to City Council .~:. y" 6. Public Hearing: PP 06-041 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 17 ~~~ single-family units in the proposed R-4 zone, 8 single family units in the =i proposed R-8 zone and 5 common lots on 7.6 acres for Benelli Springs Subdivision by Rob Godsill - 3420 South Locust Grove Road: ''`- Recommend Approval to City Council ;i 7. Public Hearing: RZ 06-006 Request for a Rezone of 6.82 acres from R-8 to R-15 for Cedar Springs Townhomes by John Flaherty Construction - '`.'`~~ south of W. McMillan and west of N. Meridian Road: Recommend ~~". Approval to City Council ', 8. Public Hearing: PP 06-033 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 48 ~<-; attached single-family units in the proposed R-15 zone, 20 detached single-family units in the existing R-8 zone and 5 common lots on a total of 11.05 acres for Cedar Springs Townhomes by John Flaherty a3~ Construction -south of W. McMillan and west of N. Meridian Road: Recommend Approval to City Council =~; 9. Public Hearing: AZ 06-030 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 8.03 acres to an R-8 zone for Northborough Subdivision by Gemstar ~~~~ Development, LLC -north side of Ustick Road and east of Linder Road: {. Continue Public Hearing to August 31, 2006 fi, 10. Public Hearing: PP 06-030 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 35 ~~ residential lots and 4 common lots on 8.03 acres in a proposed R-8 zone ~~' for Northborough Subdivision by Gemstar Development, LLC -north ~~~. side of Ustick Road and east of Linder Road: Continue Public Hearing to August 31, 2006 ,;`~~, 11. Public Hearing: AZ 06-040 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 4.38 acres to an R-8 zone for Bellabrook Subdivision by JE Development, `~~~ LLC - 300 South Locust Grove Road: Recommend Approval to City Council 12. Public Hearing: PP 06-038 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 20 ~, .;. '_~ residential lots and 4 common lots on 4.38 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Bellabrook Subdivision by JE Development, LLC - 300 South Locust Grove Road: Recommend Approval to City Council 13. Public Hearing: AZ 06-036 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 10.94 ~;~ acres from RUT to an R-4 zone for Bitterbrush Point Subdivision by ~., ~~ Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda -August 3, 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 ~CC ~ i - ~ cL 3 ;~R? ~ &~ ~~ Y f ,.~~ ' ~~ ~ j~fr:.h Yt r{I~ SYn 1-- ~~~~ i~ 3-~; ~~~ ,Y'j` '~~'"i~ 7 fs~ -; ; '~~r~'e'~~s~g~~ ~ ~ d ~sd~ s .z ` i . . , r St a 3a e ~ k.~ ~ rN~u t-'+ ~ a - r ~ ;; •~a~ ~ , _ - M j ,~- t4 .,.. K'~r~Y~~r. T«y i~~ S~ ~p vQ ~~~y~., ,y,. f ~~ #W` z ~ , art", .-. ~.5'M1:'i1~. :I _. ~- ,.~ ~:{ F~` F ~' - ~~ ~~t ~; (... tf ~', }: f ~ k_ ~. .f ~ = Majestic, Inc. -east of Meridian Road and north of Victory Road: Recommend Approval to City Council 14. Public Hearing: PP 06-039 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 27 single-family residential lots and 4 common lots on 10.94 acres in a proposed R-4 zone for Bitterbrush Point Subdivision by Majestic, Inc. - east of Meridian Road and north of Victory Road: Recommend Approval to ,City Council Meridian Planning and Zoning Cpmmission Meeting Agenda - August 3, 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. ., ~A e Y ~ F ~ t': W,IU.G Hsw~I'~ ..~, Jyi t ~ ,~_ J ~` ~ ~~ ~a ~ ~i ~~~ ~ asi.~~~ ~; _ t s ~ r ~" ~7`r t ~" r ~~y ;, 4/ ~~ g~~,'~ ar~ti~a~ r a 'r ,y wC TKi T4~ ~, a k!%n 1 ~ ~M; H_ t ~~~~4 ~ :'C~~ ~ :w.Y~ ~ ~a ~ i . ~ _i,n ~5~~"ti •'y. k :r::' . ~ ~+0 rt:f d o f~ ~ ~~ y 7 ~ r~ to ~ ~ ~ ~,~i~~;r tf ~.~`\ i fir T ~~~~ ~ttia. r a,'~~.~ .:~~.~a Y/ h:- w ~.~.~~? -.. ~~ ~'~ k; . , .~:r <. h~~ ~ • o . J a1. d ~~f ;. ~ '~~ ~~ti °"Y °F ,~ ~ ` MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING ~ a , ~~~~'n ~' r~ REGULAR MEETING ~ . ~ :~~ t ~~ i iDnHO j AGENDA ~.,~ cE,~ J` ~T~~L~~~Y ,903 City Council Chambers n ,~rt,~ 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho a Thursday, August 3, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. Jk ~AJthough the City of Meridian no longer requires sworn testimony, c ~'~ 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 ~ Wendy Newton-Huckabay ~ -- David Moe David Zaremba :- a : ~,; : Michael Rohm -chairman ~ ~ ~: _ ~ ~~ ~~ -, .,,. ~ ~~~ 2. Adoption of the Agenda: ~~ ~~ C~~ 3. Consent Agenda: p-. Approve Minutes of July 6, 2006 Planning & Zoning Commission .' ~ Meeting: ~ ~~~~ ~ ~ U~ 4 :~n,~ ~ ~~~ B. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: 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 8< H ~-~~~ Utility Contractors, Inc. by H & H Utility Contractors, Inc. -225 N rl~~'; West Franklin Road: ~~~(~~.~ ~~ . ' '~Y"e C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: MCU r ~; ~ ~ 06-001 Re uest 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 ~' ~ M: 5) by Russell Dunstan - 2593 W. Ditch Creek Drive: ~ ~~~r~L h 4. Public Hearing: AZ 06-034 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 2.95 ~f ~~ acres from R4 (Ada County) to L-0 (Limited Office District) for Ashtyn _z Park Annexation by David N. Price -- 201 W. Ustick Road: E~ ~;~ ~~ ~ ~°~ , ~~, ~' ^ GYI ~~~ ~ ~~~~`~~' ~~c°~ ~ lam' `~~ ~~~52 ~~ ` ~' Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda - August 3, 2006 Page 1 of 2 _ 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. .;~=w: ,f ;,~.;; ~ ~. ~ ~~3 ~~ ~~: ~~, ._ ,~, c,;~,~. ti 6 of 7 d Zonin ti A 5. . g on an nnexa Public Hearing: AZ 06-033 Request for ~~~~ .~r. acres from RUT (Ada County) to 6 acres of R-4 (Medium Low-Density Residential) and 1.6 acres of R-8 (Medium Density Residential) for Benelli `~ ~:, ~ ~' ust Grove Road: oc odsill -3420 South L on b y Rob G bd iv i i n gs Su Spri /[ /~~ } ~p /s//,',' / ~ o ~/f ' / ~ 1 JJJ ~ ~. _ 6. ~~~--lll... Public ~earing: PP 06-041 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 17 `~ ~ . single-family units in the proposed R-4 zone, 8 single family units in the rN proposed R-8 zone and 5 common lots on 7.6 acres for Benelli Springs y ~~*- Sub ivision by Rob Godsill -3420 South Locust Gro a Road: ` ~ 7. Public Hearing: RZ 06-006 Request for a Rezone of 6.82 acres from R-8 , to R-15 for Cedar Springs Towmhomes by John Flaherty Construction - ~'-~ south of W. McMillan and west of N. Meridian Road: 8. Public Hearing: PP 06-033 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 48 _ attached single family units in the proposed R-15 zone, 20 detached Y~~~ single-family units in the existing R-8 zone and 5 common lots on a total of p 11.05 acres for Cedar Springs Townhomes by John Flaherty ~~ F~4 Construction -south of W. McMillan and west of N. Meridian Road: ~ ' ~ C~ ~ ~ ~ i~ YYt~r~i ~ ~~ ~~, ~ ra,~ ~-f U (~ ~ 9. Public Hearing: AZ 06-030 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 8.03 acres to an R-8 zone for Northborough Subdivision by Gemstar `~~ Development, LLC -north side of Ustick Road and east of Linder Road: `''= roval of 35 Plat a inar li t P .~ ~ ; 10. pp y m re r Public Hearing: PP 06-030 Reques ~' z., residential lots and 4 common lots on 8.03 acres in a proposed R-8 zone a~ ~ for Northborough Subdivision by Gemstar Development, LLC -north ~. ;.~ ~; si a of Ustick Road and east of Linder Road: ®p~~/` ~'~ LC.~ ~~ ~9 !~ ~ ~''-ti'~PJ~ ~4 P~`'7~ ~ ,~'~ Ga' d' ~' ~ c ~ ~r r~tC.°~ ~~ . `_ 11. Public Hearing: AZ 06-040 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 4.38 acres to an R-8 zone for Bellabrook Subdivision by JE Development, ' ^ L C - 300 South Locust Grove Road: ' ` 'k .~w 12. roval of 20 p Public Hearing: PP 06-038 Request for Preliminary Plat ap ''~ ~x'~ ~` ` ` residential lots and 4 common lots on 4.38 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Bellabrook Subdivision by JE Development, LLC - 300 South Locust r ~5~ Grove Road: f~~C~-? ~l D~~ ~~~~~v~~~ ~ ~'~ ~ C°~~~ ~~ 13. Public Hearing: AZ 06-036 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 10.94 f ~, acres from RUT to an R-,4 zone for Bittelrbrush Point Subdivision by -~ M 'estic, Inc. -east of Meridian Road and north of Victory Road: 14. Pu lic Hearing: PP 06-039 Request for Preliminary~lat approval of 27 single-family residential lots and 4 common lots on 10.94 acres in a proposed R-4 zone for Bitterbrush Point Subdivision by Majestic, Inc. - ~~~~~~~~ ~ east of Meridian Road and north of Victory Road: ~ ' ~ : ~ ~ Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda - August 3, 2006 Page 2 of 2 ~¢~, - ' 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. F3 ~.4.'i'+Z3w~~!. ''Y4 .f ~ ~ea.~~os+ -Foy' ~! ~hU`~ ~.~ e ~'~`~`°F MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING =~9~~, ~~_' ~f'j~l~`jj ~~' ~ REGULAR MEETING 1DAH0 ~~ AGENDA ~r,~,,s;~v~ 79~ City Council Chambers ~;'~~ 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho ,~ Thursday, August 3, 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 Wendy Newton-Huckabay ~'° `~~ ~ David Moe David Zaremba ;~,. Michael Rohm -chairman n . ~. ". ,', 2. Adoption of the Agenda: .; ~, ~£ '~ 3. Consent Agenda: ` } ~ A. Approve Minutes of July 6, 2006 Planning 8~ Zoning Commission ~~. ~~ ~,'' Meeting: B. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP ~~`=' ~ , ' 06-019 Request for a Conditional Use Permit to construct 10,072.5 ~~' ' square foot addition for company offices, track, equipment and F ~` material storage facilities on 3.68 acres in a C-G zone for H 5< H t Utility Contractors, Inc. by H & H Utility Contractors, Inc. - 225 West Franklin Road: ;~<; C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: 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: r ,.. ~ ~ , ,~ ' ' 4. Public Hearing: AZ ~-034 Request for Annexation and Zoning ofi 2.95 acres from R4 (Ada County) to L-O (Limited OfFice District) for Ashtyn Park Annexation by David N. Price - 201 W. Ustick Road: Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda - Augus! 3, 2006 Page 1 of 2 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodadon 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. • ~ f f c' F ~s.. ~i ~ }~ , ~M1M1~H'' f _ {'kit ,~''- f x~k.' '' h~,tF ,~~. ~~~; I~ Y~' t n .K ~~ 3~ r ~.a r .~, u, fig. ~~N iifi ~' ~?,i=' ` t ' ~~ ± ~/ ~; 1 ~i r,~n'~ r& 0 °~: 1 { ~ r ~ Fc¢e. a H 1`,j 1~~ s k~t-~,u ' ry {': ~" 1 ,~~-. . ~h~ ~'+I ~:.~ 5. Public Healrin~l4Z 06-033 Reouest for Annexation and Zonino of 7.6 ;5 acres from RUT (Ada County) to 6 acres of R-4 (Medium Low-Density ~., Residential) and 1.6 acres of R-8 (Medium Density Residential) for Benelli '' Springs Subdivision by Rob Godsill -3420 South Locust Grove Road: ' 6. Public Hearing: PP 06-041 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 17 single-family units in the proposed R-4 zone, 8 single family units in the proposed R-8 zone and 5 common lots on 7.6 acres for Benelli Springs Subdivision by Rob Godsill -3420 South Locust Grove Road: ,~; . _,. ~ 7. Public Hearing: RZ 06-006 Request for a Rezone of 6.82 acres from R-8 ~ <,~ to R-15 for Cedar Springs Townhomes by John Flaherty Construction - 3 ~. ~~ ~' south of W. McMillan and west of N. Meridian Road: `'~ 8. Public Hearing: PP 06-033 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 48 T attached single family units in the proposed R-15 zone, 20 detached single-family units in the existing R-8 zone and 5 common lots on a total of ~ ~, 11.05 acres for Cedar Springs Townhomes by John Flaherty ~_ ,.,~ - Construction -south of W. McMillan and west of N. Meridian Road: ,. ~~ 9. Public Hearing: AZ 06-030 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 8.03 fl 4 ... acres to an R-8 zone for Northborough Subdwis~on by Gemstar Development, LLC -north side of Ustick Road and east of Linder Road: 10. Public Hearing: PP 06-030 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 35 ~;; , residential lots and 4 common lots on 8.03 acres in a proposed R-8 zone f N thb h S b or or oroug u division by Gemstar Development, LLC -north ~~ r, ~ ~ side of Ustick Road and east of Linder Road: . 11. Public Hearing: AZ 06-040 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 4.38 <: acres to an R-8 zone for Bellabrook Subdivision by JE Development, `' ' LLC - 300 South Locust Grove Road: ~r 12. Public Hearing: PP 06-038 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 20 4 residential lots and 4 common lots on 4.38 acres in a proposed R-8 zone . for Bellabrook Subdivision by JE Development, LLC - 300 South Locust 4 ~i Grove Road: ~'" ~ 13. Public Hearing: AZ 06-036 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 10.94 ° ~ acres from RUT to an R-4 zone for Bitterbrush Point Subdivision by ~W :~ ~~ ~- Majestic, Inc. -east of Meridian Road and north of Victory Road: ~, .I 14. Public Hearing: PP 06-039 Request for Preliminary Ptat approval of 27 `' ~ single-family residential lots and 4 common lots on 10.94 acres in a ~' ~ proposed R~ zone for Bitterbrush Point Subdivision by Majestic, Inc. - ~~ ~~ east of Meridian Road and north of Victory Road: ~. ~'" ` ~` Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda - August 3, 2006 Page 2 of 2 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the Cily of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, ~ ' `' please contact the Cily Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. r. ~ ~~ ~~: r. ' i ~ , 1,~ ' ~ , >~ TX TION REPORT Hac R S OF JUL 31 PRGE.01 06 1 ~.~ CITY OF MERIDIAN ~: } ~, ; °' ~' ;;} -F. DRTE TIME TO/FRDM MODE MIN/SEC PGS CMDtt STRTUS ~ 08 07/31 14 29 3810160 EC--S 01'21" 002 094 OK k', 09 07/31 1430 PUBLIC WORKS EC--S 00' S0" 002 094 OK f; ~ 10 07/31 1432 WATER DEPT EC--S 00' 49" 002 094 OK y'~; ';~ 11 07/31 1433 2088840744 EC--S 00'50" 002 094 OK , 12 07/31 1434 POLICE DEPT EC--S 00'49" 002 094 OK 13 07/31 1436 8985501 EC--S 00'48" 002 094 OK ~' 14 07/31 1437 LIBRARY EC--S 00'48" 002 094 OK ~~';~ ;'fi` 15 07/31 1438 2083776449 EC--S 00'48" 002 094 OK I; 16 07/31 1440 3886924 EC--S 00' 48" 002 094 OK ~~ ? 17 07/31 14 41 P-RND-Z EC--S 00' 48" 002 094 OK %~ 18 07/31 14 42 FIRE DEPT EC--S 00'48" 002 094 OK ~- - 19 07/31 1444 208 ~ 2682 EC--S 00'49" 002 094 OK ' ~~ 20 07/31 14 45 208 387 6393 EC--S 00'48" 002 094 OK ' ~~ 21 07/31 14 46 RDR CTY DEVELMT EC--S 00'49" 002 094 OK 23 07/31 1449 LRKEVIEW GOLFCOU G3--S 01'30" 002 094 OK 24 07/31 1451 IDRHO ATHLETIC C EC--S 00'49" 002 094 OK ~~ 25 07/31 14 52 ID PRESS TRIBUNE EC--S 00'49" 002 094 OK ` 26 07/31 14 57 25052 EC--S 00'49" 002 094 OK 27 07/31 14 58 2088686701 EC--S 00'49" 002 094 OK ~~ l~rse ~'o~+ -tor Ytnb~~~ Ni9fi1~ - ~ n cn,lc~s~~ ~~ ~'~ arras ~ ~ MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING ;~' ~/ Y/.G~`YI(J1T~~'I ;, REGULAR MEETING ~: ~ i~.wo ~' AGENDA ~} ~' ~~. . ~ ,av. ~` City Council Chambers t' '' 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho r; ;- Thursday, August 3, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. i4lthough the City of Meriden no longer requires swam testimony, ~~"; a0 presentations before the Mayorand City Counal are expected to be frcrthful and honest to best of the abr7ity of tt-e presenter. " 7~+' 1. Roll-call Attendance: F~ .!~, ` j~ Keith Borup Wendy Newton-Huckabay David Moe David Zaremba Michael Rohm -chairman ` 2. Adoption of trre Agenda: s `~ 3. Consent Agenda: ~,,.: . ~ ~ A. Approve Minutes of July 6, 2006 Planning 8 Zoning Commission ~ c; ' .~ Meeting: B. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 06019 Request for a Conditional Use Permit to ~trud 10,072.5 s'~ square foot addition for oDmpany offices, truck, equipment and material storage faalities on 3.68 acres in a C-G zone for H 8 H Utility Contractors, Inc. by H 8 H Utility Corrtradors, Inc. -225 West Franklin Road: ~' ' C. Findings of Fact and Cortcluaiorrs ol` Law far Approval: MCU - 06-001 Request for a Conditional Use Pemnit Modfication far Ic,"~ residential home built two feet into five foot setback (sold prior to : discovery of mistake) for Fuller Subdivision No. 5 (Lot 4, Block S) by Russell Dunstan - 2593 W. Ditch Creek Drive: ~_; ` 4. Public Hearing: AZ 06-034 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 2.95 ^' acres from R4 (Ada County) to L-0 (Limited Office District) for Ashtyn k' Park Annexation by David N. Price - 201 W. Ustick Road: a 1~. ~~ Meridian Plarming end Zoning Conaniesaon ~ ~~ Meeting Agenda - Auguffi 3, 2U1~ Page 1 of 2 resetded et ~~ p pu meetings shall become properly oldre City of Meridian, Anyone desMcrg erxommodetion ror d>sab~ related to dooms and/or hearhig, "i ^~ Please corlfeffi fhe City CIeHc"s OfBae ffi 888-4433 et least 48 houre priorto the public meeting. b. .__ & Y_ryF if ' # b~ ~ l\~1tI a~~C~ ~ ~[~.~ d fii*.Y ~ ~f i-1 fi _ '~' I ~, t 3i~ 1 ~ ; ~;'~ {: 31 a "G t '''' L;. A fhk 3r ii ~~~ ~. ~ y:a ~ .>y., .5 y~ ~_... _.. ~ ~j'f .. 4 i ~ r ~r. ~M~ '' t ~ ~..k. r ~' ) Y r . C ;~'yY~' ~ a ~ ~ *" _ (~ ~ N f' ~ , l 4 ~ t~ r. Y ~t y fff~~~ ~~ ~ ~~~`l:. YI4e ~C ~a~~`. 1L p <MJ..~ 4, '~ a l .C. ~'~. qtr 4 r ~: ,~; a 1 T~.. y{ , `t ~ r4.' • 4 fC I41 'Y t e r:l~-, ;. _ ~3 S ~" 1 i ~. K iHi >~ TX CO~TION REPORT ~ DRTE TIME TOiFROM 01 07/03 12:59 3810160 02 07/03 13:00 PUBLIC WORKS 03 07103 13:02 8848723 04 07103 13:03 2088840744 05 07103 13:04 POLICE DEPT 06 07103 1305 8985501 07 07103 13:07 LIBRRRY 08 07103 13:08 2083776449 09 07103 13:09 3886924 10 07/03 13:10 P-RND-Z it 07103 13:11 FIRE DEPT 12 07103 13:13 208 888 2682 13 07103 13:14 208 38? 6393 14 07103 13:15 RDR CTY DEVELMT 15 07103 13:16 2088BE~052 16 07103 13:18 l_RKEVIEW GOLFCOU 17 07/03 13:20 POST OFFICE 18 07/03 13:21 IDRHO RTHLETIC C 19 07103 13:22 ID PRESS TRIBUNE 20 07103 13:24 208E~6701 21 07103 13:28 WRTER DEPT RS OF JUL 03 ' 06 1~ PRGE•01 CITY OF MERIDI RN MODE MINiSEC PGS CMDit STRTUS EC-S 01'04" 002 070 OK EC-S 00'40" 002 070 OK EC-S 00' 39" 002 070 OK EC-S 00' 40" 002 070 OI< EC-S 00' 40" 002 070 01< EC-S 00'39" 002 070 OK EC-S 00' 40" 002 070 OK EC-S 00'55" 002 070 OK EC-S 00'40" 002 070 OK EC-S 00'40" 002 070 OK EC-S 00'40" 002 070 OK EC-S 00'40" 002 070 OK EC-S 00'39" 002 070 OK EC-S 00'39" 002 070 OK EC'S 00'40" 002 070 OK G3-S 01' 18" 002 070 OK EC-S 01' 04" 002 070 OI< EC-S 00' 39" 002 070 OK EC-S 00'39" 002 070 OK EC-S 08' 39" 002 0'70 OK EC-S 00'40" 002 070 01< (~lkccse. ~O~f ~- ~f u.GY~C 11I0~1 C2, -- rTl?~'Z~S ~ CITY OF MERIDIAN' MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Thursday, July 6, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho "Although the City of Meridian no longer requires sworn testimony, all presantatfons before the Planning and Zoning Commission era expected to he truthful and honest to the hest of the ability of the presenfer. " 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. Approve Minutes of June 16, 2006 Planning $ Zoning Commission Meeting: 4. Continued Public Hearing from June 15, 2008: RZ 06-005 Request for a Rezone of 1.004 acres from R-4 to L-O (Limited Office District) for Meridian Professional Office by John Homan - 2835 and 2825 North Meridian Road: 5. Continued Public Hearing from June 15, 2006: AZ OB-026 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 80.98 acres from RUT to R-8 zone for Paramount South 60 Subdivision by Paramount Deveopment - northeast comer of N. Linder Road and W. McMillan Road: 6. Continued Public Hearing from June 15, 2008: PP OB-025 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 201 residential lots and 13 common lots on 59.81 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Paramount South 60 Subdivision by Paramount Development -northeast comer of N. Linder Road and W. McMillan Road: Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agentla -July 6, 2006 Page 1 of 2 All materials presented at pubOc meetings shall bemme property oP the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring awommodatian fordl~bilities related to tlocuments and/or hearings please contact the City Clerk's Office at 886.4433 at least 48 hours prior to the pubAe meeting. •' ..',. ~;~ `. ~. '~; t r.,~ ~` ~c* TX CONF~iION REPORT NWc AS OF AUG 03 '0b~~44 PAGE.01 CITY OF MERIDIAN DATE TIME TO/FROM MODE MIN/SEC PGS CMD# STATUS 24 08/03 22 32 PUBLIC WORKS EC--S 00'54" 002 124 OK 25 08/03 22 33 WATER DEPT EC--S 00'55" 002 124 OK 26 08/03 2235 2088840744 EC--S 00'55" 002 124 OK 27 08/03 2236 POLICE DEPT EC--S 00'54" 002 124 OK 28 08/03 2237 8985501 EC--S 00'53" 002 124 OK 29 08/03 22 39 LIBRARY EC--S 00'54" 002 124 OK 30 08/03 22°40 2083776449 EC-S 00'54" 002 124 OK 31 08/03 22 42 3886924 EC-S 00'55" 002 124 OK 32 08/03 22 43 P-AND-Z EC-S 00'55" 002 124 OK /, cm OF 1pAH0 ,1~ ~,~ j/ T aan• MERIDIAN PLANNING AND 2QNING REGULAR MEETING AGENDA City Council Chambers 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho Thursday, August 3, 2006 at 7:00 p,m. °Although the City of Merman no long®rrequires sworn testimony, all presentations before the Mayor and City Counra7 are expected to be truthful and honest to best of tits ability ofthe p~esenter.° ~? 1, Ra11-call Attendance: li~'n ~l~ ;~;` ,~ Keith Borup ~~: D5J .~_ Wendy Newton-Huckabay '` _,~, David Moe _~David Zaremba ,~_ Michael Rohm -chairman ~~~ '~ 2. Adoption of the agenda: ~}-jo p r'p U,e 8. Consent Agenda: = A Apptove Minutes of July 6. 2006 Planning 8 Zoning Commission . ~:. Meeti ng' ~pproll~ ~, B. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP F 06-019 Request for a Conditional Use Permit to construct 10,072.5 y ~~, square fit addition for company offices, truck, equipment and ~' material storage faclities on 3.68 acres in a C-0 zone far N &. H ~~ - Utility Conbraetors, Inc. by H & H Utility Contractors, Inc. -225 West Franklin Road: ,~pY,~ ~, C. Findings of Fact and Concluslort~ of Law for Approval: MCU ~` ` 06.001 Request for a Conditional Use PermR Modification for ~, residential home built two feet into five foot setback (sold prior to ~'4 ~~ discovery of mistake) for Fulfer Subdivision No. 5 (Lot 4. Block ~~: 5) by Russell Dunstan - 2593 W. Ditch Creek Drive: ~.~~I,.D ltd „. a ~ 4. Public Hearing: AZ 06-034 Request far Annexation and Zoning of 2.95 "' , acres from R4 (Ada County) to L-O (Limited Office District) for Ashtyn ~'` ~ Park Annexation by David N. Price - 201 W. Ustidc Road: y `~ ~~~ m end ~ pP~'o va,P -fip ~' ~ ~u~az ~f'~ 1 t M ~' Meridian Planning end Zoning Comnisstcn hleeAing Agenda - August 3, 2Q09 Page 1 of 2 All matartals prod at public meetings shell become properly of the City of Mertd~an. ~ ~ `;:, ~ .; ~ Anyorre desiring eccommodatlon for disabaities related to documents end/ar hearing. please coMed the Cily Cierlrs Office ffi 988.4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. ~~; i l t. ,. _ _ ..... ~ :t: - S `'-Y `a~Y ~ R ~~ ~i ~+ 4~~ h ; r r A{ i~ ` f ~$ , ~~ . yti, _ As ~~j' a is ~ € ~ ' 1 k ux,, a s1 •.. ~~'7t ~ ~ ~ ~'~ ~ § ~ r .~ ~ _.- y { 5. v ; l.. i .. a ~.~ p ,' ~~~ v l 4' ~~y'Y~ (F ~ _< Qyt ~f .~ ~g ~ ~y ~~ ^' i ~'(iO1+. y ~~ , x r.~~ s~ ~ x'S,S • ? ar {~ Re @f;~,.,. ~ '~i~ >' 1 1 ~ i~ ~~ .5~. ~t rvz.~. 4; ; .* V~F14t. `~ 4 $~ ~ _~ y e ~ ~' ,~ "~i 4~ tt'n-'F 1 ~' ~~' ~ j ~f ~% M ~ ~, f ^ ~~ ~.'L, ~.~ a•~<4 : r ~ . .. r 3'~ 6 - V {A H tt~6 !W ~~ ~2~ ~~ ~ ,~V y74,p?S!~'~ !:~f ~; t' 's a. } ,,-~~': ,: ;i t~ s r w~ : ,> 'r ,- ~; ; ~, ~ TX CONF~:TION REPORT ** AS OF RUG 03 '004 PRGE.01 CITY OF MERIDIRN DATE TIME TO/FROM 01 08/03 22 45 FIRE DEPT 02 08/03 2246 208 888 2682 03 08/03 2248 208 387 6393 04 08/03 22 49 ADA CTY DEVELMT 05 08/03 22 51 2088885052 06 08/03 22.52 LAKEVIEW GOLFCOU 07 08/03 22 54 IDAHO ATHLETIC C 08 08/03 2256 ID PRESS TRIBUNE 09 08/03 22:58 2088886'701 10 08/03 2302 3810160 MODE MIN/SEC PGS CMDLI STATUS EC-S 00'54" 002 124 OK EC-S 00'55" 002 124 OK EC-S 00'54" 002 124 OK EC-S 00'54" 002 124 OK EC--S 00'54" 002 124 OK G3-S 01'32" 002 124 OK EC-S 00'54" 002 124 OK EC-S 00'54" 002 124 OK EC-S 00'54" 002 124 OK EC-S 01'32" 002 124 OK 1, ,a CTIY OF .. .~ eri~i~'n IpAF10 ,1 ~~ ~/ Y 1. 2. 3. 4. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING REGULAR MEETING AGENDA '°~^° •" , rA City Council Chambers 33 East Idaho Avemr®, Meridian, Idaho Tht~day, August 3, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. °Although the City of MeriaGan rto /or-ger requires sworn testimony, al! presentations before the Mayor and City Cound7 are expected to be truthful and honest to best of the ability of fhe presenter." Roll-call Attendance: ~;,r,' vet ,~„ Keith Borup C7' ~S~ ~ Wendy Newton-Huckabay _„~ David Moe .David Zaremba ~_ Michael Rohm -chairman Adoption of the Agenda: ~~+ r-O U~ Consent Agenda: A. Approve Minutes of July 6, 2006 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting: ~ppYot~ B. Findings of Fact and Condusions of Law for Approval: CUP 06-019 Request for a Conditior~l Use Permit to construct 1Q,fT/2.5 square foot add'~ion for company offices, thick, equipment and material storage faclities on 3.68 acres in a C-G zone for H i9< H Utility Contractors, Inc. by H 8~ H Utility Contractors, Ina -225 West Franklin Road: ,~opro ~ C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: MCU 06.001 Request for a Conditional Use Permit Modfik~tion for residential home built two feet into five foot setback (sold prior to discovery of mistake) for Fulfer Subdinrision No. 5 (Lot 4, Block 5) by Russell Dunstan - 2593 W. Ditch Creek Drive: ~.~ pl-~ Ire Pubic Hearing: AZ 06-034 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 2.95 acres from R4 (Ada County) to L-0 (Limited Office District) for Ashtyn Park Annexation by David N. Price -201 W. Ustick Road: ~~~vnmer~ld ,~prova,P -fa ~'~ ~ur~.~+'~ Marid'an Plamdng and Zoning Comnisslon lAeeting Agenda -August 3, 2008 Page 1 of 2 All materials presented at public mee6nge shell trecome property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accortmlodalion for diseb~iti~ related to docurtreltts and/or hearing, please ~lrtad fhe City Cterlts O1Nce at 688.4433 et Ieest A8 hours priorto the pubLo meetlr-g. ~. w ~{ µ ~ _ y ~SL 4fi ~{IX rY.;t r ~~f,.. ~ ~ j ~ r3'~ ~ p ~ ~ ~ ~. }IiF 6 ' h"~ _ i ~ ~ ~ ~» ti ~ 4'ti k4~ ~~~ ~' k s'~ ~ r i~tiF ? r ~~ l k~ ~ F ~L } ~ j~~' y "~ xis, p~,~ 44 ~4~ ., ~~~{ a ~ ~ } wG r '~`~~ 1 ~~ ry~ ~ j>y~ s ~kf;~k ,~• . ~ h W~! t ~~~Xk~ <S .'~ ~~;".~ a i' jY :{ + ~aq ?~ .~a ~'F ' "r-~ .-` ~ }~ .~- "t, uk 15 ~~ .~~~y~ Thy ~<I~t ~ ~q ~:=. . P ~ ' ~ 7 Eg ~ Y ! 43F j # y J ~ ~ L F !~ f6 ~ F 4 -~~ l ~i}N f~T ~'V ~ ~ r~ ~~ e r, y2e ~~ JA ~ L itX ~;~ iS w ~ 4 ., ~~'. ~5~. `~'~ '~'~ l `,~ a ~~ ~y~ Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting AuQUSt 3.2006 ~: _ Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of August 3, 2006, was `' ~ called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Michael Rohm. ~3. ;';a. Members Present: Michael Rohm, Chairman Keith Borup, Wendy Newton-Huckabay, '` ~ and David Moe. ~.. Members Absent: David Zaremba. ~~ ~ ~~ Others Present: Ted Baird, Machelle Hill, Caleb Hood, Mike Cole, Jenny Veatch, Justin ~~` ~~ ~: Lucas, Amanda Hess and Dean Willis. ~- , ~'~ .t. Item 1: Roll-Call Attendance: ~ r ~, Roll-call ~~ ~' X Wendy Newton-Huckabay X Keith Borup ., X David Moe -Vice Chairman David Zaremba ~~ ::~. ;l X Michael Rohm -Chairman Rohm: Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. I'd like to call the regularly scheduled ~' : ':~, ~ meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning to order and we will begin with the roll call. ~` ~ ~w ti;= ,~, ~~; °~+~ Item 2: Adoption of the Agenda: R Rohm: Okay. To start off with we'd like to start with the adoption of the agenda and ' ~ ~ there is one change in the agenda. Items 9 and 10, both related to Northborough `~ ~ ~' Subdivision, will not be heard tonight and that project will be continued to the special °r;~ meeting that we are going to have on August 31st and that will -- that's the date that that ' `~ hearing will be continued to. So, if there is anybody here for that particular project, ~: ~ that's when it will be heard. So, other than that, the agenda will stay as published. .. S` 'fit. Could I get a motion to accept the agenda as amended? ~' '` ~. Moe: So moved. ~. Newton-Huckabay: Second. Fri Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to adopt the agenda. All those in favor say aye. ~~~ r~~ Opposed same sign? ~~~ -~; . MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. TWO ABSENT. ~~~ ~ `.`~ Item 3: Consent Agenda: A. Approve Minutes of July 6, 2006 Planning & Zoning Commission ~' § Meeting: z~ Y .~_ xn z E ~•._~,. ~r ~~r ~~ ;: ' ;s ~~ ~ .;rte s r*~yq fh 4j ~_; ~ i~~~ X0'`4 „„ ~~~ ~t '~ n ~ .3 ~ r ~f' i. ~ ~. ~ ~~~~ ~' .' ~~ ~ ~. r'~ ~ ~ ~ ~y ~ ~ ~~~~ G3 t ~ ~ FY i eg`'~ t > '•."~, ~ r t ~I ~;~ ~~FS ~ { c ~ u~, 3 i ~y him,*y a. ~ ~, ,v c Y~ .. 3. sk "`~~t f {tw Z l~ d't ~;l~ ~ 11 ~2.:_ y.. __~; ___ ~:~ -- z,.:~ ;_•'~ ~' ~- . - a:~ .: ~3, ,~ }~~ '~ F ~_ .,,::~~ °~~- ~s °E.~'TM :~.. Y+rf :t. ~~ _; ,: <z >~ ~:. _,~~~. >: ~ '~~~ ~ .r, _` ~:~ Sy _:.~,: -. x ~" ~~ ;,<,,,: ~--_ s:x~< ~~ .~,.; ,, l T' 2,~,~. '~g5 "gi,*ri t%r'!:< Meridian Planning & Zoning August 3, 2006 Page 2 of 56 B. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: 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: C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: 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: Okay. Next item on the agenda is the Consent Agenda and there is three items on that and first is to approve the minutes of the July 6th Planning and Zoning meeting. Item B is Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for approval of CUP 06-019, both -- or this related to H&H Utility Contractors, Incorporated. And the third item is Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for approval of MCU 06-001 related to Fulfer Subdivision No. 5, Lot 4, Block 5. Could I get a motion to accept the Consent Agenda? Moe: So moved. Newton-Huckabay: Second. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to approve the Consent Agenda. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Very good. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. TWO ABSENT. Newton-Huckabay: Have we established the pace? Rohm: This is the pace. We should be out of here by 7:20. And could we get the minutes to reflect that Commissioner Borup is here. Okay. Before we open up any hearings, for those of you that generally are not in attendance at these meetings, what we do is we first ask the staff to present the project from a staff perspective where they take a look at the project as it relates to city codes and the Comprehensive Plan. They present the project from that perspective. Once they have presented the project from their perspective, then, the applicant has an opportunity to sell the project to us as the Commission and once those two presentations have been made, then, it's open to the public for their comment. Once the public has made their comments, then, the applicant has an opportunity to respond to any testimony offered on that project. That's pretty much the way the procedure goes. And, then, throughout that procedure if we need to get clarification from either staff or our attorney, will ask those questions as we go along. But, generally speaking, once we open a hearing and take testimony, we try to 'r~J;:;, E ~~ ~~~~ • o ~ Meridian Planning & Zoning ~' ,~,; August 3, 2006 -~ Page 3 of 56 L :°`$ act on that project the same evening. There are times that we end up having to .F ~~ :~ a is ;~ continue for whatever reason, but, generally speaking, we try to conclude. 2 ~. ;' Item 4: Public Hearing: AZ 06-034 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 2.95 i acres from R4 (Ada County) to L-O (Limited Office District) for Ashtyn ~` ~~~, Park Annexation by David N. Price -- 201 W. Ustick Road: ;~ V+ ? r ~~~ Rohm: So, with that being said, I'd like to at this time open up the Public Hearing for AZ _ 06-034 for Ashtyn Park annexation and begin with the staff report. ,_ ~; Hood: Thank you, Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission. There is the Ashton Park annexation. It is just an annexation application. There is not an associated , development application for the 2.95 acres that is being requested to be annexed into . ,` ~ ; the ci and zoned to L-O office zonin ty g You may recall last year this same parcel was :~ ~; also before you and you forwarded on a favorable recommendation to the City Council "~ ~ ~ The City Council did deny that application, primarily because there was not a detailed '' enough concept plan for the site and it was at that time, too, just an annexation request, ~ tip but it wasn't real firm on how that site would develop out. So, the owner of this property has hired The Land Group and have put together a concept plan, which I will show you here in just a minute for how that site will develop and staff has taken that concept plan :~ ?~'' k {i and some of the other provisions that are generally put into place for properties that just ,; ~~ have a concept plan on them into a development agreement that we'd like the City a ~; Council to approve for this site, so when it develops it does resemble the concept plan ~ ~~° that they are proposing. To orient you a little bit, this site is located on the southeast -- ,~9 or southwest corner of Ustick and Meridian Road. I'll move to the aerial here. It is just t ;4;` east of the church and da care. This -- actual) y y, part of this parcel was just until recently owned by the church and that's why about half of this property is designated on ~ the Comprehensive Plan future land use map as public, quasi public, and the other half ' i is designated as residential, because back in 2002 the church did own this parcel or ~;>; portion of this parcel and it was shown as public, quasi public. They have since r~s~ deemed it unnecessary for their uses and have sold it to Mr. Price. To the south area couple of single family homes in the county. Those homes are zoned RUT. Across =' Meridian Road is Eastbrook Subdivision. There is a public street there, Eastbrook, just '~~' ?';,F south of Meridian Road. I'm sorry. Just south of Ustick Road. It's about 200 feet south. ` 9 And I'll touch on access here in just a minute. To the north across Ustick is Settler's . ~ ' ' Park. And, then, if you go kitty-corner to the northeast corner of the intersection is the ~ ~. office uses that are approved in Sundance Subdivision. They are just going to be under -k construction, if they haven't broken ground. I haven't been out there in a couple of '~ weeks, but they should be breaking ground on the office uses there on the corner of that intersection. So, here is the aforementioned concept plan. There are six buildings `` '' shown on this plan. The access point, as I also mentioned, is at the far southern boundary of the site. The previous plan -- there were a couple of concept plans with the ' 05 application that was processed. The access point at that time, ACRD required them ~ to align that driveway with Eastbrook Drive, I think it is, that is directly across Meridian Road. The ACHD has recently -- I don't want to say rescinded that staff report, but they have updated it to reflect this concept plan and requiring the applicant now to have that 7 S'R RIG. s^k iy~~~~ '"!.'. ~ a.~ F ~'~~ M 'tl tl Yyi~+ fit. ~A ~ _ - I 2 J qF!f!' S YTT' . ~, yu 9rr di_~, ~ ~ ~.~4~' ~L~ '" a t 5 . y . '~ Tf ~ .r a ~iM?r. k~r ,r~'~' b c ~~ F~ a ~ -rb '~ ~ `~` + v ~ t a r 4 ~_ r r,w_~1. J~~ ' ~.,,fi ~~ ~.~ ~~I~ r ~ ~ 31I ~ '1 r t ._. ~. . ~ 'ic ~ 1 , r-, ~T i~a~: } ~ , ~z ~ z ~' .. Y r e~' ' ".F s ~~ 1 ~~ ;~ y ~ ~}; ~ ~. ~ ~ ~K ~.: R> r w~ ~ ~ ~ G in ~~~". ~ ;. ~ ~ x ~~kF4~ ~, 1 n ~ s ~a ~. k } T S.'_ ~ ~ ~~, ; ~ { l;'~ ~~ ~.. 1 i ~} ~ Ai b i ~~ F c .k 'y T47~! ~4 ~e ~~ :_YA LLi ~;~ih~ a,' ~~r~ .. ~' $ Meridian Planning & Zoning ' August 3, 2006 i '; Page 4 of 56 ~~ ~ driveway be no less than 315 feet south of Ustick Road. So, that's generally where you will see the driveway and staff has also required that that driveway connect up with the '..~ ,v -~~; church parking lot, so that a reciprocal easement can be granted, so that people on this '~ roe can et throu h the church u to Ustick Road and vice-versa, p p rty g g p church patrons f, ' can come through this property and get to Meridian Road. So, not everyone has to go ~ ~; ,_ through this intersection if you were heading back to the west and you're at the ' u ;: chiropractor s office or whoever may be in here. And same with the church, if you are just heading south you can cut through the office development and continue on and ~.