1997 06-10MER~AN PLANNING & ZONING COM~ION
AGENDA
TUESDAY, JUNE 10, 1997 - 7:00 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD MAY 13, 1997:
(APPROVED)
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR A CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT FOR A CAR WASH WITH FUEL FACILITIES BY STEVE LYONS
8~ STEVEN BAINBRIDGE: (APPROVED FINDINGS; APPROVED
RECOMMENDATION)
2. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR
OUTSIDE SEATING BY WILD WEST BAKERY 8 ESPRESSO - 815 E. 1sr
STREET:
3. PRELIMINARY FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR OUTSIDE SEATING BY WILD WEST
BAKERY 8 ESPRESSO: (APPROVE FINDINGS WITH AMENDMENTS;
APPROVE RECOMMENDATION)
4. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A REZONE FROM R-4 TO L-O BY
MERIDIAN ASSEMBLY OF GOD - 1830 N. CINDER ROAD: (CITY ATTORNEY
TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW)
5. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A
NEW CHURCH BUILDING BY MERIDIAN ASSEMBLY OF GOD - 1830 N.
CINDER ROAD: (CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF FACT AND
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW)
6. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A
TRUCKING TERMINAL BY DONOVAN BROTHERS COMMERCIAL
CONSTRUCTION - S. OF PINE STREET, E. OF NOLA ROAD:
7. PRELIMINARY FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A TRUCKING TERMINAL BY DONOVAN
BROTHERS COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION: (CITY ATTORNEY TO AMEND
FINDINGS FOR JUNE 18 MEETING)
8. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A REZONE OF 1.4 ACRES FROM R-8 TO
C-G BY ROGER MICHENER - 519 E. FAIRVIEW AVENUE: (CITY ATTORNEY
TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW)
9. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A
MULTI-TENANT RETAIL CENTER BY ROGER MICHENER - 519 E. FAIRVIEW
AVENUE: (CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING TO JULY 8, 1997 MEETING)
10. PUBLIC HEARt~ REQUEST FOR ANNEXATIO~ND ZONING OF 48.7
ACRES TO R-4 BY WESTPARK CO. - E. OF LOCUST GROVE ROAD, N. OF
VICTORY ROAD: (CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF FACT AND
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW)
11. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR
SHERBROOKE HOLLOW SUBDIVISION BY WESTPARK CO. - E. OF
LOCUST GROVE ROAD, N. OF VICTORY ROAD: (TABLED TO JULY 8, 1997)
i •
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JUNE 10 1997
The regular meeting of the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission was called to order
by Commissioner Keith Borup at 7:00 P.M.:
MEMBERS PRESENT: Ron Manning, Byron Smith, Malcolm MacCoy:
MEMBERS ABSENT: Chairman Jim Johnson:
OTHERS PRESENT: John Fitzgerald Jr., Will Berg, Shari Stiles, Gary Smith, Richard
Baxter, Jerry Van Engen, Morten Awes, Jeff Foster, Loren D. Ross, Robert Fritts, Ruth
Fritts, Rhonda Coonse, John Shipley, Dixie Jenkins, Hoyt Michener, Clifford Babbitt,
Nancy Hansen, Marvin Hansen, Van Elg, Carolyn Jansper, Patrick Drake, Jim Maines,
Karen Gallagher, Robert Jacobsen, Richard Coonse:
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD MAY 13, 1997:
Borup: Has everyone had a chance to read the minutes, any comments, questions or
additions?
Manning: I move the minutes be approved as written.
MacCoy: It has been moved and seconded to approve the minutes as prepared, all
those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #1: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR A CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT FOR A CAR WASH WITH FUEL FACILITIES BY STEVE LYONS AND
STEVEN BAINBRIDGE:
Borup: Any discussion from the Commission concerning the findings of fact and
conclusions of law?
Smith: Mr. Chairman, I would just like to reiterate my concerns that I brought up at the
last meeting regarding the site plan as designed. I have concems about the parking
spaces backing out onto the access drive. I think it is a safety issue that should be
addressed. I also don't believe that there is adequate stacking space in front of the
vacuum bays. The findings of fact state that Bob Daugherty testified that 15 vehicles
could be stacked in the three staging areas, three lanes. That would be five vehicles a
lane. The standard parking stall is 19 feet, 5 cars and 19 feet is about 96 feet. I don't
think they have 96 feet from the vacuum bay to the street. I think at a minimum they
should do some kind of a vehicular flow projection to determine how many vehicles are
actually going to be stacked and how many are going to be required to be waiting in the
street. Atso, in response to the construction of the building it has been stated by the
architect Joe Numbers that the building would be constructed of primarily of CMU and
Meridian Planning & Zo~g Commission
June 10, 1997
Page 2
metal siding. The rendering of the building that was presented depicts pre-cast
concrete and I don't want to belabor a graphic issue but it clearly does not depict CMU.
I think it should be adequately or accurately depicted when presented to the City
Council. The correct material designation on the construction of the building. Also, I
guess I have a concern that this building has been designed to look pretty from the
street and once you turn the corner of the building the applicant has chosen to minimize
the durable, they have minimized the CMU and have gone with a metal shell which is
not as attractive and requires more maintenance and does not have the longevity of
concrete masonry. If I need to put together some kind of motion to amend the findings
of fact and conclusions of law and incorporate those concems about the design, I don't
want to hold up the process for the applicant to incorporate those concerns into the
findings of fact.
Borup: You can go ahead and anything can be amended at this point. Maybe you can
get it more precise. Counselor?
Fitzgerald: Well his concerns he expressed are somewhat detailed and I would say that
given the expression of his concerns unless he can be more concise and specific it
would require or I would suggest that we redo those findings of fact and conclusions of
law to specifically incorporate those as stated.
Borup: Concerning his comment on not wishing to hold it up further here is there some
way that some of those comments could be submitted along with the findings to City
Council that they may want to consider any adjustment?
Fitzgerald: I suppose that he could specifically try to provide it in a motion to amend it by
saying his concerns with regard to the parking spaces backing out into the roadway
access roadway the stacking he doesn't believe that there is a sufficient area. And third
in terms of the design of the building the appearance and so forth he has concerns
about those. And then he could amend it that way and include it (inaudible).
Borup: Commissioner Smith does that sound like that would cover (inaudible)
Smith: Let me see if I can give this a try here. I would like to amend the findings of fact
and contusions of law with the following inclusions that the parking be reconfigured on
the site to eliminate backing onto the access drive. That the applicant provide
documentation to show that there is adequate stacking space for cars on the site as
designed and if not that redesign be done. That the rendering as presented to the City
Council be corrected to show the materials that are proposed to be utilized in the design
and construction of this building. And that consideration be made by the City Council to
require that the entire building be constructed of CMU in lieu of partial walls CMU and
metal siding.
MacCoy: Second
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 3
Borup: We have a motion and a second, do you want to expand on the motion to
include the rest of the findings?
Smith: I will make a second motion
Borup: With the aforementioned motion I would also like to propose that the Planning
and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian hereby adopts and approves these
findings of fact and conclusions of law.
MacCoy: Second
Borup: We have a motion and second, roll call vote.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Smith -Yea, MacCoy -Yea, Manning -Yea
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Borup: Do we have any other recommendations for City Council?
Smith: 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 applicants 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 should be subject to review upon notice to the applicant's by the City.
Manning: Second
Borup: A motion and second, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #2: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR
OUTSIDE SEATING BY WILD WEST BAKERY & ESPRESSO - 815 E. 1ST STREET:
Borup: At this time I would like to open the public hearing and invite the applicant or the
representative to come forward.
Carolyn Jansen, 708 Spyglass Way, Eagle, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Borup: We have got your application and such, maybe you can expand a little bit on
what you are proposing.
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 4
Jansen: Alright, what we would like to do is put a couple of tables and two chairs a
piece for those tables right outside the door to our business. They would go underneath
the window. We would also like to put a couple of whiskey barrels closer to the street
side so ~ have the tables and chairs close to the window, we would leave a five foot
pedestrian pathway and then on the other side put a couple of whiskey planters with live
plants in them to kind of add more color. We would also like to put an awning up over
our window with our name on it Wild West Bakery & Espresso. We would also like to
put up a sandwich sign, it is really cute, it is a sandwich sign that stands about 9 foot
tall, it has a black board on it and drawings around the side and cowboy boots for feet
and a cowboy hat on top of that. It would show our coffees of the day, we have four
different types of coffees of the day and we always change the coffees. So a customer
could know before they even walked in what kind of coffee he could be served that day.
We also I think there was one more thing, a planter box for undemeath the window so
we could plant some live flowers in the planter box. We think that would be conducive
to Old Town. We think it is in the spirit of Meridian and the Wild West theme that we are
trying to (inaudible). We also need the seating really bad as well.
MacCoy: On this sandwich board which you propose 9 foot tall is pretty good size.
Jansen: I think that is what she was doing, it is 9 foot high, 2 feet wide on 9 inch legs.
So I guess it probably stands he is not 9 feet, probably about that high I would think. It is
not nine feet.
MacCoy: Where would you actually locate that?
Jansen: Right up next to the building probably by the door. So it wouldn't be in the
impending pathway that we are going to leave vacant it would be up by the door or by
the tables, on the other side of the tables. Because there is parking right next to the
street so if we put it by the street you couldn't see it. So we are going to have to move it
in toward the building itself.
