1997 06-18
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
AGENDA
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 18, 1997-6:00 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT FOR A TRUCKING TERMINAL BY DONOVAN BROTHERS
COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION: (APPROVE FINDINGS; APPROVE
RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL)
2. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR
VANGUARD MILITARY ACADEMY CAMPUS BY VANGUARD MILITARY
ACADEMY: (CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF FACT AND
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW)
3. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A
FAMILY LIFE CENTER BY CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH: (CITY
ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF
LAW)
4. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR
EXPANSION OF FACILITIES BY CLASSIC KITCHEN INC. - BRET JONES:
CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
OF lAW)
5. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR DAKOTA
RIDGE SUBDIVISION BY MAX BOESIGER INC.: (APPROVE
RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL)
6. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR DEVLIN
PLACE SUBDIVISION BY D.W. INC.: (APPROVE RECOMMENDATION TO
CITY COUNCIL)
7. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING TO R-4 BY
MERIDIAN LAND DEVELOPMENT CO.: (CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW)
8. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR HAVEN
COVE SUBDIVISION NO. 7 BY MERIDIAN LAND DEVELOPMENT CO.:
(TABLE UNTIL JULY 8, 1997)
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JUNE 18, 1997
The Special meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission was called to
order by Chairman Jim Johnson at 6:00 p.m.:
MEMBERS PRESENT: Keith Borup, Byron Smith, Malcolm MacCoy, Ron Manning:
OTHERS PRESENT: John Fitzgerald, Shari Stiles, Gary Smith, Will Berg, Ben Jepson,
Sue Sheehan, Fran Dobnor, Dave Fuller, Bret & Trudy Jones, Rick Bigalsch, Jerry &
Janee, Perez, Leonard Aschenbrenner, Don Bailey, Carol Bailey, H.M. Vance, Jennifer
Campbell, Robert McRill, Charles Knapt, Stephanie Anderson, Angela Grigg, Linda
Rupe, Ceceil Conser, Becky Bowcutt, Gary Lee, Charles Eddy, Glen Blaser:
ITEM #1: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT FOR A TRUCKING TERMINAL BY DONOVAN BROTHERS
COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION:
Johnson: These findings have been revised to incorporate recommendations and
comments from ACHD so that was the copy vue should be looking at and talking about.
Are there any corrections or deletions or any discussion regarding these findings of
fact?
Fitzgerald: Chairman Johnson, there is one thing that I would advise the Commission of
is I received a telephone call from a representative of the applicant. The findings of fact
according to the testimony was that there were 20 truck doors he informed that in fact
there are 28 truck doors. That would be referenced on page 3 in which it says 20 truck
doors. 1 don't know if a representative from the applicant is here tonight can confirm that
but I point that out.
Johnson: Dces anybody have anything else?
Smith: Mr. Chairman, regarding the references to the location the Meridian school I had
a conversation with Jeff Foster with AHA Architects and clarified Chuck Lee the Director
of Operation and Maintenance for the Meridian School District. Mr. Lee was mistaken as
far as the location of the school. I have been faxed a copy of the vicinity map. I will pass
it around. I think maybe with Mr. Lee being mistaken about the location of the school
site he may have a different opinion as to whether he feels the terminal would have
some kind of impact on the school location.
Borup: I have a question for Commissioner Smith, what was your understanding that
Commissioner Lee thought the location was?
Smith: North of Pine on Locust Grove.
Borup: I don't remember, I know one of the applicant's thought it was there. But the
school came before the Commissioners (inaudible)
Meridian Planning & Zo~g Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 2
Smith: It is on page 8, item 19.
Borup: (Inaudible) where Mr. Awes said he made the mistake about the location. It is in
the minutes, probably in a different paragraph.
Smith: That is item 20 he states that.
Borup: My reason for asking I was questioning whether Mr. Awes was mistaken about
the location or Mr. Lee.
Smith: Mr. Awes information was based on that given to him by Mr. Les.
Borup: The reference 1 was thinking of is in the minutes and it may not be in the findings
where he stated he wasn't sure on the locations.
Smith: It is in the findings of fact.
Borup: The location
Smith: That Mr. Awes stated that he may be in error as to the location.
Johnson: Anything else? We have a motion then that should inGude that correction
Smith: Mr. Chairman, I vwuld like to make a motion to incorporate the vicinity map,
enter the vicinity map into the record and note that Mr. Lee was mistaken as to the
location of the school therefore his opinion as far as the impact of the trucking terminal
on the. school may change. And to approve the findings of fact and conclusions of law
with the that amendment to those findings of fact and conclusions of law.
Johnson: We need a second on that
MacCoy: Second
Johnson: It is moved and seconded ~nre approve the findings of fact and conclusions of
law as prepared with the stated amendment to be included, roll call vote.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Borup -Yea, Smith -Yea, MacCoy -Yea, Manning -Yea
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Johnson: Decision or recommendation to pass on to the City Council?
Meridian Planning & Zo~g Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 3
MacCoy: Mr. Chairman, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends to
the City Council of the City of Meridian that it approve the conditional use permit
requested by the applicant for the property described in the application with the
conditions set forth in the findings of fact and conclusions of law or as similar conditions
as found justified and appropriate by the City Council and that the property be required
to meet the water and sewer requirements, the fire and life safety codes, uniform fire
code, parking, paving, landscaping requirements and all ordinances of the City of
Meridian. Conditional use shall be subject to review upon notice to the applicant by the
City unless the City Council states that a conditional use is not subject to review.
Smith: Second
Johnson: It has been moved and seconded to pass the recommendation onto the City
Council as stated by Commissioner MacCoy, all those in favor'? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #2: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR
VANGUARD MILITARY CAMPUS BY VANGUARD MILITARY ACADEMY:
Johnson: I will now open the public hearing and invite the applicant or the applicant's
representative to address the Commission at this time.
Robert McRill, 530 N. Five Mile Road, Boise, was swum by the City Attorney.
McRill: Vanguard Military Academy is anon-profit organization 501 C3. We are the only
bon'rfied military academy in the Northwest United States. In fact we are only one of
three bonified military academies in the western United States. New Mexico has one
and California has the other. Obviously ours is here. We are the newest academy in ten
years and this is by General Scott who is head of the United States Military Academy
Association in Washington D.C. Our organization is not specifically or our idea is not to
turn out troops that is not the basis of it. Number one is academics, ~nre run from 5~' grad
through high school. The organization does not accept individual who are whore care
young people. Occasionally we have heard over the we get calls in from. somebody who
would like to place their young people obviously military discipline seems to be they
figure the answer to it all. But it isn't, consequently hard core cadets are not accepted
in. We have a screening process that parents sign in. A conditional agreement that
cadet is taken under for six weeks of probation in the academy. During that time should
we find anything that is not in condition with their contract with us that cadet is
dismissed from the academy. We have had very good luck our academic rates are
running 92°k across the board with our young people. Our military, the National Guard
has been very kind in helping us out. In fact I have sitting with us here one of the young
people, one of my cadets here who happens to be the (Inaudible) of the State of Idaho
General Cane's son is here with us tonight. So I think you can see that the type of
Meridian Planning & Zo~g Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 4
young people we are trying to place in here our main emphasis number one is
academics and number two is the military disciplines and training. With the academics
self discipline we find that is necessary in a military atmosphere. Goes parallel with the
academic program. Both the disciplines are required, the self-disciplines are the same.
So we find that our young people in general are really of very high quality type of
individual. Thank you.
Johnson: 1 have a couple of question for my own edification. Your academy is an
operating entity now is it not off of Five Mile?
McRill: Yes, actually we have been in existence for two years. This is our first year on
academics. We are in the process of accreditation through ACSI which is an
accrediting institution.
Johnson: Is your facility co-ed?
McRill: Yes sir, by law it, we beat Virginia Military Institute.
Johnson: A couple of times in your short presentation you mentioned the word hard
core, what does that mean to you?
McRill: What that means to me is individuals that have been in a constant problem with
the law. WE cannot take that type of individual and haven't been able to take those into
the academy. Though we have had individuals that would have, those that would. like to
have their young people come in. I mean by hard core those that are constant
offenders. A Young person might make a mistake and we have all seen that. If that is
not a gross mistake that doesn't keep that young person out of the academy. But we
have a 6 weeks probation also so that we can constantly keep an eye on that young
person. Our goal also is to train up a young person in the way he should go. Honor,
Duty, Country.
Johnson: Your source of funding?
McRill: Ours is private sir, being a private institution that is a very hard subject that we
have answer continually as a private school We have no statements that come in are
private funds, donations and things on this order as well as tuition into the academy.
Johnson: Your information indicates up to 120 students.
McRill: This is what the anticipation is right now, we are up to the is the maximum right
now.
Johnson: You lost me when you said this is our first attempt or first entry into
academics, what were you into the past two years?
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 5
McRill: The first year we had a part time program. When we started the academy out
and we received our, ran our material through the State of Idaho and was licensed and
everything, we started a part time program for young people knowing that we were
eventually expanding into an educational program. The first we had it part time
(inaudible).
Johnson: Part time did not inGude academics?
McRill: It is not inGude academics, yes sir. So what we did, that gave us also the
opportunity to look for a curriculum that would function and work with the academy that
had a high standing on math and science and English as well as social studies. But a
hard emphasis on mathematics, that is very important.
Johnson: I appreciate that, (inaudible) anyone else like to ask some questions of the
applicant?
MacCoy: I have a couple here, on the material you submitted which is this material right
here, it made it very difficult to really tell what you were proposing here. The building
type you gave us nothing in the way dimensions nor do did you give us anything in the
way of elevations.
McRill: And those need to be in there.
MacCoy: We need to have that in order to figure out really what you are asking.
McRill: I understand, we had about I believe 3 or 4 days in order to produce that sir. We
will be happy to put the others with it. We had a short period of time to do it and when
we came over we asked for a copy of something we could see that we could look at that
would give us some idea of what was required by Planning and Zoning. We were shown
a schematic of a plan and we used it as fast as we could to get in so we could at least
get this before Planning and Zoning. We would be glad to get you anything else you
need in here.
MacCoy: We need quite a bit along that line because really it leaves us out in left field
(inaudible) that we can't understand.
McRill: Anything that we need to put in there we can assemble. All I need is a list so that
I can hand it into the proper people and have that handled for you.
MacCoy: Do you have a copy of the staff report?
McRill: I have a copy of the staff report and I read it through just here the other day.
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 6
MacCoy: Do you have any problems with it?
McRill: No sir
MacCoy: I know we talk about code and ADA is a code which is required by Federal. I
am just curious from the stand point I know quite a bit about your type of business, do
you plan to have handicapped people being a part of your organization?
McRill: There are no exceptions that handicapped can't be because the 501 C3 codes
that we are under for IRS absolutely prohibits us from denying anybody those
applications.
MacCoy: I think our staff people did a fine job in outlining the material.
McRill: I did too, looking through it, it was very detailed.
MacCoy: (Inaudible) well documented and spelled out. My main concern vvas that you
understood what you received because (inaudible) to make a final decision. Thank you
very much.
Smith: Mr. Chairman, I would like to read a line out of the staff report, "a revised site
plan incorporating staff and agency comments needs to be submitted to the Planning
and Zoning Commission prior to action on this proposal. There is really nothing for us
to review as far as site plan or building information. Therefore in the interest of time I
would like to move that we table this item until this information is submitted to satisfy the
staff report.
MacCoy: I second that.
Johnson: We can do that but we are obligated to take public testimony, this is a public
hearing. So I would rather not table this until the public has an opportunity to testify.
Any other questions at this time of the applicant?
Borup: I have a couple Mr. Chairman, it appears that you are planning on developing
this in phases is that correct?
McRill: Yes sir
Borup: And the first phase the use is all existing buildings?
McRiII: There are some of those buildings that are existing on the property sir would
have to be removed.
Borup: My question is are you going to be building new buildings in the first phase?
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 7
McRill: That is right, we will have to put up one.
Borup: So you will be doing some in the first phase in addition to the parking and such.
McRill: Yes sir
Borup: The other staff comment I was curious on was whether all of this area has been
annexed, have you had a chance to research that yet?
McRill: I understand in reading through it obviously there must be a portion of the
property in some area there, it says the City has not made an annex on it. That was my
understanding when I read it there was a portion of the back property that has not
received annex.
Borup: It initially appears that
McRill: And this would have to be
Borup: (Inaudible) detailed survey
McRill: I am not sure how much it is or anything on that and that is something that we
need to address.
Johnson: Anyone else? Thank you very much, we may call you back. Anyone from the
public that would like to testify on this application?
Charles Knapp, 185 East Blue Heron Lane, Meridian, was swum by the City Attorney.
Knapp: I have a lot of concerns, 1 live on the north side of this right where the main
building part of the main field and parking lot will be. One of my concerns is the way
this is drawn it shows the entry will be along the north side of the property. There is no
approach off of Meridian Road at that point. I talked to one of the real estate men and
they said they were going to use the approach of the house in front and go around
behind it. My concern is fire trucks are going to have a problem getting through. It is
actually what they call a land locked property without using the house in front driveway.
I am concerned about the noise and I know the City has moved out, we are in the
county. There is one building there and that is the barn, that is the only thing that is on
that property at the moment. So I would like to know how they are going to access the
property, what they are going to do on it. All I see on the map, it just shows the north
side. I think I am with a lot of other people that would like to know how they are going to
do this and how they are going to get emergency vehiGes in. I don't understand it.
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 8
Johnson: Thank you sir, anyone else? Any further discussion or comments from
anyone? If not then it is probably appropriate to make your motion.
Stephanie Anderson, 9609 Irving, Boise, was swam by the City Attorney.
Anderson: I just think I should let you know as a parent that has a child there and by the
way my child is my daughter that Vanguard Military institution has been a phenomenal
institution for her. As far as the academic curriculum they have there the first thing they
did which I thought was a wild and wonderful idea when my daughter came to this
school was test her to see where she ranked academically. Where her strengths were
and where her weaknesses were. We found that even though 1 had her in some private
catholic schools in her math education she was about a 6M grade level due to the fact
that she had always been trained to use a calculator. She didn't know how to do the
basic concepts without pushing the buttons on the calculator. I have been very proud to
see her progress here at Vanguard. What they are talking about with this military
organization and I think what the General was trying to communicate was it is not their
goal to take problem children, children who are in trouble with the law constantly,
disrupting neighborhoods which might be a concern to the neighborhood that the school
is going to go into. That is not their goal to take those children and turn their lives
around. Their goal is to provide an academic arena for these children that they can
study and excel in and go onto be wondertul human beings. They intend to keep
children who an opportunity and are basically good individuals to begin with. They
intend to keep them good and productive members and have them help and contribute
to the community. The military style works very well for my daughter and it actually
gives her a sense of pride, achievement, the ability to achieve a rank and a goal. She
has to earn that right, if something goes wrong then they have a way to say a person of
a certain rank cannot behave that way so therefore you are not going to have these
privileges. It is an institution that allows them to help her grow individually and
personally as well as academically. So I have seen a huge difference in my daughter.
But I think again it is important to stress these are good kids that can be even better
kids and contribute to our community. The types of things they did before they had the
academics were involvement in this type of rank and structure in drills, parades and
giving them a sense of honor in the community. I think they have a lot to offer Meridian
and I think they will bring a lot of productive individuals and keep a lot of good kids on
the straight and narrow and keep them good. So I really hope you consider their
application.
Johnson: I appreciate your testimony, anyone else?
Smith: Mr. Chairman, I would tike to make a motion that we table this item until which
time the applicant can submit a revised site plan incorporating staff and agency
comments.
MacCoy: Second
Meridian Planning & Zo~g Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 9
Johnson: A motion and a second to table the item until requirements as stated by staff
are met and I might add to that it would be imperative that we find out if the land is
actually all annexed into the City before we can act on that. If you need any, all those in
favor of the motion? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All yea
Johnson: If you have any questions on that I was just going to suggest that you discuss
that with our staff and then can, since you don't do this on a daily basis they can give
you examples of what would meet the criteria for us to proceed further on that.
Fitzgerald: For clarification the public hearing is continued to that date as well is that
correct?
Johnson: Yes, I didn't close the public hearing.
ITEM #3: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A
FAMILY LIFE CENTER BY CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH:
Johnson: At this time I will open the public hearing and ask that the applicant or the
applicant's representative address the Commission at this time.
Richard Bugatsch, 508 10~' Avenue, Nampa, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Bugatsch: As I am sure you are aware this application is for the addition of a 12,536
square foot family life center to the existing facilities at Cherry Lane Christian church on
Cherry Lane here in Meridian. We have reviewed the staff report and would like to
address some of the items one by one if we could. Items 1 and 2 are fairly standard
and we have no problem with. The owner in general really has no problem with meeting
the ultimate goals of the city's zoning ordinance. The major concern at this point in time
has to do with the landscaping and parking. The existing parking lot has been in place
since 1983, my understanding is Meridian did not adopt the current zoning ordinance
until April 2, 1994. So a lot of the requirements that exist now did not apply at that point
in time. We realize that adding a fairly major project to this site does impose some
requirements upon us. The owner would like you to take a look at the best way to
approach this. They would like a little bit of latitude in how we go about landscaping and
dealing with the parking problems that the staff report identified. Currently we would be
required to have one 3 inch caliper tree for every 1500 square feet of parking that there
is. That is 57 trees. The owner would like you to consider allowing them to reduce the
caliper size or perhaps reduce the number of trees required and just give them some
latitude in time frame to implement all the changes that are required. fn addition to the
tree problem staff report identifies the parking striping and drainage as needing to be
revamped. The existing drainage system collects water and presently discharges into
Meridian Planning & Zo~g Commission
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 10
Nine Mile Creek. The request from Central District Health department is that all water is
collected, runs through a landscape swell prior to being retained on site. The owner
doesn't have a problem coming back at some point and working on the parking
situation. We would like to look at alternative methods of water retention. We would like
to do some underground perhaps some French drains and again the time period is of
essence. Our request to you is that we look at the landscaping and parking
requirements as it relates to the development now. Our proposal is to landscape
around the new structure, deaf with the parking situation in the new structure area and
implement a phasing schedule to deal with the rest of the site. To sort of wrap it up the
owner will comply with City requirements whatever they shall be in order to make the
project fly. But they would like you to consider some of the economic and time
considerations that are involved in making us update the whole facility to accommodate
a development that at this point only encompasses approximately 1/3 of the property.
Johnson: Questions of the applicant?
MacCoy: 1 do, it seems you already have the staff report because you are trying to
(inaudible) under item 21 it says the applicant is to provide a revised site plan and etc.