`~' bypass that intersection. There are several provisions in the development agreement. I _ s don't know that I need to touch on all of them. Some of them, just real quickly, have a ~ minimum -- or maximum size, excuse me, for each of these buildings to be no greater ~ `~ than 5,000 square feet. They aren't shown quite that big, I thought I'd give them a little x ~.-n ~~ 4 bit more flexibility. I think they are in the neighborhood of 3,500 square feet now, I ~' `s; thought maybe if you have got a user that wanted a little bit more, combine two of these '' ' buildings in one or something, 5,000 still seemed to be a pretty manageable number :> and wouldn't stick out like a sore thumb, reall in this develo ment an y, p yways. So, the '~~ other DA provisions do require the 20-foot wide land use buffer along the southern ':, ~: -r~ boundary and a 25-foot wide landscape buffer along both of the arterial streets, Ustick ~ and Meridian, as well as a 25 buffer foot wide buffer to the church, because it's zoned residential. That's according to ordinance. So, I think I touched on pretty much the r main points here. I won't belabor it too much more. I know you saw a similar project `° ~ °~~ ! here -- or similar layout here on this site and I will stand for any questions you may ,; have. ~~'a Rohm: Thank you, Caleb. Any questions of staff? ~;! ~' Borup: Just one. Caleb, the staff report mentions that some of the dimensions do not ~; '' seem to comply with the UDC. Is there anything specific that's a concern or is this just ~~ ; , ~.~ minor things? :~ ' - Hood: Mr. Chair, Commissioner Borup, they are pretty minor. If you look right here %' there is a little bit of this backup area for this -- this parking stall that does encroach within that required 20-foot land use buffer, so it needs to be a 20-foot land use buffer, ~~~ ~ ,r. l exclusive of any asphalt. That's the one off the top of my head I can think of. But `° F` t nothing too significant or else I would have spelled it out a little bit more clearly. But ,, that's the one I can think of. =' ~ Borup: Thank you. , `~~' Rohm: Would the applicant like to come forward, please? And, please, state your ~ „ .~ ~ ;. name and address for the record. ~:~~ °~' Elg: Sure. Thank you. My name is Van Elg. I'm with The Land Group, 462 East Shore F.'' ~ ~ in Eagle. I'm the planner for The Land Group and representing Mr. Price tonight, who is { the developer. Caleb, do you have that disk, that Powerpoint? Oh, it's already up. ~~ i Again, Iwon't -- as Caleb mentioned, I won't belabor it too much. We have gone over ;k t ~, . ,;F } F rf r y r a g ~ ~, r+ 1ft' ~~~o-~~ Gx r. ,y Y. c ~ ~~~ r,yYfl '~ ~ ~. ~ ~' ~t ~" ~ F~% ~ls'~ K '~ C ~E ~~~G . .. , c,. y, ., F ~ ~p~,T'~' t_ ~ ~~ h;: ~ .~ ~ L . ~+ fl [, } } Yr ~ -v 4 Y~~~ , y ~r ~~ 5 . ^Y ~ . 1 ~ A 46•~~:. N 1 '~ ~ L ~aA ~}~~ ~~ ~4 ~~ 5 ' f-G.~ ~ Wit' ~. 3~' 44l k1~G~ YY~~ Y 4 ~ l 9 :~~ f ~r'MI~A .r'~Y G ~ t t ul.; 1 ~F F~-,1~~ ~' ~`S~ y ~' 1~i'~ ,~r ~ 7 ~~ .4 k; ~~,. fs y,v,t~~,~. i ~'7 ~~' E 2 4~Fh.._~ l.t:. . Y 7 ~{ 1 ` ,; 3 .;,,~ e i i Meridian Planning & Zoning August 3, 2006 Page 5 of 56 the staff report and find that what Caleb has indicated in this report is in compliance with what we understood to occur on the project. We don't have any particular issues with any elements of the staff report. There was a comment that I think Caleb probably had addressed, but you may have it in your packet. ACHD initially transmitted a report that was the same report, apparently, from the last time that this was before the Commission and there has been a slight change in here. So, let me -- as I go through this I will point out what change that was and why ACHD has now adjusted that report. Again, you have seen the aerial here, Caleb, so we can flip to the next one there. There is just the vicinity map again, which Caleb had on his. This drawing right here -- I wanted to show you some of the initial drawings that you saw last year as from a concept standpoint. This is the first concept drawing that you saw. You will notice that the access point is about 220 feet from the intersection of Ustick and Meridian Road, which is in approximate alignment with Eastbrook Subdivision, which was a point of contention for some of the neighbors last time. They did not want to see that -- that intersection in alignment there. In addition, ACHD had some issues with it and it was going to be a restricted access to right-in, right-out only. And since that time we have come back with what we believe to be a much better plan. Caleb, you can flip to the next one now. Again, this is another concept plan that was presented. We didn't feel like this one really met the intent or was a design that we wanted to proceed with. And the next, Caleb. When presented last year, Mr. Price identified a number of permitted and conditional uses in the application and Caleb has indicated in the staff report that through the development agreement we are being restricted to only those permitted uses in the L-O zone, that conditional uses won't be allowed. I think the only thing that - - it looks like the ordinance may have changed a little since the last time we were in, Caleb. I believe the L-O zone has changed. Some of those things that were conditional uses at one point are now part of it. The next slide kind of highlights -- condenses those yellow areas. Oops. No, it doesn't. I think it went to -- one back, maybe. Clicking over somewhere. Okay. Anyways, if you look at those yellows you can see that there is -- that's asummary of all of the principal permitted uses in the zone. And we completely agree with what's allowed there. You can see that our intent is to provide professional office spaces, dental offices, doctor's offices, chiropractic offices, maybe financial offices, perhaps a day care center, as allowed by the zone, but certainly nothing that will be intensive in either traffic or pedestrian generation in the site. It will be a fairly low impact development. Caleb, if we can go to the next --flip through -- is that the last one for ACHD? There we go. There is the condensed version. This is the -- yeah. That's fine. We will use that one right now. Okay. This is what you were lacking last time. One of the things -- one of the elements that you were lacking was an aerial of the site and -- I don't mean an aerial, an elevation of the site. And you will probably recognize this. This is Heritage Commons or a similar type development. Mr. Price fully intends to have something very compatible to this type of development on that site. Let's go to that site plan now, Caleb. This is the site plan that we have identified as being what we believe to be a much superior plan to the ones that were presented last year. You will notice that, as Caleb mentioned, 315 feet south of the intersection you will find the full access intersection -- or access point to this site. It's not aright-in, right-out, but a full access. No longer aligning with Eastbrook Subdivision, but should provide a much better means of access to the site and reduce some of the transportation -- the trips that i r' ~x~ Na t e ~ f ~? I Y. J. 1 ., 1 fit' r ~ ~ 1~ ~ 1 t J .S~ TA Y _`.'~ Vim'. ~ ~~, ~:~ ~.F ~~~ ~ ~i.tf ~d+"~~+yi 1 ~N~ - ~ , . ;r -4 5 ~1 ~+~ ~ ~ r .:~ s , ~~1 r .r~~~~4 . F ~,~ Yb ~ ~~~ t Iv`"V. Y tai ~ ~ +4 ~ .Z ~~' ,.' 3 2}v'~ ti ~..~a ~ ' y >:: y # ; s ~+ r F• ,,M' ~, ( X43.^ Y + ~~ ~`& r ~ r S ~ a ~: x. s .. ~ ~~~ ~,, r/ ~.. j // ~ ~ ~ r ~ ". t ~ ~~ y f ~i~~ .~,: 5:: fi. u,. ~ ,t .'.n ,~ i`a~~' ~,,.' ~ ~._ 4 -~s ~~~~~ ~ q :y ~~ . ~~;~, r, ~ ~~~.: ~~ 1' '- r', ~s, '•ri ~` .Yr, ~~' `: ~: ~., 3;:~ ~:_;~.. =-~, y, ;; ~- F4i;~} x._ 1 f Y_,` ~ Y,~v "'~ ~. ~~wr ;; ,~; ~=` :=. -Y:~ ,,~; ~, ~~~:= s,`_ ~- ~' :` , ;r ~~~`-' >~ -..A ~R: T Meridian Planning & Zoning August 3, 2006 Page 6 of 56 are generated through that intersection, as you will come directly into the site, instead of passing through Ustick and Meridian Road. In addition, this site allows -- or this access point here will deter cut-through traffic from Meridian Road or from Ustick Road through the church site and back down through. So, you can see you'd have to wind fairly significantly through that project to get back out. So, it won't be a very convenient cut through approach. The six buildings that you see there, as Caleb mentioned, vary in size. I believe there is a total of about 21,000 square foot of commercial space, with about 3.8 parking spaces per thousand. Certainly that one parking space or turn out -- back out area there on the south boundary is something that we will have to come back and address and certainly willing to do that. But with that I don't think that there is whole lot more that we need to cover particularly with this -- with this proposal, other than we did mention the cross-access easement. That does exit. Mr. Price already has that agreement in his hands and we will be providing that for the church and possibly allowing them to park on Sundays within the property as well. We would ask that the normal hours of operation be consistent with the code. I think it goes from, what, 6:00 to 10:00 is the normal standard hours of operation. And with that I will open myself up to any questions that you might have. Rohm: Okay. Any questions of this applicant? Newton-Huckabay: I have none. Rohm: Okay. Before you sit down I have a question of staff and, then, possibly you can respond. Caleb, he had mentioned day care as one of the potential developments. Is that something that would be accepted in this -- as part of this project? Hood: Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission, it is on that list, which looked like the list out of the UDC. It is principally permitted. I think that is one of the changes that was made from the old Meridian city code to the new UDC in giving home, if you will, for day care centers, whereas before they were, basically, a Conditional Use Permit in all types of -- all different zoning districts and now it is principally permitted in the L-O and I think there are still several other zoning districts where they would require a C-U. But I can verify if I had a UDC here and I may try to find a hard copy of one or jump online real quick and just find you a for sure answer, but (believe -- Rohm: Typically, the day cares require a CU and I just wanted to validate before we went forward with the assumption that it would be principally permitted. .yam FAT , ~'; ;t; i~ ~.~.~ Hood: Right. Rohm: And that's fine. Elg: Mr. Chairman, I checked the UDC directly online, Caleb, and that's where I found that as well. That -- I wasn't aware of that change myself, so I checked it several times. Rohm: Well, good. I'm satisfied with that, then. Good. Thank you. ~,, ~,_ ;x~:` .; o , a , '',4 Meridian Planning 8~ Zoning August 3, 2006 Page 7 of 56 .~.r, .,_ ~i' y~.. ~ ~ f , Elg: You know, as Caleb mentioned, the day care center is currently existing -- ' ~~' currently at the site at the church and has for a number of years. And they are anxious ~' ~~ ` ' ` to potentially use one of the buildings, so -- . ,:, - ~~_ ~ Rohm: Good. Okay. Thank you. Elg: Thank you. Borup: That is what my book shows. ,y~ ,, ~~d Rohm: Okay. Good. I just -- I didn't want to move forward without clearing that in my ~;:;, r ~ ~ ,~y own mind. -~°~ ~ Elg: Yeah. That's why I checked it several times myself, because -- yr Rohm: Okay. Thank you. ;. k ~` r Borup: Just one question, Mr. Chairman. Previously the City Council had denied that. ~'=~~Y ~ i Do you feel it was because of the sample buildings or because of the landscaping T i~ ~ ~~ la out or -- I mean there is not a lot of difference from what ou submitted then and now Y Y and I -- do you feel comfortable that it will be okay at City Council this time? ,: ' ~` Elg: Frankly, we do. ';,. ~' Borup: Okay. brwj ,.?.'~ +:v'-: ~~ Elg: The Council -- I guess could say this. They asked for the additional elevations and ~A° 7~ a~ such. The applicant initially wasn't able to be at the meeting -- missed the first part of _ the meeting. When he got to the Council meeting through the appeal wasn't able to -- ` because the meeting had progressed he wasn't able to get the elevations and so they ~ r%~ denied it. So, I think it was just a combination. He didn't have a good concept plan and he didn't have the elevations that he needed -- #. Jac ' ' _~. Borup: Okay. r ~~''~' Elg: --and there was a few things like that. Borup: Thank you. ` ` Elg: Okay. Thank you. t ~~ ~ u Rohm: Thank you very much. We do not have anybody else that has signed up to ~= ~~~ speak to this application, but if there is anyone who would like to, this is your opportunity r < and, please, come forward. And state your name and place of residence. ., ~, F >rtx ~~~ i.~ J' ~~ -~ ti,., i i d; ~'`i~~'= ~Z~ X. .,,, ~ ,;.~~` ~_ ~. ;~~; ~r_; N~ , ..., ~. 4 :. -~ ,.: ~J~; ~~ ' ...~ ;;:y ~:;; ~;, ' ,:~ ~~= a~:, ~: t 4 '~i i 'F*' :'~'.k. ;: :~~;- ~~ sr;; ~;, Meridian Planning & Zoning e August 3, 2006 Page 8 of 56 Vogel: My name is Lester Vogel and we have some water users and there is an irrigation pipe that comes up on the corner there and will they be leaving that alone and not planting shrubs or something around it? Rohm: Typically, the way a development works is any water use that was available to adjacent properties before development occurs has to be available once the development is completed, so -- Vogel: They won't be obstructing me? Rohm: The water will be delivered just as it was prior. Vogel: But how about bushes and trees over that? Borup: I think that can -- that ditch is probably outside of their new property line. I think that's probably within the ACHD right of way, if I'm -- it's pretty close to that. Vogel: Okay. There won't be anything over it? Borup: Well, normally, the ditches are required to be covered if it's -- Vogel: Yeah. It's covered, but it's got a clean out there, so it needs -- Borup: Oh, you're talking about a covered ditch, not the open one that's there? Vogel: No. It's a covered ditch, but there is a plate there where it goes under Meridian Road and under Ustick Road. Borup: But along the road it's open, isn't it? Vogel: No. Borup: Okay. I'm thinking of a different one. Vogel: If you have -- if it gets plugged or something you -- Borup: Okay. We can probably -- the applicant can answer that specifically, but -- whether it's on the property, but, no, they were -- Rohm: Okay. Thank you, sir. Before we ask the applicant to come back, is there anybody else that has any question about this particular project? Any other testimony? Would the applicant like to come back, please. Elg: What you said is true when we come back with a full development concept plan that's for final approval, we certainly understand that we can't impede or interrupt or obstruct any of the flow -- any irrigation flows there. He's correct, there is a covered s ,; ,, „~; Meridian Planning & Zoning August 3, 2006 Page 9 of 56 u K f I ditch up there. It is in -- it's the Nampa-Meridian or Settlers irrigation and that the church was the end user on that, as the applicant explained to me just a moment ago. And they have seceded their right to -- or at least a portion of the rights to this site here. So, we will do whatever is necessary to make sure that irrigation water is protected and preserved in that ditch. It may take some negotiations with ACHD as well and there will be some coordination as we get that, so we don't obstruct the flow of irrigation. Moe: So access will be available? Elg: Yes. Rohm: Okay. Thank you very much. Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Chair? Rohm: Commissioner Newton-Huckabay. Newton-Huckabay: I just had a question for staff. Caleb, what -- is there an ordinance that requires them to deliver water or -- Borup: State law. Newton-Huckabay: -- or state law or -- and not interrupt the water usage? Hood: Yeah. Mr. Chair and Commissioner Newton-Huckabay, there is a state law for sure and there may be something in the Public Works section that talks about, you know, where irrigation water enters your property and exits. You can't mess with those two points. I don't know of anything in Meridian City Code. I know it's a state law, but I'm not sure of state code, so I'm going to ask Mike if he -- Newton-Huckabay: Well, I just was aware of that legal responsibility by -- Cole: Mr. Chair, Commissioner Newton-Huckabay, there is a state statute that requires that you deliver water from where it enters your property to where it leaves Your property when you develop that, that you have to maintain historical flows from where it enters and deliver it where it exits your property. Meridian City Code doesn't require that, it requires that you the any ditches that lie within that property and to comply with all state statutes. We, in the past, just for a little bit of clarification, and it might help the member in the audience, in the past we have required downstream user approval prior to final plat signature. At times that's caused some headaches, because facilities are already put in, it's costly to redirect them at that time. We since have a new policy where prior to construction plan approval -- so even if they are doing a construction without a plat involved, if they are doing just multiple buildings on one lot, as the UDC allows, they still have to have the construction plans approved, sewer, water, and one of the -- one of the requirements that we make them is submit written approval from the downstream users prior to construction plan approval, so it's hatched out before it's in ,. t ~ - ~- ~~~ a 3.,' ;~ ~Q.~ xr~ ` ~,. ~,x;~ ~~ ~' ~,;. u~° , ~F ~ ~,~~ ~ ~ ~~ E r~ ~~ ~ 3 ~..u r ~~ . "' ~,.. +r ,~:. ,,,,~ ~~ u~~N`` s, ~ ~ , ~:t ~ -~ > ~sK ~' ~ h ~ -, srz~~S ti'. ~~. KF } ~ y, {,,~` ~~1 M s -1;~4" €} ,. 1:ty ~ s ~~ ~.To ~~'a~ r , f"t x h sr33 .~ }' ~ _ u k ~ 'iA, ~^ r ~ X .~~ b~'P b 4''~~~, ~' { f ~. d~ 3t~ ~'; ~~'` yy~ti ^f f ,,..,iii. _ ~ . M~ ~~~^ 4 ~ 'S,• ~k ~_M~l 'oK _ TJ'' '~ ~ ~k ,, ,' ~. ti ~Ji it ~t Y ~-, ~`:'3~ i . •, sr i..r ;..o,'.' ,. ~~> Meridian Planning & Zoning ~ O August 3, 2006 Page 10 of 56 the ground. If it's a Settler's or a Nampa irrigation ditch, they have to provide something `: ~' from that district. If it's a downstream user, the next property downstream they are the ones that have to get written permission from those people ;' Newton-Huckabay: Okay. Rohm: Okay. Thank you. Newton-Huckabay: Thank you very much. Rohm: Any further discussion among the Commission on this application? Okay. fr' Moe: Mr. Chairman? Rohm: Commissioner Moe. Moe: I move that we close the Public Hearing on AZ 06-034. Borup: Second. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to close the Public Hearing on AZ 06-034. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT. Moe: Mr. Chairman? Rohm: Commissioner Moe. Moe: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of file number AZ 06-034 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of August 3rd, 2006. End of motion. Newton-Huckabay: Second. Borup: Second. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to forward onto City Council recommending approval of AZ 06-034 to include the staff report. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carried. Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 5: Public Hearing: AZ 06-033 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 7.6 acres from RUT (Ada County) to 6 acres of R-4 (Medium Low-Density Meridian Planning & Zoning August 3, 2006 Page 11 of 56 Residential) and 1.6 acres of R-8 (Medium Density Residential) for Benelli Springs Subdivision by Rob Godsill - 3420 South Locust Grove Road: Item 6: Public Hearing: PP 06-041 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 17 single-family units in the proposed R-4 zone, 8 single family units in the proposed R-8 zone and 5 common lots on 7.6 acres for Benelli Springs Subdivision by Rob Godsill - 3420 South Locust Grove Road: Rohm: Okay. At this time I'd like to open the Public Hearing on AZ 06-033 and PP 06- 041,both related to Benelli Springs Subdivision and begin with the staff report. Lucas: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners. I'd like to begin with a brief summary of the project and, then, we will move into any specific issues that we may have. The applicant has applied for annexation and zoning of 7.6 acres located on the east side of Locust Grove Road approximately 600 feet south of Victory Road. To the north is the proposed Casa Meridiana development, which has requested an R-15 zone on the corner of Locust Grove and Victory. To the east are approved single family lots within the Tuscany Hills Subdivision, kind of to the southeast right here, which have been constructed. To the south is a single family home on a large parcel, currently zoned -- it's that triangular parcel right there. Currently zoned RUT in Ada County. And to the west are single family homes on large parcels here on the corner and portions of the Tuscany Village Subdivision. With that context, the applicant is requesting two different residential zoning designations on this property. The requested zoning is R-4, which is medium low density residential for six acres and R-8, which is medium density residential, for the remaining 1.6 acres. All of the property is currently zoned RUT in Ada County and there is currently one single family home on the property that will be removed from the project. This is just the aerial photograph. It gives a picture of what I just described, basically, and we will move on to the plat. Along with the annexation and zoning, the applicant is also requesting a preliminary plat approval of 25 single family building lots. Seventeen of these lots are located in the proposed R-4 zone in the southern portion of the property, which is all this area here. And eight lots are located in the proposed R-8 zone in the northern portion of the property, which is this row of lots right at the top there. Five common lots are also proposed for the development. With this number of build-able lots the total gross density for the project is 3.3 units per acre, which is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation of medium density residential, which allows between three and eight units per acre on this site. All of the proposed lots meet the minimum dimensional standards described in the UDC for the proposed zones. We will move on to the landscape plan. The applicant's proposing to set aside .92 acres or approximately 12 percent of the total site area as common usable open space. Most of that is located -- there is a -- kind of circular park-like feature in the cul-de-sac there and the applicant's also proposing to extend this multi-use pathway from Locust Grove connecting towards the Tuscany Subdivision. This -- kind of moving on to some of the issues. This was one of the main issues that came up as staff reviewed this application was the location of this proposed pathway. It's -- currently it's located on the southern side of Ten Mile Creek, which is inconsistent with the Tuscany Subdivision to the southeast where the path is located on the north side of Ten Mile ,r j, ,,.{Y ,7 ,f, T ~,,~ ,_ x~ ~~ , e ~~ ~~ ~~~ •~. +1 ~~~N, 4 f~Ml ~ f }~ ` ~/'~ ax.~t 3- ~ ~'it fy l'.. ~3: ~~ ~~ G ~ ~ - a t;S^3~ ~'~ x~K I.f ~~~{ dy~y ~-! tYr~f °A 1 •• ~ yS- ~s ~. 4 i' !i ~ f n?' K ~a a~ ~~ ~r ct ? y r ~ . ht. r9 h t.F.. 1.=i'~ ;~: i, ~,! ~~ l ~a ' C 'S . 5 M~i "~_~ ~ e ~' ti j ,, y ` r ~~" ~... t ~ ~ ~«~ k. f ,~~iY fM . F?.,T ~,JF'j. y~C x~. V '=T ~C. ~~ f 1. J ~~ t ~~ ~` ' ~ ~ "~ i i r ~ ~ _ 4 y,,, ~tf . _ ~~' /C ~ z k ~ LcIG~. -. Meridian Planning & Zoning ~ O August 3, 2006 Page 12 of 56 Creek. Staff has included a condition to relocate this path to the north side of Ten Mile Creek to remain consistent with Tuscany -- the Tuscany Subdivision to the southeast. What happens with this path is as it crosses Locust Grove it, then, jumps to the other side to the south side of Ten Mile Creek, so that's why there may have been some confusion. But on this side it should remain consistent with what has already been constructed. One other issue that came up in staffs review was the proposed buffer. The applicant proposed a 20-foot landscape buffer along Locust Grove Road, but staff is recommending that be bumped up to 25 to meet the -- to meet the landscape buffer standard for an arterial street, which Locust Grove currently in the most recent Compass map Locust Grove is identified as an arterial and which is consistent because of the overpass that's going to go in, that's going to be a very heavily traveled road. Other than those issues, staff is generally supportive of the design and recommends approval and I stand for any questions. Rohm: Thank you. Any questions of staff? Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Chair, Justin, do you have a picture with -- the southern piece of property below this? It seemed like we were leaving rather strange outparcels. Is there access to that if it redevelops? Lucas: Mr. Chair, Commissioner Newton-Huckabay, yeah, that outparcel that will be created -- I think I actually -- it shows better here. Newton-Huckabay: Yeah. Lucas: This triangular piece -- it's a good question and, yes, the only access it looks like will be off of Locust Grove Road and I -- there is no stub proposed to the south because of the Ten Mile Creek that runs through there. Newton-Huckabay: Right. Lucas: But that's kind of the dividing line. So, that outparcel -- and it doesn't look like there is a stub proposed to that parcel from the Tuscany Subdivision either. So, yes, it is an odd outparcel that will be left there, though mostly because of the creek feature that runs through there. Newton-Huckabay: I know there was another piece of property in north Meridian that had a similar instance and we -- was at Ten Mile and Ustick and it bumped up against a creek and did we go ahead and put a stub there anyway? Because it did -- or did that landlock that piece of property across from Autumn Faire? Lucas: I'm not familiar with that. Newton-Huckabay: Oh, no, that would have been before your time. Lucas: Yeah. F, " ~~bi\: {::. .< 3' _~~ Meridian Planning & Zoning ;!':~ August 3, 2006 ~' Page 13 of 56 `°'~~ Newton-Huckabay: That's okay. I guess my concern is that puts a lot of accesses to a Locust Grove. If there was any way, I would prefer to see some kind of opportunity to take an access off of Locust Grove with its future as being a main north-south route. I'll "? leave that for -- we will let the hearing go on and we can discuss it. " `i= Lucas: Yeah. Staff can consider that and we may bring it up in the future. :},; ~' Newton-Huckabay: Okay. F; `' Lucas: Thank you. Rohm: Any other questions? s~ Borup: Yes, I do have one for Mr. Cole. Two things. One, any comment on ~' groundwater concerns? And, then, maybe just for my information, the definition of an ?~ off peak pumping station. ''` Cole: Commissioners, Commissioner Borup, there are concerns on the groundwater out here. I contacted the applicant's engineer a week ago when we -- when I started reviewing this project and said -- the groundwater report that you have submitted shows ~?+ some very high groundwater levels. We have a requirement that they sign astamped -- the professional engineer has to submit a signed, stamped, document stating that there is three feet of separation between the highest established groundwater through ` ~~`' groundwater monitoring and the center line of the road. I asked him how he thought he was going to accomplish that and he was unaware of our requirement at that time. ;r` asked him if he should probably be thinking about it and maybe give us some idea of how they were planning to do that, fill the site. In the past you remember Bellingham in the south that was -- had high groundwater, they actually -- it wasn't required, but they went to all slab on grade construction out there to try to minimize any groundwater in the crawl spaces. I'm reluctant to place that condition on a development. It's definitely y, an option that they could use to try to minimize those concerns that we have. Getting rid of the storm water on this site is going to be difficult, too, as there is many DEQ regulations between the height of the groundwater and where you discharge it to. So, there are some -- there are some engineering issues with this site. I think they can be overcome. It's going to just take some work, some -- some work, I guess. To your _ second point, an off-peak pumping station is a term that we have used for -- you will see it again tonight in another report. Down here in the south these mains are all planned to go to the Black Cat shed. The Black Cat shed is not here yet, so they are temporarily flowing out of shed into lines that weren't actually designed to take this much flow. So, what happens during peak flows from 6:00 until 9:00 o'clock in the morning, on weekends when people are doing their laundry, lots of showers being taken, the lines actually become full and it's a problem. So, one of the ways that we have -- to temporarily fix this until the Black Cat Trunk comes across is an off-peak pumping station is what we coined them and what it is it's basically a lift station. It doesn't lift sewer, it has an oversize wet well, so it actually stores it -- holds it during those peak . ,:k ~,: yf o 4fi' g r ,~~~ r~ :. ~a, JC k'~~r S- N ~~y ~+Cth~ ~~ bs'• s7 ~ 4,~F to c~ '7qk -,.~.- aF,y ~_k '~ ~:: ~ ~„ . s ; fi< ~. ~ ~ ~k ' 3t - ~~ n, ,~ ~ ' ~~ _ 1~ > 5,~,.~~, ~ x 3SE"'' 1~''' §~ ~' - I i;~.' 1 1 ~ ~. :.: .' ~ 2 y _ -. ...~~~}}~~... ~~ z- ~ ~> ~ '~, q kit: , ~ q~lc~, X11 ~ v 4 :- y~~ ~ ~H+{ ~ T ~ x G ~i~ +tl~V f . 4 „r. ~ r , i:~. r ~ 3~~f ,a'' { ~~ F~ '~ Y ~~ ~ C~* i v,r Std ti, ~ i ' T.,.~ ,~, ,,, FA +F ~ O Meridian Planning & Zoning August 3, 2006 Page 14 of 56 flows when it's pumping to these over full lines, so that they are not adding to the f ~~ ' problem, and, then, once the peak flow's over and there is more capacity within those } ~x '~~' lines, it actually lifts like a lift station, but it just lifts it up high enough to dump it back in `'; the gravity line and, then, flows down through gravity. It's basically a -- it's a way to hold ~h4 ~'~~~ ~ and store the in-flow for a couple three hours a day. We have put the condition on three or four projects now. We have seen just a few designs come in. There, actually, hasn't ?>~;` been one built yet. We are waiting to see our first one built. We are almost hoping that ,' we can get the Black Cat trunk across before these actually have to be built. z Borup: Okay. ~~r, ;'-~'~ ~: + Cole: I don't know if we are going to make it or not, though. I hope that answered your ``" ' `~ question. Borup: Yes, it does. Thank you. Rohm: Good. Any other questions of staff? Okay. Would the applicant like to come ~' forward, please? 1;:,~, McCarthy: Good evening. My name is Kevin McCarthy, I'm with Toothman Orton ~~:~~ Y Engineering, 9777 Chinden Boulevard. As far as addressing some of the comments ~ made by staff there, we are pretty much in agreement with everything that they have set '~' forth as far as just complying with the Comprehensive Plan as far as our zoning designations go. To address some of my concerns regarding the engineering, he was -- ~' } y he did make me aware of that three feet of separation issue, which we will, obviously, ~ ~ti~ . ~~ comply with. To help in that regard we will be probably proposing slab on grade - ~ ~ construction for the homes that will be proposed out there. The other things that came ~a ~~ up were the pathway that we have currently shown on the south side of the canal. We V, ; were made aware that we'd like to have that on the north side, we don't have any ".y=, problem with that. We will move that pathway to the north side, in addition to widening - the buffer from 20 feet from Locust Grove; we will widen that to 25 feet as mentioned. ~: ` We don't have any issues with that. Trying think if there is anything else that was made >'<: , mention of. I uess if ou u s have an ' g y g y y questions I d feel free to answer those. ,, ;~, >~ ~: ~ ~ ~~. Rohm: I have none. That's pretty easy. Any questions of this applicant? Nq L S -,~ ~,~: Borup: I think you have, essentially, said you agreed with the staff report. -`~ ~ McCarthy: Yeah. We agree with the staff report and the items that they have brought t~ up. You know, we are going to -- agree that we would address in our discussion with fr-~ ~:~ Justin. One other thing, I guess, would be to the south as far as a connectivity issue, `` "~ what was prohibiting us from doing that was the Ten Mile Creek there was crossing that. ~, };~ That piece, I'm assuming would take access off Locust Grove, ideally, because the ~:, _ creek, being the barrier, would have been better to take access from the properties to `, the south, but it doesn't look like that's possible any longer. I can't tell from that map, Jf so -- i Ak y< r _ r yi'i ~, p ~ Vii' ~ ~` ~; ~~. w Meridian Planning & Zoning • August 3, 2006 Page 15 of 56 Borup: It's not. It's developed. McCarthy: Yeah. So, it's our intention not to provide a stub street to the south at this time. Rohm: Commissioner Newton-Huckabay, does that pretty well answer your questions about that the outparcel or do you still have some concerns? Newton-Huckabay: It's not the answer I wanted, but -- Borup: Okay. Thank you. All right. Let's see. Thanks very much. There is nobody signed up to testify to this application, but at this time if someone would like to come forward and offer testimony this is that time. Seely: I'm Renee Seely and we own the property south of the development and you had mentioned landlocked. What concerns should we have about that if we want to develop this property later on? Newton-Huckabay: Oh. If a property becomes so surrounded by development that they have no access to a road, then, they are landlocked and you have access and they y wouldn't take it away. ~'` ~ Seely: From Locust Grove. Okay. ,~ Newton-Huckabay: But if -- my preference would be if you chose to redevelop that your ' ;` °'~ development would be accessed through this development and your Locust Grove access would go away, because it's going to be a very busy road and the less accesses " ~ directly onto Locust Grove there are -- y, g l f Seel Ri ht. Newton-Huckabay: -- then the less traffic hazards. So, that's what -- that's what I would like to see is some access made available to your property and know that the canal creates a challenge there, but that's why I'm concerned. Your property will not be ~ landlocked by this development. ,~ Seely: Right. Okay. All right. Thank you. ~ ' , Baird: Mr. Chair? I might add for this persons information that Ada County Highway °~y `~ District would be the jurisdiction that would say where you would take access and how you would take access. So, if you're concerned, I would encourage you to meet with their staff and certainly nothing that was said here can guarantee access when your development comes forward. Newton-Huckabay: Oh. Good point. Sorry. That's why he's here. ~„~y ~: ~" <r ~x ti ~,~-,~, f ~'' ~..~ t,~. ~.~ .~, :. -f- Y 4 v 1 ....5 .7~y~ 4~ 1 4 ~~~~ ~4 r '~~t 5i~{.N {m I~ ~~ ~ `~ ~~. rz .a *. ;'~ K z 4t "~ ~? ~ 4 ~ ~ . t V h , . ' " ~ ~ .3 ~. t ': ~ ~ ~~ w,t« Y~ ~'. :, 4 , l 7 AYR J ~ }'~ r '~4~ 3 ~. i'~ l{v'.9` SS G.ai`.