MacCoy: You read part of the report which requires you to leave a five foot (inaudible)
Jansen: Absolutely, the tables aren't that big and the feet between where the road starts
and where our building is, that is like 18 feet I think. So there is no problem, when we
put our tables out there it doesn't even go on that first cut off where the actual sidewalk.
If you are on the sidewalk and you are going toward the Sunrise Cafe or the church it
doesn't even obstruct that part of the sidewalk, So this is like the space going into our
building is not even actually on the sidewalk because if you get into that alleyway there
is nothing there and the sidewalk continues on toward the church. So we are talking
about putting them on that little space that is right in front of our window. So even if a
customer moves his chair out there is still plenty of room between that and the street.
MacCoy: Let me ask staff a question here, Gary, on the sandwich board since that is
not allowed in the City do we have because of Old Town an exception to that?
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission
June 10, 1997
Page 5
Stiles: Commissioners, this has been a policy of the City of Meridian to not allow
temporary signs within the City. I don't know if this is something that would be moved in
everyday.
Borup: The application does day 9 feet.
Stiles: It is a little hard for the Commissioners to decide if that is something that truly
Hrould fit in just with the verbal description of what you are proposing. I appreciate your
intent and it could be a good idea and something that the Commissioners would buy off
on but we are really trying to eliminate the temporary signs that just sit out there as a
portable day in and day out kind of sign. I think if it were something that were more
discrete with a menu board that is a little bit different than some of the signs that we are
having a problem with. But I think that would be up to the Commissioners to decide if
they felt that was appropriate.
Jansen: If 1 could make one comment, 1 have seen some of the sandwich signs that are
up and down Fairview and up and down First street. I am not talking about two pieces
of plywood smashed together, I think they look tacky. This is completely different from
that. It is very tastefully done, it is all painted, It is a professional office working on it.
The writing would be professional writing when we get read to the names of the coffees
out. It is cute, it is not the kind that is just two pieces of board with metal strips on top
and folded in. It is really tastefully done.
MacCoy: What about turning that thing 90 degrees and have it against the building so
that as people into your establishment they would actually still see (inaudible).
Jansen: We could do that too very easily. It would be nice if it could be put out so
people could see it, but I could stick it right up next to the building that wouldn't be a
problem.
MacCoy: There is a, I guess a question has been raised about the receptacle for trash.
Jansen: Well, from what I, Mr. Foley is not in attendance, I am kind of surprised. I see
that there is a letter dated June 9"', it was received by City of Meridian June 9~h that said
he was going to table that because they were in agreement with the or they are trying to
get it to an agreement with the Nazarene Church. I have not been made aware of the
conclusions of that agreement.
MacCoy: I didn't see him here this evening and I was hoping that maybe you had
already resolved that issue.
Jansen: I know they have discussing it and as a matter of fact he was going to, we
agreed that item #6 be tabled or withdrawn to allow us to reach an agreement regarding
the issue between ourselves. If the item cannot be tabled then it is my request that it be
Meridian Planning & Zon'i}fg Commission •
June 1Q 1997
Page 6
withdrawn in its entirety so the remaining items of the conditional use permit can be
acted upon. The last I heard he and Pastor Cox were, Pastor Cox came to me on
Saturday and said they were going to reach an agreement they just hadn't yet.
MacCoy: That is all I had.
Smith: Conceptually I like your proposal, a couple of issues that I have, you are
proposing two tables with four chairs.
Jansen: Two chairs per table
Smith: Okay, two things, one I definitely have a problem with the sign, I guess I would
like to see if you had to have a sign outside to see it tucked back in the alcove of the
entrance here between Valley News and your shop. But I guess at that point to locate it
that far back off the street you may as well go inside and look at your signs inside, your
menus boards and that thing. So I don't know if it is really going to do anything for you
back there. The Xerox copies that we got that show the awnings that you are proposing
to use they didn't come out very good. So I guess I would like to request that you have
some kind of picture or something for the City Council to approve and then if you are
going to have actual signage on that awning that you have that designed and present
that to the City Council for approval as well. As far as the placement of your tables and
whiskey barrels out there, I think that is a great idea, I would just like to see some kind
of a plan that the City Council can approve to where those will be located so that
pedestrian traffic is not impeded or safety is not compromised out there in front of your
shop. Just to kind of prevent things getting away from us here down the road where we
don't have any control over where that stuff gets put.
Jansen: I took a picture of the front of the building, the pictures with the awning the
awnings that are on now is the store in Eagle. That is where I took those pictures. There
are pictures of the front of the building of Wild West in Meridian, I can actually show you
where those tables.
Smith: That is what I am asking is that you have something showing the Council where
those will be placed so they can (inaudible) I would like something a picture or drawing
or something that shows that. Something that we can hang our hat on.
Borup: I might mention here I think the application is strictly for the table and the
awnings and the planters and that kind of thing are just added things that they are doing
for their own decorating benefit. I don't know that those even need to be in the
application other then they did add them. 1 believe I am correct on that, is the application
just strictly for the tables? That and the sandwich board would be a factor too.
Stiles: Commissioners I believe that as part of the conditional use permit we can, we do
have the ability to review all of those items particularly in Old Town. It would be nice to
have a scaled drawing that showed how much overhang you have on the awning, how
Meridian Planning & Zor~g Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 7
much it projects. I think that is mainly what we are concerned with here. We did get
another comment from Ada Planning Association that asked that at least 8 feet be
allowed clear space particularly due to like when you have the parades like the Dairy
Days you are going to need more than 5 feet for people to walk safely. I think you could
still meet that 8 foot requirement. I think the Planning and Zoning Commission is
perfectly within its right to ask for additional details whether they want to ask that this go
on to City Council and that you provide those details by the time you get to City Council.
Byron would have the ability to make a comment at the time it even event to Council as a
Commissioner I believe would be appropriate. It just depends on if they are able to
make that motion and want to proceed that way.
Borup: Any other comments?
Fitzgerald: I just had a question of Ms. Jansen, in terms of the sign, where specifically
did you plan to locate the sign?
Jansen: Originally we wanted to locate it right next to the front door. Not in front of it but
next to it so people walking this way and people walking this way can see what it said. I
don't have a problem leaning it up against our side of the door because it wouldn't
impede people going up the step to get into the front door.
Fitzgerald: So would it be on the sidewalk, actually on the sidewalk?
Jansen: That was the initial intent was to put it on the sidewalk and still leave the 5 foot
area. I even thing I, right underneath the window there is like 3 '~ feet of block cement
that is part of the sidewalk right up next to the window. That is realty what we need. So
if I could just move those tables over a little bit and put the sandwich sign up against the
window if that is what it takes. When he said people could just walk in and see the
menus, the problem is getting people to walk into the store. If they saw we had Hagen
Daaz ice cream and I had it on special for Saturday it might help them to make up their
minds whether or not they wanted to come in. The whole point is I am just trying to get
people in the store.
Fitzgerald: I would point out to the Commission that Section 11-2415 C specifically
prohibits the placing of signs on the curb or sidewalk and that would require a variance
from that ordinance, but I would point that out.
MacCoy: If she put it right next to the building faced with the building and not on the
sidewalk so that it could be part of the (inaudible)
Fitzgerald: If it is not on the sidewalk that would be correct
MacCoy: How do you get around that?
Manning: Is the sign design basically an A frame sign?
Meridian Planning & Zon1Rg Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 8
Jansen: Yes
Manning: And that would if you put it up against the building essentially you would lose
one have of the sign.
Jansen: I could always write iced mochas on one side and hot mochas on other and
turn it over at noon.
MacCoy: You could do that or you could only pay for one side
Jansen: Actually she has got a lot of it done and I didn't think, that would be an idea we
could put hot mochas and hot coffees and what they were and then at noon when
everybody turns to iced espressos and iced lattes we could just tum it over.
Manning: I have no more questions.
Borup: Any other questions?
Jansen: I just want to be certain what procedure I take now?
Borup: We are still going to have it open for additional public testimony and then what
Counsel has done is prepared preliminary findings of fact which enable us to deal with
that tonight which essentially saves you a month and get it to the City Council faster. So
that is what we are endeavoring to do. This is a public hearing, is there anyone from the
public that would like to give testimony? At this time I would like to close the public
hearing. Commissioners now I guess, it was my understanding it was the intent they
would like to have the seating in operation in time for Dairy Days and do have
preliminary findings of fact and conclusions of law available for us which have most of
the pertinent information to enable us to add anything else to it that if we would like to.
Do we have any other comments or discussion at this time?
MacCoy: So you are going to combine two and three, is that what you are doing?
Borup: Well the public hearing has been close on two I guess vae are on item No. 3 now.
It sounds like maybe from some of the comments, the one item, item #4 in the findings it
does pertain to the A-frame that says essentially a variance would need to be obtained.
Counselor, after hearing testimony is there anything you feel should be added?
Fitzgerald: I don't believe that there was anything substantial, the testimony was
substantial don't get me wrong, anything that would cause the findings of fact or
conclusions to be changed or revised in terms of how they were presented. I think that
they do need to be amended in terms of adding in the applicant's representative's name
Carolyn Jansen as her appearing as well as striking the fact that they would be
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 9
preliminary from the findings of fact. If you decide to move forward with these as
presented.
Smith: Mr. Chairman, I think we also have this trash receptacle issue to deal with and I
would also like to incorporate into the findings of fact the concerns about the layout and
design of that sidewalk space. I will make a motion if there was nothing else.