This Commission won't deny it but (inaudible) So I have some questions that pertain to
that very same document. I did notice that the handicapped parking in your plan
Bugatsch. There is handicapped parking I believe showing existing and I believe and I
may not have striped some lots as (inaudible). We will of course comply with all of the
ADA building code, fire code and any other requirements that are related to that. That
is pretty standard stuff, we do that as a matter of course. There was a comment on the
staff report about the fire department access easement. We illustrated towards the back
of a property. We met with the fire Marshall and building department, Shari was out of
town unfortunately and wasn't able to attend. We were looking at how best to serve this
property and actually came through the fire department, they suggested we look at this
rear access. We needed to investigate whether that access is possible. If not the other
option is locate a new hydrant there. So there still are some items to be ironed out. We
are approaching this as a development that we need to work with the City on to make it
both affordable for our client and make it the type of development that fits the
community and ultimately meets alt of the aims of City of Meridian zoning ordinance.
MacCoy: When you turn out your next issue of your plan 1 would like to see dimensions
shown. That left me with a question mark, just to (inaudible) ADA, such things as
walkways, doorways, lavatories, etc. Let's me know that (inaudible) yes it will be here
and the next thing you know you don't have it and we don't have it.
Bugatsch. This is a preliminary drawing that was prepared for the purposes of the
Planning and Zoning Commission to see whether we are meeting the aims and goals of
the zoning ordinance. To address the concerns that we had brought up to Shari in our
initial conversations. And really to resolve what the requirements will be at this point in
Meridian Planning
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 11
& Zon~g Commission
time we are going forward with the full blown construction documents and they will detail
that to an end.
MacCoy: I was a little bit, I knew what you were doing but I wish you had put some more
detail in there. For my own edification what kind of material are you going to use on this
building?
Bugatsch: The building, the exterior will be synthetic stucco, also known as (inaudible)
a portion of the larger structure in behind will have metal roofing. The lower portion will
also be metal roofing but the siding will be (inaudible) pretty standard construction for
this area.
MacCoy: Is it going to match your building when you finish?
Bugatsch: It will be a little bit different in style and color. Well that is typical of most
building additions and if you look at the existing structure it is not to one particular style
at this point either.
MacCoy: I am just curious what color of roof are you going to put on that building?
Bugatsch: This roof will probably be brown, the siding will be an off brown color.
MacCoy: You have a part that will be seen by the public.
Bugatsch: The coloring will be conservative. If anyone wants to see a similar example
they can look at Karcher church of the Nazarene in Nampa. That is what was used as a
basis for the type of building that they wanted.
MacCoy: Also on your plan you are going to show lighting I hope for your parking areas.
Bugatsch: There is existing parking light lighting in place, we will evaluate whether more
will be required with the building placement. We usually do minimal lighting on the back
for security only. (Inaudible) so we are not intruding into neighboring areas.
MacCoy: You understand about that
Bugatsch: Oh yes, that is always a concern and I don't think anyone would argue that
point.
MacCoy: I don't think you want the neighbors (inaudible) I thought the staff report
outlined a number of things for you to take care. If you are already involved with them 1
think that is very good.
Johnson: Anyone else?
Meridian Planning & Zo~g Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 12
Borup: Yes, you said the main two things you had concerns on where the landscaping
and you mentioned parking lot striping. I wasn't sure what you meant?
Bugatsch: Item 11 on the staff report, the existing parking lot is striped. The sizes are
not to current City standard. They are just slightly (inaudible) I believe the stalls are 8'~
feet by 18 feet long. The drive well is 24 feet, in many communities that is an acceptable
standard. It does not comply with the current zoning ordinance but it is eminently
workable. In the area immediately surrounding the building we have already revamped
the proposed parking layout to accommodate the new siding. If necessary as deemed
by the Commission we will implement a schedule to restripe the rest of the parking lot.
Borup: Staff had also made reference to some landscaping along the drain. Do you
know how much area you have between the existing paving and the drainage right of
way, is there anything there at all?
Bugatsch: My understanding is there is twelve feet.
Borup: Before the right of way?
Bugatsch: Right before the right of way and
copy of the warranty deed for it but in t~
building committee they feel that is the fea
accordingly.
that is federally owned land. I don't have a
king with one of the owners members of
3ral property there and they will landscape
Borup: Right now you are proposing a landscaping detail pretty much as you have
submitted it at this point?
Bugatsch: Correct,
Borup: You are adding a lot of trees out in the parking area and such.
Bugatsch: We have 28 trees shown on the plan that was submitted to the Commission.
Again as the Commission may require we will increase the number of trees. Again we
ask you to look at the caliper requirement. In just phoning around this afternoon three
inch caliper trees are going to be hard to get a hold of. Two inch caliper is a little more
appropriate. We would prefer to go to 1 '/ to 2 inch caliper. We will work with the
Planning and Zoning Commission through Shari 'rf necessary to determine what trade
off between number of trees and size of trees you deem appropriate.
Borup: It looks like your parking, the amount of parking styles will increase by about 14,
is that correct?
Bugatsch: Correct, they have about 3 times as much parking now as is required.
Meridian Planning & Zor~g Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 13
Borup: So you are really not anticipating a lot of extra usage.
Bugatsch: Right, they are looking at a maximum membership of approximately 350 and
I believe we have 159 stalls as illustrated. And the current existing parking is 125.
Smith: What is your required parking count?
Bugatsch: I would have to look at up to be honest. It is usually based on the amount of
fixed seats or pew space. Shari might be able to tell me what the ratio is off the top of
her head. (Inaudible)
Smith: I guess I would like to see you stick with the 3 inch caliper tree and if you are
having problems getting them and then maybe exceeding the minimum number of 3
inch caliper trees would be appropriate instead of reducing the number.
Bugatsch: Well our approach to this, looking at from a grandfather clause in a sense this
parking lot the way it is has existed since 1983. We are looking at mediating the initial
impact and scope of what this project is proposed to cost the owner and just looking at a
way to spread out the time to bring us up to full compliance.
Smith: Shari, so the number of trees is present and new asphalt not just new asphalt?
Stiles: It v~rould be based on the overall project. It is one piece of property. They are
asking for a conditional use permit to add a building. Any time you issue a building
permit for a piece of property need to comply with the ordinance in effect at the time
they get that building permit.
Johnson: Anyone else? Anyone else from the public that would like to testify at this
time on this application?
Angela Renee Grigg, 1426 N. Tina Marie Ave., Meridian, was sworn by the City
Attorney.
Grigg: I wrote out my comments so that I could try to stay on track, I hope you don't
mind if I read. I am a little bit nervous. We are in opposition of the building of the family
living center proposed by the Cherry Lane Meridian church. As individuals living in the
City of Meridian we see the vast growing numbers and we know how this impacts the
many churches in the area. The need for them to expand and accommodate the
growth. However, we are not insensitive to the desire for the Cherry Lane Christian
Church to have a recreation center. While we can see the benefit that this structure
may have for the church we feel that this particular plan as proposed is not acceptable
for our neighborhood. We have contacted the architect, probably the gentleman who
spoke earlier and have viewed another church building in Nampa that he deemed very
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 14
similar. On paper this project could be perceived to be quite reasonable. However we
are talking about a very large obtrusive building being (End of Tape) our view of this
building will be the back side which constitutes a very plain, very large, very high wall.
This building will be 30 feet tall and they will be built approximately 20 feet off our fence
line. Aside from the unappealing appearance of the building which I have to say when
the comment came up about will this match the existing structure. The existing structure
of this church is kind of an off white yellowish brick which is very appealing very nice
they have some wood siding up their spire and it is a very nice structure. Last year or
the year before they built an addition which is this section here. This section is like
siding and it is kind of a beige color and it doesn't match the church. This other
structure, this part is stucco but our view of it is straight up and it is just the metal siding
that he spoke of. Very unappealing to our neighborhood. Aside from the unappealing
appearance of the building we have several other concerns. Back yard noise from air
conditioning this large structure will be a problem. We have spoken to people who live
immediately behind the new wonderful library that we love, and I know these people are
really struggling with the constant noise of those big air conditioners trying to cool that
big building. This will be an issue with us. We are also concerned about lighting, at
present there is an ongoing issue with existing lighting and homes. We are concerned
that this building will be used for more than Sunday instruction. Will it be rented out for
other functions, to whom, how often and at what hours? Surely this will disrupt our quiet
neighborhood atmosphere and we would be naive to believe otherwise. As proposed
this structure will over shadow the homes in the immediate eastern vicinity. They will
not receive full daylight sun until noon when the sun is overhead because this building
will be so close and so tall and so vast. A present we walk into our backyard and we
have a beautiful panoramic view of the mountains. This adds charm and desirability to
our homes, our collective homes. If this building is built we will walk into our backyards
to find a 30 foot tall gymnasium. Now obviously we like our present view and if someone
were to build a home we would still lose our view and we may not like that. However it is
a whole other issue and a whole other circumstance to walk out our back door and have
a warehouse type building standing virtually in our backyards. We feel that this proposal
will intertere with our basic right to enjoy our property. It will lessen the current property
value and severely limit the future opportunity we have to sell our property. Because
personally I would never buy a home that is built in the proximity of a building like this.
When we built our homes I realized that this church is not responsible for comments
made by real estate people. But to their knowledge it was a parking lot behind us and
what was vacant was to be paved and to become a parking lot and would remain a
parking lot. We had no future notice when we built our house that there would be a
gymnasium going up in our back yard. We have collected signatures that of people in
our subdivision who support us in our position. We have signatures representing 100
households who feel that this is not the atmosphere that we want for our neighborhood
nor should this structure be forced upon an already developed neighborhood. If they
had built their gymnasium previous to the establishment of our subdivision then we
would have the choice to build our homes in that area. This is not the case. We spoke
to of all the different households and we spoke to over 100 households we had 5 people
Meridian Planning & Zo~g Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 15
who declined to sign because either they or someone they knew well was a member of
this church. And that is a reasonable position for them to maintain. We spoke to four
people who didn't sign because they were just totally indifferent, not my backyard I don't
care. Short of that these other hundred households see and support us in our position
this is not a desirable situation and they do not support the building of this family living
center as currently proposed. We are not, first of all let me go back because I wrote
down these notes also while he was talking. One of the main concerns that my
husband and 1 had and have discussed is I took pictures of the lot and 1 was going to
bring them and show you what we live with as far as landscaping and lot maintenance.
I didn't bring. them because I thought I don't want to start that tone at the meeting
because they don't maintain the weeds behind their lot and there is stuff piled up in their
back yard that we have asked them to remove that they have not over the last several
years. We are concerned that an expensive structure like this is going to take every
penny that they have and any landscaping money that they may have had will lie
usupert to finish their project and landscaping will be a major problem for us. That they
will not consider the impact of the lack of landscaping on the neighborhood. Having a
big huge structure like this that shoots straight up in my backyard is going to take more
than one or two little trees to make it look nice. At present the only landscaping they
have is here and that is it. They have no other landscaping. This is, also the 1983
grandfather cause thing he said that the parking iot is as is since 1983 and that is not
true. This area up front to here is their 1983 parking lot. This parking here and all of this
pavement poured back here has been done in the last two years. So that is not a
wrrect statement. Until they poured this parking lot they never maintained the weeds.
They don't maintain the weeds in this area. Sometime in the late fall they come through
and bull doze them up into a big pile and leave them there for the next year to
accumulate. The people in general that I have spoken to that belong to this church are
very kind people, very good people. We don't have a problem with them going to church
here. 1 don't have a problem with them coming to church every Sunday in my backyard,
1 knew they were there whey I built. But I do have a problem with wondering about
landscaping and noise and lighting and the disruption of our basic ability to enjoy our
property. However, we are not without suggestions, as for this plan here. I and
everyone that is on this list which is way more than 100 signatures because some
people both spouses signed however it is 100 households. So, they are opposed to this
structure , however we don't see why you can't take this same structure and reconstruct
the main building where the foyer is now sitting, reconstruct a new foyer here, build their
gymnasium in the middle of this and that would buffer the neighborhood from the noise.
That would buffer the neighbofiood from the additional air conditioning because they
would top mounted away from the homes. It would buffer the neighborhood from the
additional lighting. I know we had some people that were going to testify that they live
here and already in this canal area there are kids partying back here. They don't party
here because this is a straight way to the street and it is too obvious. However you put
a building here and this is going to be their new little kegger place. Unless you put big
floodlights in here and then that is not fair to us. So we don't see why we can't move
this here and cut down on all of the lighting and noise and inconvenience problems and
Meridian Planning & Zo~g Commission
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 16
then they would have this whole area still to pave for additional parking. And additional
parking would not be a problem. I just want to say that this is our second home and
when we built our home I was talking to my builder about we don't ever want to move.
He says you will move in three years or five years, everybody does. When we built this
home we built this home to stay. This is our home and this is where we want to live, this
is where we want to finish raising our children, this is where we want our grandchildren
to come visit us. We feel that owning a home is the American dream. We feel that it is
something that we worked hard to make come to pass. Our homes are our sanctuaries
and our place of retreat. Progress is important in our communities. As quaint as this
picture is behind you I don't think there is anyone in this room that wishes that we still
lived this way. However we must consider all options available to us and be very
careful that we hold a very high priority in maintaining the sanctity and privacy of the
homes of the people in our City. I just want to thank you for hearing us tonight.
Johnson: You need to leave those documents with us, anything presented has to be
left, because we do our notes from these (inaudible}. Any questions of Mrs. Grigg?
Anyone else that would like to testify at this time?
Thomas F. Juul, 1438 N. Tina Marie, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney
Juul: Mr. Chairman, we purchased our house about 3 '/ years ago. One of the first
things that we noticed about the house was our (inaudible) view of the mountains. We
were told by our builder at that time that we have a church behind us you don't need to
worry there will never be anything behind you just a parking lot. On their brochure, the
very first positive thing they have to say about the house is unobstructed view of the
mountains. The day that we closed on our house was the very same day that they broke
ground for the new addition. We immediately lost a very small portion of our view but
we did lose some portion. I had kind of mixed emotions about it but I figured it is very
important that churches grow and I supported that and figured we could live with little bit
of lose of view, it is no problem. Now we have this behemoth going up behind us,
between 50 to 60 feet from my back door, is going to be a 30 foot high tall building. We
will get no morning sun, we will have no view. Trees will not hide that building, even a 3
inch tree is probably going to take 20 years to mature. With the building being that
close to my back fence I doubt that a mature tree will ever hid the building. Lighting is a
very big concern of mine. I understand that the architect says that they are going to be
sensitive to that however the church so far has not been sensitive to it. We had lights
shining directly in my bedroom window, we went to the church. We said is there
someway you can put a shield up so the light doesn't shine directly into my bedroom.
Their answer was no that is not possible, you can't expect us to change the way we do
things just because the subdivision goes up around us. Well when the addition was
finished they did take down the one pole that was shining directly in my bedroom and up
another one. Put a security light on the back of the addition, that security light shines
directly in my bedroom. The pole light shines directly in my living room. I have to get up
at 4:00 every morning to go to work it doesn't .make for a good night sleep. The
Meridian Planning & Zo~g Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 17
landscaping behind us is nonexistent. When they do spray the weeds in the back they
also manage to spray my roses. They come through and bull doze it up. They put it in a
big pile and leave it. It go so unsightly back there I just had to put up a fence. Something
I didn't want to do, I like the open and I have had to construct a 6 foot fence in the back
of my property to hide the field. So I have some concerns as to whether or not they will
actually be sensitive to the neighbors. I am very concerned about the sound of the air
conditioners, they are going to be right in my back yard. Would you want them in your
back yard. I think probably not. Would you want a 30 foot building up against your
fence I think probably not. I have no objection to the church growing, I think however
that there are other options to the location of the building on their property where it won't
be as obtrusive to the neighbors. If that can't be found I think it may have to be
determined that they have out grown their property and they may need to look for a
different location to put their gymnasium. 1 am concerned about noise, they have had
bands practicing over there until well after 11:00 a night loud enough to wake me up. I
am concerned that this will continue to go on. That is all I have.
Johnson: Anyone else that would like to come forward at this time?
Linda Rupe, 1422 N. Rutledge, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Rupe: Can I borrow the large map that she gave you? We share about 200 feet of
property with the church now. We live right here. We have had a lot of instances where
we do see cars late at night parked back in this area. This is the ditch along here. They
park back in there because they are quite a ways off the street. The lights that are here
shine this direction toward the Juul's house. So back along in this area is fairly dark and
teenagers and what not tend to like to come back here and park and drink beer and do
whatever they do. I have a very deep concern that if this building is put here this is
going to be a very secluded area here. It is going to be a perfect hiding place. I think
that putting lights in there again would not be the answer because that would be
shining into our homes. The lights that they have now don't shine down so much as
they shine forward. That is the kind of lights that they chose to put in. I thought most
city street lights shined down. But these seem to shine a direction. When we first
moved in we had one shining directly into our bedroom window. We were fortunate
enough to get them to turn it. So it shines more towards the building. I have a concern
that this area in here is going to be fairly dark, fairly secluded. I think it is going to be a
wonderful gathering place for trouble makers. They sit back there, they play their car
radios quite loud. I do think that if this building were put over into this area in the foyer I
think that would not make this such an interesting place to park and hide. We also have,
there was some chain link fence along here. When we moved in we put in a wood
fence. They took down the chain link fence and piled it right here where it has been for
at least two years. Along with all of the weeds that are piled there. We have asked them
to remove it. It has never been removed. Based on the types of neighbors that they
have been so far vue have concerns about what kid of neighbors they will continue to be
with this large warehouse type building in our yards. Anyway that is all I have.
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 18
Johnson: Thank you very much, is there anyone else that would like to come forward?
Don Bailey, 1342 N. Rutledge, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attomey.
Bailey: I didn't sign the petition that was given to you earlier, I wanted to think. about this
subject awhile. I hate to object to a church activity but one thing they are referring to this
as a family life center when as I understand it is a 30 foot high gymnasium which will be
10 to 20 feet from the adjoining property owners as has been mentioned before. I
hadn't thought about the noise of the air conditioners and the flood lights that will be
used to light the building. But the proximity to the street and these homes will definitely
block their view. A 30 foot high building is a tall building and it will be an eye sore from
the street, people driving down the street. Especially those that live right behind. We
don't happen to live right behind it but we are three houses away. I am imagine it will
have a slight adverse affect on property values. The building could be placed over next
to the canal or that drain ditch, the Nine Mile Drain ditch. ff they would move it over,
back it up to that drain ditch as close as they can get then that would move it quite a
ways from these homes that are being obstructed now and leave the parking lot where it
is but just move that building over to the extreme easterly edge. The present location I
object to and think it would be a detriment to the neighborhood.
Johnson: Thank you. Anyone else?