{ ~~~ ~~ t~ ~ '~" ~ c +k='F .. ~s 7<w~'~; ~` ~: -. T. ~~ S ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ [H ~i'~ ~, o 0 ~" Meridian Planning & Zoning August 3, 2006 Page 16 of 56 ~~,' ~t °~ F; Rohm: That's why he's here. Thanks, Ted. Any other testimony to be taken before we - ; move forward? ~t ~ , X ~.4~ Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Chair? :. :~x ~' Rohm: Commissioner Newton-Huckabay. F~;~r Newton-Huckabay: Can I ask a couple more questions? k ~'-~ 't`'+~~~}~` Rohm: Absolutely. ; . ' ~'~ Newton-Huckabay: Justin, I had heard -- on Casa Meridiana what did we end up with '~°~" on that development? Has it been -- has it made it through City Council? :r Y, Lucas: Mr. Chair, Commissioner Newton-Huckabay, that -- the Casa Meridiana ,w~, - development has not gone through City Council. It has currently been continued for '~"~ another month and it is in limbo I guess is the way to say it. I don't know, I don't think I ~k ~,.w. T~ _ need to go into the whole background of what's going on with Casa Meridiana, but ACRD was very happy with the stub street that this development, Benelli Springs, is proposing to the north and Casa Meridiana will have to comply with that stub street whenever it does end up going through. And so that's kind of the status of that. ` ~ Newton-Huckabay: Now on the -- the original one had access on Locust Grove and ~` ~~ ~` Victory, but the one that actually went to City Council pending has access only to ': ~ ~ Victory; is that correct? ,~, ~~,, Lucas: Yes. Mr. Chair, Commissioner Newton-Huckabay, that is correct. >~ Newton-Huckabay: Okay. ;~~, Rohm: What is the size of the ditch that's parallel to this southerly line? Is it a -- Borup: It's big. t ~ ~~ :' Rohm: It's big? So, it's not something that you would put -- Borup: A culvert in? ,~ ~~ h:~ ti Rohm: -- a culvert in -- ~J rY ,, ~~ i ` ,~C~, >,~~. Borup: No. Rohm: -- and cover it up and be done? Okay. 1YC Borup: It's got a major bridge over it in Tuscany. ~;4 V~T ~ ~'~~ ~_ !~' hiru 5~~~, - '~ ., uA~:• T~~' ~;3• tip,:: ~~~~ ~ %~~• ,,~ .F „ ~; ;;_ ~" N~: ::'~, ~.~: S %: )A ~. s4: ;{ ~: "~-~ ~;:. SrY; ~`Y =:-~ =~:; is> 4IY~: ,~. ..~5 ~f: ;, t~ ->~, .,~,: r''.: ~ ~ y. ~y ~ ~~~ ~' i-,ltijL,; J."W. _:,r=% ~~ *~:ki r ~,; _~, ~; ` ~ ~~ rr~t, : . Meridian Planning & Zoning O August 3, 2006 Page 17 of 56 Rohm: Okay. All right. Thank you. Okay. I'm not -- Borup: Mr. Chairman? Oh. Rohm: Go ahead. Borup: I move we close Public Hearing AZ 06-033 and PP 06-041. Moe: Second. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearings on AZ 06-033 and PP 06-041. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT. Moe: Mr. Chairman, I have a question. I am kind of curious in regard to the discussions of on grade slabs. Do you want to -- Borup: Well, maybe that's a good point. Is that something that should be clarified at this point or is that something the developer has a choice, either three feet -- well, maybe I was premature in closing that hearing, because last time they came up with that prior to finalizing the application, didn't they? The other development. Cole: Mr. Chair, Commissioner Borup, they actually at this body did not decide how they were going to take care of it. Borup: Okay. Cole: Slab on grade or not. At the City Council meeting is when -- after they had a chance to do more ground water monitoring, do some more engineering on the site, is when they decided that they wanted to go slab on grade. Borup: Okay. So, that's essentially, the same as here, they said that may be an option they would look at. I remember it did come up. Did that answer that? Moe: Yes, it does. Borup: Okay. Do we have any other concerns before we move on? Moe: I have none. Newton-Huckabay: I have many. t,~:.l. Moe: Pardon me? .< h y '`~ z~, ,,6 `~ i:;t.:...:f _. ~_.~; ,~ ~:,~ :-= ~' . U': ~~ ~ {; ~, ~;,. ~, ~< ,~; ;~. .~ ,t r ,, ~;~~ . ~'_ r~f,~r ~~.:YM t~)li )? !. _~,r ~,, ijY'r' 4w ~~ ,t;, -.~. .~,y; ~,ti ~~ 'i ... `~ . ~_.: ,~: r. +~ riy ~~ ;~~,;; Meridian Planning & Zoning O • August 3, 2006 Page 18 of 56 Newton-Huckabay: I have many. Moe: Have you expressed all those? Newton-Huckabay: I have no further comment. Borup: Mr. Chairman, after considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to City Council of file numbers AZ 06-033 and PP 06-041, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of August 3rd, 2006. End of motion. Moe: Second. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded that we forward onto City Council recommending approval of AZ 06-033 and PP 06-041, to include the staff report. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 7: Public Hearing: RZ 06-006 Request for a Rezone of 6.82 acres from R-8 to R-15 for Cedar Springs Townhomes by John Flaherty Construction - south of W. McMillan and west of N. Meridian Road: Item 8: Public Hearing: PP 06-033 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 48 attached single-family units in the proposed R-15 zone, 20 detached single-family units in the existing R-8 zone and 5 common lots on a total of 11.05 acres for Cedar Springs Townhomes by John Flaherty Construction -south of W. McMillan and west of N. Meridian Road: Rohm: Thank you for coming in. At this time I'd like to open the public hearing on RZ 06-006 and PP 06-033, both related to Cedar Springs townhomes and begin with the staff report. Lucas: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners. Once again, I will begin with a brief summary and, then, move on to any issues that the staff looked at specifically. The applicant has applied for rezoning of 6.82 acres from R-8, which is medium low density residential, to R-15, medium high density residential on this site. The total project area is 11.05 acres -- 11.05 acres, which includes 4.23 acres already zoned R-8. The site is located on McMillan Road west of Meridian Road and this area received preliminary plat approval as Lot 18, Block 13, of the Cedar Springs North Subdivision and the original preliminary plat noted that this site was to be developed as attached single family units. And this area received final plat approval as Lot 2, Block 36 of Cedar Springs Subdivision No. 4. And that note that it was previously -- they had received to be developed as attached single family units is important, because they are proposing townhomes on this site. I'll continue with the context. To the north is the recently approved 85 lot Cedarcreek Subdivision, which is zoned R-8. To the east is a future residential development or Amber Creek Subdivision, which is also zoned R-8. To the 1~~~~ ~r ~ ~ ~, Meridian Plannin & Zonin 9 9 August 3, 2006 s;9 °« Page 19 of 56 ~.. south there are some future single family homes within the Cedar Springs North '" Subdivision. The pads that -- I went out there and took a look. The pads are already , there. They are close to being under construction. And to the west is some future office i` uses, which are also partially under construction at this time, which have been approved } ~ 4 i ~ under Cedar Springs North Subdivision. Once again, the aerial photograph shows what I t d ib d i li ~ ~,~ y jus escr e n a ttle bit more detail. And we will move onto the -- to the preliminary ~b '^i ~ plat. So, along with the annexation, the applicant is also requesting preliminary plat ~- : approval of 68 single family building lots. Forty-eight of these lots are for the : townhomes located in the proposed R-15 zone in the northern portion -- northern and ~ t central portion of the property. I can kind of draw a line here of that requested R-15 I j,~ zone. It kind of goes up and around like that. So, this whole centerpiece is proposed R- ~' ,~~~ y 1; 1. 15 and this top portion here is also proposed R-15, which will contain the townhomes. ~~ Let's see here. To the south we have 20 additional lots, which currently have existing ~, R-8 zoning and they are proposing to maintain that R-8 zoning and build single family ~--,I ~. ~~~ detached homes on that site on those lots. There is also five common lots proposed in a this development and the total gross density is 6.15 units per acre, which, once again, is -j consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation for this area, which allows for ~' ,~; ' between three and eight units per acre. We will move on to the landscape plan. The t . _~ applicant is proposing to set aside approximately .67 acres or six percent of the together - ~ '° ` ~, •~ site area as common usable open space. The bulk of this open space is located in the ~~; proposed micro pathway that runs through the southwest corner of the property right ~cti~ here and also there is some common lots, open space lots, in the center portion of the - ~ = property that provide open space for this development. Another -- a note for this ~ property concerning open space is the access that this -- these residents will have many ~ ~'' ~ open space amenities, which currently exist in the Cedar Springs North Subdivision. ~ ± ` F They will be part of that subdivision and be able to access many of those same ' , Y ~:. amenities. We will move on here to -- the applicant has also provided some -- some ~'~ concept plans for those townhomes and some elevations that would be ood to take h g a look at, just so we have an idea of what's going to go on the ground there. This is a '~ ~` concept plan or a site plan of those ro osed townhomes. As ou can see th p p y ey are ~ going to have common driveways with four units located on each common driveway ' ~ ~,.... ~ with landsca in And, then, I ll ust brin u the elevations here of these -- of these P 9• J 9 P . ~~ townhomes, which will be accessed off of those common driveways. They will have _ garages and that this is just an example of some of the building types and elevations ~,c _~ that will be proposed there. I think I have one more. Other than the elevations which , we just had a chance to look at, the only major issue that staff identified with this project ~ ' was some inade uate lot sizes er the - q p -per the UDC that existed in Lots 13 through ~. ~ 16, which are these lots right here. As I stated earlier, the zoning is R-8 and these lots a ~~ did not meet the minimum 5,000 square foot requirement. They were around 4,700. ~~ :. ,~ And tonight it would be nice for the applicant to verify kind of how he's going to deal with ~,~ ~ that, whether it be through shared driveways, which would lower the lot size w. ~` requirement to 4,000 and, then, they would be in compliance or if he would like to .- z ~ redesign that area to provide for the 5,000. Other than that issue, staff, in general, is su ortive of this ro°ect and recommends a royal and I stand for an PP P 1 pp y questions. ' ~~ ,' ~..~;I Rohm: Thank you, Justin. Any questions of staff? t ~ m ': ~. ter" ;' ` f:-.,}. L ° ~k ! ~ j.,, ~ ~ t ~1VdC N~ r:` ~ ,~.. ~, t ~FP' ' ~r. "tiy S ,~ M '' ~ t . L '` ~= rite ~.~ ~'' ,~ \ Y ~,~ ~ ti+tFt':. ~,* , ,~~G,-'x} !T L~4 _, ~.. _. h ~i i 3 '~~ ~~}' 1 .Yif iiFTTT`,y F .-f. f ~~{{'' 1 t ~ . ..a 4 ~k^ T~ a f d ' `.. +''. - r ` y tom-.. . ~ J ~rf F ~ t v,' ~; ~ ~I r. ~~P;, 4 ~. Meridian Planning & Zoning ~ • August 3, 2006 Page 20 of 56 Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Chair. Justin, can you go back to the landscape, the colored -- how do the rest of those lots in the center work? I mean are those like flag lot access? Borup: Same as the corner one. Lucas: Mr. Chair, Commissioner Newton-Huckabay, that -- this lot -- these -- well, this group of lots, yes, is an example of all -- of how all of these would work. Newton-Huckabay: Oh, a complete -- the whole center is just like that -- Lucas: This is four units. This would be four more units, four more units, et cetera, throughout the whole center, all taking access off of these common driveway that are those flags. Newton-Huckabay: Got You. Okay. Thank you. Rohm: Would the applicant like to come forward, please. Fluke: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. My name is Daren Fluke with JUB Engineers, 250 South Beachwood in Boise, representing the applicant in this matter. We are in complete agreement with the staff report, so I'm not going to go over the gory details of the project at this point. I'd just like to give you a little bit of history and context for the project. I'm sure you read my narrative that was attached with the application. I think the only commissioner on -- at that time was Commissioner Borup when Cedar Springs North came through and at that time the concern over Cedar Springs North was, actually, that the density was too low. I think that project came in at about three and a half units to the acre, maybe a little bit more, and this area was designated by the Comprehensive Plan as one of your commercial higher density nodes -- the neighborhood commercial nodes that are shown on the map and that's how we got the L-O to the west of us and that's how we designated this portion of the project as a higher density portion of the project to bump up that density. It was always anticipated that this was and recognized that was a part of the greater Cedar Springs North development and, therefore, all our numbers at that time worked as far as the provision of open space and there is a fair amount of park space within Cedar Springs North, which is -- which this project is subject to and welcome to use, I guess. They are part of the same CC&Rs and will be integrated into that previous project, so -- we think this is a very nice looking project. Whenever you see projects that get up about four units to the acre I understand there is always concern over density. To my way of thinking it's not really about the density -- six units to the acre is not that high, but it's all about design and so what we hope you agree with us here is that we have designed a project that's really nice with interesting buildings and a layout that really works for the intent of the developer, which is to market these as lots that are almost maintenance free. There is very little yard that are included with these and that's by design. These are intended to be sold to empty nesters and people who don't really want to be taking care of a yard, but want something more maintenance free. I did have a rendering done ~1~ ~ ~ µ ~~~~,. ,, ~ . ~rv air •' .z *c~ 4 ` ~} ~ ~,~ '''~' Ci ~~ ' W~ ~~` r ~i '~ e - ~ _ > > ~ 3r~'h'' , yU [ ~ ~ ~~ ,. j'{ i S ~ .h .~ J - P k i ~, M~ ~ {,_ s~, ~ ` _ s., ds~` a a. ~ Y r y ~ 4 $' ~ ~ ~ y t ~~ ~ ~~~ i ~ ~,~ : tl 1 ~ k' .~-s { ~"~ I `~ ~~' ~ 4 ' ~~';- r -1I 1 ~ ~~~~~ T~ .; ~ , kk ` b-- `~i~ = r~11 g . 44~`YiJ~ 7'~ ~.~ f~ !{~ 3q< ;YR ~~ zv; . ; ~ h1 ~ x ~ • - '~ , X .~ ?w ~ rtk, ~~ x3.. _.~ . F: t~ ~ ~ t, :;~ ® ~ n4 Meridian Planning & Zoning ~~~ ~' - August 3, 2006 `'; Page 21 of 56 c~ . ,k` • ~§ along McMillan Road. This would be the elevation facing -- can we go back one? ~~ '' Yeah. Thank you. Right along here. I didn't want it to look too monotonous and we do :r;, have existing landscaping along there and so you can see that the buildings have good ~~ '_F, fenestration and modulation on there that make it a little bit more visually appealing ¢' along that streetscape. That landscaping is also, you know, fairly mature along there '~, now. We did, as a concession to the development that has gone on around us, ~-s including a project to the east that was approved since this one was approved, we have •:~'~ ~ tried to buffer that by including detached single family units next to those other detached }F 5 single family units, while our attached project is all here and along here. And, then, we ~t ~ ~ do intend to provide shared driveways on those lots that Justin mentioned that are ,. ~~ ~ below your minimum for this lot. I think that's all the high points on the application. So, ~4 t ~~` if you had any questions I would be happy to take those now. ;,,,: ~_~ Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Chair? ~~ ~~ Rohm: Commissioner Newton-Huckabay. Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Fluke, can you hold your story board back up? Where are the `~~`i front doors or the rear? Are those -- all of those buildings attached together? ;. ~A;;. ~, , Fluke: Right. That's -- Commissioner -- or Chairman and Commissioner, we have got -- `l"~ basically, you have got two building plans, so you have got four units around each ~~ courtyard there, with the front elevations being this -- !~ Newton-Huckabay: Okay. ?'~ Fluke: -- and this. And, then, the courtyard elevation would be the garages, these, which will face each other right here. So, you will be able to drive in, two car garage, .: ;`~; two car garage, two car garage, two car garage. We have front doors here and here and, then, entries off of here and here for these units on those. ` ~~~. Newton-Huckabay: So, where are the front doors for the back ones on your picture over here? ~'4 °~~ Fluke: They are located -- they would be just off of the -- ~:; i};. ~ to ~y`~ Borup: Right there on that -- ~ % Fluke: Yeah. You would come in off the garage on this one. You see how this pops out. You can't see the door in it there. And the same here. '` i Borup: The elevation hides it, because the garage is wider -- or the house is wider than the garage. `"` '° Fluke: What you have got is, actually, a pop out there that doesn't show up on the flat board. ~. ~2. y~.'yd~.~T'h '+fi~~~., F %s' r y„"~'F•~x F'-. ~ q•t~.:~1:~ ~y.(i A:" ;~;'• ~~..'w• •;,N~~.~'i`., .*.,L:~.~t~h:,~E. ., ~. .e ... "lt~i:%a+t.••,.~3, .~. or: ~. ~':'' ~&~~~ ~" Vii; 4.4~,i ~i. .. ' ,,,; : ~.., . .,,~,:kj~ ~ t •~3 ~ t ~l , d ~:i ~ ~;1 ~f F .: ~G ~~ .,.-. , ... FYI ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ 1 CC~ '' r ~ > ~Y . L F ~ F 4.f y ~~ yy J F . 'y 4 y~ $ S 7 k i 3f ^3` 3 ' ~ r ;S j t ~ ~~~ ~ a ,~ , ~ ~ ~~r r :. •; i ~ t ~ c ~ T F ~ 7'~ , r ^ K•.a ~n: ~Sr,~ µ'4~~ f ,3, i '_hyPe°'.rN~ _ ,. Meridian Planning & Zoning r August 3, 2006 Page 22 of 56 Newton-Huckabay: Okay. And how does aperson -- how do you get extra parking? Is there room enough in those little courtyards if you have more than two cars or you have -- Fluke: Right. Well, there would be each -- each dwelling would, technically, have enough room for four parking places. Newton-Huckabay: Two in the garage and two in front of the garage? Fluke: Correct. Newton-Huckabay: Okay. Great. Fluke: Plus, those -- that is a public street section out there, 36 feet back to back, so there will be parking allowed on this public road as well. Newton-Huckabay: Uh-huh. Thank you. Borup: I just have one minor question. I assume the landscape -- this is intended as conceptual. I noticed that some of your houses are over the property lines, some units. Fluke: Yes. Borup: Okay. Fluke: That was to give you an idea how each one of those individual -- or those four pods would work. Borup: Yeah. I understand that courtyard concept, but they are not lined -- they are over the property line, so -- does that still -- if those -- by the time those are shifted that's still -- you're okay for your backyard setback? Fluke: Yeah. We do have setbacks in between the buildings there. Borup: No. I mean the backyard setbacks. Fluke: So, when you say rear yard, you mean -- Borup: Right -- yeah. Right there. Fluke: In there? Yeah. There will be, actually, green space in -- Borup: But that building has to shift to be able to be on -- have the units on the property lines. ~:~,;:; ~;.:-M~: ~- ~°~ . O • M ri e dian Planning & Zoning August 3, 2006 Page 23 of 56 t ,' '~, ~ . Fluke: I guess I'm not following you. °°` r ±, ~~~,~ ~~ Borup: Well, here is your property line right here and it's cutting right through that '° ~ garage. It needs to adjust up there, so it's -- M 5.. ; ~ ,r.' Fluke: That's where they will be attached. That's our zero setback right there, so there Y~,= will be no -- and this is like a planter within the driveway in between the two garages ~ there. Essentially an above-grade planter. ,~:~, ?~; :,~, Borup: So, this line right there is not where they are attached? .. r ~~ ~ Fluke: No. That's correct. That is where they are attached. That's a two car garage and that's a two car garage. ~~ ~ Borup: But, you have got about a four to six foot offset ~ y~ . °, Fluke: Well, that's a drafting error. # ~~~. `~ Borup: Okay. So, it does shift -- by the time that shifts down you're okay on your ;~ ~~ •. `~~„ setbacks? Fluke: Yes. ~; ;t" Borup: All right. That was all I was asking about. 53 ~-~. 4 '~~ Fluke: Thank you. ~~' `.`l, ~~}~ ~ Rohm: Thank you. Again, there is nobody else that has signed up to speak to this application, but at this time it's open to public testimony. Anyone that so chooses may T ~~ 4 come forward at this time. Good. Things are going very well. Discussion? Don't have ~= ° any additional questions of the applicant or of staff for this application? Seems to be pretty well laid out. ;: -~~. 3 ~ ': 9: ,. ~- Borup: I mean the concept is a little bit new. We have had a couple of these courtyard ~~ ~. ~ ~ designs, but I don't know if anything's been built yet in Meridian. ~ Rohm: I guess my question of staff is on those lots that didn't have the 5 000 square , foot minimum would it take a development agreement to insure that the ha i t k ` - ~ y ve a jo n driveway to reduce that requirement down to 4,000? "r~ `r ~~~ Lucas: Chairman Rohm, maybe we should have the -- it seems like the a licant is pp saying that he is going to use shared driveways on those and we do not need to include ~, ~Y'~~ that in the development agreement, because it's required as a part of his development. >: It won't be allowed without those. _~'. r Rohm: Works for me. Thank you. ', ~~. ~:,~, ';~;,a k' t X4'3 }' .]~'.~ ~[~ Y~1` i~'. ~uM. ~,:- Meridian Planning & Zoning a O August 3, 2006 Page 24 of 56 Moe: Mr. Chairman? Rohm: Commissioner Moe. Moe: I move that we close the Public Hearing on RZ 06-006. Newton-Huckabay: Second. Rohm: You want to close them both? Moe: Oh. I'm sorry. And PP 06-033. Newton-Huckabay: Second. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to close the Public Hearing on RZ 06-006 and PP 06-033. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carried. ~; MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT. Borup: Do we need to make a change on 1.1.3? That was the one that talks about the lot sizes. Would that -- Rohm: I think that -- Newton-Huckabay: Or a common drive. Borup: No, it doesn't say that. I mean the -- Newton-Huckabay: Mine does. Or common drive shall be used to meet the minimum UDC requirements for lot size. Borup: Let me see. Oh, there it is. I'm sorry. I was looking for that at the end. Moe: I think we are fine. '~ Borup: Yes. N, Moe: Mr. Chairman? Rohm: Commissioner Moe. Moe: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of file number RZ 06-006 and PP 06-033 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of August 3rd, 2006. agar.:'... :~+ci 4~5 f ~,~,. :' ~:~~ -~~. -~ .,~~g 'f.ti. Dlr. yr ~~'. ,,: Affirm ~ 4~Y~':i 7;; .,.>;~ ~;t~~ :~~: :~< ,,. _~SY 1 :~. ~,~~; `K:' ~~'r,~_ ~~,~. ;;, ~~>' t,,- s3 >:~;~., ,,- ,~, ~~ ~r ~;v~~;,; ~~~;; . :. Meridian Planning & Zoning O August 3, 2006 Page 25 of 56 Newton-Huckabay: Second. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded that we forward onto City Council recommending approval of AZ 06-006 and PP 06-033. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT. Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Chair? Can we -- Rohm: We certainly can. At this time we will take a 15 minute break and reconvene at about 8:25. Borup: Or maybe shorter. Rohm: Let's make it 8:20. (Recess.) Item 9: Public Hearing: AZ 06-030 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 8.03 acres to an R-8 zone for Northborough Subdivision by Gemstar Development, LLC -north side of Ustick Road and east of Linder Road: Item 10: Public Hearing: PP 06-030 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 35 residential lots and 4 common lots on 8.03 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Northborough Subdivision by Gemstar Development, LLC -north side of Ustick Road and east of Linder Road: Rohm: All right. At this time we'd like to reconvene the regularly scheduled meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission for August 3rd, 2006, and begin with opening up public hearings AZ 06-030 and PP 06-030 for the sole purpose of continuing them to the regularly scheduled meeting of August 31st, 2006. Could I get a motion to that effect? Moe: So moved. Newton-Huckabay: Second. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to continue public hearings AZ 06-030 and PP 06-030 to the regularly scheduled meeting of August 31st, 2006. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT. f~; y..~ +s-a~ Meridian Planning & Zoning August 3, 2006 Page 26 of 56 5~,~ Item 11: Public Hearing: AZ 06-040 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 4.38 ~~;" acres to an R-8 zone for Bellabrook Subdivision by JE Development, -'~ LLC - 300 South Locust Grove Road: ~' Item 12: Public Hearing: PP 06-038 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 20 .~~ residential lots and 4 common lots on 4.38 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Bellabrook Subdivision by JE Development, LLC - 300 South Locust ~'' Grove Road: 1; ;.~ y~_ "~1 Rohm: At this time I'd like to open the Public Hearing AZ 06-040 and PP 06-038 and :~;~ begin with the staff report. :~~ ,~;1 Veatch: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners. Tonight we are looking at Bellabrook Subdivision. The applicant JE Development, Inc., has applied for annexation and zoning of an RUT parcel in Ada County to R-8. The site is 4.38 acres. And they would also like to submit for a preliminary plat of 20 single residential lots, with five common lots. The subject subdivision is located on Locust Grove Road just south of Franklin and as you can see in the area there is quite a mix of uses. We have some commercial here, which, actually, is an LDS church site. We have some county with R- 1and some other R-1 parcels over here. A little light office and commercial and, then, we also have an R-4, which is the Woodbridge Subdivision. As well I think this RUT parcel comes down for both those pieces there. One thing that the applicant did want me to note -- and I guess after we get through this we will see. We do have the Ten Mile Creek that runs along here and this site has provided quite a lot of open space. I think total open space for the site is 24 percent, 18.3, which is usable. Quite a lot of that is this area up here, which is in the flood plane. There is existing fencing from the church that runs along this section here to approximately midway down and, then, for the southern property here there is fencing that runs to about here. So, normally, we would not have fencing around that common area. The applicant will not be putting fencing in addition around the rest of that common area, but they wanted us to know that there is an existing for other property owners that's there. Most of these lots are going to be with common driveways. The applicant has also submitted a letter for changes that we have spoken with the fire department to confirm this and that is that normally there is condition whereby there has to be a certain turning radius for common driveways for the fire services, but fire services would be able to park on the road and be able to get within 150 feet of the furthermost corner of each of these homes and so, therefore, even though they are beginning with it, the driveway is 20 feet, it narrows to 12 and so that 3.7 condition under the fire department we will go ahead and -- with your permission we'd like to strike that, since they can reach to the back of the houses from the street level. Let's see. So, they are asking for an R-8 zone with this site. They will be providing access to Locust Grove here. There will be a right of way with the Torino Avenue that comes down to here, at which point when this parcel develops, then, they can connect to that. And I think if you have any further questions I will be happy to answer those for you. Rohm: Any questions of staff at this time? ~rtt :;. 't ,: ~~{ ~ Iyll, IC i1 f } F ~ .~ a r s ~~ ~ F ~i _ . ~~ t ~ ~ ~ ~ , ~'~ ? ~`('y t '4iM , r~ r ~ 3 x'p~'yt-0 ~ s ~f~ i t ~ ~4. '~'i, rife ~ s t ~ ,~ ~ C' as u.,.i.. ~j.'a'ir '~` f'~'9 ~ ~ ~ ~.' Vin: h ai Fr,.-~•. w, ~,t~ ~ ~?! t ~1 ~ r vxe~s4j t .r3_ ' r ~ ..t- S s " ~ ~ "~ . t ~ ~` t~' i n j ~~~ • ~^ ~ Meridian Planning & Zornng ~; August 3, 2006 ~. Page 27 of 56 s~ ;.~ . '~ Borup: Just which is the -- do we have two different plats? '; ~ ; Veatch: As far as like a revision? Borup: Well, the one I have is different than that one. Veatch: How many site does it show? ,,` Borup: Same amount of sites, just the stub street's in a different location. r~ Veatch: I don't believe so. We had arevised -- ~~ Borup: This is the latest version? w' ;,n, Veatch: The latest would be of July 20th of 2006, which Mr. Erickson is very good { ~ about forwarding current plats, so I believe the one that we have on the screen is the `'~ most current. Oh. =~'~ Borup: I don't think we got a copy of that. s:~. Veatch: I'm sorry. Mr. Cole is saying that that probably is an older version and the one . ~~ `~= , that you have is the most current. ="` Borup: Okay. That's what I wondering. Thank you. { Rohm: Well, if not, the applicant will certainly be able to clear that up. Any other `'~`~ questions of staff before we ask the applicant to come forward? Would the applicant f;~ like to come forward? `i ~;:j A'' LI_R Erickson: Good evening. Ross Erickson, 1854 East Lanark Street here in Meridian. Thanks for the good staff report, Jenny. We, actually, massaged this plat around as we developed it, working with city staff and ACHD, and just to clarify, this is an old copy of the plat. As a result of some coordination with ACHD we decided to dedicate the right of way for Torino all the way to the east property line to offer some flexibility to the adjacent property owner for when they come in to develop, they will, basically, be able to locate that stub street along that property line, because their right of way will be all the way to the east. So, they can come in and actually connect to Torino at whatever desirable location they can work out with the city and ACHD in the future. We don't really have a lot of outstanding issues with this project, so I'm not going to go through a whole bunch of things, but I'd like to hit just a couple of the high points. The project does offer a lot of open space. We have got about 20 -- just under 23 percent of green space in the project and of that about 18.3 percent is actually usable. A lot of that is the flag or the easterly portion of the site. It just was kind of a natural fit with the flood plane for Five Mile Creek running through there, rather than try to go in there and move a lot of dirt around and alter the existing condition. Our plan is to go in and just do some ~: , ~ ~-.. F ~i7 it ~ _ ~~`~. ~r} '~ ~~ ~11y~{ T 4 I~.J~y S ".t ~ y'~.~~.: r ~~ L c~ ~A~i~~x t b t ~~ \. 4 ~: ~~y{~~Ml ~L 4+~' a}f. t ` 3~' "fit ~, ._ .~'C j Y 1a f $ , .~ ;_ f s'~ir ~ _~ ~ ~, µ r .: Sg~T _- - y' ,r ~ .F. . ~y _; _ ~ ~ .... ~F~~ _1 ~~~ ~~ } C'' : L ~Y l ,t wg ~~ + ~~~'a -: x ~~ y 3S ~ ~ ~. Yi pV.ry{r: ' G 4'YJ } 4j~ ~ SE ~ 1 ~ S, yf 3t'~ ~ki y ,g , ,`h, ~ I+~r" h ~ ~ .+' , ~ Meridian Planning & Zoning August 3, 2006 '. ' Page 28 of 56 s. minor grading, possibly place some top soil and put some trees and irrigation. We will r 4 „~ do a portion of -- a very short portion of the multi-use pathway along Five Creek that runs north and south on the project and, then, provide a micropath connection from that back up into our project so people will be able to access that in the future when it does ' ~ connect through along the -- I guess there are many portions of Five Mile Creek. The common driveway is actually a pretty unique feature to the project. Our vision was to create a really nice streetscape for the project and not have a lot of driveways or a lot of ~_ concrete out front and, rather, have some nice building elevations that -- I brought some _' copies that I could hand out to you. I don't think they were included in the staff report. You can see that with the project built out you're mainly going to see our architectural features of the design of the homes, rather than garages and the concrete, and that's one of the things that we think will really be an attractive feature about this project. The street section for the public roads within the project is a 34 foot width that does provide for parking on both sides, so there will be overflow parking that's available for guests or g` whoever, you know, would need that. I guess with that I will stand for any questions. don't really have a lot of other items, I guess, other than Jenny had mentioned the ;.. condition of the fire department that we would like to amend. We wrote a letter that you ` ~ should have in your report that kind of explains the reasoning why we want that change. So, I guess with that we will just ask for your approval tonight and stand for any questions. ;~l ~. - Rohm: Okay. Thank you. Any questions of this applicant? ~~ Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Chair? ~: Rohm: Commissioner Newton-Huckabay. _ Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Erickson, how -- on your -- the front part of the flag that s green space, I can't really tell by looking at your map, but what is that going to look like? ~i Erickson: Right here? :;;.; ~ '~~ ~~ Newton-Huckabay: The front plane I think is what messes me up here. y - Erickson: Are you looking right here? . '~ ~ ~ Newton-Huckabay: Yeah. Just that whole front section of that. There is not actually } houses -- right there. Erickson: This here is a building lot. w Newton-Huckabay: That is a building lot. Erickson: It is a building lot and it is a 20-foot strip from the north line of that building lot to the north property line and within that strip we are going to build a micropath and landscaping and this landscaping, actually, continues out along East Kalispell Street to ~ ~~1C,. Y .. .y ~A: /! ~, i ~.T .Y~ ~~ S ~ k ~~ ~~ "t r T `` ~~; ~ ~ ~. ~. P a ~ ~ ~~ Y ti ~,. L.z .h.( ~,, -: _ ~'~ Y f ~ ~' 'A .~ ~.,~y~ry.. N L ' : 1 ~y3}Y Cr ... r F': ~ ~ : i~ c. f. ,~ ~} 4 ~`t R+ µt n Yy Y teat ... y ~FC •R P ~ G , '~ . jj rr~ ,~~ ''~' 4, ~..4 ~4 r.. AS {- +~ . .. ,~~ ?_ . .: ti . fi; 1 f "YT L~ }'" ~' ~ i ~' y 7' ~. yt~l i ~ a Gf , , ~ j~a F~ + r ..fir i 4 .`~ ~ r ,yy ~.a -tu,~ p~ ~ l ;fi ~,y _ _c; ~ Q'y~~ ~w~d A~~ fit. ~.fr~:; r $" ~~ ~~ ~k t ~ r e ~ ~ Meridian Planning & Zoning ~~ August 3, 2006 Page 29 of 56 '~~ the west. So, it will kind of -- from this corner here you have kind of a flared out ' micropath that, you know, people can just kind of walk down, go do their thing. h ~~~, Newton-Huckabay: How many -- one house goes on that lot? ~, s ~~ Erickson: Yeah. It's a really unique lot. It's just the topography out there. I don't know , if you can tell from the contours, but it's got a lot of relief and it has a really nice view Fk` looking this direction at the Boise front, Bogus, and it overlooks a lot of this flood plane ~~ land here. So, it kind of made sense to make that lot a little bit larger, just because ef think it's a lot more desirable lot and you can put a pretty cool house on it. .nJ y ~~ Newton-Huckabay: It just doesn't seem to fit with the rest of the development to me. ~~>,~ Oh, it's 12,000 square feet. t~ ~~.~ Erickson: A lot of this lot -- -~~: ~, _. Newton-Huckabay: You can't do anything with it? Erickson: -- isn't actually build-able. .,,:; ;~'~~.. Newton-Huckabay: Oh, you can't do anything with it? -~ ' Erickson: Yeah. A lot of it will be partially backyard. It sort of depends on what sort of an architectural plan is designed for it, but you can see it drops off really quick here. Some of this will be feathered out a little bit, but it's likely that the home will actually sit =~.~ right here on a similar footprint to what these lots have here. r+~fi Newton-Huckabay: And, then, the path was 20 feet you said? Or that distance 20 feet? 4 Erickson: Yeah. There is a 20 foot strip right here with a micropath connecting it. ~: Newton-Huckabay: Thank you. r ~~ Borup: Are these homes in a project in the valley? Are they -- f ~~~ Erickson: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Borup. Yes, they are. They are in a _~ ~ development called Winding Creek down in Eagle and it's a similar concept where they have shared driveway. Their lots are a little bit narrower than ours, but the concept for ~FN the driveway and things is very similar. ,.~,, Borup: Thank you. That's all I have. ~. `k x=~~ Newton-Huckabay: This development doesn't have street trees, though, does it? '~ ~ Erickson: Actually, there are no street trees just the 25-foot landscape buffer and then , , , the trees back there. ;: a: ~~ °` _^ ~4 ~~~:. ,t~,. ,;. " ... A~Z';., ~..., ~-k- k .