Borup: Is there any other discussion? Are we looking at tabling on the trash receptacle,
the letter referred to item 6 is that the proper?
Smith: It is item 3F on page (inaudible)
Fitzgerald: It would item 6 in the application.
Borup: So that would be item 3F and also and also 7E would that be correct.
Fitzgerald: The Commission may want to ask if that, as I understood it was either to be,
the request was either to table that or to withdraw it. The Commissioners needs to
know how the applicant is approaching this, should it be withdrawn or if it is tabled then
we would have to table the findings of fact and contusions of law.
Borup: The way I read Mr. Foley's letter and maybe 1 am assuming something his first
choice was to withdraw it but table it (inaudible)
Stiles; Commissioner Borup, Commissioners, I believe what the intent of that item in
that letter from Mr. Foley was is that item #6 of the applicant's request which I am not
sure that I really understand if you will see that letter from Valley Shepherd Church of
the Nazarene on the third page there is a description of the conditional use permit that
was part of the application. The request is amendment to conditional use permit granted
Hunter Investments Inc. owner of the building to allow a garbage receptacle behind to
the west of the subject building to be used cooperatively by surrounding property
occupants. I believe that was partly from an understanding that they were required to
provide their own individual trash receptate and enclosure. I think as long as they are
working on cooperatively doing that, that is still a condition Of the application. They are
to provide a screened trash enclosure just as long as they work that out as soon as
possible. I think a resolution is fairly close. I don't believe it was the intent of Mr. Foley to
stop this in any way to really table it or withdraw the application. It was just that one item
he may have had a question on.
Borup: That makes more sense, did the Commission understand (inaudible) No need to
table or withdraw it, let it sit as stands they just need to work out whatever they work
out. Commissioner Smith, any of your other items do you feel we need to open for
discussion? Or are we ready
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 10
Smith: I guess I can't support the sandwich sign seeing as how it is not permissible
under the existing zoning.
Borup: The findings already state that, that they need to, what you saying is you agree
with the findings then?
Smith: Yes
Borup: For the applicant's information that was just saying that a variance would need to
be secured on the sign. The sign was the one item and then anything else, I think the
findings address that.
Smith: Just some kind of drawing indicating a proposal layout for the whiskey barrels,
the tables and to show that the awnings and window boxes are not going to impede
pedestrian traffic or safety on the sidewalk. I don't think they will 1 think vve need to have
something that shows that they won't.
Borup: You are saying you want that to come back to us or (inaudible)
Smith: I don't want to hold it up, 1 want them to be able to go forward with it. So I can
make that as an amendment to the approval of the findings of fact.
Borup: So some more detailed drawings on the tables and landscaping layout. We
have also added the applicant's name, does that need to be I the motion?
Fitzgerald: Yes, in terms of if there is going to be a motion to approve the findings of fact
and conclusions of law you need to intude the amendments into your motion which
would include striking the word preliminary and adding in the blank on the first page the
applicant's representative or the representative Carolyn Jansen. And make sure that
part of your motion which would need to be second.
Smith: Mr. Commissioner, I would like to make a motion that we approve these
preliminary findings of fact as findings of fact and contusions of law, that the word
preliminary be stricken. That the applicant's name Carolyn Jansen be added to the
record. And that the findings of fact and conclusions of law be amended to intude
request for submittal of drawings showing the table and whiskey barrel layouts, the
awnings and window boxes as they are proposed. Which show that they will not impede
pedestrian traffic or safety. Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian
hereby adopts and approves these findings of fact and contusions of law as amended.
MacCoy: Second
Borup: It has been moved and seconded to approve the findings of fact and conclusions
of law, roll call vote.
Meridian Planning & Zo~g Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 11
ROLL CAL VOTE: Smith -Yea, MacCoy -Yea, Manning -Yea
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Smith: Mr. Chairman, the Planning & Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the
City Council of the City of Meridian that except for the placement and display of
sandwich sign which uses in paragraph #B of the findings of fact it approves the
conditional use permit for the rest of the uses specified in paragraph 3 of the findings of
fact herein above 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 should be subject to review
upon notice to the applicant by the City.
MacCoy: Second
Borup: All those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #4: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A REZONE FROM R-4 TO L-O BY
MERIDIAN ASSEMBLY OF GOD - 1830 N. CINDER ROAD:
Borup: Is the applicant or representative here?
Patrick Drake, 704 Spyglass, Eagle, was sworn by the City Attorney
Drake: Good Evening Gentlemen, thank you for your time tonight. As per the request
we at this point in time would like to have the ability to conform with the current
ordinances. The property was built approximately 13 years ago prior to the rezoning. At
this point in time we would like to go ahead and conform to the current ordinances by
changing from R-4 to L-O. We have had a chance to review at length the comments
from the engineers department as well as the P & Z Administrator and are willing to
adhere to the requests that have been stated and so forth.
Borup: Any comments or questions from the Commission? I think at this point we are
just looking at the rezone request.
Smith: Can you show me where, what area of this site we are dealing with here for the
rezone request?
Drake: The entire 12 acres. In reference to the question the entire 12 acres is owned by
the church it is all contiguous under the one title.
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission
June 10, 1997
Page 12
Smith: So it is all currently zoned R-4.
Drake: The church was built prior to the zoning, our intent is to conform with current
regulations.
Borup: Any other questions? This is a public hearing, anyone from the public that would
like to submit any testimony? I would like to close this public hearing at this time,
commissioners. This is an item that we do need findings of fact. So we are open for a
motion.
MacCoy: Mr. Chairman, I move that we ask the Counsel to prepare findings of fact and
conclusions of law for this project.
Manning: Second
Borup: It has been moved and seconded, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #5: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A
NEW CHURCH BUILDING BY MERIDIAN ASSEMBLY OF GOD - 1830 N. CINDER
ROAD:
Patrick Drake, 704 Spyglass Way, Eagle, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Drake: Gentlemen, we request a conditional use permit (End of Tape) wee are in three
full morning services on Sunday. We would like to build a new building sufficient so we
can go back to one service and see each other again.
Borup: Commissioners, any questions?
MacCoy: You are in receipt of the staff report?
Drake: I am sir.
MacCoy: You made an earlier statement that you were, when you read it you were in
compliance with it or at least you would honor those things.
Drake: We have discussed it with our architectural firm and the church board as well.
We would adhere to all of the recommendations from both the engineering department
and the P & Z administrator.
MacCoy: I have a couple of questions along that line then. What is your building
material, what is this going to look like when we get a building out there?
Meridian Planning & ZonlFig Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 13
Drake: Perhaps some of these questions I can address and some others might be
addressed by the representative from the architectural firm Jim Maine is here as well.
MacCoy: Do you want to hold that one until he gets up here?
Drake: I can give it a whirl and he can follow up perhaps. It is basically going to be a
concrete construction
MacCoy: Do you mean poured or concrete block?
Drake: It will be concrete block and probably stucco.
MacCoy: What color?
Drake: I would assume it would be an off white, I think he might have some renditions
with him.
MacCoy: Before you leave, vre will come back to his. To do with your exterior lighting,
that is a very touchy issue with us. The fact that you end up with a structure like this and
a neighborhood setting and people do all kinds of things with outside lighting and the
next thing you know what do wa hear about it that everybody is complaining about the
fact that there are lights in their bedroom at nighttime.
Drake: I think it is a very good question Commissioner, we will definitely address it. We
have and will hire civil engineers along with other consulting engineers to properly light
the parking lot. Perhaps timers would be apropos to go off at a certain time. We would
put the lights in the parking lot itself in islands per say versus the buffer zone contiguous
to the neighbors. I think that would alleviate some of their fears. One of the gentlemen is
an engineer lives next door. He came over and addressed his concern. We reassured
him that we will engineer it property and intend to be good neighbors. We want the
neighbors to come and visit up.
MacCoy: You don't plan to put lighting on the building itself that would highlight the
building like a white wash or something like that?
Drake: I think I will defer that question.
MacCoy: Lets move over to your architect.
Fitzgerald: I have one question, as I recall, you recently had a conditional use permit for
temporary buildings is that correct?
Drake: That is correct.
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 14
Fitzgerald: What do you plan to do with the temporary buildings once the its
constructed?
Drake: At this point in time they are going to be used for educational purposes. I don't
think we have fully addressed what we are going to do at that point in time. The City
gave us permission to have it reviewed on an annual basis and then we ~nrould go from
there.
MacCoy: Do you recall we asked that question up here and they mentioned the fact
they had a new building coming. We were looking (inaudible) for educational reasons so
we got (inaudible). We haven't forgotten.
Borup: Any other Commissioners have questions for the applicant?
James Main, 414 South Sailor, Kuna, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Main: If I could just take a minute to kind of review where we are at. This is a copy of
the site plan, it is the same one you had in your packet. What I have done is I have put
a red dotted line in this area, the conditional use permit that was granted in March takes
into account the property to the west of that line. All of those areas that were addressed
by ACRD in the findings that were sent back to us are already being addressed as far
as the entry. The width of the driveway, the tapers, the landscaping, planting trees. So
this conditional use application is for the remainder of the site. As far as the building
type we are still in the schematic design phases. What we are leaning towards right now
is concrete masonry units on the bulk of the building on the higher part with possible
some mansard type roof around the perimeter with the standing seam metal, a colored
standing seam metal
MacCoy: What color are you going to make it?