Jane Perez, 2375 West Santa Clara Drive, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Perez: We have a lot of concerns about this new structure also. Probably the main
thing that we have been concemed about with the current structure is that we have 3
lights shining directly into our bedroom. This is extremely difficult to deal with. I didn't
realize that anybody else had complained about this. I thought this was something, this
was just our lot in life. So we are concerned that there are going to be more lights back
there now and we certainly don't want that. The building that they added onto the
addition to that building is not very appealing to the eye. I understand that with the
structure that they are proposing that this would be a third material used for this
building. That would be less appealing then just the two different materials that are
there right now. We are concemed about the hours, we don't know what the hours for
that particular structure is going to be. We are concemed about the noise level, the air
conditioners definitely would cause a problem. It would block our view. It would be from
an aesthetic value it would not be a good thing to have in our backyard. The
landscaping there right now I guess about the only word I could use would be
deplorable. because it is not kept up. There are weeds everywhere and we have no
reason to believe that any additional landscape would be kept up either. As far as the
structure being put over on the east side by the drainage ditch because that would not
block the view of the homes that is where we live. There are a lot of homes back there.
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 19
I can assure you that it would definitely block the view and we would be sitting in the
same situation that some of the people that live on the other side would be. Thank you.
Carol Bailey, 1342 N. Rutledge, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Bailey: We came to this hearing tonight for information as well as giving an opinion.
The information that I wanted was under what conditions are they asking for this permit.
Is it planning, is it zoning, is it structural. We the public have not been informed of that
at the beginning of this meeting. We know that a conditional use means not complying
with the existing ordinances. Therefore we should be entitled to know what that
condition is that they are asking for. That is mainly what I wanted to ask and see if you
would tell the public in general what it is.
Johnson: We can comment on that for you. I don't know if it would answer your
question because I am not too sure I agree with your definition of what a conditional use
permit is. Shari if you want to sum that up as to why it is a conditional use permit is
required for this structure is probably a better way to approach that.
Stiles: My first comment was that this project site is located in an LO zone, it is located
in an R-4 zone. The church was built when churches were permitted in that zone. They
no longer are according to our current ordinance. Therefore to expand an existing non-
conforming use they have to have a conditional use permit. Another reason they need a
conditional use permit is they are adding a building to one parcel of ground. So those
are the reasons they are required to apply for a conditional use permit. That is the site,
the location of the buildings, trees, utilities, that is all up for review by the Planning and
Zoning Commission and any other things they would wan to review as a condition of the
application.
Johnson: Dces that help Garify?
(Inaudible)
Bailey: It answers my question except for one thing and that is the definition of a family
life center.
Johnson: Well I am not too sure we can tell what that is. The church can, I know what
the definition is for the Meridian Methodist Church which is here in town because they
call theirs a life center as well. There are a multitude of functions held in the building
one of which happens to be playing basketball. That is why I guess the gymnasium is
referred to. There are a lot of other functions held there. We can get a comment from
the applicant before we close the hearing on what his definition is. Perhaps it will help
clarify it for you. Anyone else like to testify? If the applicant would define family life
center for us please I would appreciate it.
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 20
Bugatsch: Family life center I would best define as a multi-use building. It will be used
for all aspects of church activity including social, recreational, services, education,
classes will be taught. It is in all aspects a reflection of every day I'rfe, it will be used for
everything you can readily expect a church would want to do in a space.
Johnson: thank you, is there anyone else that would like to testify before we close the
public hearing? Any questions from the Commissioners?
Smith: I have a couple questions for the architect. There are no dimensions on the site
plan can you tell me on the south, the closest comer on the southeast corner of the site
how far that is from the property line to the building?
Bugatsch: We are approximately 30 feet at that point.
Smith: This dimension is (inaudible) then from the back the Gosest point to the building?
Bugatsch: (Inaudible)
Smith: I am eyeballing also because I don't have my scale either.
Bugatsch: Given that the length of the parking lot illustrated is approximately 20 feet.
Smith: You showed us the elevations which face the existing building and also the west
portion of the site or is that the east, I am sorry east. One of those who stood up in
opposition said the side that was going to be facing their houses were going to all be
metal siding.
Bugatsch: No they will not, they will be synthetic stucco.
Smith: So all of the walls will be (Inaudible)
Bugatsch: (Inaudible) except the little portion that is shown as a return lip on the roofing.
Actually it won't be on this side it has been determined just on this side of the building
will not return to (inaudible).
Smith: What is the height at the ridge of the building?
Bugatsch: I don't have that information right off the top of my head. The eve height
which is this point of the building will be 21 feet. Karcher Church in Nampa since they
have seen that one was either 27 feet or 29 feet as memory serves me. So we have
some down substantially in height. We are not too different from a two story residential
structure.
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 21
Smith: Then you had tested that you are going full speed ahead into working drawings
so you can tell me where you are planning on siting your condensing units for your air
conditioners.
Bugatsch: We haven't reached that point yet.
Smith: Your mechanical room is located on the west side of the building so I would
assume that you are going to be tucking right here in this comer.
Bugatsch: That has been revised to some extent. There may be a unit there. Cooling
load, we are just cooling building shell, we are not planning to cool for occupants in that
area. The only thing that will be fully cooled is the perimeter portion where the
classroom and fellowship hall are. Preferably we will mount those on the side walls of
the structure itself. Through wall units in the gymnasium they will just pull across. They
are still working on that determining the best route and most efficient route to do that.
Smith: Were you the architect on the building addition that was referenced earlier?
Bugatsch: No
Borup: Do you know the dimension, the easement dimension of the Rutledge lateral?
Bugatsch: The Rutledge lateral, curcently it is I will have to go through my files to be
sure, it is 10 feet from center line toward the existing fence line and I believe 25 feet
from centerline to the existing edge of the easement on the west side. In talking with
Nampa Meridian Irriga#ion they will allow us to come within 10 feet of centerline of that
pipe if we ever have to. But we need to maintain access for fire trucks around the
structure.
Borup: Does your detail show that encroachment then? The encroachment Nampa
Meridian would allow?
Bugatsch: I believe it does, a portion of it.
Borup: So originally the easement was 35 feet and you say it may be down to 25 feet?
Bugatsch: Correct, it would be down to ten feet from centerline.
Borup; But then from center line it is another 10 feet.
Bugatsch: We do not intend to encroach any closer than illustrated.
Borup: So 20 feet would be
Meridian Planning & Zo~g Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 22
Bugatsch: The fire department access I believe requires 26 feet clear space from edge
of building or any impediment to vehicular traffic. So there is a practical limit that we
could push to that site anyhow.
Borup: So 26 would be the max.
Bugatsch. Would be as close as you can get.
Borup: That would be to the property line.
Smith: I am sorry I do have one more question, you have shown a 4 foot landscaping
strip around the whole peripheral property, so are you going to shift the aisles and
parking stalls over 4 feet?
Bugatsch: Correct.
Grigg: I had a question to the architect, can you tell us is this building going to be
rented out for other things or will it just be an occasional Wednesday, Sunday kind of
thing. Is it going to be as many times as they can rent it out there are going to be people
there doing (inaudible). That is part of our question. Also even though they are going to
be the air conditioners are going to be mounted up where is the compressor going to
be. That is what is going to make the noise.
Johnson: I think he has already answered that question.
Grigg: I missed that. Then 1 couldn't tell when you were asking him questions this area
right here you can see right here that this point to here is 20 feet, it says so right there.
On another issue, my husband, did he speak to you, someone at his office, my husband
did contact them and they told us to go out and look at this structure. He asked them
specifically the dimensions and he said 22 feet to the eves, 30 feet to the peak. So
those were specific, he didn't have them here so he is guessing. But those were
numbers that were given from his office to us. Thank you
Johnson: Did you have a comment you wanted to add when he is through. Did you have
anything you want to rebut or answer?
Bugatsch: On the plan that you have illustrated, locating the building in that central area
can't be done because of life safety requirements. Exiting from the existing building
most of the main exits are to that side. (inaudible) remodeling the whole thing it would
become somewhat impractical to place the building in that location.
Johnson: This is your last shot.
Meridian Planning & Zon1Rg Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 23
Grigg: This is my last shot, but I was speaking to a member of this congregation and he
said that their plans because they are totally outgrown of their building to three meetings
now and they can't seat all of their people. Their plans were to meet in this new
addition while they remodeled their current place. So they are going to be remodeling
anyway so I still think that could be a viable option that would still impact our
neighborhood to a much lesser degree.
Johnson: Is there anyone else that hasn't testified that would like to come forward? Any
further discussion before I close the hearing? I will close the public hearing at this time.
MacCoy: Mr. Chairman, I move we have the City Attorney prepare findings of fact and
conclusions of law on this project.
Manning: Second
Johnson: Moved and seconded we have the City Attorney prepare findings of fact and
conclusions of law on the application for a family life center by Cherry Lane Christian
Church, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Johnson: Dces anybody have a question about what we did? We will review findings of
fact and conclusions of law at our next meeting. It is not a public hearing, you can come
and have a copy of the findings of fact but you can't testify again. Then it moves onto
the City Council where you will have another opportunity to testify if you want to.
(Inaudible)
Johnson: July 8 if our next regularly scheduled meeting assuming the findings of fact
are done by then.
(Inaudible)
Johnson: We have closed the public hearing and we wouldn't make any
recommendations at this time. That is part of the findings of fact.
(Inaudible)
Eng. Smith: Mr. Chairman, can I ask a question on that item, we had 20 some
comments. I would like to get a response from the applicant on those comments. There
are some things that they need to respond to.
Johnson: Were you here when the meeting started, he attempted to go through those
by item. Those that he did not totally agree with or he thought he had a problem with
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 24
and the ones he specifically questioned or asked for a
were landscaping etc. That will all be part of the record
he took the time to go through the items not each item
not readily comply with or wanted some flexibility on.
variance on or consideration for
We have no written response,
s but those he thought he could
Eng. Smith: Item #6 concerned the fire department access that is not available.
Johnson: It is a little difficult to reopen the public hearing when everybody is gone.
Eng. Smith: Well we will deal with that with him but it is part of our comments and it says
it is not available and it is not available.
Johnson: And I don't recall that being specifically addressed in the testimony.
ITEM #4: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR
EXPANSION OF FACILITIES BY CLASSIC KITCHENS INC. - BRET JONES:
Johnson: I will now open this public hearing and ask the applicant or the applicant's
representative to address the Commission.
Bret W. Jones, 1435 Loder, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Jones: Classic Kitchen Doors Inc. is a manufacturing plant here in Old Township of
Meridian south of the railroad tracks between 3`° Street and 1~ Street, the end of 2n°
Street in Meridian. We produce, manufacture wooden products that are a raw product
that we sell to home builders, cabinet makers (inaudible) across the United States.
What we are doing here is applying for a conditional use permit to expand our facility
across 6 lots that we own there. (Inaudible) conditional use permit for all six and there
is a part of vacated 2"d Street vacated by Ada County here in Meridian. We would like to
do is add 5200 square office, some office and new manufacturing front of an old
warehouse to continue and expansion of our company and the growth.
Johnson: Questions for the applicant?
MacCoy: You have received a copy of the staff report and have read it and gone over
it?
Jones: Yes sir
MacCoy: Do you have any problems with it?
Jones: No sir
MacCoy: (Inaudible) written response on those questions, (inaudible)
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 25
Jones: Did I write any responses to them? No other than we intend to comply with
everything that was asked of us there.
MacCoy: You are asked to turn that in writing. t have a couple of questions along that
material, what is the material that your building will be made of?
Jones: It would be block.
MacCoy: And the height of that is?
Jones: Between 20 and 22 feet at the eves.
MacCoy: You show on your drawing here and elevation, the new building will look just
like what you have shown.
Jones: No, there are some revised plans, we met with the Building Inspector today to go
over some fire codes and issues. There is a large expanse to building a commercial
building with a flat roof like this. We are intending to revise that and give you a new
drawing with a pitched roof on it with eves, gable end. We are working out the fire (End
of Tape)
MacCoy: (Inaudible) I noticed on your drawing you have taken care of the
handicapped, do you plan to do the same in your (inaudible)
Jones: Yes
MacCoy: I was concerned about your work, do you have any fumes or dust or anything
that might be explosive or odors that would be vented from your exhaust system?
Jones: We do, in our facility we do not spray or lacquer any products, they are a raw by
product. The explosion part that we do have is sawdust coming off the mills, table saws,
(inaudible) that is collected in a general collection dust system. Which in the plans we
would like to move from where it is at currently east about 100 feet or so. We have to
comply with DEQ regulations on that, we are in the process of doing that. We have
guidelines that we have to (inaudible)
MacCoy: I think that is all I have.
Borup: Staff had made some comments on parking that they weren't on this parcel but
the parking is on lots that you own also is that
Jones: Yes, I own lots 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 there in Bower Addition I guess 1 through 6
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 26
Borup: Your application was just. for an addition in front of the one building and the other
building the present use is staying as existing.
Jones: That is our maintenance building, we do some light welding in there for the
public but it is nothing in manufacturing. It is all held for maintenance of the current door
plant that is onto the west of that building.
Borup: It looked to me like there was quite a grade difference. Your building looks like it
accounts for that and on the dock loading area: In fact that probably makes it handier:
But I assume you have (inaudible)
Jones: We are going to grade that; Briggs Engineering is engineering a grading. and
excavation plan for that: WE have to present that to Nampa Meridian irrigation district to
comply with what they have us do (inaudible) which we currently don't do now. It
currently goes into the drainage system.
Borup: The concern on the parking is just another parcel you own property (inaudible)
Jones: We run across a real tough situation with being in Old Township zoning there. It
wasn't designed real weli back in the 1900's early: (Lnaudible) it is hard to utilize the
property and get the most out of investment for our building and to meet all of the
codes. It just doesn't make the. building feasible to build: so if we can use that other
property to park vehicles on it allows us to get closer to what the City recommends for
parking.
Borup: (Inaudible) your plans look like it wold be a real asset.
Jones: We hope to improve the area so you don't have to walk down there at night with
a stick in your hand.
Smith: Concrete block, are you going to leave that natural or are you going to paint it?
Jones: I haven't really thought about it, I will probably leave it natural. We will probably
do same accent colors across. through the middle of it I believe (Inaudible) We may
accent that split face block. We are trying to make adjustment to the (inaudible)
Smith: Are those metal siding metal overhead doors?
Jones: Yes sir
Johnson: Anyone else? Thank you, is there anyone from the public that would like t
address the public at this time?
Cecil. Conser, 4335 N. Cloverdale, Boise, was sworn by the. City Attorney
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 27
Conser: I am an adjacent property owner to Bret Jones and l just wish to state that I
support his proposal to do this addition to his property. I feel it would be an
improvement to our area.
Johnson: We appreciate that, anyone else? Any further discussion among. the.
Commissioners? If not 1 will Gose the public hearing at this time. What is your
pleasure?
MacCoy: Mr. Ghairman, I move that we move this forward. to our attorney to prepare
findings of fact and conclusions of law.
Smith: Second
Johnson: We have a motion and a second to have the City Attorney prepare findings of
fact and conclusions of law, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #5: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR DAKOTA
RIDGE SUBDIVISION BY MAX BOESIGER INC.:
Johnson: I will open the public hearing and ask the applicant or the applicant's
representative address the Commission.
Becky Bowcutt, 1.111 S. Orchard, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Bowcutt: This is Dakota Ridge Subdivision, the property has been annexed and zoned
R-4. It was approximately two years ago. At that time a preliminary plat was submitted
on the property and included the entire portion and it consisted of 135 residential lots.
That particular applicant kind of went by the wayside. Mr. Boesiger optioned the
property and we have been working in conjunction with Meridian School District they
want to purchase the 12 acres which you see right here which is not part of our plat.
Then the rest of it would be single family residential. So it has gone from 135 originally
a couple years ago to 90 lots. Our density is 3.15 dwelling units per acre. It consists of
28.6 total acres. What we have done here is when we lay this out we came up with an
acceptable width here for the school We have a street that tames in functions like a
collector The developer will construct this street in its entirety from Ustick Road down to
the school property. We didn't front any homes on that particular street so that we
wouldn't have any conflict between the residential traffic and the school traffic. To the
south of us is the Lake at Cherry Lane No. 3. They have a stub street that will be
constructed right here. Right now the improved phase is right here, what you see here.
They will put this stub street in and then we have told the school district we will make
this connection, will 6e a public street connection and then wrap into this development.
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 28
We have got a second stub street (inaudible) on the eastern boundary here that
intersects with Englewood Creek Subdivision and we coordinated with the Highway
District and got information from their engineer on where to place that stub street. So we
will have two stub streets and then we also have a second entrance here. This gives
two points of ingress and egress for the future elementary site which is required under
fire code. I would like to show you quickly we did a quick sketch and that is how we
determined our width and depth for that school site. Using the school districts pad plan
for their, they have a standard can plan for their elementaries. The building will have to
site toward the south due to the fact the sewer is not that deep in this vicinity. The
building would sit back here and then they would take access here and have a second
means of access off that stub street. We showed this to the school district we did
provide them a copy for their review to make sure their plan and their parking
requirements would be met with this width and depth. One problem we had in
designing this particular subdivision is the fact that there is an existing 18 inch that
transitions to a 15 inch sewer trunk line coming off Ustick Road. That trunk was put in
the property when it was still an agricultural use. It comes down but it meanders, it
doesn't come down like you would think they would put it in. It comes in at an angle,
angles out and then back down like this and goes down south into the Lake at Cherry
Lane. We had to design around that trunk line, it is extremely large and it is just not one
that you would want to relocate. That is why you see we have this micro path here
because the City Engineer does require that we keep those sewer trunk lines in a
separate lot so that we don't have any interterence with landscaping or fencing on
adjoining residential lots. We provided this particular pathway is 22 feet wide, this here
is 30. Now it causes a problem when we got down to the south for the fact that it cuts
off our frontage or our access to this public street. So, we sat back and took a look at
that. What we proposed is these two lots, this will be paved by the developer and these
two lots will take access off which is called a shared driveway. That particular concept
is used all over the valley when you have accessibility problems. Sometimes it is
preferable because it minimizes the number of approaches to the public street. It
functions quite well, 1 have one in my particular neighborhood, there are 3 homes and
they come off, they are tucked back in a corner, very similar to this. They come off a
shared driveway and it works very well. The Highway District did review that shared
driveway concept. The one required they asked of us is that we put notes on the plat so
that there is a perpetual ingress and egress for access to those two lots that would run
with the land forever. So that there would be no way that they could be cut off from
access to the public street. That is easily done. We have a second micro path over
here on this west side that is to the school district. I did coordinate that location with
them, that was their preferred location in that vicinity. Kids would have access here, we
will have 5 foot sidewalks both sides of the street. They will have access here, access
here and then access here. With those three points is should function quite well.