~: ~~~ Meridian Planning & Zoning A t 3 2006 €~; ugus , , ,,~;~~; Page 30 of 56 -~~: u, ' ' ;,~~; ~ ~ ~ ~` Newton-Huckabay: Okay. `; ~~ Rohm: Good. Thank you very much. Would Rod Cullip like to come forward, please. Cullip: Mr. Chairman, Planning and Zoning Commission. My concern is -- .~~. ' L Baird: Name and -- ~~ ~-~' e ~ . Cullip: Rod Cullip. 1821 East Franklin Road. Excuse me. I live adjacent to the north on Five Mile Creek. And it is Five Mile, not Ten Mile. And it does run right up -- excuse ~" me. I will show you here. Right here on this property here. And my concern is -- you talked about not having any fence on this area and we do have livestock, horses, cattle, everything in here. My concern is kids getting over into this area here and all around 4~'" ~, ~ the rest of it -- right here where the church is it's all white vinyl fence that they put up ~ ~ around that. Over here at Osborns he's putting white vinyl fence around his property ~~ ~~:~~, ~ there. Also, over here on Marshall he's got it fenced on this section here. So, my concern is kids getting into where the livestock is. Okay. Borup: Excuse me, sir. What contains the livestock that's there now, then? =~,~. Cullip: It's just a barbed wire fence -- ` `' Borup: Okay. ;Y- Cullip: -- is all it is. On that where it abuts to him to that section. r f` ~~ _ Borup: Okay. ', Y.;, :r}`~< Cullip: And, of course, you have got the creek with the culvert there, too. And I'm not sure -- that culvert was put in and it doesn't really handle the water flow that goes ~ ~~,R through that and that floods around that culvert and it's washed it out a number of times . So, that might be something you want to consider, too. -~ ~ Newton-Huckabay: Thank you. ; . °~ Cullip: Thank you very much. r-; t ~,x' Rohm: Rod is the only one that signed up, but would anybody else like to come forward ~~ _` ~ .: and testify on this application? r ~ Moe: Mr. Chairman, I have a couple questions of staff if I might. In reviewing this project I guess a couple things came to mind. Number one, as far as the Comp Plan, - you know, that it's, basically, designated as a mixed use community in that area and -- }7sYw~4.~ ~ 1..rti`._71: ~ ~. ~.Y '~: 3 ~:.~: ~X ~ ~ .:r ~ ~} 4 ~ ~. , ~. ~ :+.~ :~- er..t Y'~ .J ~rf::.. ?~;~~t ~r;-,~` l;' :'t ~. °:'t; :~~ C` 7: ~, ~ r F ~~..~.. -. _'~~; ~~, ~,~_, ,;;=,<! ~: _ ~~. `' r:. ,~; `: ,, :}, ~ ~ ~~; r ~~. .' ~~~ t _,~ , s.~ <<L:, F -. rri~ ~+3~ ~: -t:7 ;,,; ,: ,F '~~' ~~-- .~; T.1 ~~, t ~~ ~: ;.~,H, ~~: h,,. Meridian Planning & Zoning e o August 3, 2006 Page 31 of 56 Veatch: Yes, it is. Moe: I'm just kind of curious. I mean we are within the designation of mixed use community it seems like we are putting all our eggs in one basket with an R-8 design on the thing and the other thing I'm a little bit concerned about is -- quite frankly, I'm very surprised that we don't have other testimony tonight for the simple fact that Woodbridge being an R-4 designation to the south and this being basically right above it, I'm surprised that no one's here commenting on that tonight as well and, basically, this development here is really showing no transition whatsoever between an R-4 into this property. And I'm just kind of curious as far as on the mixed use community no problems with staff with that? Veatch: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Moe, I think the thought was that since it is mixed use with some of the other properties here being commercial, light industry, and that they might redevelop some of these outlying parcels and that there were other R-8 in the vicinity, that it would work, basically. And because of the amount of open space, too, I realize that the transition is up here at the top to these parcels and not down below by Woodbridge, but we haven't received any letters and I know that a neighborhood meeting and postings were done, so -- Moe: They were done. Okay. Thank you. Borup: Commissioner Moe, I think another reason might be the section of Woodbridge that's to the west, the lots aren't much larger. There was conditional use and it was a planned development, so a number of those lots were quite small. Moe: Okay. Thank you. Rohm: Okay. Is there anybody else that would like to testify? And seeing none, would the applicant like to come forward? Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Chair, Ijust -- I'm not understanding the fence question. Where is there fence, where isn't there fence -- Veatch: Okay. Newton-Huckabay: -- around the flag and -- perfect. Erickson: Again, Ross Erickson. Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Newton-Huckabay, I can clarify. It sounds like I should have done that the first time on the fencing, but the existing fencing that staff mentioned when they first presented the project -- I'll just kind of run through that first. There is six foot closed vision white vinyl fence that is right along their property line to about right here and there is a -- the same fence, actually, is just right along this lot to about that point here. We will be providing fencing with this project. The reason why this was even an issue is I just wanted to bring it to staffs attention that a portion of this common lot has a six foot closed vision fence on it that's ~t i~;:, ~~ , 3. ,~, •~ ~ i Meridian Planning & Zoning August 3, 2006 ;4 Page 32 of 56 ^' :{ not on our property. The way the code reads you have to provide either a four foot -- i'~ think it's -- is it a six or a four foot open vision fence or a four foot closed vision fence. just wanted to bring that to their attention. We will be constructing fencing around the entire boundary of the project. This common lot likely will have a four foot open vision -~~~ fence around the entire boundary of it and, then, match it with the existing fence right here and right up here at the LDS church site. ~'j Newton-Huckabay: So, it's going to be like ametal -- or like an iron -- wrought iron or -- ~~ ~. Erickson: That's an option. We could use the wrought iron fencing or even like a rail fence or something that -- whatever, I guess, we decide to put in that would fit and look nice for the project. There is -- this fencing up here is white vinyl, so I kind of think I'd like to carry that through with something that would be allowed for a common lot fencing, you know, on the boundary. So, it will probably end up being like awhite -- like ~~~ a rail fence or open vision fence. ,,;~,; ~. ;, .;; ,; +a Newton-Huckabay: I guess my thought is that a rail fence wouldn't discourage people from crossing over, but, you're right, it may not look good to have anything else, so -- Erickson: That's kind of what we are up against. You know, I guess we can look at a lot of different fencing types and we'd just like something that would look nice for the project. Newton-Huckabay: Well -- and the open vision fencing in like Heritage Commons -- but that's wrought iron and black and cedar, but I think that looks very very nice. Something like that I think would look nice there, if you -- Veatch: Commissioner Rohm -- excuse me -- Chairman Rohm, Commissioner Newton- Huckabay, Ithink staffs concern was because this is a flood way that that fencing would restrict that area. I know that the director -- we have looked into the code with that and also being a common open space, we do normally around the common space require a shorter fence, like the four foot or to have an open vision fence, you know, we realize we normally would have someone fence the entire perimeter of the subdivision, but -- and Ithink maybe Caleb wanted to add -- Newton-Huckabay: I'm not asking them to put a solid fence all the way around it, I just - - aspit rail vinyl fence is going to be nothing but just visually appealing. I don't know that it's going to be a deterrent, but I don't know that the option -- I agree that it does need to be open, especially that long of a common space, it needs to have open vision for safety purposes, so -- I'll end my comments. Hood: Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission, Ross, my question -- and I haven't walked back there. I have driven down Locust Grove. I haven't walked back there. How do you set posts in the floodway, then? I mean is it -- that's where I'm failing to see how that fence goes all the way through and you have got a micropath shown through the floodway and is there not water, you know, running through the floodway? I 1 ~ ~~:~C y ~1r.. ~} R f ~ ~ w a ' ~1 +. N ~ ~u~Y ~'V f},'~,'~' :`~ '~ ~ ~ r~- ~ `%;~' ~ ;',x;',~~.~ z3.~"y' ~~ i l-.;~t 3 fi K;Yt rr.'~t ~ i. -i(t E _~ ..c',tF` ~ "~ ~~~ G ,~, ;: '; ~~. q,: ~k f `p~ #ye y ° k dy H i ~... f ,t IL~~t-C r~1PA F t 4iY '.. ~~ R`~ w SS r ' 55 (( "` ~ ~ ~Y r !° ~ ~ 4~i. Yx, . Y :. F ~ by ~+ ~} I `'` < f ~~~ '~ ]~~y r •~ T Meridian Planning & Zoning August 3, 2006 Page 33 of 56 r;. mean the five mile creek I think as being a creek that has water in it sometime of the year. Erickson: Yeah. Let me answer your question. Yes, it does. In fact, right now there is flows -- you know, Five Mile Creek flows from ground springs, from irrigation return, from storm water, from a number of different sources, and there is a mapped flood plane through here. Currently the actual flows for Five Mile Creek are contained within just the channel and there is still some freeboard on that. I think just the tributary area of Five Mile Creek alone is fairly large and that's why you're seeing a flood plane that's mapped like this. And, then, also the banks are pretty flat as it comes off of the flow line of the -- of the actual drain. You know, as far as setting fence posts, you would set them the way you would typically set a fence post. I don't think, you know, the flood proofing measures for fence posts, I don't think there is really are any. I guess you could imbed the post hole deeper and maybe reinforce them, so that, you know, if there are fast moving waters coming through that it would knock the fence over, but I think if you're going to get an enormous flood coming through there, like a 500 year flood, it's probably going to blow anything over, you know, if you get some big -- some big flows coming through there, so -- Hood: Yeah. I was just wondering if there are any provisions for that. You know, as the testimony was stated earlier, that culvert gets breached and you got water going around. Are you just looking at a maintenance headache for the homeowners association in the future if the fence goes down every year or -- I mean I see them wanting to keep people kind of contained within this common area, but at the same time you have got almost that far end of the common area that isn't really accessible in the first place to the homeowners -- I mean they have got to walk across this culvert to get there and, then, there is not much there anyway. So, I'm wondering if it -- maybe it just makes more sense to even fence off, you know, on this side, the west side of the culvert or something and -- I don't know. Erickson: For the pathway connection we kind of need to get across and I think, you know, this development alone will kind of bridge a piece between Woodbridge when their pathway connects and this will probably ultimately connect out to Franklin Road would be my guess. I think it's important that we put it in there. As far as that culvert and the breaching, I spoke with the property owner and I asked him have you seen flooding out there and he's like, well, we haven't seen it in years. So, you know, as far as the frequency of major floods that would cause a lot of maintenance -- I guess requirements, it's probably pretty minimal. I think, you know, throughout the years you probably -- I'm sure you will see some, you know, if you did get a big flood you would have to go out and clean things up if it damaged a fence or something for sure, but I think that the frequency and the amount of maintenance required would be pretty minimal. Borup: We don't have major floods here, but you had mentioned the culvert again and it sounds like there is a concern there. Is that undersized? They are talking about -- I mean is there plans to put a larger culvert in there, then? ~L - ~ ..~ ..AA att i .~ V~ ~ ,~. r;i{r~ii ~. EE ., T.. 4 (~ ~~~~ ~ 'j}¢ t i * ''!: 1~ tt ,^ ..._ ~ ~ . ~ '4; ~ .. ~ 1 5r J ~ i F 6 f ~ y K fit ~r~m t^Y "C ~~Y~~~ ~ .1 /}.~ w Yai,. +~ ~ i; - x ~ r ,~ ` ` L. C ~ ~ 'S' t `:,~. a ww~~°fL. ~ ~ .r _ 4 ~ ~~ ~ ~ Ya ~ t¢ x ~.T ti ~~}~ '-. ~, [ L1 ~1 i. s ~' ,} r .. ~~ ~ ,,x r 1: ~ ~~ ~ - y.,, 1.r~,:t ~. ~ ~. }a r ~ ~- ,~ e ~ ~~ ~ A,r ~ ib `~ ^ aL# : ,~ y r ~ ~- i4 w' ~ _ ,~, 3 i r~ iY,. ; ~ ~ t~,y is ~~ ~~1'.3 __ . u Y y~1 ~7T i}~ ~ ~rt F - ~ ~. 1 { ~~ ~ F ~ ~ ~,i~'. o[.~, 'i_ ~ rn IF .~'z: `~;` ~~ e ~ ~~` ~~ ~t~ Meridian Planning & Zoning "; ' August 3, 2006 Page 34 of 56 Erickson: At this time we don't have plans to enlarge the culvert. It's already in place, '} ;_`;~~ ~' it's got some nice -- it looks like someone built up some like nice rock around it for the , , ,; y .r head wall, but the inlet and the outlet kind of actually supported the bank a little bit '~ around it, too. ~~ k ".' N~~~ _ a Borup: Do you know what the size is? I mean what size it is where it goes under °~~. Franklin? Are they both the same size? Erickson: I believe that Franklin it's actually a bridge. I don't think it's -- ,.~; k ' .~i :~,{ Borup: Okay. Yeah. That's right. ~~ -~ :` . Erickson: I'd just answer your question if we were to try to accommodate the flood r ' _; water that came through there, you would be building a bridge with probably, you know, ', " - a 20 foot span or something to get across there and I think it's just not -- not too realistic for a pedestrian footbridge to, you know, to go -- ~r -~ r Borup: Well, I agree with that for flood water. I guess I had the -- I thought -- I took out ' ``~ ' of the other testimony that it wasn't -- it wasn't during flood time, it was during heavy ~~. , , y~ , irrigation or something that was doing that. Now, maybe I misunderstood. The chairman's going to have to -- 3 `~ ~ n Rohm: Yeah. Go ahead and come up just to help clarify the -- { ~r Cullip: The culvert's probably -- ..di,.y ~L .'iq~k' `° Newton-Huckabay: You need to state your name again. Cullip: Rod Cullip. 1821 East Franklin Road. Sorry about that, Mr. Chairman or =` ~- ~. Commissioners. It's about a three and a half foot culvert that he had put in there and -- ~: ,~ Borup: That's big. ~, . k. Cullip: Yeah. And the water -- you know the creek is six foot wide and when you have -' ~ ~; ~ , a wet spring with snow, when it melts off, the creek fills up and what happens there is °~`~ more water in the creek than can go through that culvert, so it goes around the culvert and that's why he put concrete around all that and the concrete was to keep from 1 ` ; ~ washing the bank away, so now what it does is it overflows and goes around the culvert and back in the water. But the problem is it's washed our area out, so I ended up putting railroad ties there to keep from washing the whole bank out and everything when .~ ~ ~` it happens. So, that was my concern and yours, too. ;,,~., °5 i~ ~~ -~~,;,; 4` Boru So, how often has it done that? P~ .t ~>> ~ ; ~~~ f ~,, ~'' ~a~ ~',,, °'~~v~ r r ~... ~, r ~' ~': ~, .4`-,: r M ridi Pl k'; e an anning & Zoning August 3, 2006 .~"; % Page 35 of 56 ~ 'i~t '~~' Cullip: Not very often. Every 15 years, probably, you will have a bad water -- you know ~t ~4 3~ , melt off with snow and heavy rain. .~~~. Borup: Back in the days when we used to have snow. ,.,,. Cullip: Absolutely. Back when we used to have it the way it was. But it doesn't really ~~ ~~:' ~' + overflow the banks, it is in the creek, but the culvert is too small to handle what comes :~ '~' through the creek. `~ '' Borup: Okay. .4 '''` Newton-Huckabay: Thank you. `-,~ ,;~ Borup: That answered my question. It sounds like it's just during times of flood, a melt >~, R ~~ .: ,,~,. off. ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~- Rohm: Okay. Thank you. Erickson: Thanks. ,~,,: Rohm: Discussion? JJ~.~~~`, -tc-~ V ., f J'P4 Borup: No. I don't know, I think they have off -- I mean, obviously, it's kind of a difficult ; i site, an odd shaped piece, so I think they have done a good design to accommodate the ~~ . ~. ~~-;~ site they have had. Rohm: Commissioner Newton-Huckabay, did you have additional thoughts? Newton-Huckabay: Oh, no. I think it's anice -- I really like the elevations and I think it Ytf },~.;~ will be very nice when it comes together, actually, but just the flag piece -- I hate it when we have these odd-shaped parcels come through that it would have been nicer to have ~~~,,; the other property to the east, but Iknow -- as we are witnessing tonight, I don't get "" ~ ~ ° ~ ` what I want every time, so -- ;~~ ~~ Rohm: Well, I think just when you're looking at the flat on a piece of paper it looks like fi '- ° ~ it's a potential for a different type of lot to that area. It looks like it, but when you get out y there on site and you see the elevation changes, it's just not feasible and I think that rear that's the reality of the situation. ,= R_:~ x ~ ~~ Newton-Huckabay: No. I understand. I'm familiar with that area, but -- Rohm: Commissioner Moe. `~' ' ? ~ ~~' Newton-Huckabay: -- I'm happy with it. ~? ~:~; =s~ ~~ ~~,.~ :; °. y.;~: .~~-: ,~t,.; 3:~; , .- ,:~s, ~;~~.: ,:>, 'J r~~. ' s o °.~ ; Meridian Planning & Zoning August 3, 2006 Page 36 of 56 ~~~e Moe: I really don't have much more. As I said earlier, I'm a little bit concerned about ~~ w ,. this property within the mixed use community and whatnot. I do like the elevations that ~~ -~: ~ ; were submitted. I'll leave it at that. ~ -~ Rohm: Okay. Thank you. Okay. At this time I'd entertain a motion to close the Public ~~. k Hearing. - _ Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Chair, I recommend we close the Public Hearing on AZ 06-040 ~`~~3; and PP 06-038 for Bellabrook Subdivision. L~~.~ ~~'~ Moe: Second. ~` Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to close the Public Hearing on AZ 06-040 and PP 06-038. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? ;;'; MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT. <~f. ~~; Newton-Huckabay: Now, we had no changes to the staff report. -~~ Rohm: There was one. I think -- ;__=~ Newton-Huckabay: Oh, the fire department. ..';_'{_ ~~~~~ µ ~'fA Rohm: To delete 3.7. `} Newton-Huckabay: Just delete it altogether? k Rohm: I believe so. ~`" ~ Veatch: That's correct, Commissioner, Chairman Rohm. ~~aY~ - Newton-Huckabay: Do we need to reference the -- Jenny, the letter? ,, ,, ~~rY; {~~ ,v ~~ p Veatch: No, I don't believe so. ,:. Newton-Huckabay: Okay. Veatch: I mean we noted it within the discussion and I think if you go ahead and make ~' ; ~ it part of your motion to delete that condition 3.7 that would be okay. . ~.:4~ k~ ,>-~ Newton-Huckabay: Okay. Thank you. After considering all staff, applicant, and public ~a ~~~~~~ testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of file number AZ 06-040 and PP 06-038 as presented in staff report for the hearing date of August 3rd, 2006, ~, ; with the following modification. That condition -- fire department condition 3.7 be °~~" deleted from the staff report. End of motion. :`'-1 . , ~ -. F~ .: ~~t r _: ,; :~ ~« ~~,~ ~- Meridian Planning & Zoning August 3, 2006 E Page 37 of 56 r; Borup: Second. Moe: Second. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded that we forward onto City Council recommending approval of AZ 06-040 and PP 06-038, both relating to Bellabrook Subdivision. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carried. Thank you folks for coming in. ~;' ~ MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 13: Public Hearing: AZ 06-036 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 10.94 acres from RUT to an R-4 zone for Bitterbrush Point Subdivision by Majestic, Inc. -east of Meridian Road and north of Victory Road: Item 14: Public Hearing: PP 06-039 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 27 single-family residential lots and 4 common lots on 10.94 acres in a proposed R-4 zone for Bitterbrush Point Subdivision by Majestic, Inc. - east of Meridian Road and north of Victory Road: Rohm: Okay. At this time I'd like to open the Public Hearing on AZ 06-036 and PP 06- 039, both related to Bitterbrush Point Subdivision and begin with the staff report. And welcome one of our new staff members here. Hess: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. The subject application before you is the Bitterbrush Point Subdivision. The applicant has requested annexation and zoning of 10.94 acres from RUT Ada County to R-4 medium low density residential and as well as preliminary plat approval for 27 single family residential lots and four common lots. As you can see, Bitterbrush Point is generally located north of Victory Road and east of Meridian Road. The site is currently vacant agricultural land. To the east there is the existing Observation Point Subdivision and zoned R-4. To the north a platted Ada County subdivision right here. And south of the Kennedy Lateral right here is the Mussell Corner commercial subdivision. As previously stated, the applicant has proposed preliminary plat approval of 27 residential lots ranging between ,; ;' ,~ 9,600 square feet and 25,250 square feet. There is stub street connection provided by ,- Observation Point that will serve as the sole access to the proposed development and if ~' you can see down here residents will enter Observation Point and head up along east ;-P .a x~~~ Observation Drive and, then, access South Andros Way and, then, get into Logger Pass Street right there. The applicant has provided 7.4 percent of the property as open space, meeting the requirements of the UDC. The majority of the proposed common ''~ area is provided along the Kennedy Lateral, which is tiled, to serve as amulti-purpose pathway. The issues highlighted in the staff report for the Commission are, first, the '~' lack of the perimeter fencing plan. There is currently existing fencing running the length ~`, n of the north and eastern boundary. However, the applicant has not indicated whether ~:, permanent fencing will be installed around the remaining perimeter boundary. And the ~~ ~~ applicant will need to state this tonight. Additionally, the applicant proposes four foot .!~ ~ _ ~ r`t I -~ ,:., s S ^J ~` ~ ~ ,w: n ~t ~~ F`:. r ~, ~.~~ ~ ~ ~~: _ f ~j ~ x' p'S 1rT N ~1 h ~~y~ y_' 'L~" ,f., ~ ~ ~' ~~~ ' ~i ~, S ,.,t , ` ~' ~~,~4 is ~~A7yt ~,p ~'~ y.. . A} ~ f.' '~L _r r~~. p ~x ~" ~ ~ .~k4 ,(~.. f3 S ~S ~ L ~= ~~ ~~,r~~_ ~~~ ,ri, ~ ~r(s4 ~ ~?-!~ y '.N t ply ~Y ~~ Y }:. SreZ ~, µ, +F+` cc ~ k~ i i~: 4L3 .p ea h P. 1 ~" ~,. ~ ~ 9ti S ~kA +, A a ::ii ~ ':.t': f C ~ ~. ~ f~ n ~'r Meridian Planning & Zoning '"4~ .• August 3, 2006 ~~ ~ ~,' ~;~~ Page 38 of 56 I ~: #;~ - solid fencing along the micropath and this is acceptable and meets the requirements of Vii, the UDC. Just to clarify for the applicant, six foot solid fencing is permitted along all rear ,~~ ~ ~ ~` 1~; ; and side property lines, not adjacent to common areas and micropaths. The code ~. ~~, s '~ , would limit fencing in those instances to four foot if solid or six foot if open vision. And, ~` '~~. . ; ,,,~ lastly, ACHD has recently provided comment that the 34-foot wide street section as t ~ proposed for Observation Drive and Lake Creek Street, which are the ones that run ° `~' northwest and, then, east-west up there. They are acceptable and the Commissioner ;r~i can refer to the memo that should have been provided to you prior to the hearing for a A, ~~ ~ more information on that. They had only mentioned the 36-foot wide street section in ~~'y ~~ t their site specific requirement from Exhibit B and also the proposed design of the cul- _ ~~~ ,'` de-sac do not meet the fire department's turning radius requirements and the applicant " ~ ~=~ ~' will be required to redesign them prior to submittal of the final plat. And that is all staff ~ ~~*~. has, unless the Commission has questions. ~ ~ ~~' ` ~~~; _ . Rohm: Thank you. Very nice. Mike, did you have something you wanted to add? ~ f~ Y i~,t ~' Cole: Mr. Chairman, yes. I don't know if ou u s of the memo I sent out after the Y 9 Y 9 ~~„f- '~j staff report was sent out. I had had a meeting with the applicant's engineer on design of ,t ~- ~ _~~^' ~~ ~ the off peek storage facility. He's got a rather ingenious design that doesn't involve riz~ ~~ {,_r s ~~ pumps that we are kind of excited about. Very forward thinking. We just would ask that ~"~ ~= ; ,, if you do recommend approval of this subdivision tonight that you would strike condition ~~: .~. -~ 2.2 as written in the staff report and reference 2.2 as written in the memo provided to °' ,~, you. Thank you. _ ~~ Rohm: Okay. Thank you. Any questions of staff before we ask the applicant to come x4 - 5; ~~"~' '~' forward? Apparently not. Would the applicant like to come forward, please. ~. ~ ~~~~ ~ J y ~ti ; ti~~ ,~~ Beck: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. Richard Beck, 148 }~_ ' North 2nd Street, Eagle, Idaho. We are pleased to be able to bring this piece into the ~ ,q . city. We feel we have come up with a land plan and use that is compatible with the . ,~~ surrounding uses and takes into consideration some of the site constraints that are '`_~ a associated with the site. I guess I will start out with the fencing, to comment on fencing, ' ~; ~ rr i~ since we did not include the perimeter fencing plan or what we will do on the landscape ~~. ~k ~~~T~ ~! plan. We will start with addressing that. We will be looking at, again, an open vision ~ :`'. type fence with vinyl materials on the perimeter, especially along the landscape buffer ~~ ~' s area adjacent to the Kennedy Lateral and that will be -- we will show that on the fencing ~ ? plan when we submit the final -- with the final plat. And we -- as you can see the site is ~ { ~' -- does have one thing to take into consideration with the design is the access, the - ~t~t Y'}~- current -- the frontage on the site is just from Loggers Pass currently. However, access ~ h~ ~~ ;' has historically been taken from Meridian Road to the northwest there. And, initially, ~` ~,~ y r' ' with, I guess, design in mind, due to the commercial -- the commercial zoning ` ~ { ~, , _ x~~`N~°° -~ ~ designation there were thoughts of looking at potentially a higher density, but we felt ~~y. ` that the R-4 and 9,500 plus foot lot sizes would establish more compatible functional ~'~ :: ~~ land design that would be compatible with the Observation Point Subdivision, fill it. It ' does comply with the zoning ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan. And we do want °` ° ~ ~' to make sure that the staff report condition -- see if I can find it here. We appreciate ~$ ~~ :-~: jv3 v _, ~Y Y'~~it~, ~[ ~' t ei~ ~ ~ =. ~; ~~ .'~ s f +.,_ _ ... .. ~ ~ ..tr 1F ~3'n-. ~ ~: ~ - ~ ~ t ^3 ~ ~ }~ (~ -~ i~ l ~~~ Y ,s ~ { N ~ y K~I, "i.. ~{S 7 ~ '~ ~ Y~i ~ ~ £ ~ til~ept ~~ t i~ } ~ ':~ I II .+5'F*3, 1~,~.' ~! ~:-::a:; iS ° ~ ~~, f ~ i:4~ h`. x ~ ;.~ q ~ ,r s `~ < s~~~iF't ~ 3 ~` ` ~.. . r - ~ ~ _ :a?, ~ ~ ~- ~F~ ~_p~ ~.sx i ~~.` P ~ ~i "rya ~.V k.ta ~ r ~~~ ?~}'r; .. :~~ 4 ~~ e ~ Meridian Planning & Zoning ~`~` ~~ ~ August 3, 2006 Page 39 of 56 Amanda bringing up the memo from the Ada County Highway District. Do you want to ~~ t= make sure that the condition -- I believe 1 2 5 is -- reflects that memo and shows a 34 to ~; ~~ . . 36 foot street section. Other than that, we agree with the staff report and I'll stand for ~, ~;.~x any questions. ,~~~ Moe: Mr. Chairman? x~ ~, 'y Rohm: Commissioner Moe. t.-= ,} Moe: Mr. Beck, I may have missed it. I know you went with open vision on the _ Kennedy Lateral. What are you doing with the rest of the perimeter? -f~i vn: _'-~; Beck: It would the same all around the perimeter. We would have the open -- open z t. : vision vinyl fence. ,~, ~ Newton-Huckabay: What is the fencing on the east? Is that just vinyl? ' ~ Beck: I believe it is vinyl. ,~ eA Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Chair. Why is it you don't want to put a solid fence around the ~~>`` property or the development? ~z ~~`.;~ Beck: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner, I believe one of the objectives with the open vision fence is to keep the open feel and to preserve some of the views from the property of ~"'~" r` some of the surrounding maintain ranges. I don't know that the developer -- I believe the developer would be amenable to putting in solid fencing. .~ 4~~ j Newton-Huckabay: I mean isn't that a nursery right south of it there on the west side of the -- of the nursery -- ~ ~~'a~ Beck: Yes. F~.~ Newton-Huckabay: -- Victory Greens? Victory Greens, yeah. Borup: But you have got the canal right there, too. `~' ~.;. Newton-Huckabay: Uh-huh. What's on the -- what's the fencing around Victory Greens ~' ~ ~}~ - there? Is there any? I have not been that far back on the property. :~.. :,~ ::<, Borup: I doubt it. ;j. Newton-Huckabay: Yeah. I do, too. Do you know? r. 1~' ' ~~, ° '` ' ; ,r Beck: I don't know. '` , , ~~r:' Newton-Huckabay: Okay. I have no more comments. 3 ,~; -_ ~i. ~~i ~~' _y ~.. .,. ~~. rt.. .'~ ,~ ;a `i Meridian Planning & Zoning ~< ' ~' ~ August 3, 2006 r`•3 - ' Page 40 of 56 rjl ~4 l Rohm: Staff had mentioned something about your cul-de-sacs and the turning "; °I radiuses, them not being conducive. Could you speak to that a little bit? P' ~~ ~i ~- 4, ~. Beck: Yeah. Not -- Mr. Chairman, I'm not one hundred percent familiar with the design { 'a~ '' standards. I know that we did discuss that with our engineer and he did say that they W~p. -; ~ ?z; ~~ .: ; would be -- they would meet the requirements, that it would comply with the condition. ~~?.~ Rohm: So, just before final plat, the cul-de-sacs will be modified to accommodate for -- fit, i ~~` to respond to those comments? ..., ,':~ Beck: Yes. Rohm: Okay. Borup: It looks like you need to increase it from 45 to 48 on the radius. Rohm: Any other questions of the applicant at this time? One of the things that I'll just ,~;,. say before you sit down is that there is additional public testimony and as they speak it's -~ always a good idea to take notes, so you will be able to respond to any questions that { come up. ~~; Beck: Thank you. Rohm: And thank you. Okay. At this time would Steve Yeager like to step forward. '-~; You're okay? From the audience he says he didn't need to speak. Okay. Jeff Johnson. Okay. B.J. Allen? Alloway. .'~ Alloway: I'm B.J. Alloway. 324 East Loggers Pass. Obviously, being on Loggers Pass, ,' the stub street that's going to connect to this proposed -- ~;,3 ,: Rohm: Could you bring the microphone down to you? There you go. Thank you. ~~ `: ..; Alloway: Can you hear me now? I have several concerns with having this new subdivision being their -- their entrance being Loggers Pass. Obviously, during construction everything is going to be coming right directly in front of my house back and forth. There will be a lot of mess, mud, dust, you name it. I'm not trying to stop this subdivision, but I don't know what other entrances have been explored for this subdivision or because it has a nub street there that they just automatically looked at that and thought, okay, that will be the easy way to be an entrance, less cost effective for the subdivision. Currently there is access from Meridian Road to that subdivision and I ask that if they don't explore another avenue for at least, you know, entrance to that subdivision, that they at least use the existing road in from Meridian Road for -- during construction, so that all the construction vehicles, heavy equipment, et cetera, bypass our subdivision and that route be used. At least taken into consideration. Basically, that's pretty much it. So, thank you. ~-,~ ~ ~ ~ ti ,~ ~, • ,, ~ ~~ ti~ , . r •y-+ti~ 7 ~1;~t t s ° '~, <.hS y E ~ ``l .ytr ~. ~ r ~ ~~ ~ ~ q} qy ' h l~ '4' ~ _ .~ •}=j i7 }j4 +[ ~ t ~ y q ~ ~ h ~ ~ ~ { {... F 4 ~ ~~ ~ ~ '~ e ^v e ` ~ r'.~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ r4 . ~ . .,. 3 A ~ 3 ~ :' ~' ~.h } ~ ,~. ~~ :S~F 7a;-r. - :~~,gs ~. ~ bifi4 yy'G. A.~- 1 '? y ~ ~ r b..~_ .._, .,_?sY ~ F - E; 4~ ~~~ ~j :.~=: ;# ~. } 4. - :{~ :;b. ~~; ~'' ~~ Meridian Planning & Zoning ;a,: August 3, 2006 Page 41 of 56 ~+ .`~~ Rohm: Okay. Thank you very much. t a~ Borup: Makes sense. k~' Rohm: Christine Helk. {-~ Helk: Christine Helk. 432 East Forest Ridge Drive, Meridian. I live right off of Andros 4? and Forest Ridge that kind of go like this. I'd like to know how much more traffic this is going to bring in to -- that Andros is going to become now a major road there, how much :~:' more traffic we are going to have coming, you know, in there. That's one issue I have. ,. ~~' Because we have a lot of cut-through traffic right now. And, then, with the south 548 ~~ home subdivision from far east -- I can't say it. It's like Banana, Tanana or whatever. ,, ,~' You know which one I mean. None of us could say it. But that's coming in. They are going to be cutting through there, too. So, here is another one that's going to be cutting ~' through and running down Andros Way and I just really have concerns for that, for -- there is no stop signs on that and people speed on it now and I don't know if there is any way that Lake Drive -- could they do something on the site there and have like ~~~"; maybe two streets coming out into the stub, kind of where that Lake Drive comes in there somehow? Or I guess there is a house there. I don't know. I just don't like ~~! having only one way to come in and out and all that traffic going right next to my house, ;.~, because it really is a mess and that and, then, I agree with her on the builders, if they could find another way to get in and out of there, at least until it's pretty much done, you '~ ~ know, because there really is a lot of trash that's thrown around and it's really a mess and if they could find another way I would appreciate that, too, and that's it. I'm sorry. Rohm: No. Good. Thank you very much. Okay. There are no others signed up to speak, but it's certainly open to -- would you like to come forward, sir? ~~ `~ t Ni l; l {:_~.li Hart: My name is Mike Hart. 2961 South Andros Way. I just want to echo some of what my neighbors have already said. South Andros Way currently we get a lot of cut- through traffic. People do not want to wait at Meridian and Victory Road. So, you can cut through there and get over to Overland or you can cut through Meridian and take Calderwood out onto Meridian. And so we get the traffic coming both ways. And by putting that subdivision in there with only one entrance and exit, it's only going to compound that. Currently all the buses that take the children, both high school, elementary, junior high, stop on South Andros Way and unload those kids. That's a very steep hill, it's blind, you cannot see what's coming from either side of that. We have already had an incident where ayoung -- a little girl in the neighborhood that was almost run over on her bike, because I have witnessed cars racing up that hill parallel to one another trying to beat each other up to the peak on both sides. We have already had the police out several times. We have tried to get surveys to get some kind of traffic control in there. Right now there is no way to slow it down, there is no signs, no nothing. And it's an accident waiting to happen at the moment the way those people drive through there. By putting not only the subdivision across, which is high density and, then, that one, you're going to probably see another five to six hundred cars ~ ~ a?;~l 3q~ l l CN j ~'~ J T ,i j fi r F r k ti ~ - y+erti h+~ T }j'"T'S ~~ C h if }~ Y l ~ ~~ V hlon 4 ~ ' At1 ~fl 7 •K,KY ~ E4i r ~1,k +f~1S }fi ~ ]>~i j ~ ~ L ~3 S ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ytl t ~t t o ~'' ~~ ,~ ri.,u ~ i ^~a ~ ay '''*"?~ R r~` .. ~. ~' ~~~ s r ~ ~ ..~,:K~, '~ .,( f L 4 ±- ` . ' ~ t r i' ~~~} ~ ,. ,. Y ~~ ~- ~; ~.:p Fi, i }.~•:: ~~ ~ ~~, ~` { -~*: ~ ~r . ~< E :: ~~~ , ~J~ ~i~ ~1~1~.: ty ~ i F rs:.:, ~i k .icf ~ fi li ' 1 i l.. U,.; =.