Main: The existing building now is a beige with green trim, so I would think we would
probably play off that. What we are looking at is probably a split face GMIJ in an integral
color so we would probably go with some earth tones. Possibly on the standing seam
metal going with a green or blue to play off the trim on the existing building.
MacCoy: And you are not going to have any lighting on the face of the building for a
Tight wash?
Main: At this time we haven't planned any. The concern about the site lighting initially
we did a site plan which was preliminary to this that the church used for some
promotional reasons that sat inside the lobby of the church. On that we had some
lighting randomly spaced on it and one of the neighbors came in and saw that and that
is where their concerns came from.. At this time we haven't involved an electrical or site
engineer yet. Once we do that we will engineer the site so that the lighting lights the
parking area without affecting the neighbors.
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 15
MacCoy: Since you are the architect will you be looking at almost directional down
lighting low height variety I would think anyway.
Main: I think we will probably go with probably 20 foot poles, as close to the center of
the parking as we can. One of the items on Shari's comments also was the fact that
there is no buffer along this line over here. The reason I didn't do that the church owns
this entire piece of property over here. Right now vue are showing approximately 450
parking spaces. The church may decide that instead of a one to 2.5 ratio they want to
go with a 1 to 2 ratio. That may bump over just a little bit. So I wanted to leave that
option there.
MacCoy: You even have a swimming pool.
Main: Well, not quite a swimming pool. This is for sprinkling the green areas. Of course
the church has surface water rights and in order to utilize that we have a small retention
pond, actually it is a pretty long retention pond. Where the irrigation water will run into
that and then the pump system will pump out of that pond. And there also is a well that
will fill that pond when the irrigation water isn't available.
MacCoy: How deep is that pond?
Main: From the water level probably a foot and a half to tvuv feet.
MacCoy: Are you going to put some type of screening around it for protection of
children?
Main: That has been discussed.
Smith: The site plan doesn't depict between new construction versus existing. Can you
walk me through what is new?
Main: The only existing building on the site right is these Mro modular buildings
(inaudible) at this point anything behind this line all this parking area here (inaudible)
every couple of months one of the church members comes over and (inaudible).
Smith: I guess the problem 1 have with approving or disapproving is I don't know what it
is going to look like. I don't know how tall it is. I have no idea what it is going to look
like. You said you are in schematics right now which is an early design phase. Is the
reason, are you still evaluating cost or what is the issue why we don't have something
presented in front of us that shows what the building is going to look like?
Main: The reason is we have only been retained by the church within the last 2 to 3
weeks to do the project. Height on the building, what it is called here is a multi-use
building. So I would estimate the ceiling height to be about 22 feet in the main room, the
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 16
main room will be about 12,000 square feet. (Inaudible) we are probably looking at 5
foot joist which would put the top of the building at approximately 30 feet.
Smith: What is the height of the existing building do you know?
Main: The existing building, I am not sure if you are familiar with it, the outside wings I
would say probably 14, 15, 16 feet and then they come to the center which sweeps up
and has a steeple on it. I would think that steeple is probably in the 30 to 35 foot range.
Smith: I am familiar with it. I can't comment any more because that is all the information
that was presented.
Borup: Any other Commissioners with questions at this time? This is a public hearing,
do we have anyone from the audience that would like to submit any other testimony?
Hearing none we will close this public hearing. Commissioners, what is your pleasure?
MacCoy: Mr. Chairman, I move the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby
recommend to the City Council of the City of Meridian.
Borup: We need findings
MacCoy: Mr. Chairman, I move we have the City Attomey prepare findings of fact and
conclusions of law for this project.
Manning: Second
Borup: All those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: 2 YEA, 1 NAY
ITEM #6: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A
TRUCKING TERMINAL BY DONOVAN BROTHERS COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION
- S. OF PINE STREET, E. OF NOLA ROAD:
Borup: Is the applicant here or their representative?
Richard Balster, 4103 S. 239"' Street, Kent, WA, was sworn by the City Attomey
Balster: Donovan Brothers are proposing to build a freight terminal for Oak Harbor
Freight Lines who are currently located in Boise. It is a family owned business and they
currently have 14 employees, 8 of those employees are truck drivers at their local
terminal. It is a quality run organization. We will voluntarily widen the road down by the
Franklin intersection, that is at Nola Street and Franklin. We are going to pay to upgrade
a 10 inch water line to a 12 inch water line. As per Karen Gallagher with Ada County
the existing roads will handle the truck traffic. Her statement says 600 vehicle trips per
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 17
day but they currently only have the 8 drivers and they don't do 600 trips per day. The
building is going to be a metal building, 2000 square feet of office with 20 truck doors.
We will also be installing 116 three inch trees around the property to screen the
property.
Borup: Any questions from the commissioners?
MacCoy: Yes sir I do, I have a whole lot of them. What are your hours of operation?
Balster: Hours of operation they start running about 4 to 5 in the morning. Most of the
traffic is they are loading up the trucks and they are leaving around 7 to 8 o'clock. They
fill the trucks and then the truck drivers come in and take them out and bring them back
empty, they get filled up around 4:30 to 6:00. They may have one or two drivers that go
and come back if they get two loads. A lot of their freight is just going from there. They
take the freight from businesses in Meridian and Boise bring it back to the place
terminal that gets shipped to Seattle and California overnight.
MacCoy: So you would say 4 a.m. to what?
Balster: To about 6 or 7 o'cock at night.
MacCoy: What type, you said construction is going to be a metal building
Balster: Yes
MacCoy: And you have a flat roof probably?
Balster: Yes, metal roof, standard seam.
MacCoy: I am sure you have looked at the site out there and are familiar with that.
Truck traffic is a real concern of ours and you have an R-4 across the street from you
and I imagine you will probably be running from where you are proposing your location
to be up Locust Grove to Fairview and out.
Balster: The traffic will be coming off of Franklin, the easiest way for them to get to the
interstate is from Franklin and coming down Locust Grove and turning into the site.
MacCoy: You are saying no traffic would go up to Fairview for example?
Balster: Not that I know of. That is why they are also widening the road up at that
intersection, they want to take the right hand turns getting out to get to the interstate.
They don't want to take the left street and the left hand turn and go down Pine Street.
MacCoy: I was concerned about the noise antl the fumes of the area because if you are
right across the street with a house.
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 18
Balster; There is only one house across the street.
MacCoy: You have a whole complex (inaudible)
Balster: They meet all the EPA regulations for their trucks, they are having to go to
California (inaudible)
MacCoy: That may be but if you happen to be one of the ones that owns housing in the
area you don't care about EPA to the point that you have your sleep disturbed at 4 in
the morning. What about sound barrier walls, are you going to do any of that?
Balster: We are putting 116 trees that are going to be filling in (inaudible) that would be
doing some screening.
MacCoy: That is your only sound barrier?
Balster: That is it.
MacCoy: You also indicate a future shop?
Balster: Yes they may put a shop in there at some time, that is just to maintain the
vehicles on site.
MacCoy: Will you be doing maintenance which would use air wrenches for example
and tools that are
Balster: That is done between 8 and 5 if they do and that would be done inside the
building not outside which is an insulated building.
MacCoy: What about painting and so on, you have fumes of paint and solvents and so
forth.
Balster. They don't do any painting or anything like that.
MacCoy: Would you say the shop will not also be a paint shop.
Balster: All they do is basically put tires on and change oil and do repairs on trucks.
MacCoy: You are indicating it is actually a staging area then it is not, you really have no
warehouse ability.
Balster: They may have three rows of racking but all the freight comes in over night and
it is shipped out in the morning. So you call it a cross dock facility.
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 19
MacCoy: You also indicate you have a future expansion down the road with these
(inaudible) I am going to pass it at this moment.
Smith: How are you going to deal with the fact that there is a school across the street?
Balster: We have talked to the school about traffic. It is not a middle school it is an
alternative school. They are going to have temporary buildings located way down by the
other intersection. He didn't see it as being a problem, Chuck Lee.
Smith: Is he with the administration?
Balster: Yes, I am sure if he had some real concems here he would be here tonight.
Smith: I have some real concerns with it and I am not going to debate whether or not
the school site is appropriate where it is or not. But it is there nonetheless. I think there
are some issues that come up with these two type of uses there. 1 wasn't clear, you are
going to widen the existing Locust Grove Road to Franklin from your site, the entire
length to Franklin?
Balster: We are adding the left hand turn lane on Franklin or to go from Franklin to
Locust Grove. This is the (inaudible) We are widening the road so that a left hand turn
lane can be added in the middle. This is on Locust Grove, this also helps the buses get
in and out better (inaudible).
Smith: Are your trucks going to be turning left on Franklin to go (inaudible) I just
assumed they would be.
Balster: This is more of a benefit for them to tum into the project so the road is wide
enough.
Smith: You didn't answer my question.
Balster: I am not the terminal manager.
Smith: It is a possibility (inaudible)
Balster: They could go this or that way, they like to take the right hand turns.
Smith: Has there been any discussion with Ada County regarding a signal light there.
Balster: They didn't think it would be required.
Smith: They didn't feel it was necessary based on what you are proposing?
Balster. No
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 20
Smith: I hate to sound like a broken record. I guess I am not real crazy about the whole
facility being constructed out of metal siding. Your elevation shows metal siding
painted, is that indeed metal siding painted or is that apre-finished metal siding.