Whatever develops around it could coordinate their micro path connections also. There
is one existing home on the property, it sits right here up on Ustick Road, that hope will
be retained. We are platting that lot, it has (inaudible) because to Ustick Road due to
the fact its garage is oriented directly to Ustick Road. We will be taking sewer and
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 29
water to that lot, we provided and easement here. We will have to work this out with the
staff in bringing that off there. That trunk line like I said comes down through here and
we, all of these lots will sewer to that trunk line. According to Meridian's public works
staff we can't extend that trunk line down Ustick road like you typically find where you
take the sewer to and through due to the fact that it is just too shallow and it couldn't
serve any properties to the west at the depth that it is currently at. Water, there is a 12
inch water line here that Englewood brought through, we will have to take that down
Ustick Road. All of these lots that you see here exceed 8,000 square feet. We meet the
requirements of the ordinance for the minimum homes size of 1400 square feet. We will
have to request a variance to the Ciry Council due to the fact that we have got this block
length here that does exceed 1,000 feet the staff did address that in their comments.
We are breaking it up at this point with the micro path and I think the intent of minimizing
the block length is to provide acceptable pedestrian access between different blocks
within subdivisions or adjoining uses such as parks, schools and that particular micro
path would serve that function. We had an angle on this micro path in the beginning and
we angled it in order to meet our 80 foot frontage requirement for this particular lot 19.
In staffs comments they asked us to straighten the micro path out and reduce the
frontage here and stipulated that we would need to request a variance for that particular
lot on the frontage requirement. They felt that it was an acceptable compromise due to
the fact that we get a nice straight connection with the micro path. All of these streets
are public, one of the things that we worked through with the highway district we
originally had a street coming straight through here. They want us to break that up to
slow the traffic down. We will have some traffic exiting to the north from the Lake at
Cherry Lane. They want us to put these different curves inhere. Every time we make a
90 degree tum that traffic has to slow down. When we had a straight connection right
here obviously you go that length traffic can get up to 45 miles per hour and that is not
preferable. So this layout does slow that traffic down that may be inGined to cut through
us to get out to Ustick Road. Do you have any questions?
Johnson: Any questions from the commissioners?
MacCoy: I have two, first place I commend you for doing your homework, I appreciate
that I am sure we all do. (Inaudible) You have already received the staffs comments
and gone over them, and I guess what I am hearing here is you have no problem with
any of that.
Bowcutt: We addressed all of staffs comments did you receive, Will did they receive a
copy of my letter?
Johnson: We did yes.
Bowcutt: I addressed all of staffs comments and I don't think we had any disagreement
other than the item where they questioned the less than 100 foot centerline radius on
our curves here. When Ada County Highway District, I guess I probably ought to
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 30
address that for the record when Ada County Highway District revised their policy
manual they omitted a section that referenced what they call an L intersection and what
this centerline radius should be. They did it, it wasn't intentional it just happed. The way
that this policy plan reads that this centerline radius must be 100 feet well when you
take an L here that is a 65 foot radius. So based on our conversations with the Highway
District and their reviews on other projects when this issue was brought up they have
told us that as long as it meets the criteria of an L intersection it is acceptable. They are
currently making changes to their policy plan right now, they are supposed to be
adopted in July. We have repeatedly told them please get this section of your policy
plan straightened out. So I would like the record to reflect that we are meeting their
criteria based on what they have told us.
MacCoy: Are you in receipt of the letter from Gary Johnson?
Bowcutt: No sir
Johnson: Here is a copy for you, you may want to read it while we take further
testimony.
MacCoy: Basically a quick run through that, the stand point there he has been doing
farming for 57 years in the area and he raises some very good points that you might
want to take into consideration. He is an operating dairy and he has truck traffic and he
has tractor operation and he also has the odors, the dust and the spray. I thought this
idea about the sprayer planes too was of interest. He thinks that you should include that
in your works so that people understand that they do have a real dairy and they don't
want to have since they said they have been good neighbors all these years they don't
want a lot of complaints later on from people new to the area and then find out they live
next to a dairy. So, 1 just bring that up as a point of interest to you and 1 am sure you
will take care of that.
Bowcutt: If I could answer that, Ada County requires us when we are out on the fringe
areas where we have other rural interests in the vicinity to put what they call the right to
farm statute out of the Idaho Code on the front of our final plat. It basically states that
when anyone that purchases a lot in this subdivision recognizes the fact that people
have the right to farm whether that be a dairy or row crop whatever the case may be.
Those uses are legal and cannot be considered a nuisance if operated under the
current statutes. So I think something like that could be applied that has worked in the
past.
Johnson: Any other commissioners?
Borup: Maybe just one of curiosity for myself, do you have any idea why that sewer line
meanders like that through there?
Meridian Planning & Zoniffg Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 31
Bowcutt: I don't have any idea, I asked that question and no one could really answer it
for me.
Johnson: Mr. Smith could answer that, Gary Smith.
Eng. Smith: Mr. Chairman, I can answer that question and 1 would like to make a few
comments if it is all right. The sewer line was designed in 1976 I think to conform to a
preliminary plat that was being proposed. That is why it is where it is, it wasn't just
arbitrarily just dog legged through that property. The other comments that I have sir or
Becky, the first comment you responded to concerns a 24 inch pipe (Inaudible) a
concrete ditch that traverses the parcel diagonally. Does that ditch go any farther than
this piece of property? It does not so you will end that ditch at that point?
Bowcutt: The water comes in right here
Eng. Smith: I knowwhere it is.
Bowcutt: It looked like it just fed that property and there are two little drain ditches that
pick up the waste and they function the same way.
Eng. Smith: It does not cross Ustick to serve any property on the other side?
Bowcutt: Not to my knowledge (inaudible).
Eng. Smith: I know you understand our policies or the requirements of the ordinance.
We raised a point about the content of the application on the square footage and the
minimum lot size and minimum structure size. That was different then what shows up on
the plat. I know what shows up on the plat is in conformance with the ordinance but I
guess I am curious as to why it was stated in one manner on the application and
otherwise on the plat?
Bowcutt: It was a typo that just wasn't caught. They go through, we have your
application on our word processor and they go through and revise those items with each
application, they just didn't change that.
Eng. Smith: The lot 6, Block 6 that you are proposing to serve as a shared driveway,
who will own that lot?
Bowcutt: That is a good question, I guess we would have to talk to you what your
preference be.
Eng. Smith: Will it be a paved access way?
Bowcutt: Yes, I guess the association would own it
Meridian Planning & Zon~ Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 32
Eng. Smith: Same as the micro link?
Bowcutt: That would be our first option unless that was unacceptable to the City. We
would pave it, we would pave the full width.
Johnson: Anything else Gary?
Eng. Smith: One other comment that I will make, I made for the Candlelight Subdivision
for Englewood Creek and I will make it for this one. Similar to Mr. Johnson's letter the
City of Meridian operates and maintains a sewage treatment plant %4 mile north of this
project site. We treat human waste there and once in a while there are some odors.
Sometimes the wind blows from the northwest and just for the record we are there and
we have been there since 1979 and we intend to stay and will be the best neighbors
that we can be. But it is not an infallible situation and it is a process that does have odor
for the record.
Johnson: Anyone else for the applicant at this time?
Smith: I have a couple of questions, that shared driveway lot 6, Block 6 does the fire
department require any type of turn around at the end of that?
Bowcutt: The ones that we have designed in the .past in various fire districts have not
required a turn around. 1 haven't seen Mr. Bowers response to this plat, I know I
received it. Typically what the look at is if that dwelling is within 100 if they can get
within 150 feet of the rear of the dwelling it meets the uniform fire code. So if you, say
you parked a truck right here at this corner, there is a fire here. It is 80 feet from here to
here and 84 feet from there to there. And your house is going to sit right in this area. I
think it is 150 to the rear of that building.
Smith: So they don't need to drive down there?
Bowcutt: They don't have to no.
Smith: I know they don't like to back their trucks.
Bowcutt: No they don't like to back them up and in these situations we have never had
to provide a turn around unless it was excessively long.
Smith: The second question I had was the elementary site is that part of your client's
property?
Meridian Planning & Zon~ Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 33
Bowcutt: The elementary, the property is owned by Mr. Aschenbrenner and we have an
option on the 28.6 acres and the school district has an option on the 12 acres. So we do
not control this.
Smith: So the extent of your client's contribution the school is the access drives
Bowcutt: Yes, this, this and the sewer and the water.
Johnson: Thank you Becky, anyone else from the public that would like to address the
Commission at this time? Any further comments from staff or the commissioners?
Borup: Mr. Chairman, speaking to the application and I realize a variance on lot 19 on
the lot width and I realize the City Council needs to make that but considering the
18,000 square foot lot with over 200 feet down one side that seems a reasonable
request in that situation to me.
Johnson: We can take that as an educative comment couldn't we.
Borup: From the standpoint of a builder when you have a lot that size you can have a
reduced setback.
Johnson: Anyone else? At this time 1 will close the public hearing.
MacCoy: Mr. Chairman, I move we have the City Attorney prepare findings of fact and
conclusions of law for this project.
Johnson: This is a preliminary plat findings of fact are not required. So we need to have
a motion recommending approval or disapproval for the City Council.
MacCoy: Mr. Chairman, I recommend that we approve the preliminary plat and forward
it to the City Council.
Smith: Second
Johnson: Motion and a second to pass a favorable recommendation onto the City
Council for the preliminary plat for this application, all those I favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: Alt Yea
ITEM #ti: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR DEVLIN
PLACE SUBDIVISION BY D.W. INC.:
Johnson: I will now open the public hearing and ask that the applicant's representative
or the applicant address the Commission at this time.
Meridian Planning & ZonT1g Commission
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 34
Gary Lee, 250 S. Beechwood, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Lee: As stated in the application D.W. Inc. is applying for a preliminary plat for Devlin
Place Subdivision. We are proposing 39 single family residential lots and three
common lots. The size of the lots will range from 8,000 to 10,000 square feet.
Approximately 12.2 acres of property, it is currently zoned R-4 and was annexed
previously. That yields a density of about 3.2 per acre. The property as it is situated
now is surrounded by mainly R-4 zoning. There is a piece of RT Ada County zoning to
the west. On all of our boundaries it is R-4 zone. The existing land uses are single
family residential uses and R-4 zoning as well. With the exception of the recently
approved Meridian assisted housing project that is situated along the south boundary of
Devlin Place subdivision. As you recall the application on that Meridian assisted
housing was for conditional use permit. I don't recall the exact date that it was approved
but it was within the last 6 months. Part of that application and at least in the documents
that I had a chance to Zook at inGuded a conceptual idea for this development. Also it
had shown a parcel north of Chateau Drive to be a future city park of roughly 5 acres.
The particular sketch you are looking at is basically the same, we have taken the
architects rendering and adjusted it to the fit the current City of Meridian zoning
ordinances for R-4. There is a piece of farm land in that Ada County zoning to the west,
that is still in agricultural production. Services are surrounding this particular piece of
ground. Transportation is provided by access to Chateau Drive which is an east west
collector street. There are two residential street connections on the east boundary that
go into Sunnybrook Farms. There will be one residential connection to the south that will
go through the Meridian assisted housing project and connect to Gemstone as was a
requirement by that previous CUP. Water and waste water are of course available at
these locations and will be extended to this project and looped where required. There
will be a pressurized irrigation system. At this point we are entertaining that it be a
system owned and operated by Nampa Meridian Irrigation District. It is our desire,
although the details haven't been worked out to build the system to provide water to this
development as well as Meridian Assisted Living project. There are two common lots
within the development that we have identified as storm water retention or detention
swales. I don't recall the exact lot numbers but there is one that is right at the northwest
corner on Chateau Drive that after discussions with Dan Woods the developer we would
like to approach the City and will bring this up with City Council and the Mayor of
possibly moving that storm water system across the road into the City Park. At the
same time maybe construct some play ground equipment or volleyball court or maybe a
basketball court or some such thing that the City can have some benefit in that park.
And the developer could in exchange have another sellable lot. At this point though the
application was that was just going to be a storm water swale, but we will approach the
City on that aspect. There is an existing waste ditch along the westerly boundary.
Initially we thought we would just show it as an easement to provide piping of that ditch
for Nampa Meridian. After our discussions with the highway district they suggested that
maybe that be a double use and be used as a pathway as well. If your read their staff
Meridian Planning & Zon~j Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 35
report they recommended that to the developer for this project. There is a small portion
of the Rutledge Irrigation lateral that currently traverses along the west boundary of the
Meridian assisted living which this project will extend a few feet to connect to an existing
pipe that goes along, I believe that is Sunburst No. 4. If the Commission has any
questions I would be glad to entertain those at this point.
Johnson: Thank you Mr. Lee, any questions for the engineer?
Borup: I have a couple, Chateau Drive, ACRD is talking about a 66 foot right of way, is
that an adjustment that needs to be made on the plat?
Lee: I met with the Highway District at the tech review and it is 66 feet at the easterly
boundary and it is 66 feet at the westerly boundary at the two points of existing
roadway. What we have agreed to do is there lie a taper off that east side from 66 to 60
and then continue the 60 foot right of way onto the west. It will be a short taper of about
100 feet. Same with the roadway width, it will taper from 49 to 41 feet.
Borup: Just for my education, that was one question I had. They were talking about
increasing the right of way a disproportional distance then the road improvement. Do
you know the reason for that?
Lee: You mean the 66 and 49 feet?
Borup: Yes, rather than 60 and 37. I think it is 50 and 37 and then they were talking
Lee: All 50 foot right of ways are 37 foot streets. For some reason in Sunnybrook NO. 4
or 5 whichever one created Chateau Drive on the east side was created with a 66 foot
right of way and a 49 foot street. Which is probably during a phase prior to the current
(inaudible)
Borup: That was not their current policy then? That is what had me confused, I was
curious on what it was different. In reference I think the Fire department made reference
to the turnaround down on the street to the south, now will that street, is this
development going to be going on at the same time as the other project to the south
there?
Lee: I don't know if I can answer that, I don't know for sure the construction schedule of
the Meridian assisted living project.
Borup: My question was if that project is in that street continues on through there, is that
correct? So a tumaround would not be necessary if the other is developed but.
Lee: If the timing is such. If for some reason it lags behind we will have to work some
kind of deal with him to out in a temoorarv turn around.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 36
Borup: The two lots on Chateau, Lot 2 and 3 that were going to have the cross access
drive, were there going to be some more detailed notes on the plat with reference to
that.
Lee: There will be, there will be some notes concerning access to Chateau and it will
also include specific verbiage on lots 2 and 3.
Borup: Well just knowing those builders we need a lot notes then what is on there now.
Something like that can get overlooked real easy.
Lee: I can see that, in fact I think that is one of the requirements on ACRD staff
recommendations to be noted.
Borup: Yes it was but it didn't say to what detail. Between Lot 12 and 13 is that and
easement line, a path access?
Lee: It started out as an easement line from over flow from that drainage lot across the
street. And as you see on ACRD staff recommendations they have recommended a
pathway there as well. Which we can accommodate them by adjusting that lot line
somewhat and still meet the minimum frontage.
Borup: Then the other big question I would have on the pathway is it is still under
Nampa Meridian's jurisdiction isn't it?
Lee: Well they Gaim rights to an easement there.
Borup: Are they going to allow that (inaudible)
Lee: We are going to pipe it which should make it a lot easier for them. That is one item
we do need to get solidified with Nampa Meridian, we think we can through a previous
conversation.
Borup: That is all the questions I have Mr. Chairman.
Smith: I am confused about this dedication of the park, could you clarify that?
Lee: Well what I have read about the conditional use permit when Prestige Homes
came in, see they owned all of this property in the beginning and still do. With their
application to the City one of the conditions was that they dedicate a park north of
Chateau Drive along with some other things building Chateau Drive and making this
access on Gemstone. So under that conditional use permit and their agreement with the
City they will be taking care of that item north of Chateau. That was one of the items
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 37
that staff had mentioned and in my response to them I pointed that out that it was part of
another agreement.
Smith; I just wanted to make sure that there wasn't some kind of a joint dedication or
something along those lines. Thank you
Johnson: Thank you very much, anyone from the public that would like to comment on
this application?
Sue Sheehan, 2541 W. Chateau Drive, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney
Sheehan: Well I just have a few questions for this. 1 am the President of our
homeowners association of Sunnybrook Farms. One of my main concerns and always
has been, we have been here before. This is a subdivision they are wanting to put in,
they have their own name however they do not have their own entrance. There was an
entrance made on Cherry Lane the last time we came because it was proven the
surrounding subdivisions we all have our own names, we have our entrances and we
take care of those. They have to access from either Sunnybrook, Sunburst and it
sounds like now Gemstone. We don't feel it is right that if they are a subdivision we
don't feel it is right that they don't have their own entrance. We have association fees
that we pay yearly, are fees are $50 a year. We pay these fees to maintain the park that
we have that is our little neighborhood park that is a 3.5 acre park that is right where
they are doing this, right across the street and to maintain the frontage. It takes a lot to
maintain these and our association dues that we are paying right now for 124 homes
the $50 isn't making it. Because it costs so much to maintain these things. We don't
feel it is right if somebody is going to come into our subdivision we have a really bad
problem right now. They are going to open up Chateau when they do this. Right now
one of Meridian's officers came to our home the other day, he was parked trying to
catch speeding cars. We have a real problem with this, a lot of little kids play at this
park, a lot of little kids are going back and forth across the street to get to this park. He
said you know you people really have a problem, he said I think you need to go and talk
to somebody about speed bumps around here. You have people starting down her eon
chateau and they are speeding so fast down here that he was doing a chase that
particular day when he stopped to talk to us. He was chasing a car that was going so
fast. We get this all of the time. Well we don't need for cars in there endangering the
lives of the kids in the park. Where he is talking is right butted up against our park. I am
going further, I understand that I have to go to ACRD if you know anything different
please tell me. I am going to try and see about having some speed bumps put in. But
we feel like if somebody is going to use our entrance and our park they should pay our
association fees. We have to pay them and it is not working very good because they
aren't going around because we are getting so many people that are abusing our park.