~~'. r ~~1 ~'~ fi ,'Y-: f'.. x ;~a~~~ ~> ~~~: =~ ~_;. ..~° y- ~s.; ~~:~, _ ~~ j.~, l~} i ro-,+t f ..-~.; - ~~~ , ~,~~k _;- ~~ a' -,~,~4tt '`: } 'fig ~~..~ ~,~r ~~ ~~ ~ :~:; ~;;;, ~µ ii 1 ~ y ' ~ ,~ ~ "~ ~~~, ~ ~:, -~~, ~` f .`r.~`~ ~ i~v}'`;'HM~ 1 -~~(=~• ~~~"~': Meridian Planning & Zoning ~ O August 3, 2006 Page 42 of 56 coming through there easy. And right now it's extremely dangerous. That was my only point. The other one would be I am concerned with all the construction coming in and out of there. Loggers Pass is not a very long street, as you can tell from your plat, it's only about 50 feet long, and it won't take much to clog up that -- that road at 7:00 in the morning when the earth movers come in, cement trucks and else. Kids are trying to get on the bus and off the bus, we are going to have a real problem there and it's going to happen once or -- not soon, but it's going to happen if we don't slow it down. So, all that is the only way you can get in and out of that subdivision. I know there is a proposal to go the other way to the north, but that -- currently that land is private, they are not going to sell it. There is no way to get there. So, that's my concern. I know development happens in the valley. That's just part of the nature of the business. But if there is some way we can try to control what is occurring on that property, just for the safety issue, then, those children -- they ride their bikes up and down that hill, they like to -- on their skateboards and everything else and, like I said, that hill is blind, you cannot see anybody on either side of that. Thank you very much. Rohm: Thank you. Borup: Mr. Hart, just -- Rohm: Mr. Hart. Borup: Just so -- Hart: Commissioner. Borup: I was trying to understand some -- a couple things you said, but one -- it sounds like you were saying you felt there would be less cut-through traffic if there was access to Meridian Road? Hart: Yes. Borup: You don't think people would cut through here to get to Meridian Road. I mean -- Hart: Cut through -- they are already cutting through. Borup: But they have got to go clear up to Overland now or down Calderwood. Hart: Oh, yeah, but at 8:00 o'clock in the morning or 5:00 in the afternoon traffic on Victory backs up almost to our entryway. Borup: So, you feel that if this went through here you would have less traffic on Andros? ~~~> t.-;--; .,' e:.:~ i ~_ >,r: .~ a ~;~ ; ~~-. Meridian Planning & Zoning August 3, 2006 Page 43 of 56 Hart: Yeah. At least for that subdivision. They have another way to get to where they are going without going through either Meridian Greens or us. Now, Ican't -- Borup: But how about all the traffic coming down that wants to cut through? Hart: Well, that's another issue that we have been trying to address. Borup: Right. Hart: With that development across the street and -- Borup: Well, I guess I misunderstood what you meant by cut through. I wasn't considering this as cut-through traffic. It would be the same as if this subdivision, when it was put in, included those lots to start with. Hart: And I agree with you. I'm not arguing that point. I'm just saying we are going to just build on a problem that already exists. Borup: Yeah. It's a busy intersection already. Hart: Yeah. And it's not a very long street, so it won't take much to pile it up. Borup: Okay. Thank you. Okay. Would you like to come forward, ma'am? J. Hart: My name is Judy Hart. I live at 2961 South Andros. My backyard is going to be the entrance to this subdivision. I think it's a great subdivision, I'm very happy with the amount of homes. The problem I have is is that usually the subdivisions have nice entryways. There is not going to be one. It's just right there in my backyard. As you can see, then, they start their houses. So, I would like to know how you get away without having some type of entry, whether there is -- how is there going to be a sign so people know that that is the Bitterbrush thing -- so I'm concerned about that, too. Also, you know, there is right there off of Meridian Road they have that -- the nursery has that area where they sell all the rocks and everything, there is an access road there that -- like Mrs. Alloway said, that they come and use for construction, instead of bringing all that through onto South Andros Way. So, I'd like to address another -- I just find it very odd that you go through a subdivision to get into another subdivision, that you have their entrance right in another subdivision. I thought that was, you know, kind of an odd thing. Borup: But that's one of the purposes of this stub street that's already in existence. That was intended that that would be developed in the future and have more lots over there. That's why that was designed that way to start with. That's a requirement of ACHD. J. Hart: Well, then, how -- well, that's fine. But I was wondering how do you designate that subdivision? What's their entrance -- _y .', i ~ O ,... y,:f Meridian Planning & Zoning FK ~,-~ "' ^~ .,,: August 3, 2006 Page 44 of 56 rs'= Borup: What's the entrance between Meridian Greens and Observation Point now? ,~:~: J. Hart: Oh, good point. There is homes. ~f~=:1 ., ~ '~~~ i'~ =~ ~ Borup: I mean is there a subdivision designation there? ~! ;, J. Hart: No. You're correct on that. I~ _ ~~ , Borup: Okay. So, it would be the same thing, I guess. .'S, a~' '` r,_ J. Hart: But it's not the main entrance. ~:-- ,xti~~A Borup: Right. ~~ ~.;~~~ -~-"=` J. Hart: Observation Point has their main entrance on Victory and Meridian Greens has theirs on Overland. So, it's just a street that goes through. But these people, you know y=<s f "F"'. ; {d Borup: They may want to put something. Sometimes I have seen small signs. ,,~ °;~~~, . _,. Newton-Huckabay: Mrs. Hart? t: Borup: That would be up to the developer. -~°~' Newton-Huckabay: In the Cedar Springs development and Sienna Creek, they have ;~~; done that, they kind of flow together seamlessly and they have made an attempt to ~~~; ~,~ make some kind of entrance so you know you are going into -- it's Sienna Creek; right? ` ,:~'~ ~. 3r`' Is it Sienna? Okay. That actually looks more awkward, in my opinion, than if they ~t would have just made it look like it was a part of Cedar Springs, because you have -- .` ~; you're driving along through the subdivision and, then, you hit the subdivision sign and ;a r just a bit of landscaping trying to designate it and think you might get more -- I think that ~:~F~ can backfire on you. I think it might look better in my mind if it just looks like a part of Observation Point. L ~_~' `~ J. Hart: Well, that's what we wondered when we first heard about the proposal. It's a ,~~ great proposal. One thing we wondered, why couldn't it just be part of Observation ~ ,~ Point, instead of having to be a whole different subdivision? Newton-Huckabay: Well, I can't speak to that, but -- •' Borup: Observation Point's already a platted subdivision that's already done with. It's 4.~~ got to be a new subdivision. ,,~Y ~;, ~ ,yA. J. Hart: Okay. Thank you. 1., ~~, 4.;~; '~~~'. ~:~~ -,' ~~: ~x phis. ,, . ~'1T. d - - $y, _ t'~S; ;.. ..~iF;;_ ,. _ .. - Meridian Planning & Zoning ~; ~ August 3, 2006 ' Page 45 of 56 .:~ ri! ~'{'~ Rohm: Is there anybody else that would like to speak to this? ~; ~: Rosette: Mr. Chairman and Commissioners, my name is Jim Rosette, Meridian Greens Subdivision, 2316 South Montego Way. And I have been to the Commissioners' meeting more than once on some of the other subdivisions that are going in around ~ ~~. Meridian Greens. I have no problems with this subdivision per se. And, staff, can you i ~~ flip to the previous slide before this? The one -- yeah. The stub. So, in essence, that • stub that goes to the north is, for all practical purposes, really not existent, because that `'~ area to the north may not be developed. My concern is that, again, I echo these other ~~' three people that were up here before -- two people. The traffic that's going to go ~~ n ,.~ through Meridian Greens is going to be almost triple. You're looking at almost 40 homes here -- t 4;; >' Borup: Twenty-one. }~ Rosette: Okay. Twenty-one. ~; ~~' Newton-Huckabay: No. Twenty-seven. v ~~K. Rosette: Okay. Twenty-one. So, you're looking at -- in the neighborhood of about 40 ~. ='° vehicles going through this -- probably our subdivision, adding to this, the confusion that's going through Meridian Greens right now. We contacted ACRD and tried to get ~j; more stop signs, speed bumps, they wouldn't do anything about it. We have got a lot of traffic going through Calderwood, cutting through at Calderwood onto Overland now, ~: what's going to happen is -- and I have talked to people from Observation Point, they '~ use Meridian Greens as a short cut to get to Overland going north. They don't go onto %~'~ Victory or they don't go over to Meridian-Kung Highway, they, essentially, go through `,~ the Meridian Greens Subdivision to get to their -- to Overland going north. ~' Borup: The Observation Point people do that you say? '' Rosette: The Observation Point people do that right now. So, in essence, these 21 homes at an average of about two cars per home -- Borup: And I misspoke, it is 27. Rosette: Twenty-seven. Okay. In the neighborhood of about 30, then. You're looking at all that traffic going north, coming off of Andros there, coming through Meridian - Greens, because if you look at the way the traffic flows down, like I say, most of it is going north. Anyway, I'd like to echo the last three individuals that were up here. The Meridian Greens right now cannot do anything about the traffic flow down 5th and 3rd Way. ACRD won't listen to us and we have had a lot of almost accidents within our subdivision and it sounds like Observation Point does, too. So, anyway, thank you very much. ~ Rohm: Thank you. ;~ 'r ;.1 p .' L' i • .._. - . ~ . Y' .~ '~ .t9,- ~ " • ~ '~ '^ ~h,aY i": °:,;V,:v'~•, r r s 3•. i7 ~ f~' Q 'l~~ " , ~ 6 "ii+: ; '~~~v. iV"' %..•..tt'.ti' •x'd~y •3"i tAY .t r" 5 " / ~ E~k: ~' i ' ~ ' ., R j i}~ . i •: A S;~ K ~ 4e: } F'~ ~ tryU~: r R3 ' ~ i .,ye? ~` F; . I .A *^.;. ci} `~;n',q~~~ i l ~ .t j i b 1ti~ : ~ y ', •°it :[~:Y~,' .C~lU-~ ~ / ., ~ i~Y:•sR - Z i ~'~~ i ~ t . .. '1 Y , 5 , . i 6~ ~'s%'. NN++ f,v '~s•`. a;~`•': ~,; ~ ~i .~. •ij: A •t r s r. '":i~ ~~ ~ ii . r ^ d4 ;,!•~.F''tiµv: ~.~~y~ A 5 ~ 1 ~ '/i. ~.a:i:~..j, t ry` ~ It t ~ } ' . (Y~ , , , S~ f, ~ ~ p r• ,7.': ' f ~ ~ ' n fij: _reY'>ai ~, • ~, '.~ ` , ~ ~ .tr•r'i, 1:~ j ~ ~ ~ i~ i 4 P; %{; ;~. Y t i ' ;.~. :,~,: <rgl! . ti. ~I • ~a Fqs :.?,~ ~.,'$. 'ti:' F a~. ^ , , , y M: -,>f:~ :~sj'~:i ~'ffi`.~r+d~.~1:5'fi,~' _ I i ~ '~ 7 r 1. i. ~ b . s . ^.t.^' . I ~f: iii:: M1'-y ~ ' a~. 1 ~ d,. _,. nA rt~z , •, ~.. .a". ._ ~ ~~ ~T'•j = { • : f' v"~'=" ` ` . . .,,. 9'.' , .,~ . , _ ., 1 x •S p Ya I Y • ,~ 4 .: . G'S; .•~ e'';'~:• ~ l ~,1, - .F; Itpr ,;.~1"` `h"F~ .~' ". >'S,c- is '•P •• ,i•,, ;~f:" , ~ "j•, . . .' 5s F~.'` i 3 k ,;5 ' ~,~ _ ,1, i 1, t ~ ::'_r ~'x.;' :~,: `' ' •yyi:r' ` ~ ~ . t , ,/~.~,N H v •nC Di 7 h~•fX e}F I ' .~ ~ ~:: ^ ` ( . { ~ ,~.,` , 9 -''` YYYYYY ~ • e§. a a, f .t= ~. 4'o- '~~ ~ { ~s I e .. I 1 _ .. r ~ • , t , . ~. _~~;~:. + °1 µ'`~`;:,~, ~ ~ ,~~ rk ,F2 4 1"'k _: t ~ v_' ,t'!?ty"f~„ y ..' h i "sl::. `• ,R x: ?xx.,.lt:we~~< `ffi h } n I 5~ 6 ` ~ ' ` ~' ~ ~ ~ ~,~5 ~ ra?;'¢~5~ .k:,;:'•ss4':` ~° but F' " ~ " • p ,. . .. .Ei *, ~ ~~+. ~ ° S'r . ~ ~ . ~' r C : `' , .,aim. F '~ ~ • t ~ ~ 1 i t~ i. *~a t, •:,}cL:.a ,t;~,r~~rs~ •'` -, i r a ~~ xt~' 'x~ a~ 1' .~i~' ~~{ ~ ' S + ° ~ .~'~~if:'r, ar~~ 'Y'~;7.'..?;~~7',E:, ( ~ ~. 7i '.' .1 :, i~~•{~': ~'t~:' +,.ix s=?~~+ i ~xN 1 :3•~t.~ t t t~. .` ~~' '_~~.,+s:r .' '~'0~~'7 ~i ~~/ViY!%:. k l11 } ~^' ' IL`4 ~ .c ' Y; ~,• '1Y $.. `.Lti:f'~ ". j' t ~ if ; 'i.'.!?~` 4~, q, `y'I1 'C•IC- " " ey+ CN° k '" ' '~h: c~~ ~' ~{~; 1 f ': :i.e.:h^.»..1 a '.t.4 i . ,F ~ 1 ': ~„~f~ b , 1 :l: ' f1 ~4 v '~:~ 1'1 .., ,,4` r fir.,, 2 ~ •' yaF i ! v.r:Y"x*.' ~"}; • .. u;•: : S ~: ' ~ .~~~c~,,, ~ t~'S J{ ~+~. ~ +k t't ~Y ~ ~~ ~ } s ~ w , 3 5r~ ~~. r~~'Y ~ t<;~'y~y- .. .. • I' .T# , I M • ~}~ '-w" ;'~„~ ,. S ~' , r y '. f ,r "'i` '~ . `'• ,<~ s ~ ,:Y' . ~" ~ {'I:.~' f ~. ~ w . ':1 ~ I 5t e rat ~~'. . ~:.,~ ~ , ,~i~ 4. ';~';m'Rff' ~:,i``,e :rk:~£; ~r,~p.:;..•i' ~. ~ ~' ~'t . p:~~'°.,a %';a`•.;;Hx°~~- '° + t ~- A+ , ~ !.: -~ ~(..~.u~I"~~i`~~ { 17` :~: ,~~ a,,. '~ ~. rat ~fyi ya ~ r~' # ~. ~ , Meridian Planning & Zoning August 3, 2006 ,, ~,` ' i Page 46 of 56 +, a E+' -; .i Canfield: My name is Mark Canfield. I'm the developer -- one of the developers of ' Bitterbrush Point and I would like to speak to some of the concerns that have been ~'j '.~ raised here this evening. > -~ Rohm: Before you -- before you do that, let's make sure that we don't have any ` ~~~' additional concerns before we address them and, then, it will just be a one shot deal. ~~ So, if you'll bear with me for a moment, we will make sure that that's the case. Is there anybody else that would like to testify before this hearing? Okay. There you go. Now you're on. ~. , rs ~( Y ~. i:~ ;. ~.. ,~:. ~.; ~: Canfield: Thank you very much. First off, this piece of property has been a gravel pit since 1957. When we first acquired it there was a hole about 250 feet deep and since we have that we filled the hole back in, tried to make it safe. There was some real concerns by the folks in Observation Point that it was an attractive nuisance, so we have tried to be a good neighbor by trying to get the hole filled in, landscaped, and take care of the weeds that existed on the site. Secondly, the access that we do have now is an easement off of Highway 69, Meridian-Kung Highway. The easement with that goes away when it ceases to be a gravel pit by the state of Idaho. So, that access will be lost. However, I do believe that through the construction process we may be able to continue to use that for an access point to eliminate construction traffic in front of the homes in Observation Point and Meridian Greens with the permission of the state of Idaho or potentially we are still, I guess, technically, an earth moving gravel situation there, but -- Borup: That's what I was wondering. Until that subdivision is platted -- Canfield: Yes. So, hopefully, we can continue to use that through the construction phase and eliminate, you know, heavy truck traffic, construction equipment, et cetera, by using that easement point. Also the concerns about the traffic through Observation Point, I understand and can sympathize with. The stub street that we do have to the north, we have been approached within the last week by another developer who has, we believe, purchased about seven acres north of there, so I do believe there are going to be plans to come along fairly quickly for a development that would, then, give a controlled access point out onto the Meridian-Kung Highway. One other thing I might add, too, is the concern about the fencing where the property overlooks Victory Greens. There is about a 30 feet elevation change between where we sit up above and where Meridian Greens is down below. So, fencingwise I don't feel that blocking that is a real necessary objective. You don't see all the equipment and everything from where you are up on top. You can see the top of the trees and the vegetation, which I think is a very nice view and I think to screen it out would kind of be a tragedy. Rohm: Just one more thing. On the subdivision signage do you have any comments on that at all? ,ids .,Y!} L,f. xr,~ ~~ ~ ~,,~ V.' "R y ;a .. .+¢~' ~Y~' ~' ~_ ..!'~ ~fL I. _. `~~'µ ~ k ~y r N ~.J} ~ ~ S~ ~ ~~ ~tP!~ n ti ~ ~ .ry. * 1 "N Z ~~. ~Y ~ ~~ t I F x~+fr t +' .fi P ~ }h ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ n~ s ~~ r " ;'~ r ~ ~ , -~~ re t r s ~~ ~ ~ ' ~' . ~ ,. '.: ~~,t p, Vii. .~.,7~ ~ k~ r~. ~~ • o Meridian Planning & Zoning ;_~ August 3, 2006 Page 47 of 56 ``_;' ~' ~ Canfield: We struggled long and hard with that as well, but we feel that trying to put ,, ~= something up there may create more of a billboard effect than something that, you know, just kind of flows from one development to the other to try to put some large .` , signage up with lighting or whatever it may take to announce it. I don't know that that's f7`: the goal that we wanted to achieve that way. We are certainly not opposed to spending the money on a nice monument with a sign on it, but, again, I don't know that it's -- the .~yL . effect or the location or how it would work. We couldn't come up with a plan that really ~`~^'~~ ;~.. made a lot of sense to us. ' <~ `i "'v'~,-' Rohm: Okay. Well -- and I think that Commissioner Newton-Huckabay spoke to that before you got up. So, thank you. ~'~ ~~ Borup: Mr. Canfield? ~'~~ ~~, ~~. Canfield: Yes. ,.s -_. j~~~; Borup: I guess I'd just like to echo my feelings on that -- on that construction entrance ~ from Meridian. I think that, obviously, for the people that live there that's an important matter and I think that makes a lot of sense that that's the way it should go. I don't know .r if you need specific written permission from the state or by the time they found out about - it you would be done, but -- '{'~~ Canfield: Well, we still would maintain a stockpile of gravel on the site in order to -- fi ~~~ ~~. Borup: The real world. Canfield: -- in order to maintain that exemption status, so -- and we could make it a condition with the contractors that that is the site that has to be used for ingress and egress. ;; :ray. '4 ~~ ~. x~ Borup: Okay. Thank you. ~~~~~~ Baird: Mr. Chair? I have got a question about that. Who owns the underlying fee? Is it the Meridian Greens folks? Okay. So, it's possible, then, you could negotiate with ;„ :~ them for a temporary construction easement. -~ ~ ~.:: ,.~, Rohm: Go ahead and respond to that at the mike if you would, please. + L ~ 1F ~~~~ ' Canfield: I do believe it's the state of Idaho that does regulate the access to that point i *~ nto and out of there. But Oaas Laney just recently purchased that and we have an f ' agreement with them to use part of that for a sewer easement, but the actual curb access onto the highway state of Idaho regulates. We tried to get an access point out ~, =~~~ there and the state of Idaho said no. Period. No. :~ Rohm: I think it's suffice to say that we would like to see you have an alternate a ~-~; ~:~ ~. construction entrance during the majority of the subdivision development itself. 'kri 8 ~' ';~ . ~ i~~„ ~~,y . ~; :-.: ~a~.:., r,>,~ -_ ,~,•i~ ~;;, k ~i ~` „~y :'F;' t -~~; ~,. y, d ,,w:: ,~_ . ~; ~:~,~_ b~ ; .~:<? 'i ~~: ~~s~<, ITV' fV2.~ .s;;~i °«;? ;. ,,:;> ., ~ ,; ~3~ Meridian Planning & Zoning a August 3, 2006 Page 48 of 56 Canfield: I believe we can accommodate that. Rohm: Okay. Thank you. 0 Hood: Mr. Chair? I'm not going to be a killjoy about this, but I think I better bring it up just because it's something that's in the back of my mind. If there were to be an accident on the state highway I would feel bad for not at least bringing it to your attention. And that's having big trucks turning in -- left into this site across where people are going 55. If you actually bring them to the intersection that's going to be signalized this next year when the actual construction traffic for this subdivision is going to be coming on the site, it may be a little safer and just bring that up just because we are requiring that access to go away when Victory Greens goes away and so it will be there for seven or eight more years is what they have leased from Oaas Laney, but it's really not a good idea to have those large trucks trying to slow down in the middle of a state highway at 55 miles an hour and turn left across traffic to get on a dirt road that has a pretty steep incline, we are talking two, three trailers on some of these big trucks that have -- you know, so I'm not trying to -- Borup: What if it's aright-in, right-out? Hood: And that may be better. You still have trucks trying to, you know, slow down and get off the interstate where there isn't a decel lane, but that helps, I think. Just to bring - - just a thought that came into my mind. I'm sorry to -- Rohm: No. That's what we have these hearings for. Thank you. Baird: Mr. Chair? Rohm: Mr. Baird. Baird: And to piggy back on top of that, if you're going to fashion a condition of approval in that regard, you might want to get on the up and up with Idaho Transportation Department, so they can use that with their approval. They would probably -- you would probably want to have them give thumbs up or thumbs down on that. Something to consider. Rohm: Yeah. I was kind of thinking that we would just suggest that they attempt to create something where they minimize the obstruction -- or the construction traffic to the existing property owners and just leave it at that. Baird: That would work. Rohm: Rather than make it a condition of approval. ?''v 3`. ?•' T rp f:i z~ ~~ z. f :.a,-. 'rr5c '~"fi~; -~_ >.:,~- ;;*-- ~~~$a ~~ ~~ ;,~ 'JN ~~: "4• k i.% `; ':,:g- . ~;~. LLy~.{> 4; ::~;~ ;~z . :: ~ ~ ~ y:~ ~ ~! . ,r ~. Meridian Planning & Zoning ~ O August 3, 2006 Page 49 of 56 Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Chairman, Idon't -- I'm possibly in agreement. We don't need to make it a condition of approval, but I would like -- I don't think we should abandon the idea of creating -- exploring that option of that as a construction entrance, even if it were as a right-in, right-out. I don't want -- I very clearly think it should be at least explored. Rohm: I don't disagree with that. I just -- if we make it a condition of approval that they use that and, then, there is objections from Idaho Department of Transportation or ACHD, then, are we right back to square one. And so I hesitate to make it a condition of approval I guess is my -- that's just my thoughts. Hood: Mr. Chair? You can sure word a condition if approved by ITD thou shalt use Meridian Road as your access for construction traffic and, then, if ITD doesn't approve it, they are back to going through the subdivision. And so a substitute condition you have left yourself that out if they don't get approval from the agency granting that permit, if that's the direction you choose. Rohm: Okay. All right. Newton-Huckabay: That would be my preference to have that -- at least that strong wording. Rohm: Okay. Good. Borup: I agree with that. Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Chair, I actually had a couple of questions. I think Caleb answered one. The Victory Road intersection improvement is 2007? Hood: Yeah. I think construction and -- Mr. Chair and Commissioner Newton- Huckabay -- that is up for construction I think this fall even, with opening in 2007. Or it's construction and open in 2007, too. I can't remember exactly. But it's in the next 12 or 15 months anyway, there should be a signalized intersection at Victory and State Highway 69. Newton-Huckabay: And, then, Eagle -- the Eagle and Victory there is '08, too, which -- Hood: I think that one got pushed back a year. Newton-Huckabay: '09? Hood: Because it was scheduled to '07. No, it was scheduled for this next year and I think they pushed that back to '08. Newton-Huckabay: And where is Locust Grove in the mix on that? ~; Y,.4 '' ~ O • Meridian Planning & Zoning August 3, 2006 ~~ s ~~: ~~~.y i~ Page 50 of 56 4 '~ Hood: The overpass is -- well, they are working on the Fairview to Franklin section this year, I believe. Same with -- the overpass ran into some snags and I can't remember 'k " -~" what it was right now. ~, 'V ~~~' Newton-Huckabay: When we had the hearing for property they had to move a house or `~' something. w~t}~: Hood: Yeah. But that's -- they are all within, you know, a year of each other, all those -.~~ projects. ~ i ~ ~ ', Newton-Huckabay: Will that overpass create the signalized access at Locust Grove and Victory there as well? Does that project put the light in? Hood: I have not heard about a signal there. t x~' ~~,~, - Borup: That's a mile away. t . ,.., ~. ~ ~~t y`~~?~` ~~ Hood: Probably not far off, but -- Newton-Huckabay: What's the -- ~ Borup: Overland. ~ , j~ ~ ,~ ~ Newton-Huckabay: Oh, it's -- I was off. ., , ;~ ~` a;ir~~ ;:, Borup: A mile. ~~ ~~' Newton-Huckabay: Well, when I was a kid here it was a block. Okay. So, that intersection we don t Locust Grove and Victory -- I don t remember seeing it either, so 4: i; -- okay. ;~~ ,~:rt~, `'~ Hood: I imagine it's on a plan somewhere. I don't think it's in the top, you know, five ra ~~f~~~ .. _ years to be signalized. Newton-Huckabay: Okay. And a stop sign in neighborhoods, you just have to apply to ,,.w ,;;- ACHD for those? Is that how -- ' ` V hA Hood: Mr. Chair, Commissioner Newton-Huckabay, what happens with your final plat - r;_ „:~ when it goes to ACRD, they actually have a traffic engineer look at the subdivision, say ,~` you need a stop sign on this side of the intersection, on that side of the intersection, or ~~ where ever they deem them necessary. So, that's how stop signs get put in. Now, after the fact if a -- some folks, a homeowners association or something thinks that they need w a one somewhere else, they will reevaluate it after the fact, but initially that's how your stop signs get put in with your subdivisions is the traffic services person at ACHD. ;ar ~~ Newton-Huckabay: Okay. Thank you. ~; f~& r, v ..'g'am t - ,r t '~3~,~'yr~{ I i'. v`i ' Meridian Planning & Zoning - ;, August 3, 2006 +" +, ,, Page 51 of 56 Rohm: Mr. Chairman? #' Rohm: Commissioner Borup. 1 a6; ,, ~., Borup: Just -- I had one question that probably needs to be addressed to staff and that's on the house orientation and I think that mostly makes sense. I think -- I think it ~~ complicates things to get too restrictive on construction requirements, but I notice you do have that in the site specific requirements. So, I did have a comment on three of the °'~~ lot requirements. The reasoning is so that -- like side yards or against like yards, but ,, ` three of the lots with the designated orientation that it does not accomplish that, ~.:~ because each lot side is different, so it's going to be unlike no matter which way the ~ house is oriented. So, I'm wondering if it makes that much difference on those -- I'm ! r,` specifically talking about Lot 4, Block 1, and, then, Lot 3 and Lot 14, just those three , r + lots, that if that's a little restrictive to specify the exact orientation on those. Plus, it gets complicated on staff -- I mean on enforcing that for the department, too. Comments there. Hess: Commissioner Borup, I guess that's entirely at your discretion whether or not you would like to strike that from the staff report. The reasoning behind that was -- I mean if you look at the site plan here, these lots are all oriented northwest and the majority of this lot -- or north-south, sorry. And the majority of this lot does -- or north-south. Sorry. And the majority of this lot does orient north-south and the same with this one down here, these are all, you know, angular and this direction, you know, parallels this one as well, so -- Borup: Which would put the front of this looking at the backyard of that one. Hess: Well, like you said, regardless -- fir` Borup: Right. ~~ `~ Hess: -- it's going to -- "`a' Borup: Well, and say it may be able to go in at an angle. It's going to depend on the "` ~ ' house design and such on those two. Same thing here. Could be somewhat of an ;, ~;~ angle. I don't know how much room there would be there. And this one could go -- `' either way you're going to be against the backyard. Again, you know, just getting too ` ~ restrictive just makes it harder for enforcement is my only thought on that. The others I ~, ~ ' don't think -- you know, the others that are designated, you know, there is probably not ~.~ any other direction they would be able to put a house on anyway. Except for -- well, :, ~ that corner one maybe. Is that a concern for any of the Commissioners or it doesn't `; ~ matter? K Rohm: Well, your point is well taken. ~, _, :~¢~-..?%`::i"e,~Y,,,4'$„~^"~=3`~,i yx ~ I j i.,~ Y 3k ~~f, ~,. f r F- ~. ' .v v •r ~~ ~_~ {{ , a" i b.: i ~ ' t t 4 I L ;. : a: <'vb'~:,;,:.~ `C~~ v uf tt # + .; :~;c y.~ ~3 !~~ 'L "~, { ~ N I 4f I , . ~ AH. A a~la i5'~'~,-.i~yF.9~f1P,af8 ~R %i I .... ! '.,t~~ iii F ~r 3 . i`3 s i . . -". .... h..R ,~;•: ~. ` k€.'S ;~Y,I ? .. ' ~ Y 511 r 11 _ , 1R 4- f ;; ~~ € .I T~ } ~ r . :~ ,;~%xx - '~.~'s <~. W 4. i t - Hi~k _;v~. ..t,~--. ~ y°f,~~C,~~. ~• ~ (± M' ) I ~ ~ ~ {s'{" ~+.• ~ ~... ; fr ~ ~ni~ (4^ry ,~7 ~4 .K.:'.,4Y.`:y7.?Fp~'t .; ~,''~„ ~„.~* 11f~Er .~. r K F' y ~ . ~ ar. ' .. .. .. _ • .. , .} .a a.. .. • ~~~ f~"f rS .. .. .... . . I~ ~ ~ `~ z .., '~i- ~ .~ F . `" { ~ f ' ~ .. 1 a. 4 i. h ~ .. .4 F .., r, 1... .. .. n` 3 y .~ ~+ J. k ` ' lk e'' . . .. .. . fiy "`•~~ ^ YA! F .. .~. .. . ; ,i ~k ~^ ; :'X.rYY II I i , }~~. . '¢.~~ ~e~i "Y, A ~ ' ~ E:! fi 4 ~.n . v.F / S•Y ~ F ~ ~~ ~ ~ f A~i p ~ n ?~p ~~ r . .' . ~z'#~ I~ ~' S•#S .f 1 f~f ~ r `~ if . .kf.;' .r:,~ `•;x ,:.~ ~,~r~,~ :~~t p • ' 4; h ~:. , ;;: . .. ~:'. ~ ' , u%° ~'t^~r` I " ~' ~'1 " ~`"• •' , ±;j. u ~.. 1m t -{ ~ j s, ~u "~~~~!,~~f.~ .j:+ y? ~'£ }' ^ s S~..i~ Y ~{s ~ , ~ R~'~ ~'~ T.c ~' l, ~(~` tr.,.. ~~ 'h .^.~1. ~ . i ~ ' ir[e. 'd }'!' • ~'' ; ' k . " C ~. ~F .y' ,g 2 ' ! ,yj, . ~ ~ ~ l ~ ^ , X5 F ~ ~ .dn ':;~~ yir G'[~~ .rYi~'V.. y ~ 1 ~ ~n~1 Y. 4 +r ~~>a" : '~ ` ~ 'tn „~' i Ic C. ~ ,. , :. .r .~. ~ F < ,.a.!.N ~ j J ' ~~ ~ , ~~+, r`•';;%tr 'i ^ f•` ~ ~ 3' iY ,'.,a ~ C' .3,.? ~~' 'ice. '.{u~ .~- 4: ~ .} _ z.. !~t ~ 9 d ..AI { I .}f ?;, ..r ~i~tia~i•.L z ' t ,C~ . ,R - :.~ ~: r "t. .C l., :i r , ,~. ~ ,. d. ~,.. ,F;. ~'r~ 1 ~'~ ~ '• ' ; ~ J r ~ . ^; P~.' "i I f te 4~,., ~ ,~.~,,~ Y ~. ~ 4'}tg:_- if .. S ' fi - ,s ., . x 3 t .r ~^ :0..•.:d i 5 : fi; fi " ^ ~ " .,+,, ~ ~ x.,, + ~ ~~e.: I L ::~N{~ '.'„Y '~'{:w {y;`, ~ iat`^' f~ I k~~` .~Miry' ~'~ .!~• !~-` ~rl~ ` ± , . '~x'; ; ^ ' a~ I ~ e . : : ~ ~ F :~;: - % .~~3 t ~.T„rc: .,,~,,yy ~ a 1 Iht::r*,. Yfr' •.i.+~i. q ~ 3` ~ .i ,i ,~ u"'~ I! l fit., ~l { ~, ll'>::... .F,r; r.:da''. ' ~ L ' ~ ~ ' ,~ .r G~>^ ~-s ~r .,,~+ ~+ ~ 'l : n . ~ L'~ } . ` v ~ tiF ti I ice ~ 'A ' # ~ ~ 4 A.~i ~ S t{ 'V~ k,: 1 ( , + . ~ F f. } 4~'"~ B I 1°' . j ~ 9 ' r't2'•` 're~ ._:'~'+.ly. ~ .' " ` A~ - ~~k '~yy ~ ' ~ a ~~ A ~ ~ ~ x E ,4 . `ry , ~ ? , 3 . ~, s, ¢ ~..~ r ~~ ^ • ' ~ ~ ~ { l d ~ ~ "• .~~ J~tt+ ' v4 W T# t r ~ i ~ h ~ ~ ~ . • yv~~~. k' y .~~ T'4 I ~ k `" .L ii C S ~] j .~.,ix..wM':"S''-e~ " . ~l e Y kt• ' ~ ., :t~`'rsY:2%s-r!r8~#~:$.b .'.`. ~ l..Si'4 '.. .': 1 : k ^ I lr ~. .:i ~ ~'! 1 ~, ~Y ~ 4. r ~ ~ F `•/v: ;v.-~' .f~~F 's: .. 4.. ):tL_'.S. e:'..;.' Meridian Planning & Zoning ~ O August 3, 2006 Page 52 of 56 Moe: Yeah. I agree. Newton-Huckabay: So, you're suggesting, then, that we strike -- Borup: Well, I'm saying that's a concern. Newton-Huckabay: You pointed out -- on three you pointed out I think you have a valid point and I would particularly -- at the bottom. I can't see what number that one is. Is that three? Borup: Three. Newton-Huckabay: On three -- well, all three of those. Borup: A lot of it's going to depend on the house design, which you don't know what's going to happen there. I would hope that the builder would be cognizant of that and -- I mean if they do something that's going to be too obnoxious it's going to hurt their sales value, so -- Newton-Huckabay: Do you have a suggested rewording in that? Borup: Well, someone -- if we have it in there, someone's got to try to enforce it and I -- Rohm: I'm not opposed to just striking that one. Borup: Oh, the whole thing? And the others -- I mean the others make sense that they should be oriented that way, but it's probably the way they are going to be built anyway. There is not a lot of choice. Moe: I guess I would ask one question. I mean I'm in agreement with you, but at the same point I did not hear the applicant -- Borup: I know. I should have brought it up to the applicant. I probably should have asked them that, but -- Moe: They did not take exception to it within the report, so -- j Borup: But they are not building the houses or trying to enforce that it happens that way. Moe: Again, I think that's a valid point there, so -- I have no problem with -- Newton-Huckabay: I suggest we strike 1.2.6. Moe: I agree with you. ~~~+• ,~~;A: •;,._ s _ , ~, ~~. ~, .~ ~~~;,: _= ~~. ~:~~~ ~: ~,f~ ., 4 ~. `v. ~,u ~~ ;;,; . f _.;: i; `" 3 s. ' ~`~ ~ s 2 ~r ;cy, t~~,k.~-~~1 H. V a ~ ~~: rz u.; ~t ,z; ,~, t~:~. tfs~:n. :~; a:'~= ,;,•. ;- ; h~ ,~ r, ~fi-; Meridian Planning & Zoning August 3, 2006 Page 53 of 56 Borup: All of it, rather than just those specific lots? Newton-Huckabay: Yes. Rohm: Any other discussion of this application before we close it? Newton-Huckabay: Do we need to word smith a construction entrance? Borup: I think what was just stated, whoever stated that. Newton-Huckabay: Well, nobody is going to claim it, so -- Borup: I didn't say it. That it shall be used as a construction entrance if approved by ITD? Something to that effect. Moe: Actually, you have been taking great notes. I hope you're anticipating making a motion. Borup: Me? ,' Moe: I haven't. Borup: I didn't have any notes. Newton-Huckabay: Okay. One -- do you want to close the hearing? Rohm: Well, let me just state two things that -- from the staff report perspective that need to be stricken and before -- on items 1.2.5 strike 36 and put 34 feet there and, then, strike all of 1.2.6. And those are the only two changes -- Hess: I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman, it's, actually, 34 feet and 36 feet. There just needs to be an addition. Rohm: Oh, 34 and 36. Okay. Thank you. And, then, strike the 1.2.6 and then -- Borup: The other option of that would say it's recommended that they orient that way, but not required. I don't know if it's that important. Rohm: Well, I think that if -- I think that if you strike it they are going to orient those houses one way or the other anyway, so that -- I don't think that we have to speak to that if -- from your comment. Newton-Huckabay: Amanda, do you have a preference that you would like to recommend houses are oriented that way? ;_.,~~{~ ...:-X-:::. ~~' t ~' Meridian Planning & Zoning August 3, 2006 ,; ~;` Page 54 of 56 .;; ~; Hess: Well -- obviously, we had a preference, because we -- sorry, Commissioner i ~~~. Newton-Huckabay, Obviously, we had a preference, because it was included in the staff ~~, ; report, but -- ~... ~~ ~~~~ u~ Newton-Huckabay: No, I'm not asking the preference whether or not -- we are going to ,;;~ change it, we are either going to recommend striking it or we are going to recommend just recommending it. Hess: Right. h. ~~~ ? Newton-Huckabay: So, I'm asking your preference -- ~~" ~"' ~ Hess: It'd probably be easier, I would imagine, just to strike it. Newton-Huckabay: Okay. Okay. Do we need a 1.2 point something for the _ construction entrance or -- . f ~ ~":". ~f Moe: 1.2.11. t .1f~~ ~E ~~ ~~ Borup: Or it could be six. Replace it with the one you struck. _ ~ Newton-Huckabay: Just replace it with -- okay. I'll do that. We will do that. ~~: ;. r Rohm: Okay. Then, at this point let's close the -- close the meeting. ~, 4, ~ `~ fi Borup: Hearing. ? ; ~ =S~ ~;,r~; Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Chair, I recommend we close the Public Hearing on AZ 06-036 _ .., and PP 06-039. l ,j; n.~ 'T° Moe: Second. ~4+ ~ ~~~ ~~ Rohm: It's been moved and seconded that we close the Public Hearing on AZ 06-036 ~: and PP 06-039, both related to Bitterbrush Point Subdivision. All those in favor say aye ' ~ ~: Y° + . Opposed same sign? Motion carried. 