Balster: That is apre-finished metal siding, (inaudible). It is very similar to the other
buildings that are in that development right off to the east.
Smith: Is the 17 foot dimension on the elevation is that to the ridge of the roof?
Balster: Yes
Smith: The heavy line I see right below that would indicate the eve line. The three
boxes that I am looking at on the office end of the building those would be windows?
Balster: Yes
Smith: The 10 foot landscaping strip along Locust Grove is that a minimum landscaping
requirement the width?
Balster: Actually we are going to have to make that one, that will be 10 feet.
Smith: I think something like a berm along there might alleviate some noise. When you
get around here to the expansion, if or t should say when Locust Grove extends on
through to the west side of your property the future expansion it looks like it would
encroach into a setback on the proposed Locust Grove, have you looked into that?
Balster: We will have to dedicate portions of our property for that property.
Smith: No the setback requirements from the road.
Balster: The setbacks, we have worked that all out with Shari Stiles and Karen
Gallagher on the distance from all of the intersections. They have approved our
setbacks per here June 5 letter. Is that what you are talking about?
Smith: No, I am talking about the setback from Locust, new Locust Grove back to the
minimum dimension from the road that you can build your building.
Balster: Right now that building is just shown that it may happen, we will have to come
in for another permit.
Smith: Functionally your site will still work okay with your offices on the back side?
Balster: That is correct.
Meridian Planning & Zonirfg Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 21
Smith: Is there any fueling done at this site?
Balster: Not currently, it is brought in. There is fueling done on the site, an outside
supplier comes in and brings the fuel on site and does the fueling in the morning.
Smith: Fuels the truck, so there is no on site storage, fuel storage?
Balster: Correct, but they may apply for a permit to do that. They are still considering
that.
Manning: You say they anticipate, this facility would increase traffic by 600 units a day,
600 vehicles a day.
Balster. Like I said right now they have 8 truck drivers that are working this facility so we
are not increasing the truck traffic by 600 units.
Manning: No but you are not building that to maintain a status quo of 8 units.
Balster: That is right, their business may grow, but I would say that is on the very high
side. They don't have any of their terminals that 600 trips a day.
Manning: To the best of your knowledge the bulk of the traffic would be Locust Grove,
Franklin into Meridian.
Balster: That is correct, they do not want to go to Pine Street, that does not work for
them.
Manning: Say the truck was headed east would it not go onto Eagle Road and gain
access to the interstate on Eagle?
Balster: Yes it may.
Manning: But the bulk of the traffic you feel would be coming into Meridian, Franklin into
Meridian.
Balster: Yes
Borup: Anyone else?
Balster: I do have a couple of comments, on the City of Meridian's letter to us, which we
have not received yet, we just picked up from the architect today.
Borup: The staff comment letter?
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 22
Balster: Yes, in the existing, item #2, existing irrigation drainage ditches crossing this
property to be included in this project shall be tiled per City ordinancz 11-9-605 we are
wondering, there is currently no ditches there but (inaudible) there is a waste ditch and
an irrigation ditch on the project but it is not on our property it is also on the City's
property. So, we were wondering what they want us to do there.
Borup: Shari, would you like to clarify that, was this a standard statement or site
specific?
Stiles: Commissioner Borup, Commissioners, it is a standard comment. Any barrow
ditches would have to be taken care of in your street improvements is that right, or did
they leave them, they are not the City's property they are the Ada County Highway
District's property. If they are within that 90 foot total width there. Are you talking about
both on Pine and Nola Road?
Balster: Yes
Stiles: There is an irrigation ditch that goes along the property boundary, the properties
east boundary clear up to Pine and then goes along Pine and hooks up with Railside
Subdivision. As far as the barrow ditches that would be taken care of with whatever
your construction is with Ada County Highway District within their right of way.
Balster: Item #7, the City of Meridian owns a 15 inch diameter sanitary sewer main, we
would prefer there is another sanitary sewer line that vue would prefer to connect in that
is closer to the truck terminal rather than going all the way to Pine Street.
Stiles: Gary is not here now to address that but these comments are from the Public
Works Department and to meet their trunk requirements trunk line requirements that
would be the nearest available sewer that you could hook into.
Balster Pine Street
Borup: You are saying the other sewer line does not have the capacity, that you are
understanding.
Stiles: I would prefer Gary answer that.
Balster: We don't have many units (inaudible)
Stiles: I would like to get Gary to address that (inaudible)
Borup: Okay, if he is still here, I would say that is something that needs to be worked
out with the City Engineer if he is still here.
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 23
Balster. Okay, my last one is the applicant is to dedicate right of way for all streets,
Pine, existing Locust Grove, new Locust Grove abutting the ten acre parcel prior to
submitting an application for building. We would like to change that to issuance of
building permit or upon occupancy. ACHD's report to us is that our dedicating of our
right of way is going to be either to the ultimate centerline 48 feet or 60 feet. They have
not told us where our property line is going to tie. We will agree to do that but we want
to actually get in for a permit and would like it to be a condition upon issuance of a
permit or occupancy rather than applying for a permit.
Borup: Is the question on right of way on both roads?
Balster: No it is just on where the center line
Borup: You said 48 or 60.
Balster: Yes the way ACHD's response was that we would have to dedicate right of way
either to the ultimate center line or 60 feet. There is a question where the ultimate
center line of the new Locust Grove is going to be. Until that is determined we can't
dedicate right of way.
Borup: That was my question, this is just in reference to the new Locust Grove.
Balster: That is correct
Borup: So your request is just pertaining to the new Locust Grove then.
Balster: But we would like them all to be done, we would like to take care of all of them
at the same time.
Borup: Did ACHD give you an indication of a time frame?
Balster: No they haven't.
Borup: We may ask that later. Any other comments you had on staff comments? I think
Smith is in now since is he up to speed maybe we can get input from him on item #7. I
believe your comments pertaining to item # 7 and 12. Mr. Smith did you get brought up
to date there, the question was on item #7 the sewer line. They thought that there was a
sewer line in Pine I mean in Locust Grove that was Goser than the one on Pine that
they would Tike to tie into.
Eng. Smith: Mr. Chairman, I am not sure exactly where the line is in Locust Grove at
this point. It is being extended to that Meridian Middle School Academy to serve that
property I don't know where that is in relation to this property.
Meridian Planning & Zor~g Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 24
Borup: Is there any problem with your department on which line they tie into. Is that
something they can work out with you?
Eng. Smith: It can be worked out
Borup: I think the concern earlier was it might be a separate line and there was a
capacity problem.
Eng. Smith: I don't think there is a capacity problem.
Borup: Does that answer your question? Okay, any other comments from the
Commissioners before the applicant sits down. This is a public hearing, do we have
anyone from the audience that would like to come fonnrard?
Morten Awes, 3900 East Chinden Blvd, Eagle, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Awes: I am with the architectural firm Awes-Hutchinson Architects representing the
applicant. I think I can help you with some of the questions you had of the applicant.
You asked about sound barriers first, the prevailing winds as you know are out of the
northwest so that does help mitigate some of that problem. Also that might also help
with the question of fumes to the adjacent housing development to the northwest. So
that might be something to consider along those lines. You asked about a school across
the street, 1 spend a good deal of time with Chuck Lee the maintenance director,
Director of Operation and Maintenance and requested that he send us the plans for the
facilities so we could look and see what they are proposing. They are proposing seven
portable Gassrooms as you know around a culdesac drive through and it is up on the
portion of Locust Grove north of Pine on the other side of Micxo Tools so it is quite a
distance from this project. I thought it was across the street just north of commercial.
But the site plan indicates it is north of Pine.
Smith: The sign is up right across the street from your property and there is quite a bit of
grading that has been done the last week or so.
Awes: I am in error then, but in his comments were that it was not a problem for him
because the truck traffic will be coming in from the south proceeding north bound and w
will be entering the site on the southern most portion of our site so that it won't, he didn't
feel it would be a problem. I asked him did he have concerns with the alternative school
being in essentially a light industrial area. And again most of those kids drive
themselves and it is, they wouldn't have located there if they thought it was a problem
because they are aware of the fact that area is light industrial. So he was supportive
and didn't feel that it represented a problem for his operation. There was just one other
item here that I thought might help you. We have covered all of them so thank you very
much.
Borup: Any questions from the Commissioners?
Meridian Planning & Zor~g Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 25
Karen Gallagher, 318 E. 37m Street, Garden City, was sworn by the City Attorney
Gallagher: Commissioners, I just wanted to address the issue of right of way and then I
would be happy to address any other questions you might have of the site and what we
went through in reviewing it: Your staff has taken a little different approach than what
we have, we are not requiring any right of way at this time on Pine. The entire site or the
larger part that it comes from does abut Pine but the development itself does not abut
Pine therefore we are not requiring right of way and as our funding is going at this point
we don't want to spend money on right of way that we don't quite need until a
development is coming forward that vue need to worry about setbacks for a building.
That is incuded in our report that Pine Street the right of way is not incuded. So I would
make a recommendation that not be included. As well as any right of way on either
existing Locust or new Locust Grove. We are only getting right of way, we don't need
any on existing Locust Grove, we do need right of way 60 from their property line on
new Locust Grove and we are asking for that but only on a portion of the site that is
being developed at this time. Thank you, any questions?
Smith: Is the widening of existing Locust Grove Road as was shown tonight requiring
the acquisition of any addition right of way?