We pay for signs, we do things nice to our park, put up equipment. All of these people
moving around us are tearing it down. The other thing, I can get a lot of signatures, I
don't know if that helps, I noticed one lady had them. There are hundreds of
Meridian Planning i;< Zon~ Commission
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 38
homeowners that agree with me on this. Not just from Sunnybrook but also from
Sunburst that on this entrance thing and more cars coming into our subdivision. So I
can check with you on that too. The other thing 1 wold like to know more about this
dedication of the park. We had heard, I know they need a million dollars to develop that
back part and that is why nobody wants to develop it. We know that they were going to
donate that and possibly run it in with our park. If that is going to happen then we would
like to hear about that. We do have that park it is ours, it is Sunnybrook's park. So we
would really like to hear about that. Then I have another question and that is the
schools. Right now as you know we have a problem here with the schools Right now it
ends right at the street where he is talking about opening it up. It ends at Chateau right
past Todd that select subdivision can go to Linder and the other one is being booted
out. What district is this one going to be in? I think that is all the questions I have right
now.
Johnson: Thank you very much.
Borup: I have a comment, just a question for the person that just tested. At some
previous application someone had make a statement that the association (End of Tape)
statement that the association would rather tum the park over to the City.
Sheehan: I said that we would be interested in talking about it. We have never been
contacted.
Borup: I shouldn't be speaking for the City but I know one of the problems on maintain is
maintaining small parks. I think maybe the adding the 5 acres to your park would get it
up to a size that makes more feasible for the City.
Sheehan: We would be willing to discuss that.
Borup: And just a general comment, you are talking about the traffic through the
subdivision which is kind of more of an infill but there are four entrance exists out of this
subdivision which gives it four areas for the traffic to disperse rather than all down
Chateau.
Sheehan: Well my main thing that I said before is we have to pay for the entrance
though, the upkeep all of that. We do have our own entrance.
Borup: You might realize also that the streets are maintained by ACRD so it is their
roads not a subdivisions roads.
Sheehan: I realize that, but I think it is only fair. Every subdivision that is their except for
this one, this will be the only one every one that is there does have their own main
entrance and everyone that is there does pay to have that entrance maintained. It
comes out of the people who live there in the association.
Meridian Planning
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 39
& Zon~g Commission
MacCoy: You asked the question on the schools and the report says that it will service
Linder, Meridian Middle and Meridian High School are the three schools (inaudible).
Sheehan: Thank you
Johnson: Is there anyone else that would like to make any comments at this time?
Seeing no one then I will close the public hearing at this time. This is also a preliminary
plat.
Smith: Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a motion to approve this preliminary plat and
forward it onto City Council.
MacCoy: Second
Johnson: Motion and a second to approve the plat as a recommendation to the City
Council. All those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
FIVE MINUTE RECESS
ITEM #7: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING TO R-4
BY MERIDIAN LAND DEVELOPMENT CO.:
Johnson: At this time I will open the public hearing and invite the applicant or his
representative to address the Commission.
Charles Eddy, PLS, 290 N. Maple Grove, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Eddy: I represent Meridian Land Development Co. for this annexation and zoning
request of 28.38 acres located at addresses 2630 and 2930 West Pine. That is in NE '/.
of the NW '/. of Section 11, T.3N, R.1 W, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho. These
parcels for as long as I can remember have been in agricultural uses. The parcel to the
north is currently zoned R-4 with Haven Cove No. 4 Subdivision. The parcels to the
east are Haven Cove No. 6 and No. 5 also zoned R-4. The parcels to the southwest are
currently zoned RT and are agricultural uses. We are requesting annexation and zone
change of R-4 and R-15. The R-15 would be approximately 3.04 acres at the
Southwestern portion of the property. There is the Eight Mile Lateral Canal which
bisects the property from a SE to a northwesterly direction and splits off this 3.04 acres
and (inaudible). What we are proposing is 80% of the development to be single family
residential and 20% of the development to be town homes. Single family residential
would contain public streets with 50 foot right of ways and 37 feet back to back curb
improvements. 3.04 acres of R-15 zone would be town homes with private street to be
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 40
owned and maintained by the homeowners association. We plan on meeting all of the
minimum standards for house sizes and lot sizes. We did however submit variance
applications for a few items and I will address those now. We have ivuo lots that do not
meet the minimum 80 foot frontage, those are lot 40 Block 9 and Lot 8 block 13. In our
letter to the City Council Lot 40 Block 9 the current lot frontage is 40.08 feet, that is at
the right of way line. The 80 foot frontage occurs 42 feet from the right of way line, the
total depth of the lot is 140 feet and the lot area is 13,206 feet. Lot 8, block 13 has lot
frontage of 68.59 feet at the right of way line, 27 feet from the front lot line is where the
80 foot frontage occurs. Total depth of the lot is 99 feet with a total lot area of 8,330
feet. We are also requesting a setback variance on an existing house which is located
on Lot 4, block 16. The builders of the home in the 1930's unfortunately didn't have the
foresight to know that the road would be widened to 66 feet so with the increased width
of West Pine Avenue and the 20 foot of additional landscaping width that is required by
the City subdivision ordinance the setback would be reduced to 13.3 feet which would is
under the minimum allowed of 15 feet so there is 1.7 feet that we are under that
requirement. I would like to go through the comments of the staff. The general
comments are accepted as stated in the staff report, that would be items 1 through 9. I
would like to address the site speck comments and I will be addressing those that we
have a little bit of difference with. Item 3 it was noted by our preliminary engineering
drawings that we had stated the clearance between the top of the sewer pipe and the
bottom of the Eight Mile Lateral the flow line was 9 feet, that was incorrectly stated it
should be nine inches. The item 6 on the site specific comments addresses the
variances that I just spoke about as well as staff comments that addressed other lots
that were under the minimum frontage. Lot lines for lot 4, block 16 and lot 46, block 11
will be adjusted to meet the minimum frontage of 80 feet. Staff had commented that lot
38, block 16 did not meet the minimum frontage of 40 feet on the chord which is
required for a culdesac. If you add the 32.46 feet that is on the tangent plus the or that
is on the curve plus the 10.06 feet that is on the tangent it would come up with 42.52
feet which is above the minimum requirement of 40 feet. Item 7 addressed the rear
setback and I just explained that. Item 8 addresses the block length as being excessive,
the main driving force behind that block length being over 1000 feet is the existence of a
house there at 2930 West Pine. We had to accommodate the house to put our streets in
and so our block length was over the 1000 foot maximum. The staff had made the
suggestion that the current bridge that accesses the house be used as a pedestrian
access once the subdivision would be completed. In our opinion that wouldn't be a
viable option at this point. One being that the existing ingress, egress easement that
serves this house only provides for access to that house specifically and not for the
general public. Second of all I believe there would be some safety issues that would be
concerned with the bridge as it currently sits. Items 9 A and 9 B there were two 9's on
the staff report so we addressed them as 9 A and 9 B, we will be through a conditional
use process we will be applying for the R-15 zone for the town houses. In our
discussions with the Nampa Meridian Irrigation District they requested that we provide
them an additional 3.5 feet on each side of the current 53 foot Eight Mile Lateral Right of
way. If we, we appreciate the staffs support of us and not having to give them that
Meridian Planning & Zonis Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 41
additional 3.5 feet. But we have incorporated that into our design and have agreed
verbally with Nampa Meridian Irrigation District to provide this for them. The rest of the
staff comments are accepted as stated in their letter with no problems. Are there any
questions, excuse me one other item. The Eight Mile Lateral is a very large lateral, we
anticipate if we were to the it, it would take an 84 inch by 56 inch pipe to the that lateral.
In the past it has been the City of Meridian's policy of anything over 48 inch pipe would
not have to be tiled. So we request that we not be required to the the Eight Mile Lateral
just to fence it in conformance with the subdivision ordinance. Are there any questions?
Johnson: Thank you Mr. Eddy, questions from the Commissioners?
MacCoy: 1 have a couple, I guess the first thing is on the R-15 what prompted you to go
into having it alt R-4 and then go into an R-15 here next to Pine?
Eddy: A couple of reasons, first of all that parcel is oddly shaped and it is difficult to
come up with an aesthetically pleasing design for single family residential on that
particular piece. Second of all we felt that since with the natural break with the Eight
Mile Lateral that it would provide somewhat of a natural buffer between that and the
single family residential. Based on conversations we have had with staff it was
suggested that might be a good place to put in a town home type of development.
MacCoy: So these are two story buildings?
Eddy: The applicant would be better, have better knowledge of what type of buildings he
plans to put on that. It would be a general two story building.
MacCoy: Sticking with the roadway, do you plan for a tum around for fire trucks in that
R-15 area?
Eddy: We have not had any formal discussions with the fire department. What does not
show up on this plan but what does show up on the 11 by 17 that I have given you we
have added an island there which provides a tum around for them. The depth from the
turn around to the southerly most portion of the private drive just in my layman's opinion
is pretty close to be sufficient in that they wouldn't have to drive down if they could park
their trucks and provide service. Of course the fire department is the final say on that.
But this 1 believe is similar to what was presented earlier with the Dakota Ridge with the
common drive way and the question was asked if the fire trucks could use that. It has
been our experience in our jurisdictions that 150 foot maximum is a generally accepted
north. But again if the Fire department does not see this as a feasible tum around then
we would have to redesign it to meet their standards.
MacCoy: (Inaudible) town house types and so on to your applicant (inaudible)
Borup: Just one quick question, what happened to lot 8, any idea?
Meridian Planning & Zon~ Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 42
Eddy: In which block?
Barup: 17, the townhouse project. That is more is curiosity question.
Eddy: It decided to go somewhere else, it didn't want to be part of this process so it left.
Johnson: Any other more meaningful comments? Anyone from the public?
Ben Jepson, 2820 West Pine, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Jepson: My wife and I own the property that is directly west of the proposed R-15
zoning. I have a couple of concerns that I would like to address about this particular
development. I guess the first one would be with Rutan Lane which is the lane that is
used for access to the houses currently on Lot 39, Block 16. There is a stub out there
for development across the Eight Mile Lateral for future development. The way I
understand it Mr. Eddy just said that lane is for access to that house. That lane is on our
property, my concern is once this development goes in I don't want to see all of that
traffic from Haven Cove using that as an access to Pine. What I would prefer to see is
once this is developed and all of the asphalt is in there I would like to see that easement
released and then we can block off that bridge and prevent traffic coming down from
Haven Cove. I don't know if that is within ordinances or not but that is what I would
prefer to see. I would like to see something done to prevent Haven Cove residents from
using Rutan Lane as an ingress and egress. Another concern I have is the sewer they
are going to be putting in across Eight Mile lateral there, the way they have it developed
now it would have to serve block 16 in the R-15 development there. Which means it has
to be fairly low for the substances to flow through that. I would like to see some kind of
requirement on that sewer drain such that it is placed deep enough so that we could use
it on our property for future development. Now I don't know if that is feasible, I don't
know if we can address that here. But if that is a possibility I would like to see a
requirement done for that. Another concern that I have is along the south edge of the
Eight Mile Lateral there is currently an open earthen ditch that provides irrigation water
to my property and also a couple of properties down stream from us. I understand that
the applicant will have to arrange with Nampa Meridian Irrigation to the that. I just want
to make sure that is done at feast the minimum and hopefully to a larger pipe so that if
additional water is available we can use that. 1 want to make sure that proper clean outs
are provided, whatever is required. Just make sure that is done right. I guess my
biggest concern is the R-15 zoning. My understanding is that the comprehensive plan
has that listed as R-4. All of the homes from approximately this area down west on Pine
are al single family single story. My understanding is City ordinances allow an R-15
zoning a maximum height of 40 feet for structures. As Mr. Eddy said the actual type of
the buildings they are going to go in there. Well he said he didn't know for sure about
those hopefully the applicant can address that. I am very concerned about the traffic,
the noise, the congestion, all the people that would come with R-15 zoning. The high
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997.
Page 43
density, additionally if you have those high of structures people might be on balconies
and throw trash over fences. I would prefer to see that stay R-4 if possible and I think
that would blend in more with the existing housing in the area. I guess that is all I had to
comment on. I have said what I wanted to say.
Johnson: Okay, thank you very much, anyone else?
Dave Fuller, 890 N. Ten Mile, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Fuller: I own the land adjacent to Mr. Jepson that just spoke. On your maps I would
like to (inaudible) draw a line right across here. This is the one that I am speaking about
of for. This Eddy and Parker subdivision here our main concern is like Mr. Jepson said
is this deal here where they stubbed in the street. The previous plot to this piece of
ground here that is in the City already and hasn't been developed I believe that this
culdesac here a lot should be taken out and a bridge put across the Eight Mile Lateral
here like was done across in this subdivision that you can't see on the map right there.
We would prefer single family dwellings rather than town homes. I have met with the
developer and we have discussed on this piece of ground making 3 one acre lots. 1
believe that the neighbors in the area would prefer that, most of the neighbors on the
south part of the street here that are across from that and adjacent to it are all acreages
and small ranchettes. We know we are going to have to develop and we know we are in
the path of it, but we want to try as long as we can to maintain some kind of mixed
development in the area. Now if we are going to go with this here then I am going to go
with it too someday. So you guys need to keep that in mind 1 am already R-4 but as
soon as you let R-15 go here it is going to go right on down the street probably. We
would like to block this off as soon as the pavement is in and give that right of way so
that we do maintain our standard of living and our ranchette type of situation. If they
want to come to us and buy this out and develop it too then we need to discuss that
further. But I drove this other night and looked at the way it is all stubbed into the canal,
it is not good, definitely not good. It needs to be hooked on here and either hooked on
here with single family or this is going to have to be stubbed temporarily. The traffic
problems is something I believe Planning and Zoning and Ada County really needs to
take a look at. I have had the police officers sitting in my driveway on the corner there of
Pine and Ten Mile for about two weeks. There are people going 50 miles an hour down
that 35. We have to put a turn lane in on Pine Street. If you okay this subdivision and
this amount of new people moving in the area that close we have to fix that intersection
before me and Mr. Jepson develop. I think it is something that we really need to
address. Like I said the County department really needs to get involved with it because
the whole corner is going to go in the next few years. We do want to make sure the
sewer line is low enough. There is a portion of my property that may not hook up to it
but I have fourteen acres there on that corner and approximately 10 acres of it will hook
up to the sewer line at the same grade as some of the property that he is talking about
in the R-15. Like I said I have talked with the developer and before you guys you make
Meridian Planning & Zon~ Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 44
any firm decisions we would like to really push you hard on the R-4 rather than the R-
15. Thank you
Don Bailey, 1342 N. Rutledge, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Bailey: This is a public hearing I understand to consider annexing 20 some acres into
the city. I am quite new here, I have lived here back in 1945 and went to high school
here and then left for 50 years and have some back now. What I am curious about is
the capability of the water and sewer system to handle these ever increasing number of
subdivisions coming in and annexing areas in. I assume that all goes through the City
engineer but this is about the only chance the public gets to speak on this. So I am just
curious if there is plenty of capacity for the water and sewer for this proposed annexed
area that we are talking about.
Johnson: That is a good question, that is a common question. Gary Smith is best
equipped to answer that and I will ask him to comment on our recent studies on the
capacities that we have on the drawing board.
Smith: Mr. Chairman, Planning and Zoning members, the City of Meridian water and
sewer system is continually in the process of expansion with the growth that we have
experienced over the last several years. Each year we are drilling at least two wells to
supplement the water demands. This year we have a consultant retained to design a 2
million gallon water storage tank to supplement the storage tank we presently have.
That will be constructed this year. We are under construction right now at the waste
water plant with the addition of new primary clarifier. We are under design for an
expansion of our aeration basin. By the time the aeration basins constructed which
won't be until next year we will have a plant at 4 million gallons per day capacity. The
present demand on the plats on an average daily basis for a month is running at 2.78
right now million gallons per day. So right now we are, we are catching up, trying to
catch up. We are ahead not by much, we will be ahead once we get these facilities
completed at the waste water plant. The water system is easier to deal with because it
is faster construction in terms of a well and construction of a pump house and
connection to the distribution system. Does that answer your question?
Johnson: Any other questions? Any other comments from the public before Mr. Eddy
gets up? Anybody else? Okay Mr. Eddy either yourself or the applicant maybe we can
talk town homes and town houses.
Eddy: I would like to address the two speakers comments first (inaudible). Addressing
Mr. Jepson's comments as part of ACHD's requirements for the stub street that stops at
the bridge will be to provide barricades at that location. So that would prevent the public
from using that particular access. In conformance with the Nampa Meridian's and the
City of Meridian's policies we will file the one ditch which is on the 3.04 acres the R-15
zone. It feeds his property and that will be tiled to their standards. For Mr. Fuller, I didn't
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 45
really get to see his comments in whole. The only thing 1 can address here is the sewer,
we would be willing to look at any working drawings that he has developed for his piece
of property to see if that would work with our (inaudible) that it can't due to the way the
land falls from Eight Mile Lateral it falls away. As the parcels get bigger, currently all of
our sewer heads north across the lateral and back to Cheny lane and it would be
extremely difficult to pick up (Inaudible). That is all I have.
Johnson: Okay, if we could ask the applicant.
Howard Vance, 2791 W. Santa Clara, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attomey.
Vance: I have questions, I didn't see drainage addressed, I am a drainage engineer. As
far as what they are going to do for that part. Is that the one they currently have their for
the rest of the subdivision is going to serve this part of it. Or do they have a provision to
provide storage in the new part that they are proposing.
Johnson: Okay, we will try and get you an answer, is that your only question?
Vance: I wanted a little comment on what the City's expansion on the fire protection
would be. We are getting a lot of subdivisions and (inaudible) is going to be spread
pretty thin.
Johnson: I can give you a general answer but not a specific one. We are trying
desperately to maintain our rating and in order to do that we have to build sub stations
because of the growth and expansion and distances involved from the main fire station.
Those are on the drawing board and there are people working on it and I can't be more
specific about that. Perhaps some of our paid staff can help us in that area. But we will
try to get you a comment on the drainage.
Glen Blaser, 3450 Stone Creek Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Blaser: I just wanted to say that most of these questions have come up and I am not
qualified to answer for the engineers. I think we have hired as fine as engineers as you
can find in the valley and they know that particular area of the world real well. We are
trying to do the very best thing we can in drainage and meet all the other requirements.
As far as the R-15 request, it is a very choice piece of land. Meridian has done a very
fine job in subdividing and the (inaudible) t have been a subdivider and builder for 50
years and I think you are doing things right. I congratulate you. I think that is a choice
piece of ground. We have to request that zoning because we want a little more latitude
have submitted that piece of ground to two architectural firms in Boise asking to come
up with what would be nice on that area. We don't want to do anything that wouldn't be
nice. I think it is a choice piece of land and when the zoning first started and Lynn
Rogers was the first zoning map in Ada County I guess 1 was the first one to argue with
him if you keep putting everything on two acre lots and 5 acre lots one day we will need
Meridian Planning & Zon~ Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 46
mass transit and people will be scattered so far it just won't work. 1 built the nine story
high rise next to St. Luke's hospital and I have built several apartment houses. I can see
some advantages in grouping people closer together. That is not our intention out there.