1 ~'" c ~ sue. ~ e~*~ ~~~ ~ ~ MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT. ;. F ~ = Rohm: Commissioner Newton-Huckabay, you're on. °n ;~~~~ Cole: Mr. Chair, if I may. I'm sure Commissioner Newton-Huckabay remembered, but if you could change -- Public Works comment 2.2 to reference the memo I would `~ r~ r~` appreciate it. Thank you. , ` ~` Newton-Huckabay: Thank you. I'm writing my 1.2.6. ,- >~~. ~r ~~ ~> °,, {E. -._ti: . _~ ,. >y r-,` r ;w ,~,; : ; . :~.1. ,f ~,~~ Meridian Planning & Zoning e O August 3, 2006 Page 55 of 56 Rohm: Good. Newton-Huckabay: Okay. Applicant will use the current access on Meridian Road as a temporary construction access if approved by ITD. Do we need to put aright-in, right- out preference or ITD would probably make that -- Rohm: I think ITD would make that determination. Yes. Newton-Huckabay: Okay. After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to recommend approval to the City Council of file numbers AZ 06-036 and PP 06- 034 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of August 3rd, 2006, with the following modifications to the condition of approval: The first one being that condition 1.2.5 will be reworded to say dedicate and construct all internal roadways at 34 and 36 foot street sections. And the remainder of the sentence will remain the same. Item 1.2.6 in its current state will be removed and replaced with: Applicant will use the current access on Meridian Road as a temporary construction access if approved by ITD. And, finally, item number 2.2 in the staff report that starts with the applicant shall be responsible to install a temporary off-peak pumping station, et cetera, will be replaced with the new comment from the memo from Mike Cole dated August 1st, 2006, with his new 2.2 comment that begins with: The applicant shall be responsible to install a temporary peak flow storage system in a location coordinated with the Public Works Department, et cetera and so forth to the end of his comment on that memo. Is that -- end of motion. 1 Moe: Second. Borup: Second. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded that we forward onto City Council recommending approval of AZ 06-036 and PP 06-039, to include all staff comments with the aforementioned modifications. All those in favor say aye. All opposed same sign? Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT. Rohm: Thank you for coming in. Moe: Mr. Chairman, I move we adjourn. Newton-Huckabay: Second. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded we adjourn. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? a. Y.1~ i P p Meridian Planning & Zoning August 3, 2006 t~~+ ~ • Page 56 of 56 f ,1>~,_~ ;fir MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT. ,~ _ . ~ Rohm: Meeting adjourned. ~~~ ~ _ MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:50 P.M. 4~ Y 1 ~j q ~~ ~; ~~ RY (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.) ~~k~-~` ~:~ .,` APPROVED: I ,~ ;~~H< MICHAEL ROHM -CHAIRMAN DATE APPROVED ~~~"""'~-~~, `\~~~, ,,,~~~ \ ~ P ,i \~ T \ ~O " ~'~ ATTESTED: _ WILLIAM G. BERG JR., CkTY L E . ~~~ s ~?' „, S ~, ~ -g~ ~ T 1 ~~ ~' ~~ . .~ ~ ' t~= ~ yon (~~~.~ `~~: ~ ~ u xo j~~ ~~~1l~tllr~l 1i~1+~~~~~ ,~' ~ }:a~ a s F ~~ -~ ,iF \~~ j f'' .r 1 ~. ; 7, ~ _1 . Y R ` ~ ~. :l ' :iy: ~1.<y~, ~ l ~ ' ~~~ t S i „'A'g:: .~~ _ h~N i'~ >~ S ~~ r ~,: S ~:{ ;~, ~~ w,< t ' ~, ;~~ ~ti ,, ~; ~'~ ~`,'' _ ~~ . ~. <. I`F F~ Y2 ~„ ~~, ~M '~ '6, - ~` rf '1 ~~. ~~,'~ '~ +~' ~;, FF• 4ti 4'. ~~ n =.i s ra 1' .~ ~~ per ~, ~ ~i ' V I '*Cy~ _ 'SK* x~_.~' ' h; ~, ~. i X' } ~ 'A"~ ~ :.$ J~, s r r - { y d ~ n fi} ct V Mfr ~ {~:1 , < ~ r n1~ ,r v •~ '~~ ~ s ~~ ' ~z~i~', ~ ~ ,' , 1 _ ~~. J ~t ~: ~~ ~ ~. ~ ~~ _ .:~ ~~ L ~~~ , , ' ti wy..,~t ue ~ s ~~ uY ``s ' ~~Y tgyf~ ' ~Y' ~ ~'~-Y r ~ .`` I ((,, ~... ~ VZ ~ :'.1. { WL {~ .a R a fy .. .~~ . 5 4A. '~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ s~ ~ , '~ f ' .. ~ i '' 'i .A ,. ~ r _ ~ -i _ '~~' * '~ f $ rye. .. ~ ~"q~ ~ ~~C .'~.t. J ~e:-i. _ T'~~5. '1.~ t tiS r ~~~A~. :'f ~ _: :k.. ~ U • July 31, 2006 MERIDIAN PLANNING 8~ ZONING MEETING August 3, 2006 APPLICANT ITEM NO. 3-A REQUEST Approve Minutes of July 6, 2006 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting 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 ,,..~:a ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~, l~ f~ ~ (~a,/U ~-~- ~~~ Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. :'y~; ~~~r ' :,_>>} .+ {. rfi 1 ,~~ h ;`. :r,~~ ~.; _ ;;~,:, .liy 5~, ~~~ ''~:~' ~E ~.h,,. ti 4, ~_ ,`t .~i. ~, ..; `.'~.``.h~, ~;-;; t_ ., .,...: ,. .'.r : \' J ~~; r: ~Y. .. rya ~:~:, _,; ti> A, ,; r` "~'s ~; -- 0 July 31, 2006 CUP 06-019 MERIDIAN PLANNING 8~ ZONING MEETING Avgust 3, 2006 APPLICANT H&H Utility Contractors, Inc. ITEM NO. 3-6 REQUEST Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: 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 HS~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: ~ ° Iu COMMENTS See Attached Findings ~~~ Emailed: (Y1~, ,~a~taff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. ~ .~' ,~ ® ® ~~ _rt ~~ .:, JUL ~ ~ X006 ~~ il~~~"'~f ~11C~1~. i lk'y" riw 14X'! a<~~ I~ { CITY OF MERIDIAN ,; ~."~ ~~ FINDINGS OF FACT CONCLUSIONS OF - r. ''~ ~ ua.Ltle,~ ~~ LAW AND DECISION & ORDER o-~° 4 ~~,~ ~,, t __-~-- .Y' In the Matter of Conditional Use Permit for Equipment Rental, Service, Outdoor Storage, and Commercial Offices in the C-G zone, by H & H Utility Contractor's Inc. Case No(s).: CUP-06-019 ':~` ~' For the Planning & Zoning Commission Hearing Dates of: July 6 and July 20, 2006 ti (findings approved on August 3, 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,~ :` ' 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 (LC. §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-SA. 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) 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-06-19 -PAGE 1 of 4 ~~ `~I ,'.~' ~~, ~+r~ rt -:~, ~: ; ~:~ *~;: ~;:~, _`~ t~ ,:` ~_~~: :.. v~F a ~ ~~ ~},~'• 11 a a t " ~ ~ ° ~ ~ ~ ~ ~x % 'F s '' ~ ~ ~ ~ .b,: x R ' .~ . v+`~~ e 1 `'c.;Nt ~«i~ ~,,; ~:~,. r ~1 ~usll ~ t'~$' ~~~Y.., I ~ u`G` "~ t '~ ~ ~~ ~ } ~ ~ . .v,.;8. . ; ~*' -;, y , '. ;l .s.; .~ ' „r ~;':.,•.".. ~.)ti.• .'.+•".r..~ :~ i ~ I.~.,I r, ,aL• ';:t`: . , >. ~;":: ~: -'~3 %^;~: ~I F ~ ! h". . . f a > 'd•3 1 'q ~ t r i I ~: . :i ~I ~ i.: as :•~ ~; .lira:!`+~H~yia; r• gin; - ~ ! .;`: ._ z , 3 ~ ~ , ..~ : . ,. ,. .~x, . ~•4= :' , , .;r.. . .. -~ .~ .. -~,;~ ~.~ . vim-.s~ :~ . ,~~.: .,t... ~ ... ' ~ ~' f ~, ~• " . M~ ~ ' ~ ` ~ ~ 3~. ', ,(. 'I . r,: ~)' . . EMI!'. ~.5: r , .1 1 } ~ , ~ ~"l M:~ I` t+ A ~+;~,. k,e ny'+5': 4 . , .vs ~t~.~r. .~~~yt ~,ny Ai ~ Y I ~ ; 1} f 1 •~. ~. r '~~;~. e '.' 7 ~ L . 1 ~ ~ r ~•. °6alFS?~Y, 6 j~ ~ 1 . ~fl n ~ S ~ •9. .. .'~ . ~ . f 1 I .. 1 ta ' i, C :: { ~ R . ~. ~ , ' . ~. - I I ~ ~ a i~.-~,sy: k ',"~s","y,~ ~n~ c +~ ~ •: a ~"r . ~ ~ ~ .,.t~c?.fi ,l- .i r.; aye. ..? ~~ ~ ' .., . ~ v' ~ ~; y ' 1r' ,a ~1 ~ ~i ti ~ >t, ~ . ...~, ~ ,,,,.. 1"r.~v=' t b`..•{.' a ~. ,~ ~ :~. ; ~ yg %, ad k ' . ' '• ~ ~ ; ~ S . ~y.. ~ ` r~ e , d ~ ~p •$ : `~. ~ . . ' / . ~5 Jt ~:'x . ~' ~ ''t~ ` gy " ~ ~ ~ , .. ~Y~~ I :~~r :.iAr :~4. .. r;;'~~.' ~ i y~~~' ,' S , -: •.w+,:.i: i ~ : •i , p . `~X i ~' fy ~~ , '~ ` ' `L• E .. .. ~' i;IS.y' ' "SSS J Hf~ :i"~ i ` 1.: ~ 3 ~ F: Jj ,~ ~ m ` ' ,f~ ) il. ~ ~ v ~ " ' ~ •?"' a,. ~' +" A.' Y g > r""~,i ` .ri k Gyr t ~i+ v' • t;. ~~ ~ ~: :.I : ~ : : : F ~ ~ .. ~. ~ ~ , ct. &'s.:t .syFsix• d. ~~ Y~ ` , , ~,,..,~ , yj~;. ^~:i'i-$ {.~, ;± ;t~~. I~ ~ ~ ; ' , ~~, .r< ~ . .~ k~~'v`~.',.1 "'?`.f 2 ° y,a ¢~ ~ ,^ F .: ~F•: :js .r-s~y,} ir~t~~ H ~I .~ 4 ~. l ' "~. ~: ,, Y$ I` ?r ~.p ~n:V#k': ~ ~h ~^ ! 1 S 1'Y 7~~~Yg' ~ #k » ~a:;~: ~ ~ ~ I t~'i r 7 ~ 4 f~%~Z'iti, ti K'V ~~.r.~t-. ~ ~~ ~ ' h. ' ~ .. .r 6 , ~ 5 ; _ ,'. - `', ~ o :7 `~~ 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 aa; 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-SA and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein `~ z: adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 4. 1. The applicant's Site Plan as evidenced by having submitted the Site Plan dated April ~~ 2006; and, "~ ~; 2. The following modifications to site specific conditions were made at the Planning & ~ Zoning Commission hearing on July 20, 2006: Condition 1.3 was modified to allow the w applicant to maintain the area to the south of the outdoor storage, rather than fence it ,;,t, off, and required the applicant to keep all lifts, extensions, risers, etc. to be stored in the down position; Condition 1.4 was modified to allow minor maintenance of the vehicles ~: ° to be performed on this site; and Condition 1.7 was modified to require the applicant to _ coordinate the type of dust-abatement material for the outdoor storage area, prior to CZC submittal. '` 3. The site specific and standard conditions of approval are as shown in the attached Staff '~ t;~ 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 ' ~ CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). CUP-06-I9 -PAGE 2 of 4 u '. 'yi ;ii t~ ~3~ ~~~.:~~° k , t;:: ,," . ~ ~° ~~~. ~;~*?• m _ - €,~-. ;y nL ~~~ .:t ~ ' ~'" t %~.; ~ s~ ._~ r y~t,. ~- 4~ ,.~~ ~ ~~ ~~~ d 1 tq~, i ~ - v $.rf.r4C at ~ ; fix: } r 4 i "~1, ,p T" ry, ~.~ 5 ~ ~. E~~} ~ , ~. ~ ;~~ -, ~:, s -,... tag ~'i C r,; k ~ ~ ) ~' ~k ~.b, ~, -~k~,. 'r ~x . f ';~ .. m ~tlb~~t~7 ~„ ',~ I .:. ;;:F1 ti ~'~ :~ t'E :~, ~` ~;`~f ~: ~~ A ~. 1 :~ P: ;fig >;ib •' { ~, ,,; ~, f u 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-SB-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 maybe 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 maybe 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 maybe 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-06-19 -PAGE 3 of 4 n~~ ~ S ~~j ~{t~ ;,i, R A~. :i:. ~ F, tt~~~ ~, 5 r1 C ~ ~~~ rrk ~u,: x°41 ~ t ~ ~ t t H 3 ~ v' ~'~ ~n t " ~ r ~ tr ~ z ... '~~+ ~ as yam- y .'.L J.. ~1 S ~ } „ 1CE r ~'. t~ Lil' ~ r .. ~~~~ 2J Y~. 4 ~ `Y '{T' yy ~`~ r,;_ "' ~t r ~`~`~. ., . - -r'-'-'- 'kt ~ A_ '~ i vx, ~~ 1 ~ l"j T `~ ~- 5 ~ - ~ ~1.. ~ _ r,ay 7 ' f ~~: ` y i f~~#~ ` h - ,i `. •1. d` Z ~~ r } #~ f ~;yp 2! tia~K c ,r& ~., t 1 ~. ~ {`:;<' ~~, `:= << ~~~, ..,, ;. ;,rr ~; r :'s»:~~'-~1' .: . ~.a, ,.4 >:a;-. ~~~~f~_ ~',-~< •;:~ ~~ ,r= .. ~~': '~: a'l,b. ~'"'~~ ti. d M+< GAS r; -1` :t` .~~~ia ~~; ~~: ~~~ >. ~; .: ~* ~~:; °1t :; rr ,; : s~' ~, Y'i} o ~- By action of the Planning & Zoning Commission at its regular meeting held on the ~ ~ day of , 2006. COMMISSIONER MICHAEL ROHM VOTED (CHAIR) COMMISSIONER DAVID MOE VOTED COMMISSIONER WENDY NEWTON-HUCKABAY VOTED COMMISSIONER KEITH BORUP VOTED ~~c~~ COMMISSIONER DAVID ZAREMBA ~ VOTED Pc1~S C A M EL ROHM Attest: _~ap~ ®IF ~''~,,, ° L ~/ /~ ~ ~ Tara Green, Deputy €ity lerk~~`'~. ~: ~~ ~P 1~~ ' a~ Copy served upon Apprf~ a ~\~epartment, Public Works Department and City Attorney. By: ~ ~~ W~ ~ , ~`V~,"~ ~ '® Dated: ~ ~ ~~ City Clerk CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). CUP-06-19 -PAGE 4 of 4 ., '; CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANK DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HF~NNG DATE OF JULY 6, 2006 E'°:' `~ ~' y ~ - .1 h ` STAFF REPORT Hearing Date: 7/6/2006 Approved on 7-20-06 , " '_ '~ #'`., ~a TO: Planning & Zoning Commission ` I ' i` `' ,. .. ; I FROM: Caleb Hood, Current Planning Manager - ~~'~~~~~'-~'~ r ~ ~+ l9 a,13is ~ ~, Ir, SUBJECT: H & H Utility Contractors, Ina --{ ~; __ ~J CUP-06-019 ~~'~~'' - ~ ~ ~ - ° ~~~ : n„ Conditional Use Permit for Equipment Rental, Service, Outdoor Storage, and ;R Commercial Offices in the C-G zone, by H & H Utility Contractor's Inc. ~'~, 1. SUMMARY DE5CRII'TION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST y The applicant, H & H Utility Contractors, Inc., has applied for Conditional Use Permit approval to s' ~~' operate an equipment rental, service, outdoor storage, and commercial office facility in the C-G (General Retail and Service Commercial District) zone. The subject site is located on the south side of Franklin Road, approximately 700-feet west of Meridian Road. rl 2. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION ~; Staff has provided a detailed analysis of the requested application below. Staff recommends approval of '`~4 CUP-06-019 for H & H Utility Contractors, Inc. as presented in the Staff Report for the hearing date of July 6, 2006, subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit B. On July 20, 2006 the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission voted to approve the subject application with the modified conditions in Exhibit B. 4~ a. Summary of Public Hearings: ~ i. In favor: Patrick McKeegan, Gordon Heath .~ ` ii. In opposition: None ~~ ;I iii. Commentin None g: , iv. Staff presenting application: Caleb Hood _ {~ v. Other staff commenting on application: None •~ b. Key Issues of Discussion by Commission: i. Outdoor storage on this site; ii. Height of new building(s); `' iii. Dust abatement proposed for the outdoor storage area; and, iv. Landscaping. ~r c. Key Commission Changes to Staff Recommendation: °~' i. Required all lifts, extensions, risers, etc. to be fully retracted when stored on this site• and, '`~ ::, ii. Allowed minor maintenance of the fleet vehicles to be done on-site; 3. PROPOSED MOTIONS Approval • =~ After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number CUP- 06-019 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 fiuther move to ~~ ~~ direct staff to prepare an appropriate findings document to be considered at the next Planning and ~ Zoning Commission hearing on Ausust 3 38, 2006. S Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number CUP-06- 4; ~; H & H Utility Contractors, Inc. (CUP-06-019) -Page 1 I .'. Id,,+' F I .i ly l t. .' }, ',.. .:.~F rJ''.tti 4 r ,~: ~ :.} . f • " " . :~ ~ ~ `~`' ii , • x . ,ti ~.+ , , „ t I~~ I .~ ,. ~ ~. I ' .T ~' ;~ : i .' < H„ . *~ Rk' f ~ II #' ~ ~~ , . ' ' r I . ts, : d ! _ :J.' . "i~ ''~$ ~'.`~a:•~4:y u~`,:•g`5 ..x~y ~ ~ ' ~ {j III . }~r~, I ~ i .!. ?'Y s '•~'~.`• ,r "R~'~%~ / .~ M ~ ~ A ~_` `fi •u 1~! ~~ ~ 'i"' . Y ~^q, 't%r-'.F' •~~: .F,~S 1 s :;4 F '~ ';°`.yR , y Y74'.~ j ~ ~K a' •.IN`'~: i.~~'~ d ,~~F ,~,.jj~ 7 , },. $~ I } t ' a ~ ~~/ yi, . f( / ;. i ~i•~: '~ I ~ f' '' i ~ -~ ~ ,: 03?`54. ~;~•'~-'zrI i.Y '\':. `!., e •, z:Y ' 'Z'~k M.'^' ..{p, ~ 4 +'!'r ~r •, : ,'~ F 11 • "s. i`zl ,'F;c ~~.'~ a k'a ~ { { ~ I i ; I ~ ; ~; ",; ,+^ +~~,i , I "'~?1'; YM'~.,Y e;p.H ~ y xe•.1 Y_~.p ~ ~ 1, !•~ ~`,1 YPl '~,~,{'j. Sc d 4 ., '. ~~ Aj ,t'!~? . (;1` 1 ' ~ " "~ + { I ~ •»`~{ • ~~' x . s3. C 1 'f . ti:. . c .:v ~ E,.. 4 :a /•.Sw .; ~ F{A,+f .c.,:,!.p"• yKµ + 1 L I~ .. ~ . . _ ~ • y„ g -y.'T".- e• . Y , . `.: " [ Y 'r :» 7~ "~ i j ' ' , . k ; t ~ d ' Yw: ~': u" i 1' ~XA^~,,~~;,'}k;~,';:g4:m=. ix+,;' S ~ ~ .. . I ~ F I ~. :~-~¢v ;.4~. ~ ~ ` w. ~ .~ '~ ••=~ i. ,:,' .fie-r`~r~. " `¢ ' ' t ~,~x ,S~Sa. xa ,,~ :i•i.'i`: _~'; " i ' . _ I '. ~ ~ '~ i . •I I ~ I ~ t • '/- . ••~S I'~ r.~ w.fr; aSRjG. . 7t y. ! ' `{ j+r( I '+Y . ~ , ;A . ~ III' f Y:~ I a ~~~ ;~ ~, ~ ~ ,y ~ , + '~. .~ ~ ',~ ~ +~f ,. '~'... ~g 6 ~ ( „ ~ t '` '1 4~x.'<l~v'c~i~~ ~L p . y'' ~ ` .pf }L ~,~ f .r y r (.mo y I r ~ ~~ 7d ••. I:~z,' ;~~f 4X, n.p E ~ u ~ ,L ~>S'z:x'r t 1 ~.~- ~ ~ 4 , 4~'a'...,PiF=~;[.}~,,;'`+;f F'i*•' .iy, '~ Sz d SyiFZw ' ~ ° ' ,e Y~ ;; i~^~p . • 4 a ,.1 i . , +.. a.~ 'tx.,,, ~ f . ,°'• Vr,; ;<..z`~ ; s~:: ~ '; " ~x ~•` d' ~` ' ' ~ .a •. ; , e t : i~. " "K'n,'; b±~ r:'L+f.' i+ - + t I + sca ~3~ ti .'. ~ A ~ ~ : ' ~ " ~ ' ~ ~S . :: " •g , , . ' :; .r:~.~y <i.~ . tiir;s.> s f ~'1:. „•:A:~~n~, y rF JI.. ~ I ): y ,}~ ; ^~y a;„A1j~t' (, ^ ^ ' ~ = ~ ~ '.i 3 '' v'~'~~` r ~~~~•}~ ~ ~' "e ~ i. ~~ i 4 , 4"q ~ ~~ j~Y,,, '~~~~ ,, i , %~+ ~"t~ ~ '••x 1. ' ' ` .k ~ c ~ `I • } ; f ~ ~ f , ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ • h ,. r.': { -F> " 3~ j $+w i ~~ .'•:a . i • ~ ' ',efw ~ v. 9~ ea. t 1 .~ , L ' .i~ y p) :.'r§ & 7x, , . ~•T ,•??f i,.. ~ ~ ~ A tl ; x ~ 3 c*'i,'i ~ srF~r . ~.+r,R.v~{cysr~ {,~ n.•'~~`'G "• : wF~',~:~;~~~~ ~'a,~: L .p'~ `F3:fi~'~ ~yT ~.. ~ ^ ~ •Y ~§~•.,9 e''4 :i~f"~• JV';. .. 7P; F, , , I •~ r~~~r `i~,;:,".'Wi't ~. `TS+~~*';~ar:~`, ,'f?,> - i ~I a „ n: , :r ~ ~.r'•S:y.•.. ~`.a?s ~ . ~ ~r t•~e vq• i '~'n'r,>,' '~~Fw I 99t / a ..,~ '~ i~:~., .~': n;. ~. ~~~ ?~' ~ J.q,..x.,y1k L1•'•~r":17.. .:Sk7;vt t ~ I Aie' III ~ • :,1';; °~'„•y~'~' .';•,. I '~.a:: •.%,~•'~;"`~~*%c t~`.-'r ;;e .r '~A: - ~ ' ' ~*Y ~ ~;I I 5 ~ , ~t:;.3 'V~ i '. . ~~ ry `~• • . >e.~i-f7~.'}l`- ;;f. J~ri, _i. t ~~.; ~/, r 4 ~ ~:~: ate, .:~: `9>~ !b':•A'Y~ ' p ~ ' I n N. • ( %Fi_; . ~ ~`~iYF~r,.9~E°A 1:v S I I _ V . F ` y .•..1v.J:p°~ i `kkS t:>s+. .. rf5. ~<a`~,r: F tl ' a ~ •~ 7.F ~ Li t ' f 1"D :'h:`~ ~ 'e q~ w ,> ~~ a ~ ~ y `~' ~•~, ~~ ... 4 %'• tf~x'°FV:m',j3"' i-t, .ik.r y.~ ~•i.. ~1 r .1+" L dA' :• +~> '~ FE 'S' ~' ~ ~ A ~ NN fr~~$ ' ' F •.d;. ~ ~~ ^ i 1 4 ' Xi'.t. ,i~%+,: 'T ' ; , ~ •tf 'ky» f.?~, . . Z•k, S. :i <.a; . • . , ,., • .1 ~~~'1 r• :`<? .. a..ry•,n~ .. ~ . ~ i . .k~ ~.l • k , ,'.,n .5-'ii s, it F' ' ' ~ ~ ` !:~a j : F 'S..4+: 34 ~`.4; °(~Y',}>~'; !'}'•r ,7 ,.y1 ~" ::•:,y'~~'., tWl4:, tK: ~ ~ I I I ~ ' ~ ~ q ; ~ i y. >~ ~+.," ;a`~.~. v..,. ,,~k,a~ I x { ~ ~~" , 9x y,,F S ~ Ybt h7 yt .W F • ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ K P >~ -;:d ~ _ ) I ~ 3:e-?~',• ?~ s' a'.,*~ i~ ;Cz '~: . II~ ~ i.+ ~.s~'x. '...:`d` ... .. :F~ w to ~- ~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANK DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HI~NG DATE OF JULY 6, 2006 rA 019 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 fmdings document to be considered at the next Planning and Commission hearing on July 20, 2006. ~ ;{ s Continuance ~! After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to continue File Number ~~ ' CUP-06-019 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: 225 W. Franklin Road; south side of Franklin Road, approximately ~. - ~ 700-feet west of Meridian Road; Section 13, T3N Rl W .N ~, ~ b. Owners: `'~` Pioneer Exchange Accommodation Title Holder #73, LLC ~'." ~ 703 Americana, Ste. 120 g.' `~ `; Boise, ID 83702 c. Applicant: F H & H Utility Contractor's, Inc. ~~ 200 E. Broadway Avenue ~ ~. `~~ Meridian, ID 83642 , '~~' d. Representative: Patrick McKeegan, Architect 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 to operate an outdoor storage, equipment rental, service, and office facility. The ~ ' applicant is proposing to use the existing buildings on this site and construct additional ;n ,~ structrues for this use. ~` '~® 1. Date of CUP Site Plan/Landscape Plan (attached in Exhibit A): Apri12006 :_ ~;J a ,~ 'I ~~I ~, `.'~1 :;' !~ ~ 4' f ;yi 'r; 5. PROCESS FACTS a. The subject application will in fact constitute a conditional use as determined by the Unified Development Code. By reason of the provisions of UDC 11-SB-6, a public hearing is required before the Planning and Zoning Commission 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 July 10, 2006 6. LAND USE a. Existing Land Use(s): Vacant car dealership b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area: Mixed uses, see below. c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning H & H Utility Contractors, Inc. (CUP-06-019) -Page 2 ~ -,' ~ J ~ a 4 = r ? r. ti'~~ ~t ~ -. , ~ ~ o- ~W ~~:. ~ `~F .'~~.', ` ~ rrr-~.r ~ve~'i~' ~`i" _; ~ ' ~~ ~ 7 . :~.~ ~ _ ~a '~,i ,yt., ,~ 4 ~ , `ro j ~ 1~4 , ~~S E'. ~H ~ ~ ~ ~ r r~~:ti~` +M j~.# t .;t a ~*~b~`. ~i1.1.. r~ . ~,.1 ~ 7ti +~~ .. ~ C .. _- ~ .._ -M1yk.. ..R F ~ ,. i.~!:,... j r { r' bb ~~ y, &~ y ~ +~'i4~F ar,~ -~ *.~i r <. t ~3~3~r't ~ ~ ` ~~. ~~ ~~ d~~, r s 'S Y ~ ~ , ' ~,~r ~~ y~" ~"j_ r r,+» ~< r. ,+S+G!M2r Rik d x~~'dP~~'~ ;? ~~ i' =~ ` CITY OF MERIDIAN PL~ DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE H)~NG DATE OF JULY 6, 2006 Y `, ~ ~~ ~~ 1. North: Commercial retail and office uses, zoned C-G (Fuel station and convenience _ ., 4~ . store and office spaces). ~::: '` `' 2. East: Mobile home park, zoned R-15. t• , 3. South: R.V. Park, zoned C-G. ~'_ " 4. West: Bar; Vacant property, zoned C-G. :. ' f~, d. History of Previous Actions: In 1997, a CUP was issued on this site for a retail car dealership. ~~ ~ In July of 2000, a variance to the landscape buffer requirements along the east property line was granted. VAR-00-010 allowed a 10-foot wide landscape buffer along the east property ~` ~,~! line. In November of 2000, a CUP was approved for this site, allowing a 20-foot wide ` ~ Y landscape street buffer adjacent to Franklin Road. e. Existing Constraints and Opportunities 1. Public Works ' `' Location of sewer: Main building already serviced from mains in Franklin ~~~ ~~, Road. "' '~~ Location of water: Main buildin ahead serviced from mains in Franklin g Y ~` Road. :, ~: Issues or concerns: None. 2. Vegetation: None. ~~ ~r ° ` d 3. Flood plain: NA ~. 4. Canals/Ditches Irrigation: No major facilities. r~: ~ . <~ 5. Hazards: None, as long as things are stored appropriately on this site. ~,~: m' n ' 6. Existing Zoning: C-G 7. Size of Property: 3.68 acres f. Conditional Use Information: '• ~ 1. Non-residential square footage: 31,743, including the existing and proposed '' structures a: ' 2. Proposed building height: varies, maximum of 22 feet ~; 3. Number of Residential units: 0 ~~` ;' ~~,, _ g. Off-Street Parking: ~ 1. Parking spaces required: 21 ; ' - 2. Parking spaces proposed: 38 5' h. Proposed and Required Non-Residential Setbacks: ~; C-G Standard ~; ,~ ' Front 0 feet b~l '' ' Side 0 feet ~.<. ~~ Rear 0 feet >~ -~ Max. Building Height 65 feet (22 feet proposed) ~~ ~~ H & H Utility Contractors, Inc. (CUP-06-019) -Page 3 ~~ ~5 . ~i4 :~ I Rai -'C %'{~NP''~~'~~~'.ly~ § ~~ I I I. 'L 1'.,ya a.~,.ri.L v T r?=^.''~JFi *~ 1 A f ' v' f + I - ` -Sr+ ' ,9~ ~ t 1, ' - " ~ a ;~',~.e, ~..;~.,:~~ I pc ~~"• , z " , I z $ ~ ; i x~ s :Y~ : 3 t 1 i ' ` ~` ,1~ ' `,•,' ~ •~.;~ ' ~::i~;r ~ ' :~~' ;c ~ r ;~ I "~TM~~i~~1 •'• '~•n~ . . '~ : J ~ ~~~ . V . : ;~ ~ ra K~ ~., ,~ wa'~~• :.t'~•, gpp,, ~~,q : ! ~, A t ~ h ? 1~: a I I . ; ~ ~ , k , i..~,: r , x ~ 4;r'r . ' .. ., .. '?,'l ~,. .ice a+ y ,.m'~- C f ,'}.:.S;f, '~s"`J~nY^~W~~~•:~e;'*~'^.~~ ' I II I I ~, .~~ N~"c ,~~~~n!t?~ ..A ~'~.`4'. .y ~ - J ~ ' I :~L~ ,.il ~"~~-0'~ :bC~. ~~.IL I.f 'r ". ' ~ T ^ a"" ~ ; f ~ I 1 1, ~ S,~i . 'S ' e~~ •('f>.:a Il.' ( ~ ~ ~ys.p .ti T I• .1~:= Y, } '~, J~~~~ ':. ,I I._ .+` , v y'#c ~ ~,~:.t ss _d "t X~ "3:F +- 1. ~1 ~ '~ g ,~ ,ak•.Q. 'C<. ' ' ~O ~S"-E ~i ;~S `" ", a.~ s ~ '~='. :~.~% ~" ' ~ y , iv!"3 ,T !b ` I i ' . k , „ , y. I,I I ~.:~~. _ '~iF ~ j ° - ~ iw' S'F'r": ~ z "~ ~ ~ ' ~ 1 ~ }i it'll ~--. 1 _ `r'c:;` .~ . tlt~. na . 4 p F ~";1 ~'W'~~y3rj.S;ir')~.{':-~~i#s"" pp ~ I ~ •J~¢ - '~,'. Jvr. ~ ~ kv. .v.4:. n S. y . A. •.~ U; ~ I i~': .'.. . .. L ,3 r r` - li : ,± a ~ f~~ t ;.. ~ : ~ I •• • ' : '- I -F~~f ~3~~.~r~a~~. ++~'.t. ~'v..G~.~'~n ~.Y .6. 4:' ( +, ,fit - {+ti'~$: •k'e{~~.~aP 't ~. Jn ~ ~' t .I, ~`,~. ~ r=~ '+F '~ `tt" J': r"' ~„~'{~fi ; L '~ : t . . i y g ,.t ~ t ..s. ~;~'SH:., %7r~i :v~': F .=+'::n ~~#SxR ;; ~.l ~ I ~I ~ ' I • ,. ti. , , i ~~4 a ..:kt i -r: ' . c f' i' Y s %A i ~ I , u. • ,, r r ~~ a . . c r • ' 5' :. Y • ~ ~ I ~. .~ ~ . ~,;~ x= ~ i 1 E. e :i.&:".. y ,x. v' : "r M .. ~~ ~ d. . . ..: } I.:' a i. .!" ~ , I I •.} 1. ' w ~ 9 . ; ~;,~;` .I~r `-Y fi s:'F^~'+"~~?~ i;`Y~;"3~~n: <iS~.-lY/..% ~ I+I I(JJ ~ l pl - t . " _ '- l'. ' -:y%:ii""L•°'~i-nL'':~~r~e~C'Y~!c'A~.`+; ^ ,Yi?: ~n- ~.re ~:+5~~~ i ~I I asy. %. ~: :'a9F2xf•'M 1 , ~. , . ' : . ,F I ~' ~ + s 1 ~ s i r ~ ~ Y e . ', e 'list r,~ L~.4+ '.~ +4. ~'~S'+`~ 1 ~ ~ ' ~ H r ~. I~; ih'.).:`a J e ~ .,k j ~ t , ~~ y, r~-q,~.m ,~~~fV' k~ +~'pi'KJ~~ 2 x~.~~~ : ~` a ~ a °.,a fi • ..,. ^ jT' ~ , ~i.~ .`.. •~~ { ~ If 1 { . . Y x. 3 5 ~~+ ' i 'E34l.ix .i'~`•• .i:' ~~ . ~~•S~'s~'Y~ II V ' ' ~. +J. ,~iY ii;~i`. . ' ~ ~' • ~ ' ~ : ~ ' I I ~ . ' ' ' k i~ ..~;~ • . ` .y+i. - J n K. r w : . ~,=` :;F~ x4 IR ~ - r.. y; : r~, • j; ~ ~ ~ • • ~ ~ I '~ ~I ,' .S ~k ~~ ~ , y,~~ 1. r • +~"^-rI ^. I t ~ nor ; ,; ;, ~ , • .. ,u, ^ !~ k'1~.;.°~".n: <.1.'p;;~:, ~_ -'~.isy k ~~ ' I ~ . ' IIII N ~I ,. . F; 1 ,. !"ir :. ~`,~3:''Y""~i < ~:.ji : i 'i~ ` *'t''"'. i6 ! < x ,.r fl ~u ' .:s+aT~~.ai?:^ Kb ~, -~:•.:. ~aY.~s , 111. - } ^ , ?3ur + e 7• . .i ' ~.. ~ SRI, •ik ~l',, ~ : ' ~. t yay A ~ }( F .. U.~f x; r " 1 I Y ~ , ~~ , I vP'•t_9~nGtW:: ~q?hj., ;,i,.. 'o4r.R>il41 +C ..p ,e o3 .k 3 J/ ~ ~~I R ~ 1 ~'~{ +' •'~•e'pp~.~ ~' ~{•=•. w yi ~ -~ (~~,'' ry~ !e yY k• : ' ~'¢ J •• tk rd R l , ~1YS>'.~4»'9:~ AC O' i-0: ~ ~{ ~~, ~~'~i ~ II'. I . -,:fis : ~~', e. ! , j., ~~ ~ ,. S ; l { !' ..45 t ~' ~ 1N • . c :b S . i i ~ .y -Sfs. ~w[.~•#tr .~-?• Y•<. I ` ~ ` .I 1 .il h , ... A ~~ft~~ '`.~'~,' ~ ni' ' ~• •tr i~ -~gh• ~..rse...yo ".':T,;:.-V~~~l~ I . ~: ' *'•'x~. I a. .rF4N y.yw s,$;:~}: s ;. ... ;.s::r " r.f~s'Z2 :.`.V ~r1:f.. ,'.~`"~." ~~ ,~~, I ~ I f li , r`~ , ~ .3 ~ , ; >:,.FI: t t rSYMy1 I y F~~~ ~; ~4 j ~ . S 'X , d _ Y- ~ .. , FV •St ~ i ~ x : II 1, 'I 1 . gFa "'c ~. ~kra*.., .~..;'~. Y ~ , x..- z :. ~.... ~.t, t ,}i 4 CITY OF MERIDIAN PL DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE H1~NG DATE OF JiJLY 6, 2006 "~ , ' ~` Min. Lot Size None Min. Street Frontage None ,'. _~% i. Summary of Proposed Streets and/or Access (private, public, common drive, etc.): Access to the site will be from an existing curb cut to Franklin Road, located in the center of this site. is NOTE: The ACRD has provided no comments related to this site, as it has no new conditions `~ for the subject applicant. ~. 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. r 8. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS r~~ ~' This property is designated "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 fmds 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 lands in the following manner: • 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 (ACFID) and ITD. This service will not change. • The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian School District #2. This service will not change. c • The subject lands are currently serviced by the Meridian Library District. This service will not change and the Meridian Library District should suffer no 5' (,i ~': i ~' revenue loss. Municipal, fee-supported, services will be provided to this site by the Meridian Building ;;~ , ~ De artment the p Mendaan Public Works Department, the Mendaan 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) H & H Utility Contractors, Ina (CUP-06-019) -Page 4 J ..:~:~.-• .oyYS;.c~+ ~~:i: r;' `x l' ~~ '~ '°: r 1 ~ - j. r F ! • :: " ~ ~ ,. M1 r ~ ~ I ?~ ; ~ ~ ; ~'•' r '• ` ` ~ , e;e.:1:".$?~~ `«,~ ~ S ~ n ~~2 s : ~ ~ht ;/ b'' ~ ~ , 1. I~ I ~ . r : i v ~ 'a'te e .~ l fir.. )~. 4, 3.. ~ S .hn .c ~, i+3ai',-' ..~ . ~ ;; x ^ 'I:, ~,r ,.Y, a7;r rr,~i4 ir, °~.~ :rtL,K'~. { ~1 + ~ , ~, i i ,;P ' ~ `~: ~ fl"~ ~' T ..n k ~ A ! N'~ ~ y, i ~~ .v'• rl: w`sS:~ ^ ~ tu ~ I ~ ~ .; Z t. '.b ( $' ~ „f'~e~. .i - f '` '~ ~ ~.i • ~ ~ k 'r d J y ~~~ ~ r ~ " y°.k ~'^,'~S :d^-Y"'..i(( '::3~u .M~ a Ar dri `'~ ' ^~ ~ s ` X w'g Y r ~ , ~' . .e 5r A „r, ~~,,:,, iw ~ d~~. .~ M;~•;r.Jy.~ ~ iw,.,.Sc ,• ° ~ ~ z { . ;. ~ , -; ~,N,.. ; a r y, •F i - s. :~ .t*_" ' ~ ~. a Si'~i~ `t J ~ #.y'S~'~ 'a~,x,'~* '~~ i ' i ~ I : j ,~ h : ' , il~ '~a ' ~''~E~, `,- ~ i 4e R~" ~~` Cn1 ~'vwAY• ~ yy b ~ Y a.4.h. %~~<Y~ . ~ , ;. a:?>:; dinrn""a: 1:s •; ?. r` `Y ;J~F ':.'tai ' t ~ i ppp I ' II i~ 1 ~ , , .. rs~y.L-i ! ~ '-c,, ;?vA q..: ~. l~ ' .°Gid .3: ;pr;R't1 ~t" ,:' ~z" '` s ~-a. :.,i''~r ^t'' ' 3 ~ ~I J il ~{I ~ 3~ - •=i"~ : n'A' +"tea. ^ ~~ K;h fi:.~ ::,.'; ~•+'`'++r''~ x! ~i .,: F r. r C ' .,+:~~:~~, 1cr r. :~nhv":• .;A o-^.,J' qi. ,.y: I .. 0.1 ~ a M tr~ . ~ _ o sa: anA'~..r.:, ., w~ .u'~}~4,'':L".~~~",+>,-, ~~~~`..e '~- - .5'. , . ,i ' ' fA {I i~ ~ F :g' •' ~ 'Y ~: .r ~•' :I•c: hd+, ~.e : .d"r„„. ' $ o- ' , a ( ~.'aX~• :~': Y i~ n au ~ , , 'F ~~~¢'t(,,gY~:':n :L ~~t~~~XKt~~ } i 1 F I.~ ~~r.: y,.~r.T3 Y. ~ 7 e~+ ~ ' .v~- k°: _ ~4~ y~.~ ~'r Gam`: .. y 'v~` 1 a I ~' { '~' ''~µylee .7 . ~ p u ~ ~ • k+ ~ . ~ ~, • ~ ~. ~' ~. ~~•;{~~~~,. `py~v ~'rt ~~"µt~+~T i ~ ... ~ 1 ~ ~• d, ` y 1~~ r k ~^, h _ n r ~ } ~*iy ~' t. • . . . . - r-• :s *~+t [ ~ ~ ` ~ ' ' ~ `y. ... ~ M . ' ~ :;Y-~';Sf •sr'aJf''v ~"'4; a.-.- ^`•,~,Yfi~«*ic: ~' ~ ~ ` -; ~y ':' ~'"•; " - ` ~ y_':h:+ tZ,y; f ¢ , ° a~~ k r, •.~x 1. y.~`,4 ~ aa :. p.;`.y„k +s r '~ • 4 Y •. . ~ .: ~i ' .3±3 Y ~ri., ~ dY~i . '~';i.iF, x t S k 1.'1r . ~ 3 . ~ ~i ~~},( ,a~. ~Z .. }y,. ~ 4~~ ~ ;,~ ~J gs .I*: ' ::;i F'%;~.'i .C': .C~~(i..a~, i i i, i,4 i ~:"'µf ~~I• `!''~"~~ ~~, yXy~;+. j0: Y.~ Y .~ . y` ~. ~~ iI ~ ~ ~ ~ 1Y. ,, "~, ~.~~7iN ~~ ~ ~ ~ • , p . ~ ~- °~da<~'~•..1E~'• . ~~f.15nb4s~~~?ia.~:: y'-.t,: t~yl; fIJ" I: J ii >i ray a. ~t ~ ~ >.. v p ct,yrLr~M~ 1~~~ t:. ;r. :, µ.. i ~` `:'k}~+~rF' ~'i ~i:(`i' yYc• ~il:.~ ~T ~ ~~ i -. 1 Ir ;" .:5 r ~.: :.5:1.:.. j;. ;.*,y . x ~ ~x. : <¢.ya ~;s~ ,,:,=-i,' , ~ ~. ~I. i J' ~ I ~.x: J .~, x "ik".~Yx. ~~' :' it r v . , I . ~' 's ' a , y ''*s~..T .#-s1~~~~`<. ::~>•: J`" C $ r ~ $."~:~~~Fa°" x rv;;r~s i'-'~~" ~ . 3 0 1.. r;A ~ . ..,;*`x ..~ ~ , t~ ~,-. ~ t J~ ' i~. { ~~ rPr"~ Y$~`;;~ ~ ~rF~ ~~J'~ d I I { ; ~~; ..¢ ~ r a; ~ ~ rr_.. CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANN~DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HT~TG DATE OF JULY 6, 2006 E° , ~_. k ~` ~ ~"' Staff is conditioning approval of the subject CUP upon the applicant installing and ~ r maintaining landscaping on this site. Please see the CUP Analysis in Section 10 below for tr ,? more information on landscaping this site. r, . ;~ • "Require appropriate landscape and buffers along transportation corridors (setback, ~' '~• vegetation, low walls, berms, etc.)." (Chapter VII, Goal 1V, Objective D, Action 4) I~. ~~'' Please see bullet above and Section 10 below for additional information regarding ~ ~ "~ 1 landscaping on this site. A 2S foot wide landscape buffer is typically required adjacent to "= Franklin Road. However, in 2000 the City approved a reduction to the standard 2S foot wide -: ~ `. buffer and allowed a 20 foot wide buffer for this site. ~~: « • Plan for a variety of commercial and retail opportunities within the Impact Area." (Chapter ~t: ~~ VII, Goal 1, Objective B) ~~~: ~'' `''' r~ ,; if, ~ Staff believes that the proposed use does contribute to the variety of uses in this area. .: ~ ~F _ ?~ ~' • "Restrict curb cuts and access points on collectors and arterial streets." (Chapter VII Goal ~I , IV, Objective D, Action 2) The applicant is not proposing any new access points to Franklin Road, an arterial street. All vehicular access will be taken from the existing driveway to/from Franklin Road. ~~ ' 0... ' ~; Staff finds that the proposal is generally harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive ~, 4~_4: ?: Plan. ~' ~, 9. ZONING ORDINANCE t;~ _ a. Zoning Schedule of Use Control: UDC 11-2B-2 lists Equipment rental, sales and services as a ~ ' ,s Conditional use in the C-G zone. Outside storage is listed as an accessory use in the C-G zone. t; b. Purpose Statement of Zone: The purpose of the Commercial Districts is to provide for the e; ~; 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 k r, ~ accommodated in the district, the scale and mix of allowed commercial uses, and the location `' ~~' ` ' of the district in roximi to streets and hi p ty ghways. 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 im act of ro osed commercial uses which ar P p p e auto and service oriented and are located F '. 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 ~` ' ' ii ;: € districts shall be connected to the municipal water and sewer systems of the city, and shall not : ~ ~ F constitute strip commercial development and encourage clustering of commercial ~, : ~ i ~l development. ~~ I 10. ANALYSIS ~r_ '. ~ a. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation: Staff is generally supportive of the { proposed site design as presented in the CUP Site/Landscape Plan labeled as Sheet SD1.1, ~% ! " prepared by Patrick McKeegan Architects, dated April 2006, and the landscaping proposed, with ~' '. the following comments: ;' i i ki,' ~. '. ~" H & H Utility Contractors, Ina (CUP-06-019) -Page 5 ;< p- ~~-. ,~,~ J __ ' I ~ ! ~ ~ b : 4S L_ '`pi ~~~ fir c~ r r n 1' yn'Yr< H ~ ~UR"• f r Y 'l ~ ~ ~ i "P ~ ~ "~ C ~ : 2 ~1 ~ ~ v ~ ~ S '(' A ~~ z `((Tr x ~ an f. }y ~ ~ ~ Y 3 K I ~ 5. 63. ~ t ~ -..fi ~il. { i t .! 7 'Y;r , ' 1 1. L ,~. I~ ~ . • ~I r 4 I l ~ a^'T Z r ' y ~ yy ~~yy ':ii3~•+~'P'4plsn~ +v.`~d^"~±dit 3C-r I :'i~'+ :-a-t.~ Y.S ~ .~:'~•'' ~'~ ~y '~ ` I ~ ~ :1 I y~ < il'1" J~~ 'k,.~: eygj l~. < ~~ ~ tr"..5,:1.~r~:•£i '•'~i,. * .Ln . - 1 ~' '^' I sM 3n ~~;. , ` r+% '.^ ,`5, r~` "` t v:~. =7 Y - < k c -. . d.. '44 jtd :~. ~t~s .'+vd'' t': ~:~[~. ::3•t ..Rr, ~ I ~ ~I.. 'Z:i , of [ ;-`', rri' ~ ` z p ;ki?, c).h-N.@K~ii1L ~)~'/'.iS sT` :+~F',: F;' t : '.i: ° ~ • ~ u 1 k +~ . )) I I ~ is nT: .~C<(~..`~ v ~'~~~~i~x:#~ >f`iY~~~$P~~ p~ t~, r sVa' i.i .~ 6 { _`i R g , + :. I f ( _ , ., i.:• A.. ..: ~ ~ ' '' ?1- 1~ ' ' , r ~+ ~ ,. :,£ ''ka r :y: a „* q k f "~4k: ! ;S°F k F F t F ~. Y ~ ~ m a~ :w4' I ~ .1 • ` C r ~ :; qsa ~" ~Tj#x; ~ ;= r"id 4 £~ '~~~'~+` '~ ~; ~"^ ~ ; ~ , y R ,~, ~"}~~a, h;. R.,i ~~'_ 3"i h+Y~`i~i ~ '~ : .. 1 ~` . ~h ,'.~A..i~ . t,~ .. ir ; ~i~a,;i. ~+ [;f•~» I`a.`'~o'-;, 'z.~. d:. - c ~ 47 .E.1µ k~C' nY, yk}~"i ~ ~t~i. ;+'sy.%, r3^...;tc ~' ~c;$"fi iF~,`-p+'A:.QS '~ i! f 'A'' :a:{ '~ ~ ) I 7 I' 'I t~~ x" k < `~' . ~~., ;; • ~ ~, „'r"..~, ~•+aa'W~~. .}•'tY R" I T`~'~ '~^ Y I `uJ• .F: ~ -' W:1~.. ^i"R:' ~~~ '~., at ` I f•I . . ~. ? to ~ f r s, ,i.{.~ Y~.~: •:f;:%°:~r^, I ~ ~` .;`?, y`I~' '.a s, •~.~3^ eta :riEi . ~ ~;`J`•_ ,,. `~ ,;~. ~ ;fig,,,;- ~ II 1 ~ ; .~. g R r. ~ ; . :`^`~`~ ~ : ~^;;'•~~ >~~'g~'~ P ., ;¢ ~ a ~~" ~ II` •,'I . '" : . ~ ' ' ' ~' :i .~i +;d' r•~~:;.'y;a~:-.rrkx.n~}: Y .'~d' s 9 r'~ dYl ' I .i ~ p ~ M v.~~R~~t .,, C ~1~ ?~ . ;?y~, '.5. '~".'~ .at?~^ :'k iN ,y:T ~ a .~1,.r} _ v~ .l: v!•~k I _ . . . . ' , ! '`F:I•ryy St ~ i . ~ II ~I , 1 . :~ ^~"^rY~ ' ~~.. •C. .,y, Y i:Xl .!;,.a r?v^ •:K N'w'1. ~ > ' ~ .~; ;R',~',!'tk'~.twyS ..~::++~s,'^'i4 i~~w '.,1~,Cr?; .• ` ' " ~ ' ~ ~ ~ f °' x ii. i~ .E'LLU'rv:;~• - z~ ' .. ~ ;:.yxr`..;F:.y-wii"%^,~G, ••, •T;'+'a31j ~.{+si' .. lr. j I. , ' .~ u.k~: .. qs •„ ~ r ~r~`SS'ir9}g ~ ~Tq 'd5T yy'~~~~~.';~.'A 4 4, ' { ~ ~ ~t ~{v~ }^ S ~ ~~l i'`.~-~° '~M~~~3 ~ , , _ r . . ~ Y~ , .y 1 ' _ I'.' . . y ks: ;'..t i• ~^a•y"$=st>A..N~~~'.y;. '~sr%5!s I{~ ~ I~ .; ~;~ ~;i:.., L,i, },4,r't' ~~" ~ ` i I , I s'~. g'~` Y '.Y,'.I'^~i~ (},1.. t~ ',,T~t•YY,; ' ~ • Y i ' ~~ I II , I 41 'i` ~ i ~.rk, rJ~ ` x f'~3< '!.,'. ,'~. ~i •"S f'~ ~T~ ~• ; ail 9 ~ { ~ 'NE'A V~ ~: I.y't a`'.~illns .i''' FF^.:~". T ~^tr ~ r ' s y'` ^ ~ ~ . .r 'Z. ~r."~y. ~~l~ ~LS" ~ ,'~ I~: ..~s;....: av'~5"--"~l+"`I~A~:B~•. 7~icS, F'1','t'?w~ '•_µ.i: 'r ~ Y G~ .r'i~ .e:S;; ~~.h~,~ :i?. oy, xu ': a, t7r~.M• ~ ,y,(", a ~ t 5f'~aa'i7F r ` , '~~`' Y "Pw~. { ~+ s •.„'k .~J {~ . ~... Itl i I.. ,.~ I `b:4~' yt k ~ .M,B~••1 . r ~.~. y ,„ Fy ,rff,. ~.e ~ 4 ~x`., , Y .. , ).. ~,.;k ,,~,. .~;^~k~~ f . .:,I_~ w ~ z ; ~ : . . r ji ry ' ,s'..; ,.Y y '•`a,:~F-a `~ •, '% y1k C ~ ~ ,~ ~ :[. ` ..`.;,,e'4_~'t,''yf ~ ~ ~ '~; ra• .,+ i ~' v 9 !: ",Ya ;~'r2 ~'S~ ~ f .! Fsa '.., .r}t• , ,r ,, j ~ y ~ : +' , rim ., .. ~ i i p~ q 'Y ~ : ~ " s azr-, ,, ~'~ zp;M.~,.s,?~• j~:c .i oj„ T1 .. ~+ ; i i A I : . ; i ,.~4.. ! } •i . xi l ~ 4 I i;~.