Gallagher: The plan that was shown for the widening at the intersection at Franklin was
not a part of development services requirement. The applicant has been concerned
about or trucks turning at that intersection and they are coordinating with a different part
of the district. So whatever they are doing must be within we have 50 feet of right of way
which would easily accommodate what they are dealing with. So to my knowledge there
is no additional right of way that is needed for that.
Borup: Anyone else, any additional comments? None, at this time 1 would like to close
the public hearing. Commissioners we do have preliminary findings of fact before us.
John, is there anything that you fee should be added other than the name for one thing
but that after the testimony anything that needs to be added to the findings?
Fitzgerald: Well I think that in terms of the testimony presented by the applicant's
representative that there were a lot of (End of Tape) we incorporate those in specifically
into the findings of fact and conclusions of law for your consideration.
Borup: Are you referring to, the most pertinent thing in my mind was the right of way.
Fitzgerald: That is correct, and the turning lanes.
Borup: Do we want to address the specific items on the right of way then or can that be
in the general motion do you think?
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 26
Fitzgerald: In terms of the findings of fact you can have me revise them so we
specifically include his testimony in the findings of fact if the Commission thinks it is
important enough.
Borup: I have a question for staff then you included in the right of way, do you have any
comment in light of ACHD's testimony? Agree or disagree?
Eng. Smith: I guess Mr. Chairman, Commission members, it is the highway district's
right of way, it is their responsibility for the roads. I guess they are responsible for the
traffic counts and the impact on the traffic load, carrying capacity of the section road, the
access onto Franklin Road. Those things are their jurisdiction and their responsibility.
So I guess if they have looked at that and said everything is okay then that is theirs.
Borup: Any other commissioners have any other comments of (inaudible)
Smith: I guess I would just like to see the findings of fact include the testimony that was
given tonight regarding fueling and fumes, noise, barrier, all of that. I think there was
substantial testimony given that needs to be included. Does that require another
motion?
Borup: Counselor, earlier 1 thought you indicated that the other changes could be made
and the findings could still be passed on. Is that still the case with (inaudible)
Fitzgerald: I would feel more comfortable given the substance of the applicant's
representative's testimony that it actually be or the findings be revised to specifically
incorporate that testimony, I would feel more comfortable.
Borup: So you are saying revise them and come before the next (inaudible) we do have
a little bit unusual month that vue have another meeting next week on (Inaudible). Are
these changes such that it could be done at the next Planning and Zoning meeting?
Fitzgerald: The quest is how quickly we can get the transcript from this hearing. Do we
have enough notice?
Smith: Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a motion that we incorporate the testimony as
presented this evening into the findings of fact into the preliminary findings of fact and
conclusions of law and that findings of fact and conclusions of law be prepared for our
next commission meeting.
MacCoy: Second
Borup: Motion and a second, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Meridian Planning & Zo~g Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 27
Fitzgerald: So as I understood your motion what you are asking is for the preliminary
findings of fact and conclusions of law to be revised to incorporate the testimony and
brought back to the Commission for review and approval, is that correct?
Borup: The intention is to be at the next June 18~h meeting. What we just did was
instructed the attorney to prepare new findings which would incorporate the testimony
with the intention of trying to have that completed by June 18t" which is next
Wednesday.
(Inaudible)
Borup: I assume you were trying to get submitted for a building permit.
(Inaudible)
Borup: The next City Council meeting would be July 1~, the City Council does meet
twice a month. Does that help?
ITEM #8: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A REZONE OF 1.4 ACRES FROM R-8
TO C-G BY ROGER MICHENER - 519 E. FAIRVIEW AVENUE:
Borup: Is the applicant here?
Hoyt Michener, 7009 Bellhaven, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney
Michener: I have read through, my father Roger couldn't be here tonight, I have read
through the comments that everybody had provided, Shari and everybody. We have a
few questions and clarifications. (guess they are all public concerns.
Borup: That would be appropriate go ahead.
Michener: Two fire hydrants, they weren't really described where to place them.
Borup: Did it reference a specific number in the comments?
Michener: It said it should require two fire hydrants, number four. I guess I could just go
through in order. I will start with number then. Cross access easements, we are
providing one to the back which would be the south property, I don't know exactly what
that owner is planning to do but we are providing access to that back and recording an
easement. I don't know what the east and west landowners are doing with their parcels.
At this time I don't know if we need access agreements for the east or the west. We are
providing one for the south. Number three, we are planning to meet all of the minimum
landscaping requirements if that requires a 20 foot strip that would be fine. Number 4,
provide fire access and hydrant locations. I guess it is not on this first one, it must have
been on the second one for the rezone. But it said two fire hydrants on the property we
Meridian Planning & Zon• Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 28
are unaware of the location and I guess the demand for those fire hydrants. It is under
the Fire Marshall comments. I guess if that is what they would require we would do it
for the building if that is what the code is orrf that is what it requires we would like to
know where they would want them placed. We are hoping that one is sufficient.
Borup: That is probably something you may want to get with the Fire Marshall then.
Michener: Number 5, the trees aren't a problem, we will be planting trees, like 1 said
landscaping the front and all four sides of this property. So we don't have a problem
with that. The screened trash is not a problem, if that is code we will meet that. Asking
for an additional foul feet on number 7, I don't know if that is, it says from centerline,
that might or might not affect the purchase price. Obviously if they are going to
reimburse us for that four feet or if we just have to give it to them. 1 don't know what the
status is on just with Meridian. I know ACRD and certain entities pay you back for taking
(inaudible) That was just a question on whether we get reimbursed for that additional
frontage foot taking off which might or might not affect the overall percentages that we
have kind of tried to draw the building to a certain size and meet all of your minimum
landscaping and parking requirements that additional feet might not affect the minimum
requirements. Number 10, it says provide temporary fencing to contain debris during
construction, maybe a clarification on that. Which I guess also touches on the letter that
was included requesting a concrete masonry block 6 foot fence along one the sides and
across the back.
Borup: Those are two separate
Michener: 1 am aware that they are two separate requests
Borup: I might mention item #10 I think the temporary fencing they are talking about a
lot of times during construction wind can cause debris to blow over adjoining properties.
That is a concern there and that is (inaudible) take care of that during the construction
period.
Michener: The wall across the one side is a little bit of a concern. I don't know if that is a
sound buffer.
Borup: Which item are you referring to?
Michener: The 6 foot block wall.
Borup: You are referring to your neighbors request, no other comments an staff?
Michener: It talked about cutting Fairview Avenue for the sewer and it said you are
going to resurface Fairview Avenue. I don't know a timing, I guess we could stub into it
right now before you resurface it. Because apparently when you resurtace, because
after you resurface it you can't cut it for five years. Or you have the option of possibly
Meridian Planning & Zon• Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 29
tying to the neighbors line to the east, we would have to I guess know the timing on the
resurtacing whether or not we need to access that right now.
Smith: It was resurfaced last week.
Michener: So this point is moot, it is saying I cannot cut into the sewer, correct, is that
what I am hearing? I cannot cut into the sewer on Fairview? So I have to access it from
Smith: There is no cutting of Fairview that is correct.
Michener: So that wording doesn't apply on this one then.
Borup: You are talking item #18?
Michener. No, where it talks about it is going to be resurfaced and you can't cut into it
after it is resurfaced. You have the option of finding it elsewhere if you can come to an
agreement with side neighbors.
Borup: I think that is item #18. So I take it you have not investigated that yet.
Michener: After I read this that it would be resurfaced in the future, no. There wasn't any
date on this.
Borup: It was probably the next day, future is very short sometimes.
Michener: Is there any kind of variance, I know in Boise sometimes you can get
variances after it is surfaced within the 5 year period.
Eng. Smith: No, the pavement is just barely cold, I don't think the Commissioners will
even listen to it.
Borup: You are referring to ACHD Commissioners?
Eng. Smith: Yes, I think that Mr. Chairman, I think there is a lot lacking on this site plan.
A lot of these questions could be answered by information provided on the site plan.
Where are you going to connect to the sewer, where are you going to connect to the
water, etc. All of these questions can be answered and that is one of the comments that
staff has made at the end of this is that a new site plan needs to be submitted. If you
want to go down through each one of these items and discuss them we can certainly do
that.
Michener: I agree, we were I guess when we put the property under contract it was I
guess in need. of several things like a rezone, conditional use permit for a new building.
We are trying to jump several hurdles, maybe too many at once, several months to get
through this process. And whether or not we can pull them all off to everybody's
Meridian Planning & Zon• Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 30
satisfaction I don't know. If we can tie into the sewer next door or to the neighbor to the
east obviously that is our only choice now.
Smith: As far as I am concerned it is, I am not going to support cutting Fairview Avenue.
I think that there would be an uproar that you wouldn't hear quiet for some time.
Michener: So any new development for the next five years needs to access it off of out
of the street in an easement out of the street within the property line. I know the sewer is
coming from Roundtree in a westerly direction and then it is also probably coming from
the other direction. So any new development over the next five years is going to have
to tie into an existing.
Smith: If the site plan would show the sewer line I think it would be fairly evident. I don't
know exactly where the sewer line is, it is along the west side of Five Mile Creek, 1 don't
know where Five Mile Creek is in relation to your property.
Michener: It is not on our property.
Smith: You have got to get to Five Mile Creek.
Michener: Okay
Smith: Roundtree does not access sewer to Fairview it accesses sewer through
Danbury Fair Subdivision.