A townhouse, I built four of them on Phillippi and then the whole street of Grover in
Boise and there are zero lot line houses, there are tvuo houses together with a zero lot
line. They look in effect like larger homes like you see in the highlands or in the better
districts but two families live in that same home. And then there are lawns and space
and rear yards, side yards. I really don't know what we would do with this three acre
price, wB are working on it. I don't think what we are presenting here could be the
etched in stone. We had to give you something to think about. But we will and whatever
w+e do we will have to get the plan and we will have to bring it to you for a conditional
use permit. We don't think this is final and that is not what vve are going to do. We
wanted a little latitude to play with the area and see if we couldn't come up with
something nicer. I found that when I built townhouses the residents are usually more
retired couples who don't want a lot of grass to mow yet they want something nice and
they can afford it. Some of the town houses are really better taken care of than single
family dwellings. They don't have to be bad or they don't have to be two story. They
can be one story. All I can say is I really don't know and we won't do anything until we
take it back to you to show you. We would like to consider the neighbors and do what is
really the best. We do appreciate your consideration of our problems, it is kind of hard
to get rectangular 80 by 100 lots out of a triangular piece of ground that comes to such
a sharp point. That is basically what started our thinking.
MacCoy: Before you walk away, the R-15 was my question to begin with and some of
the people here already have taken that right down the line the same direction I was
going to go. I have been out there and looked at the site. I too have done a lot of years
of construction and so on. I think R-4 in that zone would be very nice to have some
space because as you mentioned already wB have had a lot of things going together
and I really worry about the fact that we jam so many houses together as it is. I don't
like that. And the gentleman here made the comment if we do an R-15 and he hit the
nail o the head I think is land and that of others will be R-15. And this Commission here
will be watching it turn to R-15 all the way down there. I think it would be a dam shame
because there is some nice land out there and I would like to see some nice homes put
into it on an R-4 basis. I just would ask that you take a good look at it and with that in
mind I realize that dollars and cents come into this thing I would think that we are taking
care or our community at the same time. So I just put that
Blaser: I think those are very splendid comments and we are entertaining. We have had
three inquiries from private people. One person wants to buy the whole three acres for
one house for himself. I have said to everybody that I would sell it to him. We have had
another inquiry about a family of three brothers are thinking they want to build three
houses on it. And we will do that. It isn't cast in stone, I really don't know but I would
like to have the flexibility to play around a little bit. You can always turn me down when
we come back for the, I understand what you are talking about. We did try (inaudible)
Meridian Planning & Zon~fg Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 47
and it just doesn't come out right, it makes kind of nasty looking lots. Of course we
would make them look nice (inaudible)Thank you very much for your consideration.
Smith: I have some similar comments, I don't feel that R-15 zoning is appropriate in this
area. Maybe to make it work with a zoning that is compatible with the R-4 maybe you
have to work with the adjacent property owners and pick up a bigger parcel that will
allow you a little more flexibility. I can certainly understand your site constraints there
and laying that out. I don't doubt for a minute that you have come up with a lot of
choppy problem shaped lots. Also, I don't, as far as the canal being kind of a buffer
zone I don't think that is really following the intent of what is defined as a buffer zone.
Buffer zones are transitional zones between a higher density and a lower density and
we don't have that here. I guess also just as the way it is laid out I would have like to
have seen probably a whole common green space as opposed to more scattered out
green space. It is not as flexible or usable as a common area. I think with some design
tweaking and things like that it could work. The bottom line is I just don't think the R-4
zone is appropriate here and I am very encouraged that you have been considering
other options. And would hope that those other options are feasible and can go forward.
Blaser: Let me ask you a question, if we did have the R-15 couldn't we still build single
family houses on it. What I am trying to do is get more options and not fewer. 1 noticed
here a lot of flour plexes going in near the center of time. To me in the long run after
many years they begin to look Tike ban'acks. A lot of people like them, it is a convenient
way, it is a cheap way to house people. But with design and good architects I think you
could some something real beautiful and make something that would be aesthetic and
that is what we intend to do. You will see when you come back for our conditional use
permit that you don't like it. Whatever you decide to do why it is you are the decision
maker. I in good faith believe that you will do the right thing. We don't know the answers
to everything. I am old enough to know that there are better ways to do thing than
maybe I would do them. We are asking different people for ideas. It is like an artist, give
us a brush and a piece of paper and let us see what we can do.
Borup: Mr. Blaser, were you visualizing attached or detached housing in the
townhouses?
Blaser: I just came back from Washington DC and I have this in my mind. I drive a taxi
drove me up and down the street where they have gorgeous down in Houston Texas
recently. They have 8 families in a home. It looks like a great big millionaires home.
The doors and the garages are kind of hidden. We are limited by space here from being
too creative because we are kind of crammed in. I would imagine the would be a little be
suited for retired couples, older people or young married couples with grass around
them and flowers and we would do everything we could to hide them. I don't want a
great big line of garage doors. We would either put the garage doors underground our
beside the building and go down. I don't know what we are going to do but we will try to
do something beautiful.
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 48
Borup: Were you visualizing separate buildings with the setbacks between each building
or attached?
Blaser: Again the architects will come up with that, I have just turned it over to the
people that are in the designing business and asked them to do something nice and
they haven't come up with and concepts yes. Tom and his staff did that and that isn't
too shabby. I think it would be different than that but I have to give you something to
start with.
Johnson: Thank you
Fuller: I guess Mr. Eddy didn't understand some of the things that 1 was making a
concern to. Most of them were all the same, traffic, the condos, the bridge crossing, the
sewer line, the irrigation ditch that needs to be piped and the no use of the bridge there
the lane there that is a private lane. But what I really wanted to touch basis with you on
this (End of Tape) this piece of ground, I don't know who owns it right now but it is
already in the City and it has already had a preliminary plat once. This road comes
down here and it stops at the ditch and you have a building lot there. I believe that
building lot needs to come out because look at this little triangular arrow shaped piece
right there. That doesn't make a good building lot and it needs to connect to that other
piece of property. I believe it is Lot 35 here in the corner this arrow and that I believe
that road needs to put a bridge and go across. This is already in the City and already
R-4. I didn't get much of a response back from anyone on that so I kind of wanted to
bring that up again if any of you have a response on that as far as fire engines or
access. I have drove this around through here, it is going north and south okay but there
is no east and east. Up in this area here you have all those churches up there on the
corner. This shows it a little bit better than this map here. See these are all churches
here and this is what I am talking about. There is no connection there. Now they talked
about coming in off Ten Mile and making a loop, Ada County wouldn't let them make a
dead end loop they made a stub street through my place and the development didn't go
through. Now this one is going to go through 1 believe we need to at least have a bridge
here. If you are not going to do one here on that R-15 deal, I hope it doesn't go R-15. If
you aren't going to put a bridge here definitely I think you need one there. I hope Mr.
Eddy has made a note to that fact if he understands my concern. Thank you.
Eddy: I will just quickly address Mr. Fuller's comments, he is absolutely correct that Lot
35 is not a buildable lot and we do not intend it to tie a buildable lot. It is part of on your
preliminary plat, it is part of note 12, it says lot 35 block 9 is designated as a storm
drainage and recreation lot. That is also where our drainage will go ftom the subdivision
will be into that lot. We conform to ACHD's request when (inaudible) and this plan
complies with what they wanted for any type of stub streets to adjacent properties. If
they request us to change that plan that is something we will have to look at.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 49
Borup: Mr. Chairman, I had some questions for Mr. Eddy, back on the same subject
there (inaudible) did ACHD make you aware of the adjoining property any type of stub
street (inaudible)
Eddy: My understanding that the stub street that Mr. Fuller was talking about was also
to accommodate sewer. We have sewered this property through other methods, we
have sewered it going to the north as opposed to going to the west. So that stub street
is not required for us and I think that is the main reason (inaudible)
Borup: On the other property. A couple of other questions, some of your neighbors
seem interested in someday piggy backing on your development for their own
development. And a question was asked on sewer depth on the west end of the
property probably specifically down on the Pine Street area. Do you know the sewer
depth in that area and what
Eddy: We submitted preliminary sewer plans with the preliminary plat and on West
Roper Lane which is the street that runs East and West the sewer depth, we have an
invert out of 71.44 and a red elevation of a 75.71 which is approximately 4.3 feet which
is right at the minimum depth for sewer. So it is right at the minimum with what we have
now.
Borup: You are at the end of the line there essentially. You don't have much choice on
changing that depth any do you?
Eddy: Exactly we have to match Haven Cove's depths and ~ (inaudible} so that is
what the minimum (inaudible)
Borup: I had a couple questions on density, there has been lots of discussion on the R-
15area, can you tell me the density of lots per acre you have there.
Eddy: I will just do a quick calculation of what we have. Are you wanting I am assuming
you are wanting just the buildable lots and not the common area included.
Borup: Yes, I think some of the concern was the number of residents that would be in
that 3 acres.
Eddy: There are 15 building lots in that R-15 and 3.04 acres.
Borup: (Inaudible) 5 per acre. That was my question
Eddy: Any more questions?
Fuller: On the sewer you said it was four foot something, what is it over here because
Mr. Blaser said (inaudible) and that was a lot deeper over here. I know you raised it off
Meridian Planning
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 50
& Zon~j Commission
Haven Cove but what about over here by the churches and the other development.
What is the depth there?
Eddy: Forecast Court would be (inaudible) The best I can tell we are at approximately
8.5 feet of cover at that particular spot where Mr. Fuller was pointing too which was at
the far westerly end of Forecast Court with the sewer. That could change if I get more
time to look at it.
Johnson: Anybody else, any new comments? Any comments from staff on this before
we close the public hearing, anything you would like to add at this time? twill close the
public hearing at this time and this is an annexation and zoning request which would
need findings of fact.
(Inaudible)
Johnson: Our City Attorney prepares those and then at our next meeting which is July
8~h we will have them ready and they are available to the public in written form.
Smith: Mr. Chairman, 1 would like to make a motion to direct the City Attorney to
prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law on this item.
MacCoy: Second
Johnson: Motion and a second to have the City Attorney prepare findings of fact and
conclusions of law, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #8: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR HAVEN
COVE SUBDIVISION NO. 7 BY MERIDIAN LAND DEVELOPMENT CO.:
Johnson: On this next item which is related we will have a public hearing as well for the
preliminary plat for Haven Cove No. 7. Typically this will be an item that will be tabled
because we haven't taken action on the annexation and zoning. However, those that
have testified we can incorporate your comments on this item as well. That is usually
the way we handle that so you don't have to go through the same spiel. So at this time I
will open the public hearing and invite the applicant to make any new comments that he
deems pertinent but also to request incorporation.
Charles Eddy, 290 N. Maple Grove, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Eddy: I would wish that my comments be incorporated into, for this item that were
stated on item 7 and 1 have nothing further to add.
Meridian Planning & Zon~ Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 51
Johnson: Thank you
Ben Jepson, 2820 West Pine, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Jepson: I would like my comments from the previous item included in this item.
Johnson: Thank you we will do that.
Dave Fuller, 890 N. Ten Mile, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney
Fuller: I would like to have my previous comments attached to this program too. I know
this is difficult for those of us who don't do this every day so bear with us we want a
good community too.
Johnson: That is not a problem at all, the thing is sometimes we assume you know
what we are doing. So I try to let you know as much as I can what we are doing. We
don't really make any decisions here we make recommendations. But our main function
is to gather information so we want all of your comments. Then the City Council is
better prepared because they are the ones with the power to actually make the
decision. We have everybody's testimony and what typically happens is we get more
testimony at Planning and Zoning because people come here once testify and see we
don't do anything and never go back to the City where they really should be when the
City Council is there. So we like to get all the testimony we can at least we have done
our job gathering as much information for the public as we can for the city to make their
decision. Okay, anybody have any comments on the preliminary plat? Does anybody
have any questions? I will close this public hearing at this time and we need a motion
on the preliminary plat.
Smith: Mr. Chairman, I make a motion we table agenda item #8 request for preliminary
plat for Haven Cove Subdivision No. 7 until our next Planning and Zoning meeting July
8.
MacCoy: Second
Johnson: Moved and seconded we table item #8, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
(Inaudible)
Johnson: Whenever that guy on the end there gets that done, we would typically get
those some time prior to our next meeting.
(Inaudible)
Meridian Planning & 2on1Rg Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 52
Johnson: John what would you say they are probably available a week prior to our
meeting?
Fitzgerald: Tuesday is the 8th, I would hope to have them done by the Friday before.
Johnson: So that is July 4th when everybody is on a holiday.
Berg: One other comment, those are draft findings until these guys approve they are not
really official documents. If you listen to some of the discussion at the first item on the
agenda they hashed out a couple of things and amended a couple things and that is
their privilege. Just so you know they are not official they are draft. When they get them
they pass them onto the City Council and they can do the same thing.
(Inaudible)
Berg: You can request them, I do want to say it is $.10 a page and some of them are
lengthy. We can fax them to you too. You can read them, examine them, don't' want
them, copy certain page.
Manning: Mr. Chairman, I move we adjourn.
MacCoy: Second
Johnson: We have a motion and a second to adjourn, alt those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:35 P.M.
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
APPROVED:
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission •
Special Meeting
June 18, 1997
Page 53
ATTEST:
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., CI ERK L
$F,~1~+
y ~,`'
~' W
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
AGENDA
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 18, 1997-6:00 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
1. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT FOR A TRUCKING TERMINAL BY DONOVAN BROTHERS
COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION: a~/prar¢, ~/~'~'~%
rz~~Orrrre r`Eca-~.n..~da.~rr~,,.> r~ CjC
2. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR
VANGUARD MILITARY ACADEMY CAMPUS BY VANGUARD MILITARY
ACADEMY: ~.a,~Ce /f.'an~ii,ue~ ,O/,,/ ,.v~.~lce ,J1~.C/' ~ ~ ,
3. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A
FAMILY LIFE CENTER BY CHERRY LANE CH IS IAN CHURCH:
C~~j a t~~ 1 !v ~o,.epu-~r ~~f ~~/c.
4. PUBLIC HEART G: REO ST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR
EXPANSION OF FACILITIES BY CLASSIC KITCH,~N INC. - BRET JONES:
Gsi,~ limit>r~y ~ ~~.~--c ~~/~ £~ c/L,
5. PUBLIC HEAIFf~f(NG: REQ EST OR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR DAKOTA
RIDGE SUBDIVISION BY MAX BOESIGER INC.:
~cPyro~e- ~e cer~Y.-~~~ ~v e (e-
6. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR DEVLIN
PLACE SUBDIVISION BY D.W. INC.:
Q ,U//~/C j`Pcorn-i~+tie.-~.t-tr~/Sv~- ~v G~C.
7. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING TO R-4 BY
MERIDIAN LAND DEVELOPMENT CO.:
8. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR HAVEN
COVE SUBDIVISION N0. 7 BY MERIDIAN LAND DEVELOPMENT CO.:
CITY OF MERIDIAN
MEETING SIGN-IJ~SHEET
c/
~_ ~ Ys
` t c
,i':i~ ~ i ;i :a
~s~~~ - ~~~ -SS~zy
~~ ~~~-~
_, ,
o~ ~ ' ~ S~ -tea ~3
~~,_~~ ;.. st~,~`~-375`
CITY OF MERIDIA~
PUB~C MEETING SIGN- SHEET
~~~0
J~i~ i ~ '~r`as~
~H~ _ ..._.~.,.-,..w;r
NAME - PHONE NUMBER
~J1 s~ti/
~~ r-
i
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING: June 18.1997
APPLICANT: DONOVAN BROTHERS COMMERCIAL CON8T. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 1
REQUEST: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUBK)N8 OF LAW FOR TRUCKING TERMINAL
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY:
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
~~
1)
n,n~f
I NTS j
G~ C1V
~~ 1
r
~~ L
~ ~~~
a~P ~'
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION:
OTHER:
Y.TO~- ~
~i11 ~-tee~ ~
~d~/2~C/l~i
All Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian.
r •
BEFORE THE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
DARRELL DONOVAN/DONOVAN BROTBERS COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION
APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR
TRUCKING TERMINAL WITH OFFICE
EAST PINE STREET AND NORTH LOCUST GROVE ROAD
MERIDIAN, IDAHO
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The above entitled conditional use permit application having
come on for public hearing on June 10, 1997, at the hour of 7:00
o'clock p.m., the Applicant appearing through its representative,
Richard Balster, the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of
Meridian having duly considered the evidence and the matter makes
the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. A notice of a public hearing on the Conditional Use
Permit was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to the
said public hearing scheduled for June 10, 1997, the first
publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing;
that the matter was duly considered at the June 10, 1997 hearing;
that the public was given full opportunity to express comments and
submit evidence; and that copies of all notices were available to
newspaper, radio and television stations.
2. This property is located within the City of Meridian.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 1.
DARRELL DONOVAN/DONOVAN BROTHERS COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION
s •
The Applicant is not the owner of the property. The owner of the
property is YANKE/TRICON, L.L.C. and it has consented to the
application for the conditional use permit.
3. Pursuant to the application, the request is for a
conditional use permit for a trucking terminal with an attached
office and a future detached maintenance shop located on the
southern portion of the property. Future expansion of the trucking
terminal will occur to the west. The northern portion of the
property will remain undeveloped and reserved for development in
the future. The Applicant agrees to pay additional sewer, water or
trash fees or charges associated with the proposed use of the
property.
4. The property is currently zoned (I-L) Light Industrial.
Pursuant to the ordinance adopted to annex and zone the property,
the property can only be developed as a commercial planned
development or under the conditional use permit process.
Therefore, pursuant to the ordinance adopted for the annexation and
zoning of the property, a conditional use permit for a trucking
terminal with an attached office and a future detached maintenance
shop located on the southern portion of the property would be and
is required.
5. The (I-L) Light Industrial is described in the Zoning and
Development Ordinance at Section 11-2-408 B. 14. as follows:
(I-L) Light Industrial: The purpose of the (I-L) Light
Industrial District is to provide for light industrial
development and opportunities for employment of Meridian
citizens and area residents and reduce the need to
commute to neighboring cities; to encourage the
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 2.
DARRELL DONOVAN/DONOVAN BROTHERS COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION
s ~
development of manufacturing and wholesale establishments
which are clean, quiet and free of hazardous or
objectionable elements, such as noise, odor, dust, smoke
or glare and that are operated entirely or almost
entirely within enclosed structures; to delineate areas
best suited for industrial development because of
location, topography, existing facilities and
relationship to other land uses. This district must also
be in such proximity to insure connection to the
Municipal Water and Sewer systems of the City of
Meridian. Uses incompatible with light industry are not
permitted, and strip development is prohibited.