~~ _~, CITY OF MERIDIAN PL~ DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HI~iG DATE OF JULY 6, 2006 a:. Conditional Uses: In approving any conditional use, the decision-making body may prescribe ', appropriate conditions, bonds and safeguards in conformity with this Title that: minimise ` ~' adverse impact of the use on other property, control the sequence and timing of the use, control the duration of the use, assure that the use and the property in which the use is located is maintained properly, designate the exact location and nature of the use and the property development, require the provision for on-site or off-site public facilities or services, required more restrictive standards than those generally required in this Title, and require mitigation of adverse impacts of the proposed development upon service delivery by any political ~' subdivision, including school districts, that provides services within the City (LJDC 11-SB- 5 6D). `~' Due to the nature of the proposed use and the existing and anticipated uses near this site, staff is recommending specific conditions be placed on this business that will m;nimize, or alleviate the adverse impacts that this use may pose to nearby properties in this part of the city. Please see below and Exhibit B for the proposed conditions. x~ Existing Approvals: This site has previously been approved for a car dealership. Associated with the car dealership approval, the City has previously approved a 20-foot wide landscape jg+ buffer along Franklin Road, and a 10-foot wide landscape buffer adjacent to the residential ,4 ~`~' uses to the east. Staff recommends that the existing landscape buffer widths be allowed to stay with the proposed use. Screeninsr: The applicant is proposing, and staff is supportive of, a 6-foot tall solid fence being constructed around the outdoor storage area. This fence should be constructed of either wood or vinyl and with the installation of the proposed rolling gates, fully enclose the `~~' storage area. Further, no equipment should be stored above the 6-foot tall fencing; all ~~~ '^` equipment should be fully screened from view. `~` ~ Uses: The applicant is proposing to use this site for the company offices, storage of trucks and other equipment. With the existing and proposed structures, there will be approximately 31,743 square feet of building on this site. Approximately 15,000 square feet will be a canopy area for vehicles, approximately 12,000 square feet will be for office and ~: shop areas, approximately 2,500 square feet will be for tool and equipment storage, and f approximately 2,100 square feet will be used for a maintenance building. Approximately i 18 % of the site will be paved, 6 % of the site will be landscaped, and 57 % of the site will `_ ` be used as the outdoor storage area. Minor maintenance of the service trucks may be allowed on this site. Due to the proximity of the residential uses, the facility should not be used as a service garage, a repair shop, or any like use. 1 Access: There is an existing driveway to/from Franklin Road for this site. This driveway is located approximately 100-feet west of the east property line. The applicant is proposing to use the existing driveway as access to/from this site. Staff is supportive of this proposal. No new vehicular access is proposed, and none is approved with this application. `~ ~.. f' d $ ~~~ 1 ~i ~; r d~ 4,~ _~; ~i t ~~ ~~ ~s ~{', ~~ {,'; ~~,_ } {li 3~{ Landscaping_ The landscaping shown on the Site/Landscape Plan prepared by Patrick McKeegan Architects is approved with the following modifications/notes: • UDC Table 11-2B-3 requires a 25-foot wide landscape street buffer, located entirely outside of the right-of--way, along arterial streets. Franklin Road is an arterial street. The submitted landscape plan shows a 20-foot wide landscape buffer adjacent to Franklin Road. As noted above, a 20-foot wide H & H Utility Contractors, Inc. (CUP-06-019) -Page 6 1Z 3 h T ~ i i,~~ ' ~ ~ Y r'r~r=:ut ~ ~ '' ~f ~ ~' ~ d~ ',~1ti ..]] 'ii ' fi ~ry ",~i:1,i~ - •.~r' I i~ ** n7C7. t .,~ ~S'~ -.-M.:~.EY~ R ~}, r _ ~ ~'~T' ":2 "". x" _ "''3333 ,z'r _~ y~.C. c; ~, ~R 3 , ~ { ~~~f r r t, Vit , _ ~`'^{ i ..; k, ~;;~', r ~ ? ~' i ~~"' fir. ~ ~~,~y~~ 7, ~~ 1 ~~~ 't&? r r f, r s ; = °a __, > ~ ~ ~r-ji ~ ` ~~ L,. Fc a„ S ~~ ' '~ ~ ,a uw ir . ~ a '~7` ~ ' ' p t f~rrn--~~` , i i ~`v' ,y 1 \~: a~) J ~; ~'~~ > kk SifK F'l - ~~' ~ ~yC t' ~ r ~ - ' "' '~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PL~ DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HI~NG DATE OF NLY 6, 2006 :5 . landscape buffer adjacent to Franklin Road has previously been reviewed and approved by the City. ," • UDC Table 11-2B-3 requires a 25-foot wide land use buffer between C-G ' zoned roe and residential) zoned p p rty y property. There are residences ,'' directly east of the subject site. As noted above, a 10-foot wide landscape ~~' buffer adjacent to the residences to the east has previously been reviewed '' ` and approved by the City. However, staff recommends that additional ` ~ ,; landscape materials be installed within the 10-foot wide landscape buffer, to ~~ ~ provide better screening buffering. Additional materials should be installed along the eastern property line, adjacent to the proposed parking stalls. Said materials should be installed in accordance with UDC 11-3B-9. `~ • UDC 11-3B-8C2 requires landscape planters to be constructed to break up ~' long rows of pazking stalls. A maximum of 12 parking stalls shall be '''' allowed in a row, until a landscape planter is constructed. Landscape planters aze also required on the ends of rows to prevent cross-space driving. Said landscape planters shall contain a minimum of 50 squaze 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. Landscape planters should be added to and modified within the proposed internal pazking lot, spaced and landscaped in accordance with UDC 11-3B- 8C2. Specifically planters should be added to both ends of the pazking azeas adjacent to Franklin Road, and all of the internal planters shall be widened to be at least 5-feet wide. ;~ A written certificate of completion shall be prepared by the landscape ~ azchitect, designer, or qualified nurseryman responsible for the landscape plan and submitted prior to occupancy of the building. All standazds of ~~ installation shall apply as listed in UDC 11-3B-14. Submit a revised landscape plan, with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application. Pazkins: The applicant is proposing to construct 38 parking stalls for this use; 21 pazking stalls aze required by Ordinance. UDC Table 11-3C-1 requires 90-degree pazking stalls to ~;~ be 19-feet long, adjacent to 25-foot wide drive aisles. UDC 11-3C-SB4 allows pazking stall dimensions to be reduced by 2 feet in length if 2 feet is added to the width of the sidewalk or landscape area. The pazking in the northeast side of the site should be revised to comply 1~'~ with the UDC. ;j. ~! Gates: The applicant is proposing to gate both of the entrances into the storage area. Staff is supportive of this request, as there is adequate stacking for vehicles that use the entrances and exits of the storage yard. l Stor Outdoor a e: The a 1' scant ' is no t ro ~ pp p posing to pave the area behind the proposed gates - the storage yard. The UDC requires all vehicle use areas to be improved with an impervious surface. Staff recommends that the Commission require the applicant to improve the storage area with a " I dustless material e.. - ,II~ ( g recycled asphalt or some other dust-abatement material that is annually applied). ~~ ~' The UDC has specific standards for outside storage facilities. UDC 11-4-3.33 requires: that ~.}il all materials to be stored outside of any required yard (setback); that stored items shall not block sidewalks or parking areas and may not impede vehicular or pedestrian traffic; that the :III site shall not be used as a vehicle wrecking or junkyard; that the items stored on site shall be '~I~ H & H Utility Contractors, Inc. (CUP-06-019) -Page 7 ~; Z' ~` ~i 1 }~1 r ~Y ~ ;y S ~~ tilt i 11' til j~j 5 ~) µi~ 1 4~f i'1i1 ~~j( !I i(i(7 ~1 i r.; e' ~~~_; Was :,~,~~, k K. ~~ ~~. ~ G ~ ~: w lw~'+Y %y ti r'~, .h 4t~. ~- ~:. ~ S LL ~C ~ 6 ~ ~} ~ I~ 1 J1Y P y +ci t:. _ ~ _, ~},~ ~' l Fi.~~~:'. f" ~ 4. ~4; i - ~';'~ "~ t ~ ~s r~r-a;:h: ~``'~ -~ !'1' ~``~`JJCC4~ ~~T'.. ~ - Ill ~~.~~.' .~.:.. J~~_ y ~i ~. 4 , ' J ~~i . { 1 ~ 7S` y.~~• (1!~ w~ ~ ~' ~~ - ' L ti ~~nn~cc~~ ~:~~. 24 L~k. ' . ~tt ~'i ! ~ ~ fryy~~ ,' 4'. }~t~ i ~.. {. ~~'~r f i:; ~iT~ ... r ~' kx J!~d; ~~,,,, '~~rr:;%! ~ i ~~~ t ~_' CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANK DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE H~NG DATE OF NLY 6, 2006 limited to those items owned or used by the business; and that any storage of fuel or hazardous material shall be located a minimum of 1,000 feet from a hospital. The subject site should be subject to the above-listed standards. 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 '~r' and/or the use is established (UDC 11-SB-lA). 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 prior to establishing the subject "' use. .'~° ~~ 2,~ ~~'~ ' 11 -. ~~'~ C~ ~ :7` U' i r' t. ii _~ ~~ ~'{ 1 J.. .~: ~~i }~'' '~. Elevations: The applicant has submitted front elevations for the new shop/office area that will be visible from Franklin Road. The elevations prepared by Patrick McKeegan Architects, dated Apri12006, and attached in Exhibit A, show a metal roof, stucco and CMU walls, and aluminum accents. Staff is supportive of the proposed elevation from Franklin Road. ' "" b. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of CUP-06-019 for H & H Utility '; Contractors. Inc.. 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 Julv 20, 2006, the Meridian Planning & Zonine Commission voted to approve the subiect CUP with the conditions listed in Exhibit B of the Staff '`a Report. ": t 11. EX>IIBITS A. Drawings -~ 1. CUP Site/Landscape Plan (dated Apri12006) 2. Building Elevations (dated Apri12006) B. Conditions of Approval 1. Planning Department 2. Public Works Department r 3. Fire Department 4. Police Department ~t ;~ 5. Parks Department ' `~ 6. Sanitary Service Company C. Required Findings from Zoning Ordinance , H & H Utility Contractors, Ina (CUP-06-019) -Page g ,~ ~; >.:~i ~ w r 'A ~~ -_ _ M'7~~~ T i~~ ~ "+ ;~ .M1`... ~ C ri~~~. ..i i, A T A~ ~ {~*~ t M.. +~ ,, , k{Y `{d -]~~~• f ~a~7r1 d:~.. ~ "4 !~~ -~ ~ {~F~ `n ~ f r: a: Ga ~ k 1t~ N~N .1 a 'JJ ~ }$ !~ 1 ~~~ Yx~Y+ ~ ~ ~~~} l Y ~y+3b ! i~ ° „ , t ~ - ~ ' ~ ~+: Ji` .e~,M-~(~ieefi r _ }'n ~~le ' h ~. ~ > e gb 1 y+ ' uiE}t' rA ~ ~ti,~~k' ~ ~ '~ V '~' ~~~1,,, iff t ``tA ~ 1 ' ^ ~ f . `~`,f nF.7. F~ ~; } .;,ash ~ ~X~` z „<< ~~I: "_G. ~{ { }jh~ =^F^ a~4 :~1_ r. r., L.'t, y;;a2-,, ,':,,`~. ,_ iti~ i ~>3 x~, 's, ~~~:'t?,S', r'n 4~ ~~~ 4~. ~' .{~ Y:< '~. r'}'Y^~ k~f d'`r , ~c ~:..;~~: .„;i~(q-~ ~9}t ,,s. ' ;e±; Rµ; lati ~i~ ~•~L ~`.,: l;~~ ~ Kf~~ + t, h,e SgJ~, '~r;.. ~"} CITY OF MERIDIAN PL~ DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HI®1VG DATE OF JULY 6, 2006 ~~. 7' ~~ I lj, ~~v,ud,~ll P y~8~u~~~~ i, ~ ~iser.I~na~u'~r; ~F~I+ ~t~ ~ ¢y~ ~~ ~~~,;qq~ [ ~ P d L 38 ~ d EE ~ ~ ~~~~ G $~ y GJG.ti pj, A a ~ 1-a 6 MLr ~ r ^a! ~~~~~,< ~C +~ 1^A, pf. 7 C~ M ~6 R ~ r~ Q ~ ~ _ -~ r~, _ '1 -- ~ 1 i fjj7~ ~1 i I 1I '~ {e: 1 1~{ i 1 1 i ~ 1<, ~ ~ ~ ~ >~ pB o ( Itil' i I:I I ~i 4 i ~ ~ C7 ~ 1 F ', ~ y y ~ ~ ~ 1 f ~ j ~t ~ I L J d' l' i _ } y „ i'~ ~ ~ ~ ~ * ~ fi ~ - - - `~ ~ n ~~I ~f ' _~ N t 111 SI %J ~~~ 11 hk ~~' - ;~ ~. ,~ G~ .1. ~` ~~ a~ '~, , `~ `j.~ ~fr ,ri ~ , ~ ~ ,'. f:: '_~' .;; t t~ ,~ ~ z ~ f gf~y' ,d ~' 1~ 4 1 I I Y ~ tl ~ " A , 1 ~ ~ ~ 4 4 ~ , ~ . 1. - ~ 9 ;I GG .. ! der ~ f i ~ t '~ f 4r~:~ 1 bz~ ~ ~j+~91 ~'` - 3 ,~ ;E d `,a a tl ~_._ ..__...._ r ~ . T t ` ! ~ f ~_- Fsan~rlin 7toad Merldigi~, Idaho Pstnlak M61~iecro Acc4lttcEs uH wew/w-~. nc-um.um >~rn-wul arL~ >rm mu~aa 2. Building Elevations (dated Apri12006) Exhibit A -Page 2 ~~ .~,,~ a ~ p c.a: f#F ~ ~ ~ ~ ' : . N ` F w ~' _ t}k . S 4 ~k ~ ~ A3 '4rxN1~~ µM ~ w ~ ~ ~ yl ~ t v ~ ' ~~~t,( 1 y~ ~~,y'~~ . ti' ' "' ~ E" ! -'D -~ rx. l t ,e'Ni y,: y J . . 3, ~' k ~ R:,C k. ~, .,f,4 i, ~ s, { ,~ ~ ~,~ ~, ..~s~ ~,.~'~' r +'~K ~C'y ..L'". .V ~ ~~~ ~ ~~~~ ?~+1 ~i ~. . ~, .r., 'ro - -.. r +~ t~,a ~t r w• ~. A ~~~ c ., _ ~~ '~ ~ ~ ~, ey` r ~ ~~ r ~~* `-'t, ~5i~~ ~ ~~ ~ r ~Jc }Y ~Ai. ~ f ~• ~ ~ i v ~ i j ~ 3-.fh~+iw~ ~~:~ ~l i~~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PL~ DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HI~1VG DATE OF JULY 6, 2006 Exhibit A -Page 3 ~'." ~+ ~gcT ~'~s, 7u ~., ~ ~ `•r M~s :;fi, , ;. r Y, * t ly tVt t1 ~ ~ yy~ ~;~h f %r ~ .Y t~ 2~ t ~ v { ~Y~ S~t~ ~ `. r~.ic R. ~a~~d ~: - ~ ~~r: - J ~" i K r:~ ;~ ~` p ~ NrfiFe krL ~:Y1i~J~ ~' ~QC.'p Y.' _. - ' . : * , ' ~ f ~ ~~ ~ ~~ t.a ~ ~~~ z, ' `~~ y ;. ~ ~ ~. .. b y y ;,. ~' ~ t} ... ;.<t, r CITY OF MERIDIAN PL DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HI~1VG DATE OF JULY 6, 2006 B. Conditions of Approval ,;. 1. PLANNING DEPARTMENTS '} • 1.1 The Site Plan labeled as SD1.1, prepared by Patrick McKeegan Architects, dated Apri12006 is approved, with the conditions listed herein. The applicant shall comply with all applicable `~' provisions from the previous CUP-00-047 and VAR-00-010 approvals for this site. 1.2 The landscaping shown on the Site/Landscape Plan prepared by Patrick McKeegan Architects is approved with the following modifications/notes: • The existing 20-foot wide landscape buffer adjacent to Franklin Road has previously been -; reviewed and approved by the City. "'' • The existing 10-foot wide landscape buffer adjacent to the residences to the east has previously been reviewed and approved by the City. Additional landscape materials shall be :~', installed within the 10-foot wide landscape buffer, to provide better screening buffering for _ the residences to the east. Additional landscape materials shall be installed along the eastern property line, adjacent to the proposed parking stalls. Said materials should be installed in accordance with UDC 11-3B-9. • Landscape planters shall be added to and modified within the proposed internal parking lot , spaced and landscaped in accordance with UDC 11-3B-8C2. Specifically planters shall be '?~ added to both ends of the parking areas adjacent to Franklin Road, and all internal planters shall be widened to be at least 5-feet wide and contain at least 1 tree. > ~ • 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. ~i,~, Submit a revised landscape plan, with the Certificate of Zoning Compliance application. `?' 1.3 Construct a 6-foot tall solid fence around the east and west sides of the outdoor storage area. Said fence shall either be constructed of wood or vinyl. The applicant does not have to instaWretain any fencing along their south boundary if the applicant agrees to maintain the area south to the neighbor's fence, and if either the applicant finds that they own that niece of property or can get an easement to maintain it from whoever does own it No equipment shall be stored above the screening fence; all equipment shall be fully screened from view. All ~ lifts,. extensions, risers. et cetera, shall be fully retracted to their down position while stored on the premises. `~ 1.4 This site shall not be used as a service garage, a repair shop, or any like uses. It is permissible ,~ for minor maintenance to be done on this site for the vehicles associated with this business. 1.5 Use the existing driveway to/from Franklin Road as access for this site. No new driveways to ' Franklin Road are proposed with this application and none are approved. ' '~I 1.6 Revise the parking configuration in the northeast side of the site to comply with the UDC. ~:~ ~I a ;ti i ' ~~ t: 1.7 The applicant shall improve the outdoor storage area with a dustless material such as recycled asphalt or some other dust-abatement material that is annually applied. The applicant shall work with Planning & Zoning Staff to find some agreeable form of dust-abatement to be applied to the outdoor storage area, prior to the CZC submittal. 1.8 The subject site should be subject to the following standards: all materials to be stored outside of any required yard (setback); stored items shall not block sidewalks or parking areas and may not Exhibit B Page 1 '~i~.r t ,>¢, ' M.g,F . 1 ~.~ .a," ~~ ~~ ~~ yr4• 3 a Cir } 6F _~ ~~w~ ~~~ ,~Y. 7 ~~.. -- ~ r,l.k% r ti f 3 y'*~JY~ .t _... - iJ ~' ~ -- - rt" ~!~}tr ~':~ d e ~ h ~+i Cr- i . _. kkfi ~I.tiN9e" 4F ! t ` i' " L '.~n~ a .. - f ~ C-. 1 ~~ ~' ~.. ,{."r y t1 ~'~ S r F''Y cf ~- ~:r ' 4~ ~E~ ~~ ~ ,, ~ i,. ~ 1 ~~' ~ ~ _ ~ i7ri'dtii I ~ .E .::fit A. '~~ r J ix; ': H .Q 3 St y ~~ I _..~ j Y i~' L ~ r~~ ' '~',r~. u ~ '~t"''r _$. _. ; ~: ~_ ~,:ll HJ ;; til i '~~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PL~ DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HI~1VG DATE OF JULY 6, 2006 impede vehicular or pedestrian traffic; the site shall not be used as a vehicle wrecking or junkyard; the items stored on site shall be limited to those items owned or used by the business; and, that any storage of fuel or hazardous material shall be located a minimum of 1,000 feet from a hospital. 1.9 To ensure that all of the conditions of approval for CUP-06-019 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 establishing the proposed use. 1.10 The building elevation prepared by Patrick McKeegan Architects (Sheet SD1.1, dated April 2006) is approved. 1.11 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. 1.12 No signs are approved with this CUP application. All business signs require a separate sign permit in compliance with the sign ordinance. 1.13 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 The applicant shall coordinate fire hydrant placement with the Public Works Department during plan review. 2.2 The applicant shall be responsible for any mains or services that are required to provide service to this site. Coordinate size and location with the Public Works Department. 2.3 During plan review a looped system maybe required to achieve adequate fire flows. 2.4 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). Submit an executed easement (supplied by Public Works), a legal description, which must include the area of the easement (marked EXHIBIT A) and an 81/2" x 11" map with bearings and distances (marked EXHIBIT B) for review. Both exhibits must be sealed, signed and dated by a Professional Land Surveyor. 2.5 Sewer, water, pressurized irrigation, and any life safety development improvement shall receive fmal approval prior to occupancy. Other required development improvements such as fencing, micro-paths, and landscaping maybe bonded for prior to obtaining certificates of occupancy. 2.6 Applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process. 2.7 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. 2.8 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with and NPDES Permitting that may be required by the Environmental Protection Agency. 2.9 Applicant shall be responsible for application and compliance with any Section 404 Permitting that maybe required by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.10 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. Exhibit B Page 2 r s, 4 ~Y # ~F~ x~ , ~ ~~~ >. ' : 3i y, cT k ,~{` r ~ ~ ~. ~~ ;- 3 ` -,~ ~~ <f _Y =y <Y S ~..~~ rf~ :~~: 1 w~ ~~~ .. ~# a~5~"t i _x:,f c"c~, ,; c,*~;.~,±,i ,~_'; 4.? ,, .~ ,.; ?~'; - a{ ~: z ~=. y ~ r~ ,~ ~:.,~~ F , : ~,.. f ~,., ~ .. xr f; ~ 6 t..i. t9 '~ t ~~~~4 _ 4ri „y~#~rf. .1 Y, :, t i:.. ~~} ~.r: r. ~~ "' ~,. ~~~ ~~, F ^, *1 ~~ Z s 1^ s+ "s%c' ~, N4~ ~ ~,4 fs~:'~,,, ~, u ,;;~,: i~~° , ~ , ,- <~ `~' u~t ~~. r . r ~ ,rsr: ~ ~ ~ :t~ ~. ~~ ~,~~ ,~ z V l ~ ~ 2 k A q}.(.~G #~ Y ~~ li~ 1 t~ ~ /`7 ~~` ., t ~. ~f:--~... ~~-~ ~+~. y . ?h'~. ;t rl~ z 1:`''~ ~~~~' ~~: -, rl ~, ~'. ;:! ~~` .~; , d ~. ~~ '..~ ~r F_ I ~~ ' ~ {, ~F , ~. '~. 7 ~~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PL DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE H1~NG DATE OF JULY 6, 2006 3. FIRE DEPARTMENT 3. ] Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4'/z" 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. 3.2 All entrance and internal roads and alleys shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside radius. 3.3 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. 3.4 Provide a 20-foot wide Fire Lane for all internal roadways all roadways shall be marked in accordance with Appendix D Section D103.6 Signs. 3.5 Commercial and office occupancies will require afire-flow consistent with the International Fire Code to service the proposed project. Fire hydrants shall be placed per Appendix D. 3.6 Provide exterior egress lighting as required by the International Building & Fire Codes. 3.7 Where a portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction is more than 400 feet (122 m) from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided where required by the code official. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2 the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183). For Group R-3 and Group U occupancies, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). ~~ ::I ;1 i~ 3.8 Maintain a separation of 5' from the building to the dumpster enclosure. 3.9 There shall be a fire hydrant within 100' of all Fire Department connections. 3.10 For addressing, Place 10" numbers an the building facing Franklin Road. 4. POLICE DEPARTMENT 4.1 No comments received. 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. Exhibit B Page 3 ~ ,! -~ ~~~ ,~ t~ ~a M r ~ r~ ~ ~ ~, r ~t i R ~rhJ Y. ~~ kY~_. y ;~ iy h .~ -~ i 44iP~; '- ~ ~ `Y + ~ .. ~' o tiw ." ~~ ~ 5 ~~`? . 47,.. ~z ~ j~ ~ ,,,h y~ ~.. ~? +~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ T; h E- an~ ,. !~R y . ~ ~~ ~ 1~Y . ... 4t~ .. .rb?~:~F.`. ~ ~ 'G if~ ~ ~; •`- ~ ~~ ~ S ~" - f^ ~~Y~f ~~ k i-.VY y 7~L ?'t'~'.}~J ai '? CITY OF MERIDIAN PL DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE H~NG DATE OF JULY 6, 2006 }' .; C. 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 i dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. The existing and proposed buildings and uses on this site can accommodate and meet all ~~' dimensional and development regulations of this district. However, previously this site has been ''141 granted modifications to the standard landscape buffers adjacent to Franklin Road and the residential properties to the west. The Planning & Zoning Commission fmds that the subject `' property is large enough to accommodate the required yards (setbacks), parking, landscaping and other features required by the ordinance. 1'he 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 Planning & Zoning Commission fmds 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 r uses in the general neighborhood and with the e>asting or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. The Planning & Zoning Commission fmds that if the applicant complies with the conditions ~ outlined in this report, the general design, construction, operation, and maintenance of the proposed uses 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 Planning & Zoning Commission fmds 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 -; 4~ Commission should rely upon any public testimony provided to determine if the development ' `'~ will adversely affect the other property in the vicinity. ~ ~ si 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. ~; 1~~ ~~ Exhibit B Page 4 5 ,~.i r...i_ ~• ~t F~ xr. , - ~ fir, -,wW;p~. it + ~a~~: a.a ,- `..,';~. .~a= :a- :~~t r '".~' ~~" ,. s,. >" ~~`~a.~~. ~ ~~;~ :~~ai~:. 1 ~,. ~y{~'. ,~,; =' _`~ ;: ,,. G `'~ axo n~ ~~~ ~ r~ rst¢ ., > v rr '~^: :::: ri.:Y.";. ~i <• ~/ ~ ~*,;~,. x~; C~Y'~~:!.~. ii i; '~ fah! ~ ~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PL~ DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE H~NG DATE OF JULY 6, 2006 5 ~:~ ~ ,~ ,, The Planning & Zoning Commission fords that sanitary sewer, domestic water, refuse disposal, ' r 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. ~ , a .µa ~' 6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and ;k 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 Planning & Zoning 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. d~' 7. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment and f, ' 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. r> r' Y" The Planning & Zoning Commission recognizes that traffic and noise may increase with the approval of the subject use in this location; however, the Commission does not believe that the s ~ amount generated will be detrimental to the general welfare of the public. The Commission does r '~~ ' 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 I ~:~ x general welfare of the area. i ' ~ 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. a The Planning & Zoning Commission finds that there should not be any health, safety or t~ environmental problems associated with this development that should be brought to the - Commission's attention. The Commission fords that the proposed use will not result in the fr ~ ~ w destruction, loss or damage of any natural, scenic or historic feature of major importance. -i ~ I I ~ ,;~ y { i S~ ~; ' ~ { 1 ',i ~+ J 4 ~ ~~ t i ~ 1x_ JJ k 1 ~ 1 Exhibit C Page 2 1 3 „~ { ~ k ri I i M ^'r,. ~'fi . '`•''~s~-'•.~, K '..:: ;;i =~ ~ r r :: 1 °'~T -` ; ; :• ` ~ y"/~ L ~ .~' "r ':{ r r ~ ~ uhf t ~ .~#; tix~•'zvt~' ~,~+~ .? :~w ~ r '-'K ;~~d' ^k ~• . , e F~ r~ 4 b ' , +, . °" ,+ , t •,'' ~ ~ $ s ~ 9 - i ~ . r .5 ., , , I e ° j , K:y~p.:~~ .YIi:T f Z Mi'r,~ 4t~'E /y ti l+ t { .ti ~ •.j.: :V'; i••' $ ~ r,:i~; ^aq^•a•' k?'T•, a!'y i~~.' ;,`L:. `a',>. L i ~ ~ 11 t e° t, d .... '..iJ 1 ":^'S',; •;v;, +~.a~ l ~' ph~.sn': 'S'!'x'~" tl ~~ $}~,,Y JS~.v. 3'k.;GYY. 9I 4'~y7 .S~ {a°° -;`~•y~)':J'' a III li }• S.:.iY4 .~V.x,:' ~,. ~:~py: GIY ~ „L+,x'':~•~x,~y F' :. ~I 7 IpW1 `4 :.ai' N: ;'~ai'.:'~~~j`,',~, r, Y'~ YY F..!' . `+ . i` ti I ' - ~ -` ~ '1 K'a ~~r ; ~"i ~ ~ ~ # ~ ~, a~Z ~ ' ; #- ~ ? ~ , .%l. ~,r. :k.E' .^ ~ .+ra: : t :~f +•.,d. ~ ' ~ y" ` ~ ~ I ~+ . F: :r• .. ,;.,. ; • I 1 ^ ' 5%a ' ~ F ~g 'i .~ f^7~>% ':rvS• '3?~i ,.~al~., ~4. ,~~d''"'tY`i.~.'. T:. ~>ry°, f,14 - •# x'~f'r~' ~::i { y -t l II I ,,' : ~ ^ S ~ _ c.j,. r!:~'W i' . y~l 4,a ~;i;,y~ ' ~ . a, t I ~ ` p ~ ,„ K ii. P:],h;~i11 ' '•a ~ti: 'luR•-t'« svi :" F Y.• 1 , ~•~ n~; 1 • t: „~ .+°~;µ. ,, b T. II11rr b 6. 4 J: ~'M' Y ',' ~ i`V ICI { ' I ., %. .,i' .1! '~{i;: +, ;, y e' ~ f. . ~„ a. W } x~~,;l?. sl''~+,r,'„':v'±~~,s w*,~F';.~~i •.k~1.. ..F:. .. III.. II ~ R £~ , ~ ,: ~~ ~ ~~~y f } . T A'.. ". 7. N F - ' ~ '` ~ + III I ~t 1 d~ N t H': . Fnti44' ",".~ ' ~ - j . > • ` ..• " , . ~' • ~ • I ., F . '. .~' .. ~Ls ~t" ~•'I . i54" •:t `;'~ - ~'T. L 7 -'`ys,~'1 z..~% ~": ,t:.1';.~ ~..e; axa ~., •~. t•~'>_.,'.~~' . S ~. 16 ~: ' ~Y, !w, ~ 1~ ~ ~T J ' `ME -`~ i '~1~~1. Y~~'~f ;b.'.' >^f::.~i: >,+_ ~ ~~~ y b.~i;,~C:.i.a w ,'F~,„zyi z 'j:,. ';:~', , '• 'e~i's`y~.Qu~Yx3h:i"if x`:t ~ ~ i .I II { } ,' %'=~"; ~ n -~~{ 'il .' ~ ^ F4.^`_ ~' f.~ '. ,~aaa ., ~i$ ..4, ~' ',# iii;; i.~rn^~'f 5.+~ ~~'~r,• yx...~.+,i; ~'F-k: ~ . ''f,• ~ rit .. i ~' ~ 4 , e ~ ~ I'I~ N 3 • ~ ~ , .1. ~, s •. _ _ ,s, 3 t, . 4."€' - ;; ~': '~ •,f > ' ~ . h ' . ' .,ji; r rt, ' A s • . C ~av , ~i i ., . l a ~~. ;~~ zCi'=f ;.cl~«. K •;' l~ i Y n'~ t 4 T i~ii X i t i I a : • , I ~ i ' _.~. r;~ i l ~ 1 . , ~•. -.~ •'lYZi:.^y,',yfi~'(-~,¢,[.+•~~~i~^~7 ~~4~ b 4 ~ ~ £~a~v' } i']-,.; x :+RYY,q^>'.~ '+' ; •~?~`•Si{• '~ fl •ii'` ~; "~t ~'`E ~~',}. ~~l .'F ?' :.1:.' .31'.,, i •, '+~4y `~ S y K '}' a,,~:i;,¢{.,i}~;~,Rci. ~K'T:1-'.;.~`x;~i; ri':i ~`~• '%F !k $ ' '' Vii;'' `i •~n f. 1 II r 't..• •".?E ~ 4~ $• µt '-~~~;;~.. ;::`•.T::,,V II . .';t-~'z`"+Y ', 4^~K Y ~3A# 'i •fi ~~~•~^ , ~I i 77 • ~ t~ -jai, ^"t~'+ ~f;~,S "",':n"a% . ~K~ 'wy ~ . , ~ ;. ~.gr:t~ .`y~5a x>~;1'+~~y,K,~ ~ .~,5 . 4 (. 3 : a, , X . ~ f~. •-~'?a-1,e~."'<~~ X : ' W 1 .{ ~b y.. ~d's'`~i " ^ i i ~III" k x .•' Y f`~ t~ i y t w• Y : - ' ~ >4y~;. .i. • S M~Si:4 Y . G~ ~ ~ y } I , ,?w , ~ i ~ • •° . Y,.: S~~i.~~.,.I I k Y:Y ' S ' I~ .( R ~, g°u.~ E~ fc. ~ " ~ ~ I I re S f .. ~ 'M !' i ' ..?Y'^ . H Ff ~ ~. I <-.~- »r ,~~.' ~` f ~ 1' ~~;,, e e F~~; s July 31, 2006 MCU 06-001 MERIDIAN PLANNING 8~ ZONING MEETING August 3, 2006 APPLICANT Russell Dunstan ITEM NO. 3~C. REQUEST Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: Conditional Use Permit Modification built two feet into five foot setback (sold prior to discovery of mistake) for Fuller Subdivision No. 5 (Lot 4, Block 5) - 2593 W. Ditch Creek Drive AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: See Attached Findings 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: Date: ~ ~ ~p Phone: ~~'° Emailed: ~, Staff Initials: • Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. ~~ 5. n a. ,;} ai . ~~ ;~ ~.. ~, ~., `j ,. ~I ~: ~M gA ~I~ gyp', d, ~S CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER I ;,i i,~ ~ ~ .~ 1~~~~ ~ ~~ ~ui~riH ~,~, tiR ~ f ~u PiC.tl,; ~ Ili.\91~f? I•v df ~~~ -- ~;~ In the Matter of the Request for Modification to a Conditional Use Permit for residential home built two feet into five-foot setback (sold prior to discovery of mistake) for Fuller Subdivision No. 5 (Lot 4, Block 5)- 2593 W. Ditch Creek Drive by Russell Dunstan. Case No(s). MCU-06-001 For the Planning & Zoning Commission Hearing Date of: July 20, 2006 (findings approved on August 3, 2006 Commission agenda) A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of July 20, 2006 incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of July 20, 2006 incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of July 20, 2006 incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of July 20, 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-SA. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). CUP-06-001 -PAGE 1 of 4 r, _ :~_ ~ e ~~'~''. ~i~ '~ 'T^.I ~ i k'~-~-i , '1t Y~$e A ^ ~5 r~ R^ 1 ~ . y `I.^.`^S`. ,C.IH~ ~ f Wl~.;p!~. :SY~ ~ j _ _~~(~i s ~ 1 j' ~ ^ ~ ~. ~ 5^ . ,. . !p ~F ~ $ ~,. Y, S ~~ r ~ " ~rF4 r . ±. ~~ ;~~:" r=.~ k ~U ; yk i ~~ i t ~L f ~ £: µ r.ti/F: ~ ~ I •~ _ f u! 2 r. ~t R ~L '~.~ a ~! "Y "i', :v ~r 7 ~.. ~ K d`u~+ ;G - r i'~ L 4 a'rAyT~~CY. ~~ g :. j; .M1 t ~C4 "' _ i.y.i'''. -.'~' ~ k~ i -. ~~ ~~~ e., aW[ SNri% µgh~; ~y~ y SF, ~~IA}~ irO.S ~Er~. . ... ~ X I n S. ~ ~ ' 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 approvaU 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 20, 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 +. C Pursuant to the Planning & Zoning Commission's authority as provided in Meridian City 1 '` Code § 11-SA and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein j adopted, it is hereby ordered that: ~ 1. The applicant's Modification to CUP Site Plan as evidenced by having submitted the Site Plan, dated October 5, 2005 is hereby conditionally approved; and, 2. The site specific and standard conditions of approval are as shown in the attached Staff Report for the hearing date of July 20, 2006 incorporated by reference. ` s D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits 1. Notice of Eighteen (18) Month Conditional Use Permit Duration Please take notice that the conditional use permit, when granted, shall be valid fora 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-SB-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 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER ;3 CASE NO(S). CUP-06-001 -PAGE 2 of 4 °;; E i i ~ ~ 7 ~ ~.. .~ a• ~r f, i~ 4 ~ 1 ; a-g ' ~ ~ r . k '. i Ii °UI '~ .~ ~Y~ ~ ~ ~ , rkF ~ +h ~~~ ~ ~+ :~95. }} S4 t ` _ ~ f J ,Kr . y~ ~ u 1' ` f . } I ~gC~J}] ~;. ~;sfx~` F A3+1~x xak ti ~~: iei- _ ~t ~ ~~~ F ~ .. ~ f + '„~ r n~j.-!nHh C h ~~ ~ ~ ~4 a j`y~ , - a ~~~' . : ~.,.,,, q, d d .~w_,~+f"~, 4 ws, 0 e4 T ~ti h ,~' r . h ~!!~~ ' y .. am` , a C .. E k i~~G'~OIP~ s e time extensions up to eighteen (18) months as determined and approved by the Commission maybe 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 maybe 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 maybe 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 20, 2006 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). CUP-06-001 -PAGE 3 of 4 j-~~~: , , ~'.- t ~ fi~~~ J.,, n By action of the Planning & Zoning Commission at its regular meeting held on the ~ day of ~ ~,, , 2006. ~;:, <; COMMISSIONER MICHAEL ROHM VOTED ,~ ti; COMMISSIONER DAVID MOE VOTED t_,,~ p~ ~: COMMISSIONER WENDY NEWTON-HUCKABAY VOTED y ''"~ -~ i`"~' '` COMMISSIONER KEITH BORUP VOTED ~A4S~,~ '-t COMMISSIONER DAVID ZAREMBA VOTED ~1~3s~,NT ~:i is fc" ,~ , ~~~ CHAIRMAN MICHAEL HM _r ~o ~ +~ s/i ~ ~ ` ` '~ , Attest: ~ -' ~ ~~ = ,- _ ~zd~u ` " ~ ~'' ara Green, Deputy i~ Clerk ~ ~ ~r~°~ ' =, ~ ~ ~ ® ~T 'Q"( ~ a` ~ ~y a ~i`, 7 ~~ ~\,a~ ;, Copy served upon Ap~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e~ P,~~ining Department, Public Works Department and City Attorney. ~, x, fi~,' ~, ~ ~ 1 B ~~~U~ ~-p y: ~~~~1`~C v L Dated: V~'~Y~ - ` ~ City Clerk ; ;~: A" r ,, '° CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER ~,r ` v: z •, :P; CASE NO(S). CUP-06-001 -PAGE 4 of 4 Y ~J',Xi7'yr~`. ..... ~a r CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANN~DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE~VG DATE OF Ji1LY 20, 2006 :. t4 ~':: ", a x ' -' 1~~~~`T*~ I~u STAFF REPORT Hearing Date: 7/20/2006 4z'" "" ~- ~ '~ TO: Planning & Zoning Commission ,I~~~~!~[~~i~~ ' '~ >r a~ FROM: Jenny Veatch, Associate City Planner ~ ~ ~~~ YfX~ -~, ~ ~; _ ~~..~z SUBJECT: Russell Dunstan `~°~'~ a~~~ ~ '*`~~' ' ~4 ;L:' t~ l _~ MCU-06-001 ~ , ~ ~ Conditional Use Permit Modification for residential home built two feet into five-foot setback in R-4 zone, by Russell Dunstan. ,~ . ~`~ , ~ ~ 1.5UMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'S REQUEST ~~ °`` ~~R `` . ~ The a hcan Russell Dunstan has a hed for a Conditional Use Permit Modification approval for a Pp ~ >; ~ PP ~~ ~; residential home built two feet into afive-foot side setback in an R-4 zone. Mr. Dunstan was given a plat ' ~ " that showed the lot frontage width as seventy-six feet. However, a revised plat shows the lot frontage is ' ri actually seventy-four feet. The home was sold prior to discovering the mistake in the setback. The subject ~~ .~~- site is located at 2593 W. Ditch Creek Drive, Lot 4 Block 15 in the Fulfer Subdivision #5 east of N. Ten ' ' , Mile Road in Section 26, Township 4 North, Range 1 West. Note: There is some discrepancy in the ~ zoning for this site. This portion of the Lochsa Falls preliminary plat was sold to an adjoining developer ` and final platted as Fulfer Subdivsion. The preliminary plat and CUP-02-012 in Lochsa falls were zoned R-4. The final plat for Fulfer Subdivision No. 5 was also zoned R-4. However, the City of Meridian Zoning map and the Ada County Assessor currently show the lot in question as zoned R-8. This report >. ~ ~ ~ reflects the R-4 zone designation. Staff is researching this discrepancy. . 2. SUNIMARY RECOMMENDATION ~! -n ._ , Staff met with the applicant for apre-application meeting and provided the following options to the ,;~ ;; applicant regarding the home constructed into the side setback. The applicant could tear down and ~ ~ reconstruct the home. He could apply for a variance and staff would not be able to make the findings for ;. approval. It would go forward to Council with a recommendation for denial. Or, he could request ~ approval of a CU modification because the original CUP requested reduced setbacks. The applicant chose ~, ~ the latter option. Staff has provided a detailed analysis of the requested application below. Staff recommends approval of MCU-06-001 Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to modify the side setback of CUP-02-012 of five feet to three feet for Russell Dunstan, at the site of 2593 W Ditch Creek ONLY as :~ presented in the Staff Report for the hearing date of July 20 2006 subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit B. On July 20, 2006 the Meridian Planning & Zonine Commission voted to auprove the ~, ~ subject apulication with the conditions in Exhibit B. ~~ 1 a. Summary of Public Hearings: ~ . :' i. In favor: Russell Dunstan ~, ii. In opposition: None ~ iii. Commenting: None ,` iv. Staff presenting application: Jenny Veatch ~~ ' `; v. Other staff commenting on application: Caleb Hood b. Key Issues of Discussion by Commission: ~~. ~~ i. None I c. Key Commission Changes to Staff Recommendation: jf i. Modify Process Facts, S.b, in Staff Report from "Miscellaneous applications " '~~ to read, "Modification to Conditional Use applications.. " ~~ ` 3. PROPOSED MOTIONS ~, _,, ~, Russell Dunstan (MCU-06-001) -Page 1 'i ~, -:~ t ~ fx ~~,; ~, ~~~, KA(d~~~ ~~ S~', z~ f~ y ., ~~ ._ . _ t,p ~ ~~~ '~" c ~,,3 .~;. ,~ ~ ~ ,mow. P • -,.E"~ SF .~.' .~ ~ yrs ~"~ ~ M ~' ~c~44;.7t, 4r~ K > ~ I ~~~: ~ 5 '1l ' ui.~ : . 4 } .~ ~~ ~ , Q( ~ g~ ftl ~ l' { {. } i7~ } 1~~{y~~T '~t ''n A.w~~ ~W 4. ~g fi~ ~y1f; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ` 44 1 ~r r j Y ~ h < ~~, _ IZ .~ . ;; CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANK EPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE~•iG DATE OF JULY 20, 2006 s ~: `°~` Approval n After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number MCU- ;'~`' 06-001 as presented in the Staff Report for the hearing date of July 20, 2006, with the following _'~ '~ , modifications to the conditions of approval: (add any proposed modifications). I fiu-ther move to direct staff to prepare an appropriate findings document to be considered at the next Planning and =~ ' ~' Zoning Commission hearing on August 3, 2006. r~ ' Denial ~° „ After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number MCU-06- ^ ' ~ ' ~ 001 as presented during the hearing of July 20, 2006, for the following reasons: (you must state i r._ _. specific reason(s) for the denial of the Conditional Use Permit Modification.) 