Michener: I think that answers most of the questions that I had with the comments.
Borup: I think the one and this maybe a mute point, but the applicant had asked a
couple of questions and I think Mr. Smith's comments would take care of answering
that. But he was wondering about the dedication of the additional four feet from the
centerline. Karen did you want to comment on that or Shari?
Karen Gallagher, ACHD, 318 E. 37"' Street, Garden City, was sworn by the City
Attorney.
Gallagher: Per our staff report there is no right of way that is required. We do need 54
feet from center line, our documents are showing that they have 54. Shari and I looking
at the site plan it is not verifying that. If we do need four additional more feet we will pay
for that right of way. It is an arterial and that will come through the impact fees.
Borup: So for the applicant's question it may or may not be there so it just needs to be
verified on the site plan?
Gallagher: Correll, if we do need right of way we will pay for it
Meridian Planning & ZoniTig Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 31
Borup: I guess maybe one other question white you are up there. The cross access
agreements to the properties to the east, south and west, I assume that is something
you would like to see on the plat at this time also?
Gallagher: We have requested only the cross access to the south in our site specific
number 1. That what the only one that we see we could, don't we have the Five Mile,
we have the drainage on the one side so we really didn't see the cross access was
going to be feasible over that. To the south was something that we could definitely work
with and eliminated an access point to Fairview and we already had the existing day
care on the west side and it is already developed. We tried to see when things are going
to redevelop, what really is feasible for us to get a cross access to work and we didn't
see that redeveloping. So we only went for the cross access to the south as being a
realistic option.
Borup: Thank you, did you have some additional comments?
Michener: I was just going to answer any questions.
Borup: Any questions for the applicant?
MacCoy: (Inaudible) I wish you would have given us a map, plan, layout etc. that would
have given us an elevation. What you show us here leaves a lot to be desired. It puts
me in a position where I have to ask you what is the height of the building, what is it
made of, etc.
Michener: Do you want me to go into it? I don't have an elevation.
MacCoy: Do you know where
Michener: We have currently spent $2000 redoing the plan up to this point. ACHD
requested a single curb cut so uve v~rent back and redrew it. We spent a considerable
amount redrawing it to meet the previous hearings. We have not done a full set of
plans, we are not going to do a full set of plans unless v~ get approval. We can do a
front view showing the color scheme.
MacCoy: That is what 1 am asking for, something that gives us some type of feel for this.
Michener: We can do a color scheme, basically it is going to be mason block designer
color I guess with raised block around banded color. Basically front glass retail, we
have talked to several retail users they all want glass and frontage visibility. Like I said
Mason Block height, your typical 8 foot 10 foot interior ceilings. Another 4 foot probably
for duct work and access and a roof height of, I don't know probably flat we haven't
really got into the type of a roof. We are just now starting to talk with builders, block
seems to be the latest thing that everybody wants to build these days. So it doesn't
sound like you want a metal building out there. We don't like metal buildings either. We
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 32
could definitely do a color schematic. We didn't know if we needed to put forth more
dollars not knowing whether we are going to get our rezone for starters.
MacCoy: It doesn't have to be something real fancy either but you could have even
done it with a sketch and done a water color wash or a pencil wash or anything else to
show that to us.
Michener: The main two factors that we are going after is probably the rezone, 1 think it
fits your comprehensive Plan, we are not really trying to step out of the bounds, there is
definitely a demand in Meridian for retail space. We do a lot of leasing commercial real
estate is what we do, leasing and sales of properties. There is a high demand for retail
space right now. I don't know how many projects you have heard lately but I am sure
several. This is a prime property close to downtown and we have had significant interest
for retail type users. We need to make sure we can get it rezoned before we start going
too in depth on plans and what not.
Borup: I might just mention item #8 is just referring to the rezone. The next item is
pertaining the conditional use. Normally we kind of overlap that I the testimony.
MacCoy: You mentioned the concrete block wall which you must have received the
letter from Ross the owner of Elm Grove trailer park.
Michener: Yes I reviewed that.
MacCoy: You can understand their reasoning for the letter.
Michener. Yes I can see a visual barrier six foot, I don't know how much sound barrier
block wall is going to do. I don't know if we can put these block walls every commercial
development in town whether that makes sense or not.
MacCoy: We are talking about this one right here.
Michener: We can review, we don't have a problem with building it along the side next
to the mobile home park where the residents are. The question would be whether or not
going east and west across the back of our property not knowing what the next property
owner is going to do to the south. They are not having that same request I guess.
MacCoy: This has got to do with the trailer park, you have to understand their view
point. I was just wondering since they spelled out what they were looking for what you
felt about it.
Michener: We are just starting to see more and more of that with commercial
development requesting for sound and visual barrier walls. So it is not out of the norm, it
would be nice to split it 50/50 on the cost obviously, a good neighbor fence.
Meridian Planning & Zon• Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 33
MacCoy: Well that is between you and them. This Commission though would like to
see a barrier wall because we worry about the visual part and we worry about the sound
with your neighbors.
Michener: I didn't see where the Commission requested, I just saw the letter.
MacCoy: That is true, that is the reason I am bringing it up. I am wondering one did you
have a copy of the letter and two what your feeling was.
Michener: Again we don't have a problem with the boundary between us and them on
the west side. It is requesting the east, the southern most property line of our property
why that additional needs to be done at this time.
MacCoy: Do you plan to meet with the owner?
Michener: Yes we can, this is the first I have ever seen of this letter.
MacCoy: Well, looking down the road here I think it is going to be a point of issue for us
Michener: It kind of describes in the letter what he requests and maybe to clarify we
would need to request what you are asking for and that would come in obviously facts
and findings. I don't know, typically are you going to put all the way from Fairview, all
the way to the back of our property. Do we stop there or do we do one across the
southern border of mine. Do we extend it on to the south even longer for the south
property owner. I don't know, we just need to clarify that.
MacCoy: I would suggest that you might want to talk to our staff people.
Michener: Right, it just hasn't been addressed yet in this.
MacCoy: It will come up.
Michener: Right and I don't think we have a problem with it. We are still on the rezone
here aren't' we?
(Inaudible)
Borup: Yes we are and I, it sounds like the Commissioners may have a lot of questions
concerning the conditional use and maybe not so much on the rezone. I am wondering
if we move things along a little faster if we want to maybe handle the one and then.
Michener: That would be my preference is to address the rezone. If this sort of a use is
fitting this property.
Meridian Planning & Zon• Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 34
Borup: (Inaudible) it sounds like there are a lot of questions on the other, but we are still
on a public hearing on the rezone.
Fitzgerald: We are on the public hearing on the rezone, that is primary issue at this
point. Certainly there is in exploring what their plans are with the rezone you do have so
to speak some overlapping with the conditional use permit. But the focus is on their
application to rezone it to L-0, excuse me to C-G.
Borup: I think I would tike to proceed on with the public.
Smith: I just have one question, what is the property zoned south of your site currently
and what is it proposed to be zoned in the Comprehensive Plan?
Michener: It is one parcel right now on the map it shows that you should have in your
package it is R-8. Right on the front of the application, the whole piece the whole
parcel.
Borup: Anybody from the public that would like to testify?
Robert Jacobsen, 204 Sunrise Rim, Nampa, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Jacobsen: I am the owner of the property that is directly south and we would not
require a visual or a sound wall, at this time there is no reason for needing that. As far
as any future use of what we are going to do with that property we do not have any set
plans at this time. It is currently zoned as R-8 I am guessing that at some point in time
we will want to ask for a rezone of that. But we do not have any speafic use designed
for that property at this time.
Borup: Any questions from the Commission? Anyone else?
Loren Ross, 1383 Linderwood Drive, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Ross: I am the owner of the property to west and the comments 1 have made in the
statement you have before you withstands or still stands, I feel very strongly about
those. A couple of three questions I have relative to what I have heard tonight. One of
them being, they are talking about a south or southerly exit. That is going to be a
continuation right down my mobile home park in addition to what you see as a site plan
there it will be another probably 300 feet which will affect another 8 or 9 residents.
When we speak proximity we are talking very Gose proximity. The reason for the
concern for a sound and site barrier of the magnitude I requested, I think everybody is
overlooking what happens at the back of a building. Depending on the retail that they
lease to you can have early morning or you can have late night. Either in freight or
employees or possibly even in customers that initiates noise and initiates lights.
According to the site plan that I saw those lights are going to go one way right into
people's homes in a very close proximity. So therefore is why I require a fence going
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 35
east and west at the back of their property. I shouldn't say require, request. Some other
concerns I have, under the terminology retail does that encompass restaurant or bar? I
guess that is a question I would ask you. Because those are another type of if it is
termed or within the realm of retail those are going to have probably an unusual amount
of noise and unusual hours relative to the usual retail. But I would have a concern with
what is going to be interpreted as a southern exit and where that intends to go.
Borup: Have you seen the site plan Mr. Ross?
Ross: 1 only saw the one that was mailed to me. And it did not reference anything going
to the south as I recall.
Borup: The access to the south, maybe just for information is along the east side of their
property and that is showing future access for future development of the property
believe.
Ross: It is not along my borderline on the west.
Borup: Not it is on clear the opposite end of the property.
Ross: So it would be on the east portion. Well those are the main concems I would have
and with that you also everybody else has my written comments and I would stand by
those.
Borup: Any questions from the Commission for Mr. Ross?