6. Conditional Use Permit is defined in the Zoning and
Development Ordinance as follows: "Permit allowing an exception to
the uses authorized by this Ordinance in a zoning district."
7. The property is located at the intersection of North
Locust Grove and East Pine Street, Meridian, Ada County, Idaho.
S. The Applicant's representative, Richard Balster,
testified substantially as follows. The Applicant proposes to
build a freight terminal for Oak Harbor Freight Lines. Oak Harbor
Freight Lines is located in Boise, Idaho, and is a family owned
business. It has 14 employees, eight of whom are truck drivers at
their local terminal. The Applicant will voluntarily widen the
road at the intersection of Nola Street and Franklin Road. The
Applicant will pay the cost to upgrade a ten inch water line to a
12 inch water line. According to Karen Gallagher of the Ada County
Highway District, the roads are adequate for the truck traffic
created by the proposed terminal. The building of the proposed
terminal is to be metal, with a 2,000 square feet of office and 20
truck doors. The Applicant will plant 116 three inch [caliper]
trees around the property to screen the property.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 3.
DARRELL DONOVAN/DONOVAN BROTHERS COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION
• i
9. In response to the questions of Commissioner MacCoy, the
Applicant's representative, Richard Balster, testified
substantially as follows. The hours of operation of the truck
terminal approximately 4:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. The trucks leave the
terminal are between 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 a.m. and return later in
the day. Occasionally, one or two trucks will make two tripe
during a day.
10. Commissioner MacCoy commented that the traffic from the
trucks is a concern of the Commission due to the R-4 zoned
residential district in close proximity to the property. In
response the Applicant's representative testified that the trucks
will travel from the interstate to Franklin Road, north on Locust
Grove Road to the property. The trucks will not travel to Fairview
Avenue. The reason the Applicant is widening the road is to
provide a better turning area and access to the interstate from the
property.
11. Commissioner MacCoy commented that he is concerned with
the noise and fumes generated from the trucks. In response the
Applicant's representative testified that there exists only one
house across the street from the property, and the trucks meet all
EPA [Environmental Protection Agency] regulations. The Applicant
is also providing 116 trees to screen the property from the
surrounding properties. The trees will be the only sound barrier
provided.
12. In response to further questions Commissioner MacCoy, the
Applicant's representative, Richard Balster testified substantially
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Paqe 4.
DARRELL DONOVAN/DONOVAN BROTHERS COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION
as follows. The business for whom the Applicant is constructing
the truck terminal plans a future maintenance shop for the trucks.
The maintenance of the trucks will be performed from 8:00 a.m. to
5:00 p.m. The maintenance will be performed inside the maintenance
shop, which will be insulated. The maintenance of the trucks will
not include painting of the trucks or similar types of maintenance.
The maintenance will entail changing tires, oil and miscellaneous
repairs. The truck terminal is principally a cross dock facility.
The freight is delivered to the terminal at night and is shipped in
the morning.
13. In response to questions of Commissioner Smith, the
Applicant's representative, Richard Balster, testified
substantially as follows. The Applicant has spoken with a school
administrator, Chuck Lee, concerning the future school across from
the property. According to the school administrator, the proposed
truck terminal does not present a problem to the school district.
Commissioner Smith commented that the close proximity of the future
school and the truck terminal present a concern to him.
14. In response to further questions of Commissioner Smith,
the Applicant's representative, Richard Balster, testified
substantially as follows. With regard to road improvements, the
Applicant will add a left hand turn lane on Franklin Road to allow
the trucks to turn from Franklin Road onto Locust Grove Road. The
Applicant is widening the road to create a left hand turn lane in
the middle of the road. This turn lane will also benefit the
school buses turning onto Locust Grove Road. The Ada County
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 5.
DARRELL DONOVAN/DONOVAN BROTBERS COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION
Highway District indicated that a signal light would not be
required or necessary at the intersection of Franklin Road and
Locust Grove Road based upon the proposed truck terminal.
15. Commissioner Smith commented that he does not like the
idea of the building being constructed of metal siding. In
response, the Applicant's represenative, Richard Balster, testified
that the proposed building is very similar to other existing
buildings to the east of the property.
16. In response to further questions of Commissioner Smith,
the Applicant's representative, Richard Balster, testified
substantially as follows. As depicted on the elevation schematic
of the proposed building, the ridge of the roof is 17 feet high,
and the dark line below the ridge of the roof is the eve line. The
three boxes on the elevation schematic depict windows. The
landscaping strip along Locust Grove Road will be 10 feet in width.
Commissioner Smith commented that a berm along Locust Grove Road
would alleviate some of the noise generated from the proposed truck
terminal. The Applicant's representative further testified, with
regard to the setback along Locust Grove Road, that the proposed
setbacks have been approved by City staff and the Ada County
Highway District. Further, the property remains appropriate and
function for the location of the truck terminal with an office
despite the future widening of Locust Grove Road. Fuel for the
trucks is not presently planned to be stored at the property. The
fuel will be transported to the property to fuel the trucks;
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 6.
DARRELL DONOVAN/DONOVAN BROTHERS COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION
however, a permit may be sought in the future for underground fuel
storage.
17. In response to questions of Commissioner Manning, the
Applicant's representative, Richard Balster, testified
substantially as follows. Initially, the truck terminal will
operate with eight drivers and trucks. The truck terminal will not
increase traffic by 600 units per day. The business may grow in
the future, but the growth would not likely create an increase of
traffic to 600 units per day. The truck traffic will move along
Locust Grove to Franklin Road, and either west or east on Franklin
Road to the interstate. The bulk of the truck traffic will travel
west on Franklin Road.
18. There was discussion and comment between the Applicant's
representative, Richard Balster, and the City staff concerning the
comments submitted by the Assistant to the City Engineer, Bruce
Freckleton, and the Planning and Zoning Administrator, Shari
Stiles. Included in the discussion and comment were the particular
sewer main to which the property was to connect and dedication of
right-of-way along adjacent roadways prior to submission of an
application for a building permit. The Applicant seeks to connect
to the sewer main which is closest in proximity to the proposed
facility. Further, the Applicant desires to be able to secure a
building permit and proceed forward with the proposed facility
prior to the dedication of the required right-of-ways. The
Applicant bases this later request on the fact that it does not
presently know the specific location for the dedicated right-of-
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 7.
DARRELL DONOVAN/DONOVAN BROTHERS COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION
ways, and may not know in the near future. It is awaiting such a
determination by the Ada County Highway District. The Ada County
Highway District has not presently given the Applicant a time frame
for when that determination will be made.
19. Morten Awes, another representative of the Applicant,
testified substantially as follows. With regard to sound barriers,
the prevailing winds are from the northwest, which helps mitigate
some of the problem with potential noise and fumes from the
proposed truck terminal. He spent a great deal of time with Chuck
Lee, the Director of Operation and Maintenance of the Meridian
School District, with regard to the new school in close proximity
to the property. Based upon plans received from Mr. Lee, the
Meridian School District plans seven portable classrooms around a
culdesac driveway. The location of this school site is north of
Pine Street on the other side of Hi-Micro Tools, and quite a
distance from the property.
20. In response to a comment of Commissioner Smith, Mr. Awes
stated that he may be in error as to the location of the future
school. However, Chuck Lee had indicated that the proposed truck
terminal was not a problem to the Meridian School District, because
the trucks would enter the property on the southern most portion of
the property. Chuck Lee also indicated that the location of the
future school next to a light industrial zoned area does not
present a problem.
21. Karen Gallagher of the Ada County Highway District
testified substantially as follows. The City staff has taken a
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 8.
DARRELL DONOVAN/DONOVAN BROTHERS COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION
different approach to the dedication of right-of-ways. The Ada
County Highway District is not presently requiring right-of-way
along Pine Street. The proposed development does not abut Pine
Street; therefore, it is not requiring the dedication of right-of-
way along Pine Street. The Ada County Highway District does not
presently want to expend funds to acquire such right-of-way. She
would recommend that the dedication of right-of-way along Pine
Street not be included as a requirement for the approval of this
application. With regard to Locust Grove Road, the Ada County
Highway District requires additional right-of-way for the new
Locust Grove Road, and it is requesting a dedication of the
additional right-of-way along the portion which is presently
proposed for development.
22. In response to a question of Commissioner Smith, Ms.
Gallagher further testified substantially as follows. The plan
shown for the widening of the intersection at Franklin Road and
Locust Grove Road was not part of the development services
requirement. The Applicant hae been concerned about its trucks
turning at the intersection of Franklin Road and Locust Grove Road,.
and the Applicant is working with another part of the Ada County
Highway District to alleviate its concerns. Accordingly, to her
knowledge no additional right-of-way is needed by the Ada County
Highway District for the truck turn at the intersection.
23. The Assistant to the City Engineer, Bruce Freckleton, and
the Planning and Zoning Administrator, Shari Stiles, submitted
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 9.
DARRELL DONOVAN/DONOVAN BROTHERS COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION
C~
comments which are incorporated herein as if set forth in full.
Their comments included, but are not limited to, the following:
a. This parcel was recently split from a 20 acre
parcel. Any further subdivision will require that a plat
be prepared for approval by the City of Meridian and
recorded. All comments are to be considered as applying
to the entire ten acre site, with no phasing of
improvements unless the City Council approves such
phasing;
b. Any existing irrigation/drainage ditches crossing
the property to be included in this project shall be
tiled per City ordinance Section 11-9-605 M. Plans will
need to be approved by the appropriate
irrigation/drainage district or lateral users
association, with written confirmation of said approval
submitted to the Public Worka Department. No variances
have been requested for tiling of any ditches crossing
this project;
c. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems
within this project will have to be removed from their
domestic service per City ordinance Section 7-517. Wells
may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape
irrigation;
d. Five feet wide sidewalks are to be built along the
entire east property boundary of the parcel. Ada County
Highway District is not requiring construction or bonding
of any improvements on Pine Street;
e. Water service to this project is contingent upon
positive results from a hydraulic analysis by the City's
computer model;
f. The Applicant is to coordinate fire hydrant
placement with the City of Meridian's Water Works
Superintendent. Fire hydrant locations shall be depicted
on the preliminary plat map;
g. The City of Meridian owns and maintains a 15 inch
diameter sanitary sewer main adjacent to the north of
this property in Pine Street. Service lines to the site
shall be reviewed during the plan review process. The
treatment capacity of the Meridian Wastewater Treatment
Plant is currently being evaluated. Approval of this
application needs to be contingent upon the City's
ability to accept the additional sanitary sewage
generated by this project;
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 10.
DARRELL DONOVAN/DONOVAN BROTHERS COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION
h. The City of Meridian owns and maintains ten inch
diameter water mains in Pine Street and Locust Grove
Road. Service lines to the site shall be reviewed during
the plan review process. The City of Meridian desires to
have a 12 inch diameter water main extended from Pine
Street to the Oregon Short Line Railroad in the future
Locust Grove extension. This development will be
required to pay its proportionate share of the main line
extension cost. The Applicant should post a surety with
the City of Meridian for its share of the extension cost;
i. The Applicant's representative has submitted one
copy of a revised site plan that shows a 58 feet right-
of-way dedication south of the mid-section line on Pine
Street and hand-drawn locations of 116 three-inch caliper
trees. Detailed landscaping plans will be required of
any building permit application. A landscape architect
should verify that trees selected will be able to thrive
at 20 feet o.c.
j. The site plan does not show the location of
utilities. The site plan needs to be revised to show the
location of all utilities;
k. To be consistent with the adjacent Railside
Industrial Park, and because Pine Street is designated as
an entrance corridor in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan,
a minimum 20 feet wide landscape setback should be
provided on Pine Street. A planting strip ten feet in
width should be provided on Nola and the future Locust
Grove Road;
1. The Applicant is to dedicate required right-of-way
for all streets (Pine, existing Locust Grove, and new
Locust Grove) abutting the ten acre parcel prior to
submitting an application for a building permit. The
Applicant is to submit copies of warranty deeds for said
right-of-ways to the City Clerk's office;
m. The traffic impacts of this project, at least in the
short-term, will be significant. Franklin Road at Locust
Grove is already heavily impacted by existing school bus
traffic. This site is directly west of the recently
approved Meridian Middle School Academy. Until Pine
Street and Locust Grove Road are extended, this project
will undoubtedly cause serious traffic congestion in the
area;
n. Assessment fees will be determined during the plan
review process. The Applicant will be required to enter
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 11.
DARRELL DONOVAN/DONOVAN BROTHERS COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION
into an assessment agreement prior to obtaining a
building permit;
o. Outdoor storage of equipment and materials will
require that a suitably designed screen be constructed;
p. Underground sprinkling of landscaping via a
pressurized irrigation system is to be provided to all
planting areas;
q. The Applicant shall obtain a Certificate of Zoning
Compliance prior to applying for building permits, and
the Applicant shall obtain a Certificate of Occupancy
prior to opening for business;
r. All signage shall be in accordance with the
standards set forth in Section 11-2-415 of the City of
Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance. All signage
shall receive design approval of the Planning and Zoning
Department. A-frame and other temporary signs will not
be permitted and will be removed upon three days notice
to the Applicant. Sign permits are needed for all
signage. The Applicant's representative has stated that
no signage is desired;
s. Handicap parking, associated signage and building
construction shall meet the requirements of the Americans
with Disabilities Act (ADA), and all required Uniform
Codes;
t. Screened trash enclosures are to be provided in
accordance with City ordinance. The Applicant is to
coordinate dumpster site locations with the City's solid
waste contractor, and locate dumpsters so as not to
impede fire access;
u. All driveway and parking areas shall be paved, with
all driveway accesses approved by the Ada County Highway
District. Graveled driveways, parking and access are
unacceptable. A drainage plan designed by a state of
Idaho licensed architect or engineer is required and
shall be submitted to the City Engineer with calculations
for all off-street parking areas. All site drainage
shall be contained and disposed of on-site;
v. The Applicant is to determine the seasonal high
groundwater elevation, and submit a profile of the
subsurface soil conditions as prepared by a soil
scientist with the development plans;
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 12.
DARRELL DONOVAN/DONOVAN BROTHERS COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION
w. The Applicant is to provide parking lot lighting
plans to the Meridian Public Works Department.
Illumination of the site shall be designed so as not to
cause glare or to impact adversely neighboring
residential properties, as determined by the City of
Meridian; and
x. The conditional use permit shall be subject to
review upon ten days notice to the Applicant.
24. The Ada County Highway District submitted comments, and
such comments are hereby incorporated herein as if set forth in
full. Its comments included the following:
a. The Applicant is to dedicate 60 feet of right-of-way
from the property, which is 48-feet of right-of-way from
the ultimate centerline of new Locust Grove Road abutting
the parcel's west property line, by means of recordation
of a final subdivision plat or execution of a warranty
deed prior to issuance of a building permit or other
required permits, whichever occurs first. The owner will
be compensated for this additional right-of-way from
available impact fee revenues in this benefit zone. If
the owner wishes to be paid for the additional right-of-
way, the owner must submit a letter of application to the
impact fee administrator prior to breaking ground, in
accordance, with Section 15 of ACRD Ordinance #188;
b. The District will require a dedication of additional
right-of-way abutting Pine Street when a development
proposal is received for the northern portion of the
property;
c. The Applicant is to construct 400-feet of curb,
gutter, five feet wide concrete sidewalk and pavement
widening to a 41 feet street section on existing Locust
Grove Road abutting the parcel prior to District approval
of the final plat, issuance of a building permit, or
other required permits, whichever occurs first. The
Applicant is to coordinate the street plans with District
staff to determine the centerline using the existing curb
and gutter on the east side of existing Locust Grove Road
slightly south of the property;
d. When new Locust Grove Road is improved in the
future, the Applicant may access the new roadway with two
driveways. The northern driveway shall be a minimum of
220 feet and a maximum of 240 feet south of the north
property line, as measured from the future back of the
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 13.
DARRELL DONOVAN/DONOVAN BROTHERS COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION
curb on Pine Street and the near edge of the driveway.
This driveway may be restricted to right turns only in
the future. The southern driveway shall be located a
minimum of 440 feet south of the north property line and
a minimum of 30 feet north of the south property line.
Both driveways shall be constructed as 30 to 40 feet wide
curb return driveways with 15 to 20 feet curb radii;
e. If the Applicant proposes to access new Locust Grove
Road prior to the District constructing it, the Applicant
shall pave the road a minimum of 26 feet wide from Pine
Street to the driveway from Pine Street to the requested
driveway and install pavement tapers at the driveways
with 15 to 20 feet radii;
f. The Applicant is to construct the southerly driveway
as a 30 to 40 feet wide curb cut driveway on existing
Locust Grove Road to align with the previously approved
driveway on the east side of existing Locust Grove Road,
approximately 30 feet north of the south property line,
which may be located six feet offset from the centerline
of the driveway on the east. The northerly driveway
shall be constructed as a 30 feet wide curb cut driveway,
located approximately 300 feet north of the south
property line, aligning with the previously approved
driveway to the east. Both of the driveways shall be
improved with pavement tapers having 15 to 20 feet radii;
g. The Applicant is to pave all driveways their full
required width to a least 50 feet beyond the edge of
pavement of all public roads;
h. The Applicant is to provide a $3,400.00 deposit to
the Public Rights-of-Way Trust Fund for the cost of
constructing a five feet wide sidewalk on the new Locust
Grove Road abutting the parcel, approximately 400 feet,
prior to the issuance of any required permits or District
approval of a final plat, whichever occurs first;
i. The Applicant is to locate any gated entries a
minimum of 100-feet back of the public right-of-way;
j. The Applicant is to provide a recorded cross access
easement for the parcels to the north to use the property
for access to the public streets prior to issuance of a
building permit or other required permits;
k. Utility street cuts in new pavement less than five
years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by
the District;
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 14.
DARRELL DONOVAN/DONOVAN BROTHERS COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION
1. As required by District policy, restrictions on the
width, number and locations of driveways, shall be placed
on future development of this parcel;
m. Other than the access point(s) specifically approved
with this application, direct lot or parcel access to the
new Locust Grove Road is prohibited; and
n. Other than the access point(s) specifically approved
with this application, direct lot or parcel access to the
existing Locust Grove Road is restricted.
25. Central District Health Department, submitted comments,
which comments are hereby incorporated herein as if set forth in
full. Its comments included the following:
a. After written approval from appropriate entities are
submitted, it can approve this proposal for central
sewage and central water;
b. The plans for central sewage and central water must
be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of
Health and Welfare and the Division of Environmental
Quality;
c. Runoff is not to create a mosquito breeding problem;
and
d. Stormwater run-off should flow into a grassy swale
before discharging to the subsurface.