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 August 3, 2006. ~. ,~ +.'i , :~: '' Continuance After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to continue File Number ~; '3' MCU-06-001 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following "Y? i ~ reason(s): (you should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) ; ~ + . 9 ; 4. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS ~ a. Site Address/Location: 2593 W. Ditch Creek Drive, Lot 4 Block 15, Fulfer Subdivision #5, ~~ ~. ~- ;y : ~~ east of Ten Mile Road in Section 26, T4N Rl W. r b. Owners: ~'' ~~ John and Sandra Calpin n '''` ~ 2593 W. Ditch Creek Drive ?~ ' Meridian, ID 83642 '~ c. Applicant: Russell Dunstan ~ 175 Dewey Lane Nampa, ID 83687 `I ~~ d. Representative: Russell Dunstan t e. Present Zoning: R-4 f. Present Comprehensive Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential g. Description of Applicant's Request: The applicant is requesting Conditional Use Permit Modification approval for a residential home built two feet into a five foot side setback in an '~ R-4 zone. The home was sold prior to discovering the mistake in the setback. 1 1. Date of CUP Site Plan (attached in Exhibit A): October 5, 2005 >I `' ' S. PROCESS FACTS a. The subject application will in fact constitute a conditional use as determined by the Unified Develo ment Code. B reason of the rovisions of UDC 11-SB- 6 a ubli P Y P p c hearing is required before the Planning and Zoning Commission on this matter. I b. #1}ssel~eeus Modifications to Conditional Use applications are not currently addressed in `,~~ Title 11 of the Meridian City Code. It has been determined by the City's Legal Department ~M `ik~ Russell Dunstan (MCU-06-001) -Page 2 1 ~, a ,. . ,4¢h f I - i - r ~ 9 r ~ ' ~?~` {t .. i J .. .., . ,. ,v :x• . Let ? ~ 1 , . ~ 1 , . L: yi.. is S{~ ~N n id.-S, ' ~ ~ 4 1 ^: ' ' ., a `+.,{ . lea }! .:~ . { f 4 IU'^ ~ ? , t ~~ .. F... + ,• . .. `r» gg.r. a: _.. H~ ~ i I ? :~$ } 3-•'i ~p~. ~ % I " ` ' ~ i!.~,~ k ` '~'.r='.:IS:.: ;i .5' .:a -1~ • : C • 1 ~ y: `a" NF 31 'yik; i. , 'G;;= is {) /~'~',~~~.' }., :r .'`^eT:~ : ~" ~ ` . . . . . Jt.j k ' 4A' fk r•` 3{~ _ , ln.: ~•`",r:.'..~ ;c,"• + ~, , ~~ { ~ rd~'Ne^ ~Rl h~ +~!'.S'~ 1 ~ ~ 3 .. 2~'~.+d'.t IN~'.i.~~`hPRtf ~~ _ I . ~ ' •y,s ,p,.4.:. :~ .: RM. i. H.c~."'~ ~ I 4 yA~ .J~, II . .. ~. I~^J'~~ II '~ f ~ rc~ t 51,r,T'~ss"-~~''~~~ c.Y "~:~~ ! i.1 Ij 1 :4~ 4~.,z?!..R~'::!r'"~~'F.~;., tw"' its ... .~ • f ~'L:~'yYY+'.Fi is .!>'.Yy: S f f I .rFr'+~y°:'•f A ~ f ~ .L;+e„~s~'~t .Yt~•~atf r7` '4 L '~>.~?%~ ~~ e ^~is;~. ~. F fi i ~'~ ~' ~ v f ' ~5^T~'~'a`~r'b`$'..'!p .1~%'t _ '~y~„ rv~' ~r~e~ .. ~ ~~.' yid 9?, 'b ~+ t. _ "' ` . x. 'r s .r di.Ys. # , 7 .*;°' (iL^.Z~ i.~ yP 4: ;.:..' _ ~ ` ` x ,,1,; t~. •r„, 3 I~; ; y ,x., i„k'~ ~=,+:~~;;~; ~ .S%k~7f >at *~%] ~-vJ 1 ~ : it ~ ~~ ; ,;;;p:i~"; x rl.°ti 4.~ v F ?r~"i'~~ `;r a ::f.~ C !+' ' ' 5 ~,,~~NN Ii )j ~~'~ C I ~: .~ V ~~^ ~ ( w~, ~ . i' ~~ At~ '..~. yr' •.~'.:':e~: I ' A € ..+. ": ~~;~.a`ajw Ty'">?j. `!.S ~.. r.. I ~ ~ 1 ~ ' ~ .T wtti y'' + :Sc.~~`'d'w"'~~`. ~..F C • ` . J'.," ~` y :,- iE S'>`M VL.,~.i ,M'G:~Y;w r S . fiiA}',Y" ~n ~ i ~ ~ ~ y, ,r Ae, .(i...:.3' , ` . ~. of • ' I N r r ` +'`, f ' ~ •. y ' ~v ' " ~ ~ I f ~ : k. ; _ .`'!'• rri:3-• [ , ~.,t,~ ' ,J, / ~ Sr 1q ~1' Y: &SJ~' Yl' gyp-"l kv' 2 S ~S ~ 9( C ~.`r. . M ' ` ' i $ 'i ii i ' yd ~ ~ ~ M k ~. x 1 r < ;2' €': ~yJ~[r"•;'s~ ~~~~ {~yy~.~'.'+ 'y .~ .i•b K„ •W°' ~jk }.'~n~~'r2<l~V'j2°. k~~`~r ~ • ~ ' + ~' -.. 4 i~j' k •J . ~~Y~ ~ a .?ti."~ Fa.. j` R~ ,k ' . '' i . f • ' : ~$ » t. h ' r~~ ' .~W • r~ f.a... r . ~ • ".. rx .. ','~ , ~ ~i~,~ x :1.. = i~. ( 7.' ~ 's° .~fl: ~ ~ a~ ^' ~'{°:#?a",a!^'_ ~ -7f!3~3-. ~ ~ ICI n~ .5 : ' .w~A.'L~'~fiS~ I ~ r ~ Y • .r ..> .7 ~'R. ;r~ ' ' I '^;~;4 ,. ~.:'- i~ax '.~ "~r~'z'~ ,k ~i~' ~ ~ ~ t ~ e~i~; }}i w F'>yf~ J;'±~ ~ Z a ' r I 3, '^~.,_ r 1 r ~r ~ ~I a .:.`~,•' ..f ~ far ~i~., ~ ~ i~lti , V~^Y 11 ^• .. ::'rw'y.F ~.prrys~ _~;S~rT` i I Y Y• ,G ~! ' x' 2 y ' ~ ' ~~ x IS ..f t.}i I `•••'vx'"•`F'q '.~' tia? - r Af+P?,~. .: ~ .. :.K . 3y . ii r r,?~ ~" ~~ ~ r l,•. ..~: •r .. } . r rs~ I d. +' , a"•:, yr ! I .:, ~ ~`r°.','..'3,.~' it a(. ~ II g y s - - ~ yN .~;*;f ~,f'.. S. :y`h~"~•+lv~'iK"^F+ eP l 'l ~ : ~ v` ~k ' # ~"=~ ° ' ` ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ +r»'.r':Ft~` +^~ t r~:r2"` :aCr$~r .: ~,~ fir: _ ¢.~ a:y . , x - ~~, ~~ ~ s r r .. yt• x F~,x F ~c ,. ' .'~ -~4a + 4.: ' r : A,. } z';' 'F ~ ~ ~ ' r .. .'~: . Y . `ar f^' LLv.~,.l: `;~ .Y+:ba~;ar.'!."ry' 't=f~a ,;. ~.; I' R e.. I ~ ~ ~'~~y iYdi{1.ff~e ' ~'~it:.Y ~k`~-~. , ': i"'I . n . . (~ P.;~ r: ~' YY++.~i'~::{~; i~' ^~~ ..ti~, l :3 v;•~ -wGT ~si '(..iy.~ y ~ ? V. f : ~,.t' xi •~~.. 5 ~' ~ ~ ~ ~ ! ~ '~'i ~w' , . ~ x. A ..X, 7~ ~ y M ~ 3~`p"~ +1r4, s ~ ~, ~ 1 1•.7~'. „~' '~, ,' re , ~ e 7 rte' :'4 4 ~•~ - '~ ._ ,. n ,1 I .. , ~ +i.ti L +.~' au.... :~ N: ~; ,z~f ,t y CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANN~DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE~1G DATE OF NLY 20, 2006 that a miscellaneous application to amend a recorded development agreement will in fact require a public hearing before the City Council. c. Newspaper notifications published on: July 3`a and July 17`", 2006 d. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: June 23~', 2006 e. Applicant posted notice on site by: July 10`", 2006 6. LAND USE a. Existing Land Use(s): Single-family residential b. Description of Character of Surrounding Area: Residential c. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning 1. North: Lochsa Falls Subdivision, zoned R-4. 2. East: Paramount Subdivision, zoned C-G. 3. South: Bridgetower Subdivision, zoned R-4. 4. West: Lochsa Falls Subdivision, zoned R-4. d. History of Previous Actions: In August, 2003, CUP-02-012 was approved for the Planned Development, Lochsa Falls Subdivision of which this site is a part, to allow reduced lot size and frontage, and to exceed block length requirements. A side setback of five feet was requested in the original CUP. This is the only setback that is applicable to this request for modification of the CUP. (Please note that this portion of the Lochsa Falls preliminary plat was sold to an adjoining developer and final platted as Fulfer Subdivsion.) e. Existing Constraints and Opportunities 1. Public Works Location of sewer: Building already serviced. Location of water: Building already serviced. Issues or concerns: None. 2. Vegetation: None. 3. Flood plain: NA 4. Canals/Ditches Irrigation: No major facilities. 5. Hazards: None 6. Existing Zoning: R-4 7. Size of Property: 9,250 square feet f. Conditional Use Information: 1. Non-residential square footage: N/A 2. Proposed building height: 32 feet 3. Number of Residential units: 1 g. Off-Street Parking: 1. Parking spaces required: 2 2. Parking spaces proposed: 3 Russell Dunstan (MCU-06-001) -Page 3 ~:~<. ~~.. ;~a;,; ; ~., r: CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNI~EPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HEt~G DATE OF JULY 20, 2006 ,'e h. Proposed and Required Residential Setbacks: ~' R-4 Setbacks (in feet) Proposed CUP-02-012 Required `~ Front Living Area (to sidewalk) 20 20 20 Front Accessed Garage (to sidewalk) 20 20 20 ~~ i ~_.. Side 3 5 5 Rear 48 15 15 µ Frontage (garage facing street) 74 60 80 ~' Lot Size (garage facing street) 9,250 6,500 8,000 ,, '" "~ i. Summary of Proposed Streets and/or Access (private, public, common drive, etc.): Access to the site will be from an existing street, W. Ditch Creek Drive. NOTE: The ACRD has provided no comments related to this site, as it has no new conditions for the subject applicant. 7. COMMENTS MEETING On June 30, 2006 Planning Staff held an agency comments meeting. The agencies and departments t~ present include: Meridian Fire Department, Meridian Police 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 "Medium Density Residential" on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. Medium density residential areas are anticipated to contain three to eight dwellings per acre (see Chapter VII, Page 95 of the Comprehensive Plan.) Staff fmds 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 lands in the `~` ~~ following manner: • 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 r; , Rural Fire Department. r • 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 (AChID) and ITD. This service will not 1 jl 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. }~ ~ Russell Dunstan (MCU-06-001) -Page 4 ~; ~ - ~`` ~ x'11 F , ~N ~S + E~ ~~ 3'ar ~ $Pf .:A i. ~.. ~ ' J ~ ,.:~ ~ Q X' l } ~,. t. ~~.'iT:.. - ~ f ~, ' I ~ r ~~ . ~ • ~.~ ~ ; t~ , ~ a ,:,. r . . , _. . :~ . . :s ~ ~ W f y_ F ~ F f ti, ~... ~: 4 V, r i djj'r` J }~ ~ 2`~~. ~t~~`y~ w BFI i j t r~ S. i+r.'. ~, ~I III I ' t ~ y~,~.. 3 ~ ~ fry C~ ~ ~:. :~ I r~ . '~ ~ - { L y ~ J%'. !~ ~1 ~~ SQ , - II t F. e . r i h" ~f 1 .~ J { t' h ~ . .~ ° ~~ r ~;~ ~. ~ ~ a ~ _ ~ a~ ; ;~ ~ ~ - r ~ `" ~~ t .._ . z "1i '; G ,u reeaatqq~5~ k'~ '~ ~ ~ - .- ' S. i ~ .'t,61 g a d i 4~~YwA S ' i fs ~ L,• ,. i 1 ~+ i l 7y ~ T' f f yA~~~, ~: :, w.a. t ~~~~ ~ ~ : a;~,. ,~ f t,!. ,$ ~; Y ' ~, a ~~ k` 1 ~ t :. ~. 4 ~~ ~±{ }}i 1{ r~ '{ ;~ ~a ~: :~. ~, CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANN~DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE~1G DATE OF JULY 20, 2006 • Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective C, Action 1 -Protect existing residential properties from incompatible land use development on adjacent parcels. The applicant is proposing a modification to a conditional use in a residential zone. Staff finds that the existing single family residential properties to the north, south, east and west, are compatible with the proposed (existing site. • Chapter VII, Goal TV, Objective C, Action 10 - Support a variety of residential categories (low-, medium-, and high-density single-family, multi-family, townhouses, duplexes, apartments, condominiums, etc 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. Staff finds that the proposal is generally harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. 9. ZONING ORDINANCE a. Zoning Schedule of Use Control: UDC 11-2A-2 lists single-family, detached dwellings as a permitted use in the R-4 zone. b. Purpose Statement of Zone: R-4 Medium-Density Residential: The purpose of the residential districts is to provide for a range of housing opportunities consistent with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. Connection to the City of Meridian water and sewer systems is a requirement for all residential districts. Residential districts are distinguished by the allowable density of dwelling units per acre and corresponding housing types that can be accommodated within the density range. 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 5-1.0, prepared by Gowanwood Associates, Inc., dated October 5, 2005, with the following comments: Existing Approvals: This site has previously been approved for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP-02-012) to a Planned Development, Lochsa Falls Subdivision of which this site is a part, to allow reduced lot size and frontage, and to exceed block length requirements (see above for proposed and required setbacks). Staff recommends that the existing home be allowed to stay with the proposed use. Uses: The applicant is proposing that the existing residential home which, was built two feet into the five-foot setback, remain with no other changes. Conditional Uses: In approving any conditional use, the decision-making body may prescribe appropriate conditions, bonds and safeguards in conformity with this Title that: minimise adverse impact of the use on other property, control the sequence and timing of the use, control the duration of the use, assure that the use and the property in which the use is located is maintained properly, designate the exact location and nature of the use and the property development, require the provision for on-site or off-site public facilities or services, required Russell Dunstan (MCU-06-001) -Page $ ~* ~ ; ~dar ~ ~z~ ._ ~: ~ ,~ < ~~~3 " '' ~ ~ ° r, x n 5 }' ~;.' 1~ ~~ L{ ,~ 4 t L. ~ ~y ~,i, ~3~ ~'~ ~ ~3, ~a:~. ~.~, . _ ~., 1 ~, , `_ k ~.-i J ~ M -~~+h~13~~ , ~ ~~N Y `fl ~ 7 • ~G ~nr ~i ~~ a ` ~ . ~,„ u ay ~' ~~ ~, A ,~.' , Ri) h ~ ~. q nk~~~ ri ti n ;~_, w ~. ,; ~. .. r:~- -~ ~~ t r} ~~ ~1 ~. n. ;+ i ~. ~fl 1 ;( .- ;; ~' 'a 4'n S y ;3 5 a ~,:. ~, a 1 ~; ;; . y" 7; _.. , ':~~~ .:lk ~_ -1 i ~~ ~, ~;: ~~~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANN~DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE~iG DATE OF JULY 20, 2006 more restrictive standards than those generally required in this Title, and require mitigation of adverse impacts of the proposed development upon service delivery by any political subdivision, including school districts, that provides services within the City (UDC 11-SB- 6D). Vacation: To ensure that all of the conditions of approval listed in Exhibit B aze complied with, the applicant should be required to obtain a Vacation for the two-foot easement from the Planning Department. The home encroaches into a public utilities, drainage and irrigation easement centered on the interior lot lines of the subdivision. b. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of MCU-06-001 Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to modify the side setback of CUP-02-012 of five feet to three feet for Russell Dunstan, at the site of 2593 W. Ditch Creek ONLY as presented in the Staff Report for the hearing date of July 20.2006 subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit B On July 20, 2006, the Meridian Plamung & Zoning Commission voted to aAUrove the subiect CUP with the conditions listed in Exhibit B of the Staff Report 11. EXHIBITS A. Drawings 1. CUP Site (dated October 5, 2005) B. Conditions of Approval 1. Planning Department 2. Public Works Department 3. Fire Department 4. Police Department 5. Sanitary Service Company 6. Ada County Highway District 7. Central District Health Department 8. Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District. C. Required Findings from Zoning Ordinance Russell Dunstan (MCU-06-001) -Page f) g ,' :a.= rt ~i'. ..- "-1 1 }a ~ "~~ ~e t '~?~ ,+ t k iy 3+£ 4,;; ~' a~ :% f FI(y ~g~7p` ?V '6 ~Pf~C ~~t fj ~`: .t L § ~'Y' F. t ~~ ~ L, f ~ ~ , }lt: S ti ' I ~ 4 . , 6~ .. ~ y, 5 ,. ~1~ ` R j ~ - „i F ~l~ ~~~ {~~. ! 7! ~3 i ~ a Y yi ~ l f o-r ~ ....a,t`~~~`f;~~j, ~n~1` h r ~ - b _ ~ ~~ ~' t ~ ~ M, iti~~ 1~ J c 1 F ~^. , C~ y _ ~' n . ~ ~L`' ~' * 'sir . :~~ «, .... u. F~ ~. ~. a: Y ,;: ~. ~: r ~. .~ { r- . ; ik ~ ;1 t? '. _ `i i' `~ ~ !'I ~~~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANN~DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE~G DATE OF JULY 20, 2006 A. Drawings 1. CUP Site (dated October 5, 2005) ~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~a?d do ~ ~ ~? g € ~ ~ e 12900' p' Sp' 1)" E. a ~s sA ~ ~ m~~ $ a r---------~------ ~ e ~ ~ ~ 2.9r oz 9r \ \ \' ~ \\\ \\ ~~ ~ s II ~ ~~\~\ ~~' ~ a~ t ~ - ~ a ,~~ ~ •~ . ~ Ep--sp.9l• - -.~ R= 129.00' N. pp• 9p' J7' E. ro >~ w ~\ ` / v - ~s~gms~ ~ -~rv~o~g N~~ao~-' o gn< ~AOOaAAO ~~a9~~a --+ °~~~~~ A =A bS ,~~~AO- ~ ~~~ ~ ns°s~, o ~ D ~, z ~ s a ~ ~ ~ ~ N I g tio~o~S ~ ~°~ ~ ~ ~ bo Z - y Ig°gv~g ~ ` ~~W~'K~ T yl 1 ~ m ~r RUSS DUNSTAN ~` " ~~ HOMES co /'~~~ ~~ DPAVm BT. --L~- j ~ `~ • r OOL A950 CiATES tN pnECVEO Br~ _ G. D] 1TII dnlvad @mE tlMmen INte pBAT (2f&ppg-OBr/ ROT p4Tf- ;: -1;/ Exhibit A -Page 1 i~ ~; ~: ~ x~ ; Y J ~ .,~.~,. ~~,.e '. W / ~Y" ~ ~ { ~~L F t Illy' ,_ - } t(~' fY L ~? ~ ~' j1;Y }4 ~,y ~n~ ' ~~ ~'~ .„ ~3 ~ {~ 1 , ~ ~ /. i. ~' 7~ ~e.l ~ y i $gl T' !FCC^S +~. {y Z ~i~/i l _. _ y ', f ~ S~ ~ SH $ ; -1 +~ , .. lp / ~. ~ ^rl '~~ ~"~4`~.i~l~l" .4 at j t~% C. 4S 4 r r S f - {,' 1 ~ i vg~. v 7. r t ` esu~tl:~ih `;y~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANN~EPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE~TG DATE OF JULY 20, 2006 ~.3 ,, .{ ~" B. Conditions of Approval 1. PLANNING DEPARTMENTS ''~' ~` 1.1 The CUP Site Plan labeled as 5-1.0, prepared by Gowanwood Associates, Inc., dated October 5, _ 2005 is approved, with the conditions listed herein. The applicant shall comply with all applicable provisions from the previous CUP-02-012 approval for this site. ~~ 1.2 To ensure that all of the conditions of approval for MCU-06-001 are complied with, the . applicant shall be required to obtain a Vacation (VAC) for the two feet of public utilities, ?' irrigation and drainage easement. ~;, 1.3 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 Public Works has no concerns with this application providing the applicant vacate the portion of the easement in which the house is encroaching upon. 3. FIRE DEPARTMENT ~~ 3.1 The proposed project has no fire department concerns. 4. POLICE DEPARTMENT " 4.1 The Police Department has no concerns related to the site design submitted with the application. 5. SANITARY SERVICES COMPANY '~ 5.1 SSC has no comments related to this application. 6. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT ;1 ~` 6.1 ACRD has no site specific requirements at this time. 7. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT 7.1 No objections to this proposal. I~ 8. NAMPA AND MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT 8.1 No comments on this application. ~~ ;a ''j I -~ ~ i Y ~` (~ 'I ~'i "'if ~I Exhibit B t } t ~ I ~ ~~ ''I 'g h - fa ^ ~L 11 ~ ' ' ~ ~ 1 n y ti' . r 'rj S v M ~4. ' ..J ~•;~ ,y~.'"^ a'.a~.pj,~ ~ ~ ~ }> ~, • '~ 11 ~ ~ ~4 ._ rf Wxi'Lt~ ~~~• ~ t ~H ~ r f ~3AA I ~, t., .: ` FY 7'Y[f9Y d ~ ., ~~Y". .., a °K y*~ %k.^.^`. ajA3's ': •'.'+ ' ~~~~ ; tl ) ~E 3 ~ ( , i. R.: .s.~Gt y; i' ~; ~•. i s '{f~ a f 1 ~ x ~ s ~ '~'u;m..vr, iy~ •5~:3:C~ p~'^S Si:.f ~ x: \ ~ ~ " 11 9 • ~. i , MY ~} `'f ~ rt~.i4ii"i/•Y.~.. ~~ ,, q. ..1. r;~ 'F " ~. .'" 6'~ ~' + + ,f ~ § ~~. . e~ ~~ A ~ ~ '~ryf, tfe~ .~ 7$ y wf..~ ~ ~~' ~ d i' ~z S SS S:s~~:~. .p!~~ril'•'/~~rn~~^F~ T s cad;. 7, a i I~ ` ~ ' ~ te ~ -, • i':'•~5"4.i°! t-`~"~e ~.t ~~.~.' ; 'C ~',' _ *„',;~ :n, .t f~ + pp r ~~ Ty: a h v-.'" il~',< `• F 41F..: ~xf "7 . " Iy~RIY++t` x$'fka t>~e .•0..r. r. .t, iY':• ,~Y +A`ty '.SM", ':pix". .~°fo. ?, 'iia ~;~ d~~sb ;,^^ ~ ~'' , (( f . ~~ P '7A 'f .ht+'~: Yy. ^f%~y'9fy~'vry~~~ 4~'i'T~~ ~ $r : ..~ T 9fiT ' ~ f ~ ICI. j *. , . rtiF 1i aY a.,axt. 4 '^. ~af~• `X '~f ~' ~~ ~ , ~ati . 3• ~ .34 :.; ` . . ~~~ ~1 q"eS~' •~T°m,eS~`.~ •-~'.~~' i~i3 v ~ I ~ z~'t "' ~~ a ..Yx,.: x.,yy~e~~ z ~q ,: .. ;bW .y,~,yy"~Sf y S. j I ~. ~ 5"Y~iz. 'ry "cr~{r€;," ~'~fC.. ~~g$$y55.'+m#.. ~, ~:t'~7'i~'Y ~ ~ ~ ~ ;=.~. ::.n • ~.~5~~ i~y~.K `y~4~:.'~i7.i~., ~ rv^ f ' T `t , ...:... # .t .(.~s ahi~ '.b~.k.F4 ~ V ( ~... Y : : y'Rlf*<•, , ls~ij, ~ ~ Y. TF. ~ ~~ ~ {I f..~ ~`!S7 u . '~'r'=?~,..R.',~,~"`$'' r,t: f '1 ~~ %, '-.Gs~"s- {s+ F N v~ r.k , .fir >: ,,~ •' ~ ~ " I`Yr' l ~i ~ 11~., _ II ~ k~iPF+', .LLV~'1 ^'a.. ..~''~• !~;'~'a..-..re's'~ a ~:.: ~:4 °. S . 7 ~ ~ r' ~ ,t1 • Ai^ - " ' §/ ~y, a2 ",~31~~f~$: ~iH:;.~"~ . ~ . 3~J s,\4t'•:.,f"k5 ".~a~$, A~'.+C~f.~'l g~.~:.~"r`~ ~y%R ` I.~~ ~ ~ ' ~ • • $@, . „~ e.'~y, ~,y,' ~ { .'~.y?'a ~ ~~1~ f3, ~s'Y'1Y i-±w!.} 'f~~r.7~:;p, ~1• J7 3 i i . SI' ,;~~ ~F bt~r. T s" ~ * ~''T 7„' y~fq'~',_„~i .l.. "C'i2.' +. IH fl' °Z", ~~ 'f w`7.,.1f'.~":F" '~ z~ ~ .~ " .;'4 ~x'i3~3k~PF d~~p~~^'°+;~{~~es .6 p' ` ' - ~ s^. .+R . ;4"~• .t-~P: ..Yt` `, .~• 't "9A~a'b R° y , d.,'C Y..+"~.x ~; ~kYJ,:Hi lla ,. f i :°• i5r ••~~~, ~ ~ ~ ` i a ~ s ~ , ~...P~ { ...@' :'y~ T - s", , ~. , . a .. u ~ ~~ ' ~ F ' , J1 , '+1, . f ~ ~, t 4 ~~,c W ?k~ ` Sx ~ ~ .r y ,, .; .,..r . 1 ~ '.. . r ..~ S%~ .. . .. Y ~~ ~...:. .>.^•.. .~.,,'..v.:~U....':ii~,Y:~.nlij'v~ r ~ , . }~ ,.r.,~" - .. . . . y . ~., r'^ ' ~.!.: . f.'~. 1 l. ;rv':.~~~i,4f ry,i~.j~ a' :fK .~ i ,.r,. :~~a~. d~,?~;ja8~N=5't:.3 ,L •` «~'~~~ ~ ,I ~ ~: I '.~° .1t. '..+k;^ ~`~.+::,t ~• ~~~3`. .-raa"::~P •Y „ ~ S~ l~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ;:r ~ ~ r t ;' '4 ~ " : r r '3 ~ , ~ + . alE' yg~ 1~. +t ~'~yffft+tt 7 J ~ '~}yt i1 ~ { r ., p,. ~ „eo. , y „ f ,. ~a ~.'~, '<li ,,^tin`¢~^!~. r V 's :':Y:,Y'_FfA ..;R: . 'd~ i.$t r :vl ~, '~r. 4 .i~ A 1{ ye. E 1' ~Y V'~''ar r u 1 ;.,~ t .( ~t r ~ ~'g Y T C+ ~` .,~a ~;: ',,. ~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANN~DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE~1G DATE OF JULY 20, 2006 ~, ~a ~~ ,- C. Required Findings from Zoning Ordinance `.i `~` f: 1. Conditional Use Permit Modification Findings: ~ ; CUP Findings: ~ ~ The Commission shall base its determination on the Conditional Use Permit Modification ~'~`'~ request upon the following: zz~,' 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 Planning & Zoning Commission finds the existing building on this site cannot accommodate and meet all dimensional and development regulations of this district. This site has previously been approved for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP-02-012) allowing reduced lot size, reduced frontage, and exceeding block length requirements. 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 Planning and Zoning 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 Section 8, above for more information regarding the requirements ~~ for this use.) ri ,' 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. a~ ~~ ; -w~ The Planning and Zoning Commission fords that if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report, the general design, construction, operation, and maintenance of the ~~ proposed use should be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the o~ ~ ~ existing and intended character of the area. a A - = ~ 4. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will `' ~ not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. 4~` > I :~ ~; The Planning and Zoning Commission fords 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 At '1' services such as highways, streets, schools, parks, police and fire protection, drainage . ~'~ structures, refuse disposal, water, and sewer. ~.. Exhibit C The Planning and Zoning 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 ~, >~ ~ N x~ r'r. ~ - u . '+~~ n C '# ~. ' ° aT ~A ~4~ `.~ ~ii~ik '' ~v yxi ~'.. i ~Q `~~,. 'f ~ ~ l y :,t~. ~ ~~r ~; iv '=.Ni ~ g . y ~ `~' ~ '~a f7r p~ ~ri.~. 9+1x ~-'~:W ;r l .Gn e:ls~' ~t Iwbr pFy y •=~¢ y+l~kF.' k"~ ~~ ~ ~L` .• ~ . ~. `k S ~ ~ yy " ~ I I ii ~ ~'~ ~ r ~ ~ ~1 ~ ~~ I { IL~l I t^ ~ /41'Yfr'F i L ' ~~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ I F y: .. «i'~X I ~'~ f ~ tr _. ~~q,. v , )~ ~ ~ M I~f . , i~ y ~.. .a s r, ~ ` i . ~~ t S - r` a +t '. ~Y p• ~~~ Y ;' ~'.; 1.'k'f ~ - s. ~. tiyl~ I ~ ~ I~*A1 ~ ~i4'~' . «+~. CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANN%PARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR THE HE:; DATE OF NLY 20, 2006 Commission fmds that the proposed use will be served adequately by all of the public facilities and services listed above. ,;. n1 i i ,~, 'sil ,;; ,r a `~ ~;:9. _. ~ ,` b E -' '':~ ,r ~•:,~:;~ >_..:. ~t ''~ ,,,~i f,, ~~ .~ ~{ 4 f „~ ; i t { y i 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 Planning and Zoning Commission finds there will not be 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 Planning and Zoning 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 Planning and Zoning Commission finds that there should not be any health, safety or environmental problems associated with this development that should be brought to the Commission's attention. The Commission fmds 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 IN1, S~ „ # k 1i'.'~ ~ .ry 1. STi }'F vx t ~' ~ , f:3 ~~( ~ ; I J ~' i~ o. S w ~ SFi ~ r. ~ ~ k ~ ~~ ^ iM ~~ _ ~'ti' ~N . ~ q , ` uF ~ f:. F r4.r7~ ` ~•'~ ~ cv, uw t ~ CS `~i~~yp _ ,S ~~ '~ ~~.t y 7 , '~,7.f' ~„d.- 1ab ti~~' ~t J ~, t ,~ t c`~y~~ '~~ ~~~n'- ~ Y r't4n==+1~. s ~"! +' °~~ s y* , ~ ~,. ~ ~ ! ~,4; :, m-t.~ ~ ~, ~ f t .=~- ~ } , r t 1''~~ k' ~j~ ~ "~ f;d1-. e o July 31, 2006 MERIDIAN PLANNING 8~ ZONING MEETING AUgUSfi 3, 2006 AZ-O6-034 APPLICANT David N. Price ITEM NO. 4 REQUEST Public Hearing- Annexation and Zoning of 2.95 acres from R4 (Ada County} to L-O _ (Limited Office District), for Ashtyn Park Annexation - 201 W. Ustick Road. AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: See Attached Staff Report CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: No Comment CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICES: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: See Attached Comments CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: No Comment NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS' IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: OTHER: See Attached Affidavit of Sign Posting Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Matedats presented at public meeflngs shall become property of the City of Mertdian. ® p ,_ }M July 31, 2006 AZ 06-033 ,~ ~~~ MERIDIAN PLANNING 8~ ZONING MEETING AUgUSt 3, 2006 APPLICANT ROb GOdSlll ITEM NO. Jr REQUEST Public Hearing -Request for Annexation and Zoning of 7.6 acres from RUT to 6 acres of R-4 and 1.6 acres of R$ for Benelli Springs Subdivision -3420 South Locust Grove Road ;r~~ I ~ ;.~ AGENCY COMMENTS i ,;., ~~ ~~: CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: ,~` ~ CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: See Attached Staff Report ?;~t; ' ~ CITY ATTORNEY s~ r ~~ CITY POLICE DEPT: 3. CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: r3'~ ~` ~s' '~ CITY WATER DEPT: t , : ~s. CITY SEWER DEPT: No Comment , . CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: See Attached Comments ;, < ~t° SANITARY SERVICES: S "~ ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: See Attached Comments ~" ~~- CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: See Attached Comments ti~_° NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: See Attached Comments "' SETTLERS' IRRIGATION: ' ~- ~~' ., IDAHO POWfR: _~ ~~.~ !a t NTERMOUNTAIN GAS: ' ~ ~~~ OTHER: See Attached Affidavit of Sign Posting 3 s , ~ Contacted: Date: Phone: "`' ~ Emailed: Staff Initials: k Materials present®d at public meetings shall become properly of if~e City of Meridian. ,.~ ~ •-`.w} - ~ ?r~ ~~~: ~M., r~:. .i ~r:; - ;~ . . ~H` ~~~f t,~',. . July 31, 2006 PP 06-041 MERIDIAN PLANNING 8~ ZONING MEETING August 3, 2006 APPLICANT Rob Godsill ITEM NO. 6 REQUEST Public Hearing -Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 17 single family units in the proposed R-4 zone, 8 single family units in the proposed R-8 zone and 5 common lots on 7.6 acres for Benelli Springs Subdivision - 3420 South Locust Grove Road AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: See AZ Item Packet 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: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meeflngs shall become property of the City of Meridian. ~` z.a e ~ar~t S h yP~! ' N ~ ~ : July 31, 2006 RZ-06-006 ~~` ,~ ~' MERIDIAN PLANNING 8~ ZONING MEETING August 3, 2006 ~~ APPLICANT John Flaherty Construction ITEM NO 7 w} . REQUEST Public Hearing - Re-zoning of 6.82 acres from R-8 to R-15 zone for Cedar ` Springs Townhomes -south of W. McMillan Road and west of N. Meridian Road : ~~<< ~~ ' ,N< I~ AGENCY COMMENTS CfTY CLERK: ~,; CITY ENGINEER: ~' r ~ ~. CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: See Attached Staff Report ` CITY ATTORNEY ~ . CITY POLICE DEPT: '` `~` CITY FIRE DEPT: • t. CITY BUILDING DEPT: =a ~_ .-,.r -~ CITY WATER DEPT: ,, t;_ ~~`~ CITY SEWER DEPT: No Comment "' -, CITY PARKS DEPT: ` MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: See Attached Comments #,~k SANITARY SERVICES: 3;-,n ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ` n~, '~ '~ CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: See Attached Comments ~~ - ; NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS' IRRIGATION: See Attached Comments ' a:r IDAHO POWER: ~f:,~~l INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: ~~ Y'~~ OTHER: See Attached Sign Postin .: <r, g '' '' Contacted: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: -t~* Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the city of Meridian. ~, ~:`_~~ E of ~-~~~4 ~ ': :,:,, p§a . .- ~ ' .. RR r ~~F ~ ~ . , S`L .. _ x't4~ °';^ {= :..;- s: ~. ~'{ =~,: .; ~% ,~3''R ~. ~'>. -, ;; ,~:::; :.' o • July 31, 2006 PP-06-033 MERIDIAN PLANNING 8~ ZONING MEETING August 3, 2006 APPLICANT John Flaherty Construction ITEM NO. 8 REQUEST Public Hearing -Preliminary Plat approval of 48 attached single family units in the proposed R-15 zone, 20 detached single family units in the existing R-8 zone and 5 common lots on a total of 11.05 acres for Cedar Springs Townhomes -south of W. McMillan 8~ west of N. Meridian Rd. AGENCY COMMENTS ~° CITY CLERK: See AZ Item Packet 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: Date: Phone: Emailed: Staff Initials: Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meddlan. ~s:~ ~.i .J.u. =~~~ ~ f;~_ July 31, 2006 AZ-O6-030 MERIDIAN PLANNING 8~ ZONING MEETING AUgUSt 3, 2006 '~ APPLICANT Gemstar Development, LLC ITEM NO. 9 } REQUEST Public Hearing -Annexation and Zoning of 8 03 acres to R-8 for ~, ~}• ~~ ,;. . Northborough Subdivsion -north of Ustick Road and east of Linder Road ~: _ ;~' AGENCY COMMENTS ',,. ~'. CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: :> ;:. CIjY PLANNING DIRECTOR: See Attached Staff Report "` ~~~ CITY ATTORNEY s '' CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: - t CITY SEWER DEPT: No Comment CITY PARKS DEPT: - ' MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: See Attached Comments ~; ; t ' ±'*~ SANITARY SERVICES: ~~ ' '' ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: See Attached Comments `' i I NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: r ,- SETTLERS' IRRIGATION: See Attached Comments ;, .:- IDAHO POWER: `~' ` INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: F OTHER: See Attached Affidavit of Sign Posting /See Attached Letter from Lester >ir Betty Vogel Contacted: Date: Phone: ., Emailed: Staff Initials: } Materials pr®sented at public m®eflngs shall become properly of the City of Meridian. 4 ;~:~ 'uu 4 ~.~ f F~ 5 t "~ _ f ~ ~M ~~ '] ,1 rl ,~`~ 3 x (' f ~ 6k~ r ~y .Y sF~t. h. i `~ 7 ~~ ~ f ~e , T ~ ~13~`~ ~ ; '~~ ~ i~~~ak. e ~ ~~^ 7~ F ' _ .. T .i ~ t'. ' ,4 ~Lw ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t, x ~ ~ { 1} r ~ M ~ 1 )~ ~ - ,~h `. `3'~ ~ y~~.: f y~`~ h flies" 1 ~ Y~, a ' .~ i; "`~ Y 1 ~~ - ~'~y'1Q4; iJ ~ y L h~ ~ $~ ii y y ?"'-i '; ~~~:, - ~r ~I i r ~ ~ August 28, 2006 PP-06-030 a~ MERIDIAN PLANNING 8~ ZONING MEETING August 3~-; 2006 ~ ~~ APPLICANT Gemstar DevelOpmeht, LLC ITEM NO. Q s, REQUEST C~Public Hearing fr :Preliminary Plat approval of 35 residential ~~ lots Sr 4 common lots on 8.03 acres in the proposed R-8 zone for Northborough Subdivision - ~ ~: north of Ustick Road and eas o ' t f Lender Road j AGENCY CQMMENTS r ~~ 1 :. ~ CITY CLERK: See AZ Item Packet 1~. s' i, ~s '- CITY ENGINEER: ~ Y}~'4 ~+~f Y. CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: ': ''~ CITY ATTORNEY "~ 9 `~ ~ ~ CITY POLICE DEPT: ~ ~~ CITY FIRE DEPT: , ~., {`~" -. CITY BUILDING DEPT: ~~ ~'r CITY WATER DEPT: ~: `,~ CITY SEWER DEPT: qj`~` CITY PARKS DEPT: ~~"::, ~[4:' ~~~ ~ MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ~~t ~~, SANITARY SERVICES: y;l ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ;~,~~ CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: ~~ ~_: ~b NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: ~.. , ~` SETTLERS IRRIGATION. -; °~` IDAHO POWER: z'ti ~:'; ~~'= .: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: Y OTHER: ~ Contacted: Date: Phone: ~~~ ~~~' Emailed: Staff Initials: S - ` Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian °h'r+ ~~-~ .~ ~h ~*• } f,f4 ?~« d~~~h A ~ ~ x+-~, f ~. .r ~?_ ~ 7 ~_ ~ `' ~; Y .~ nk.' .` E 'u~5 .-;4Y' n~ 3 , -x^,fY. 15~K ~~~ ~Y~`' ~~ ~ r ~~ 3> ~"•," +~ r~ ~~+ Mc= r. , ~ rg7yC6i~ F ,f ry~gyyi r T .~ v 4~ {'~i ~ ri its ~ ~ :, ti~ .,, ~'` s ~~ ='{; ~ ~ ~- z ~` ~:' i S i t ~¢ ~ 5*„y~ L y ~yx <~ ~ - a~ .. ~~_~ xir~~.3~~~ . ~ ~k ~ ? ~ a it ~/s'' E ~ x C ,. i.~r ~f ?y~'7 t 'r ~~ ~s: July 31, 2006 AZ 06-040 ~ " y ~ ~. x { ~'Y' 4v MERIDIAN PLANNING 8~ ZONING MEETING AUgUSt 3, 2006 ~~ ~ ~ '~ r ITEM NO. ~~ ~~r; ?;r~.k~; ~: APPLICANT Ross Erickson ~ ~ _ ,~ REQUEST Public Hearing -Annexation 8~ Zoning of 4.38 acres to an R-8 zone for ~~~ ., ~~` ~~ w ~~' '~ Bellabrook Subdivision - 300 S. Locust Grove Road ~ u{~ ~ `' ~ ~ t i1 ~ 1> ~`{l ~~ ~ ~f ~tr AGENCY COMMENTS ~~ ~ ~ :3~ky,~ ~ ~~ ~ CITY CLERK: ~; s~ CITY ENGINEER: ~ ~~ v ~ n . ~ ~~ t~ ~" CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: See Attached Staff Report ryri ~,_ > . CITY ATTORNEY is ; ~~ ~r, CITY POLICE DEPT: } ~ ~ ~ CITY FIRE DEPT: ~, "` ~~;' y °~ ~ ~; CITY BUILDING DEPT: zY ~ .+~~' ~~ ~- ~- rf CITY WATER DEPT: ~ ~ CITY SEWER DEPT: NO Comment - ~, ~`' is ~ ~` ` CITY PARKS DEPT: ; ~ . ~ _ MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: See Attached Comments j, r. SANITARY SERVICES: { y- °~ `'~ ~ ~-~~ r ~ ~: .,;~ ~ = ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: See Attached Comments ~: ~: -~`~ CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: See Attached Comments ~, A ~_ } ~r: ~'~' NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: ~ ~~' : '; SETTLERS' IRRIGATION: . f:.... } ~' w. ~ ~ y;: ~:. - IDAHO POWER: ~' :~ INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: '~F -: ~, OTHER: See Attached Affidavit of Sign Posting ~ ;^ Contacted: Date: Phone: ~~~a ~. Emailed: Staff Initials: yrt ~ ` 3 '` ~' Materials resented at ubllc meetln s shall become roe P P g p p rty of the Clty of Merldlan. > ~ , ~ ~~ ~_ _ r ;_: ~:, ~ ._ kr_ .~ 1 li s~ ~ _ y' ~T']'~!'~4y ~~ ;r~., ~ dH~~ ~}'f~ y~ t ,1 +!'. ; ' ~ ~ ~ .. t Y ~ t ~4 ~.. ~ ~- } ?y t y 7~. t /~ ~~ N ~~ P~.'7 .h,,, y. C t ~•{ ~ ~{ C) ~.J:~ ~ ' '~' 1~n MY'~~' ~ r ~ r ~"' ^, F., ' ~ ~ ktfi~.', ~ t ~ s ~"'' ~ r ~' ` ~` ~ i ~ y -1 ~~~ ~ ~x ~ ~ ~r ~` ~ { ~;"~ i rK f n ~ ~. ~, , t. ~ i 't~, ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~R. ~ ~i , t ?M v d ~'. i{ ~, I~ ~, ~~ ;r t, r ~ ® i i `~ July 31, 2006 PP 06-038 ~~ ~I MERIDIAN PLANNING 8~ CONING MEETING August 3, 2006 ;r APPLICANT Ross Erickson ITEM NO. ~ Z ~" REQUEST Public Hearing -Preliminary Plat approval of 20 residential lots on 4.38 acres fi in a proposed R-8 zone for Bellabrook Subdivision - 300 S. Locust Grove Road ~`~r AGENCY COMMENTS 0 0 July 31, 2006 AZ 06-036 MERIDIAN PLANNING 8. ZONING MEETING AUgUSt 3, 2006 APPLICANT Majestic, Inc. ITEM NO. REQUEST Public Hearing -Annexation and Zoning of 10.94 acres from RUT to an R-4 zone far Bitterbrush Point Subdivision -east of Meridian Road & north of Victory Road AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: See Attached StafF Report CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: No Comment CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: See Attached Comments SANITARY SERVICES: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: See Attached Comments CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: See Attached Comments NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS' IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: 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. `f .r. s o ~,,~ ~ ` July 31, 2006 PP 06-039 ~ ~, MERIDIAN PLANNING 8~ ZONING MEETING August 3, 2006 APPLICANT Majestic, Inc. ITEM NO. ~ 4 ij' REQUEST Public Hearin Prelimina Plat a 9 - ry pproval of 27 single-family residential lots and 4 common lots on 10.94 acres in a proposed R-4 zone for Bitterbrush Point Subdivision _.^.., east of Meridian Road and north of Victory Road AGENCY COMMENTS ~. , ti ~,~ ;T ,~;. CITY CLERK: See AZ Item Packet CITY ENGINEER: x-` CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: t? CITY ATTORNEY ~, ~~'?~' T, CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: c CITY BUILDING DEPT: A ~` CITY WATER DEPT: '~i'! '~ `" 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: r t-,±y ~~~' '~ INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: ' ~` ~ ''~~' OTHER: f 1 > Contacted: Dgte• Phone: ~ ~~j Emailed: Staff Initials: ~+ Materials presented at public meeflngs shall become property of the City of Meddlan. s., f ~,T f! _ -i ~ ' " ' : 1. '~, y ~ { .,i" ~~~' ._ ~,~ - ..