26. The Meridian City Police Department submitted comments,
which comments are hereby incorporated herein as if set forth in
full; Locust Grove Road from Pine Street to Fairview cannot handle
the type of traffic generated.
27. The Meridian Fire Department submitted comments, which
comments are hereby incorporated herein as if set forth in full; as
long as all codes, water supplies and hydrants are met, it will
have no objection to the proposed use; and fire sprinklers may be
required due to the water flow in the area.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 15.
DARRELL DONOVAN/DONOVAN BROTHERS COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION
28. The Meridian Sewer Department may submit comments, and
such comments shall be incorporated herein as if set forth in full
when submitted.
29. The Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District submitted
comments on the subject application, which comments are hereby
incorporated herein as if set forth in full. Its comments included
the following:
a. The District requires a Land Use Change/Site
Development application be filed for review prior to
final platting;
b. All laterals and waste ways must be protected;
c. All municipal surface drainage must be retained on-
site;
d. If any surface drainage leaves the site, the
District must review drainage plans;
e. The Applicant must comply with Idaho Code Section
31-3805; and
f. It is recommended that irrigation water be made
available to all developments within Nampa & Meridian
Irrigation District.
30. There were no further comments or testimony given at the
hearing.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. All the procedural requirements of the Local Planning Act
and of the Ordinances of the City of Meridian have been met
including the mailing of notice to owners of property within 300
feet of the external boundaries of the Applicant's property.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 16.
DARRELL DONOVAN/DONOVAN BROTHERS COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION
2. The City of Meridian has authority to grant conditional
uses pursuant to 67-6512, Idaho Code, and, pursuant to 11-2-418 of
the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian.
3. The City has the authority to take judicial notice of its
ordinances and proceedings, other governmental statutes and
ordinances, and of actual conditions existing within the City and
state of Idaho.
4. The City of Meridian has authority to place conditions on
a conditional use permit and the use of the property pursuant to
67-6512, Idaho Code, and pursuant to that section conditions
minimizing the adverse impact on other development, controlling the
duration of development, assuring the development is maintained
properly, and on-site or off-site facilities, may be attached to
the permit; that 11-2-418 (D) authorizes the City to prescribe a
set time period for which a conditional use may be in existence.
5. Section 11-2-418 D. states as follows:
In approving any Conditional Use, the Commission and
Council may prescribe appropriate conditions, bonds, and
safeguards in conformity with this Ordinance. Violations
of such conditions, bonds or safeguards, when made a part
of the terms under which the Conditional Use is granted,
shall be deemed a. violation of the Ordinance and grounds
to revoke the Conditional Use. The Commission and
Council may prescribe a aet time period for which a
Conditional Use may be in existence.
6. The Commission has judged this application for a
conditional use upon the basis of guidelines contained in Section
11-2-418 of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of
Meridian and upon the basis of the Local Planning Act of 1975,
Title 67 Chapter 65, Idaho Code, the Comprehensive Plan of the City
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 17.
DARRELL DONOVAN/DONOVAN BROTHERS COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION
of Meridian, and the record submitted to it and the things of which
it may take judicial notice..
7. 11-2-418 C of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development
Ordinance sets forth the standards under which the Planning and
Zoning Commission and the City Council shall review applications
for Conditional Use Permits. Upon a review of those requirements,
the facts presented and the conditions of the area, and assuming
that the above conditions or similar ones thereto would be attached
to the conditional use, the Planning and Zoning Commission
concludes as follows:
a. Pursuant to the ordinance adopted to annex and zone
the property, the property can only be developed as a
commercial planned development or under the conditional
use permit process. Therefore, pursuant to the ordinance
adopted for the annexation and zoning of the property, a
conditional use permit for a trucking terminal with an
attached office and a future detached maintenance shop
located on the southern portion of the property would, in
fact, constitute a conditional use and a conditional use
permit would be required by ordinance;
b. The use would be harmonious with and in accordance
with the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance;
c. The use is designed and is, apparently, to be
constructed so as to be harmonious in appearance with the
character of the general vicinity. If the conditions set
forth herein are complied with, the use should be
operated and maintained to be harmonious with the
intended character of the general vicinity and should not
change the essential character of the area;
d. The use would not be hazardous nor should it be
disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses if the
conditions are met; however, traffic may increase, but
with the future improvements to Locust Grove Road and the
development having vehicular approaches to the property
that will be designed to decrease interference with
traffic on surrounding public streets, such increase in
traffic should not create a problem;
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 18.
DARRELL DONOVAN/DONOVAN BROTHERS COMMERCIAL CONSTF
e. The Applicant shall be able to provide adequately
for the essential public facilities and services such as
streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures,
refuse disposal, water and sewer, but Applicant may have
to pay additional fees for the use;
f. The use would not create excessive additional
requirements at public cost for public facilities and
services and the use would not be detrimental to the
economic welfare of the community;
g• If the conditions are met, the use should not
involve a use, activity, process, material, equipment or
conditions of operation that would be detrimental to
person, property or the general welfare by reason of
excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes,
glare or odors;
h. The Applicant will cause the property to have
vehicular approaches which shall be designed as not to
create an interference with traffic on surrounding public
streets, and sufficient parking for the proposed use will
be required to meet the requirements of the City
ordinance; and
i. The development and uses will not result in the
destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic
feature of major importance.
8. As conditions may be placed upon the granting of a
conditional use permit to minimize adverse impact on other
development, it is recommended by the Planning and Zoning
Commission that the following conditions of the grant of the
conditional use be required, to wit:
a. The conditional use, pursuant to the Zoning and
Development Ordinance, shall not be transferable to
another owner of the subject property or to another
property;
b. The Applicant shall meet the requirements of the City
Engineer's office, the Planning and Zoning Administrator,
the Meridian Police Department, the Meridian Fire
Department, the Meridian Sewer Department, the Central
District Health Department, the Nampa 6 Meridian
Irrigation District, and other governmental entities,
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 19.
DARRELL DONOVAN/DONOVAN BROTHERS COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION
which requirements specifically include, but are not
limited to:
1. Any further subdivision of the property shall
require the preparation of a plat for review and
approval by the City of Meridian and recorded;
Any existing irrigation/drainage ditches crossing
the property to be included in this project shall
be tiled per City ordinance Section 11-9-505 M;
3. Plans for tiling any existing irrigation/drainage
ditches crossing the property to be included in
this project shall be approved by the appropriate
irrigation/drainage district or lateral users
association, with written confirmation of said
approval submitted to the Public Works Department;
4. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems
within the project shall be removed from their
domestic service per City ordinance Section 7-517.
Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as
landscape irrigation;
5. The Applicant shall construct five feet wide
sidewalks along the entire east property boundary
of the parcel;
6. Water service to this project is contingent upon
positive results from a hydraulic analysis by the
City's computer model;
7. The Applicant shall coordinate fire hydrant
placement with the City of Meridian's Water Works
Superintendent, and fire hydrant locations shall be
depicted on the preliminary plat map;
8. The location and placement of sanitary sewer
service lines to the site shall be reviewed during
the plan review process.
9. As the treatment capacity of the Meridian
Wastewater Treatment Plant is currently being
evaluated, the approval of this application shall
be contingent upon the City's ability to accept the
additional sanitary sewage generated by this
project;
10. The location and placement of water service lines
to the site shall be reviewed during the plan
review process;
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 20.
DARRELL DONOVAN/DONOVAN BROTHERS COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION
11. As the City of Meridian desires to have a 12 inch
diameter water main extended from Pine Street to
the Oregon Short Line Railroad in the future Locust
Grove extension, the Applicant shall pay its
proportionate share of the main line extension
cost, and the Applicant shall post a surety with
the City of Meridian for its share of the extension
cost;
12. The Applicant shall submit detailed landscaping
plans for review and approval by the City of
Meridian as part of any building permit
application;
13. The Applicant shall submit written verification
from a landscape architect that the trees selected
will be able to thrive at 20 feet o.c.
14. The Applicant shall revise the site plan to show
the location of all utilities;
15. The Applicant shall provide a landscape setback of
not less than 20 feet wide along Pine Street;
16. The Applicant shall provide a planting strip at
least ten feet in width along Nola and the future
Locust Grove Road;
17. The Applicant shall dedicate the required right-of-
way for all streets; namely, Pine Street and Locust
Grove Road; which abuts the property prior to the
grant of any building permit application. The
Applicants shall furnish to the City a copy of
recorded warranty deed for or other documentation
evidencing the dedication of additional right-of-
way prior to applying for building permits;
18. Assessment fees shall be determined during the plan
review process, and the Applicant shall be required
to enter into an assessment agreement prior to
obtaining any building permits;
19. The Applicant shall construct a suitably designed
screen for outdoor storage of equipment and
materials;
20. The Applicant shall provide underground sprinkling
of all landscaping and planting areas through a
pressurized irrigation system;
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 21.
DARRELL DONOVAN/DONOVAN BROTHERS COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION
21. The Applicant shall obtain a Certificate of Zoning
Compliance prior to applying for building permits;
22. The Applicant shall obtain a Certificate of
Occupancy prior to opening for business;
23. All signage shall be in accordance with the
standards set forth in Section 11-2-415 of the City
of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance;
24. All signage shall be reviewed and approved by the
Planning and Zoning Department. A-frame and other
temporary signs shall not be permitted and shall be
removed upon three days notice to the Applicant;
25. Sign permits shall be required for all signage;
26. Handicap parking, associated signage and building
construction shall meet the requirements of the
Americans with Disabilities Act, and all required
Uniform Codes;
28. Screened trash enclosures shall be provided in
accordance with City ordinance;
29. The Applicant shall coordinate dumpster site
locations with the City's solid waste contractor,
and shall locate dumpsters so as not to impede fire
access;
30. All driveway and parking areas shall be paved, with
all driveway accesses approved by the Ada County
Highway District. Graveled driveways, parking and
access shall be prohibited;
31. The Applicant shall have prepared and submitted to
the City Engineer a drainage plan, with
calculations for all off-street parking areas,
which shall be designed by a state of Idaho
licensed architect or engineer;
32. All site drainage shall be contained and disposed
of on-site;
33. The Applicant shall determine the seasonal high
groundwater elevation, and submit to the City, with
the development plans, a profile of the subsurface
soil conditions as prepared by a soil scientist;
34. The Applicant shall provide parking lot lighting
plans to the Meridian Public Works Department;
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 22.
DARRELL DONOVAN/DONOVAN BROTHERS COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION
•
35. Illumination of the site shall be designed so as
not to cause glare or to impact adversely
neighboring residential properties, as determined
by the City of Meridian;
36. The Applicant shall submit to the Idaho Department
of Health and Welfare, Division of Environmental
Quality the plans for central sewage and central
water for its review and approval;
37. Runoff shall not create a mosquito breeding
problem;
38. Stormwater run-off shall flow into a grassy swale
before discharging to the subsurface;
39. The Applicant shall file a Land Use Change/Site
Development application for review by the Nampa &
Meridian Irrigation District prior to final
platting;
40. The Applicant shall protect all laterals and waste
ways;
41. All municipal surface drainage shall be retained
on-site, and, in the event any surface drainage
leaves the site, the Applicant shall submit to the
Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District drainage plans
for its review and approval; and
42. The Applicant shall comply with Idaho Code Section
31-3805.
c. The Applicant shall meet the requirements of the Ada
County Highway District, which requirements specifically
include, but are not limited to:
1. The Applicant shall dedicate 60 feet of right-of-
way from the property, which is 48-feet of right-
of-way from the ultimate centerline of the new
Locust Grove Road abutting the parcel's west
property line, by means of recordation of a final
subdivision plat or execution of a warranty deed
prior to issuance of a building permit or other
required permits, whichever occurs first;
2. The District will require a dedication of
additional right-of-way abutting Pine Street when a
development proposal is received for the northern
portion of the property;
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Paqe 23.
DARRELL DONOVAN/DONOVAN BROTHERS COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION
3. The Applicant shall construct 400-feet of curb,
gutter, five feet wide concrete sidewalk and
pavement widening to a 41 feet street section on
existing Locust Grove Road abutting the parcel
prior to District approval of the final plat,
issuance of a building permit, or other required
permits, whichever occurs first. The Applicant
shall coordinate the street plans with District
staff to determine the centerline using the
existing curb and gutter on the east side of
existing Locust Grove Road slightly south of the
property;
4. When new Locust Grove Road is improved in the
future, the Applicant may access the new roadway
with two driveways. The northern driveway shall be
a minimum of 220 feet and a maximum of 240 feet
south of the north property line, as measured from
the future back of the curb on Pine Street and the
near edge of the driveway. This driveway may be
restricted to right turns only in the future. The
southern driveway shall be located a minimum of 440
feet south of the north property line and a minimum
of 30 feet north of the south property line. Both
driveways shall be constructed as 30 to 40 feet
wide curb return driveways with 15 to 20 feet curb
radii;
5. If the Applicant proposes to access new Locust
Grove Road prior to the District constructing it,
the Applicant shall pave the road a minimum of 28
feet wide from Pine Street to the driveway from
Pine Street to the requested driveway and install
pavement tapers at the driveways with 15 to 20 feet
radii;
6. The Applicant shall construct the southerly
driveway as a 30 to 40 feet wide curb cut driveway
on existing Locust Grove Road to align with the
previously approved driveway on the east side of
existing Locust Grove Road, approximately 30 feet
north of the south property line, which may be
located six feet offset from the centerline of the
driveway on the east. The northerly driveway shall
be constructed as a 30 feet wide curb cut driveway,
located approximately 300 feet north of the south
property line, aligning with the previously
approved driveway to the east. Both of the
driveways. shall be improved with pavement tapers
having 15 to 20 feet radii;
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 24.
DARRELL DONOVAN/DONOVAN BROTHERS COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION
_ ~~
7. The Applicant shall pave all driveways their full
required width to a least 50 feet beyond the edge
of pavement of all public roads;
8. The Applicant shall deposit $3,400.00 into the
Public Rights-of-Way Trust Fund for the cost of
constructing a five feet wide sidewalk on the new
Locust Grove Road abutting the parcel prior to the
issuance of any required permits or District
approval of a final plat, whichever occurs first;
9. The Applicant shall locate any gated entries a
minimum of 100 feet back of the public right-of-
way;
10. The Applicant shall provide a recorded cross access
easement for the parcels to the north to use the
property for access to the public streets prior to
issuance of a building permit or other required
permits;
11. Utility street cuts in new pavement less than five
years old shall not be allowed unless approved in
writing by the District;
12. Restrictions on the width, number and locations of
driveways shall be placed on future development of
this parcel;
13. Other than the specifically approved access
point (s) , direct lot or parcel access to the new
Locust Grove Road is prohibited; and
14. Other than the specifically approved access
point(s), direct lot or parcel access to the
existing Locust Grove Road is restricted.
d. The conditional use shall not be restricted to a time
period of authorization but may be, and is, subject to
review upon ten days notice to the Applicant for
violation of any conditions imposed herein, other
conditional use applications, and/or the ordinances of
the City of Meridian.
9. The above-conditions are concluded to be reasonable and
the Applicant shall meet these conditions.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 25.
DARRELL DONOVAN/DONOVAN BROTHERS COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION
10. It is recommended that, if the Applicant meets the
conditions stated above, the conditional use permit be granted to
the Applicant.
APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian
hereby adopts and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions
of Law.
ROLL CALL ~\\
~~.
COMMISSIONER BORUP VOTED '
COMMISSIONER SMITH TE ~~
COMMISSIONER MACCOY
COMMISSIONER MANNING
CHAIRMAN JOHNSON (TIE BREAKER)
VOTED '"l ~
~( ~~
VOTED /~.; ! `~
~~
VOTED
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 26.
DARRELL DONOVAN/DONOVAN BROTHERS COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION
~~ ~ • ~
DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION
The Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the
City Council of the City of Meridian that it approve the
Conditional Use Permit requested by the Applicant for the property
described in the application with the conditions set forth in the
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law or similar conditions as
found justified and appropriate by the City Council and that the
property be required to meet the water and sewer requirements, the
Fire and Life Safety Codes, Uniform Fire Code, parking, paving and
landscape requirements, and all ordinances of the City of Meridian.
The conditional use shall be subject to review upon notice to the
Applicant by the City, unless the City Council states that the
conditional use is not subject to review.
MOTION:
APPROVED.•~~~~ DISAPPROVED:
/ i
i
~~~~
/" ~,~ ~
~-
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 27.
DARRELL DONOVAN/DONOVAN BROTHERS COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION
FROM raWES-HUTCHISON RSSOC. PHONE ND. : 208 338 0011 Jun. 18 1997 03:05PM P1
~~I V ARC N~YECiS ERIN ME R3
S T1 ~ { ~ dwES-NN1[NESON dSSO[IdIES, P b.
SOS S. 8" Siree# - Saiie TSi - 6oi3e, Idaho. 83102
1aI:I08.3d1.0000 FoR:208.367.001I
,~,~~athi9hwaymf
Company: ,. ~ Nl~. V1tt-,~~r~.~5,~'
- . •
lob Number: ~~
~ ~~ 1 _
Regmdiug: _~~}~(L,n \$t Nambef of ;'ages lacbfding Cover:
,Meswge:
Rii~ b iok3dd R~ (ar iS. na Qf Pale mdvibd a mlNy M vAadr $ u . A mRiaim iakarrtiian 8n! an'/ M oadidnllai apd/a
prpi~eged. NYm ae nRi ia#~ ~ Y10° ~ i~M nuii8af ReS 8r diRdovR. of 8dc axaaRRriOViiar n dieily P• N Ym ~ radrad 8ro
omnuRim~a ~ mm, plama aRbh m staRedi~alY EY idephare and +abuu 8313 odgloal b m d Nw akvR arb~m vie wgrlnr pmhd
swim Amd<ica!
~-18-1997 03:05PM 208 338 0011 P.01
I{you do ao# Hairs Nre wmbm o#. pages indiu#sd above. phmre call 24&357.4040, as waa as panibk.
FROM AWES-HUTCHISON RSSOC.
.t i 1 ~
a
V
:7
---
'~
V
7~
Q
N
;~
C7
C?
d
C*~
..~.
m
O
N
~.
X
t1_
0
ca
c~
ch
.-,
O
N
X
Q
.~
L~
06-18-1997 03:05PM
PHOhB: NO. 208 338 0011
Jun. 18 1997 03:O6PM P2
--,~.-~
z
208 33B W11 P.02