Smith: Mr. Ross, is construction of a 6 foot high concrete masonry unit fence something
that you would be willing to participate in the cost of?
Ross: I wouldn't comment on that at this time, no.
Borup: Is the, the site plan shows one trailer unit and maybe a part of another that is to
the edge of their property, is that fairly accurate?
Ross: Reasonably dose, the back of our building in fact there is a New Horizon day
care play ground and I think the bads fence there would right at the 250 foot mark from
the highway. So I would say am I correct that their site plan calls for about 300 feet back
from Fairview? Well maybe that is the reason I drew that assumption because I know
about where my lines are.
Borup: Show that to Mr. Ross so he has the same reference that we are referring to
(Inaudible)
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 36
Borup: So you are saying the play ground is in the back of the Horizon building between
that and the first trailer.
Ross: That is correct, it consumes fifty feet. So what is not being shown there is New
Horizons Day Care then there should be 50 feet of playground area and then your first
mobile home.
Borup: Is there any screening between the playground and the mobile park?
Ross: Yes there is.
Borup: A noise thing to keep the children
Ross: Yes there is a, well two things happen there, number one the fence is a 6 foot
fence and it has slats in which is a noise retainer. The other thing is those kids are not
back there on a very much of an ongoing basis. They are housed most of the time and
when they are not housed typically the day care runs about the same hours as working
hours. By 6:00 they are atl out of there. As opposed to what could be retail next to us
could run until midnight depending on what that is.
Borup: Have you owned this property for a number of years?
Ross: About 45 years. The other thing that I vwuld like to reference there when you
speak in terms of leasing buildings, as you may be aware I have done that a few years
myself. What you start up with is not what you end up with.
Borup: That was my question, I was wondering what some of the previous uses of the
building have been.
Ross: It has been furniture for a lot of years, we did that and went from furniture to day
care.
Borup: Did you have something in between there for a while?
Ross: No, a different style of fumiture, and a different style of day cares, a couple of
three day cares. What I was referring to was the new development beside me. Believe
me I am not against it, I just think it should have certain barometers put to it to protect
surrounding property. What I am getting at, whatever starts out as a lessee doesn't
always end up being the existing lessee. Things do change so that is why, maybe they
would put in place of building that would be strictly an 8 to 5 retail situation which is
quite workable situation. Three. years later that could change to be unless you have
other restrictions maybe it could be a bar and restaurant. That is a whole different
ballgame.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 37
Borup: Maybe while you are here, Shari, Mr. Ross had a question earlier as far as what
is allowed in the C-G zoning whether bars and restaurants are allowed in that without a
conditional use.
Stiles: A bar would be not a permitted use, it would be allowed maybe through a
conditional use if this were rezoned to C-G. Restaurant is a permitted use in the C-G, I
think that the City can place restrictions or at least have some design review as the
tenants come in since we don't know what the use is except for retail. Any change in
use would require that a conditional use permit be prepared for it. Their conditional use
permit is requesting a retail only.
Ross: But the possibility could exist is all I am saying?
Stiles: Yes
Borup: But it would have to come back for a conditional use. Does that answer your
question then?
Ross: I think so.
Borup: Any other questions?
Smith: I have a question for Mr. Michener then. Mr. Michener, do you have any
prospective tenants lined up for this building and what type of uses do you anticipate?
Michener: Thus far that we have talked to have been all retail, service oriented. No
food, we originally had a drive through and two curb cuts, that has been changed. We
pulled the drive through plan, that probab-y would have been a food tenant but we have
yanked the drive through. No leases signed, so I guess I don't really have an specifics
as far as who and what are going in there.
Smith: No prospects.
Michener: Several prospects.
Smith: Any that conflict with an adjacent use where night time hours would be a
problem.
Michener: I don't know, that would be up to the conditional use permit again. Shari said
each tenant would have to go (inaudible)
Smith: I understand that, but I am more interested in getting an idea of who you have
been talking to as prospective tenants to whether or not we can foresee that being an
issue or not.
Meridian Planning & Zo~g Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 38
Michener: I don't foresee any problems with noise or concern that way no.
Smith: Based on the prospective tenants you have talked to?
Michener: Two of the users were 8 to 5 users and one I believe was more of a 7 to 10
type of a user going into the evening a little bit later. But again nothing is signed, it is
just a typical retail building it could be anything and they would have to come get a
conditional use permit for it.
Smith: Thank you.
Borup: Okay, anyone else wish to submit any testimony?
Borup: If not, do any of the commissioners have anybody else they would like to
question? If not I would like to close this public hearing. This is item #8 on the rezone.
We are going to need findings.
Smith: Mr. Chairman, I would like to move that we have findings of fact and conclusions
of law prepared for this application.
MacCoy: Second
Borup: It has been moved and seconded to have findings of fact and conclusions of law
prepared on item #8,all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #9: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A
MULTI-TENANT RETAIL CENTER BY ROGER MICHENER - 519 E. FAIRVIEW
AVENUE:
Hoyt Michener, 7009 Bellhaven, Boise, was swam by the City Attorney.
Michener. Did you have more questions?
Borup: Would you like to
Fitzgerald: He could request that his testimony be incorporated.
Borup: That is what I was trying to say, would you like to request that your previous
testimony be incorporated into this hearing?
Michener. Yes, I would like to request that all of the previous comments on the rezone
also be incorporated with the conditional use for item 9, public hearing.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 39
(End of Tape)
Smith: I can't even begin to act on this plan it is so vague, there is nothing on there that
indicates to me what the building is going to look like. I just can't understand why you
could come in here and ask for a rezone and a conditional use permit when we don't
even know what you are proposing the building to Zook like. As far as the cost
associated with it, that is just part of doing business. And I would think that if you want
to come in here and sell us something you would go and use the tools at your disposal
to sell us a product. I don't see that here and I don't see anything, this site plan is so
vague there are 25 comments by staff requesting additional information, clarification. I
can't in good conscious act on this application for a conditional use permit based on the
information that has been presented to the information.
Michener: I can probably agree to that statement, but my understanding was this was a
public hearing for public comment and to review the comments that all the different
agencies have put forth.
Smith: My comment is what are we supposed to comment on?
Michener: Well I could have done a full blown drawing prior to these comments but I just
got the comments three days ago. This 1 would have probably had to change the look to
meet these comments or say I am going to redo it again and redo it again. We would be
happy to meet all of these comments and concerns and draw a schematic to I guess
sell it to everybody. It is basically going to be a block building with glass front retail
building. 1 am not trying to I guess sell anything or we are not going to make it neon
pink. I am sure that I have to meet all of those with the conditional use. I guess it was
my understanding this was just a public hearing and we are trying to get through the
rezone and to get these comments and understand what everybody's concems are.
Smith: My concern is what does it look like, what is it built out of, how tall is it, what are
the colors. What is the landscaping, what is the parking lot, is it asphalt, concxete, I
don't know any of those answers.
Michener: If that drawing is required for this public hearing then I would have had it
prepared. But it really wasn't a request for the public hearing meeting. I have got all of
the landscaping requirements drawn and shown to scale and the parking spaces and
the access. I redrew it to meet ACHD's needs.
Smith: There are no dimensions, there is no notes on here telling what the landscaping
is. I am not going to sit here and debate it with you, the information is not here for me to
make a decision on whether or not to approve a conditional use permit.
Borup: Anyone else?
Meridian Planning & Zon• Commission •
Juhe 10, 1997
Page 40
Michener: I just have a question, are we jumping to facts and findings and an approval
like on 2 and 3?
Borup: On the conditional use?
Michener: Yes, like 2 and 3 and then 4 and 5.
Borup: No, I think that was anticipated, the others were for a time frame. I think it was
also anticipated that we needed the comments and information.
Michener: I would be happy to prepare that for next time if that is. One quick question,
the dates I had from Dean and Shari aren't, I guess you said there are a couple of other
meetings or another meeting. I would like to clarify what dates the meetings are and
when I need to have the next drawing read.
Borup: I think it would be on the agenda it would be the July meeting.
Michener: I had July 8 for facts and findings, is that not correct?
Bourp: Yes, July 8 would be our next schedule meeting.
Michener: You said June 19~' for somebody else?
Borup: We had a heavy load this month and we needed to have two meetings.
Michener: Is there anyway possible that I could get onto that one?
Borup: I think that agenda is already prepared
Michener. I guess the other guy got on 1 was just hoping that I could get it redrawn and
prepared to review. It v~rould be the facts and findings on the 19"' instead of the 8"'. We
are just trying to move a little
Borup: We have facts and findings on the rezone for the next meeting for the July
meeting, the next regularly scheduled meeting. As far as the conditional use it hasn't
been decided yet, no action has been taken yet.
Michener: I have just requested that I could be aware of those dates so that I could
prepare whatever drawings that you would need before that date. I just had these
comments a couple of days ago as far as preparing any additional drawings.
Borup: Anyone else from the public wish to testify
(Inaudible)
Meridian Planning & Zon• Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 41
Fitzgerald: If you want your testimony incorporated into this public hearing yes you
should.
Loren Ross, 1383 Lindennrood Drive, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Fitzgerald: You can just request that your testimony from your prior public hearing be
incorporated herein rather than going through and repeating.
Ross: I would request that my prior testimony be incorporated into this particular
conditional use permit part of the agenda. Thank you
Borup: Anyone else want to offer any testimony? Clarification for Mr. Michener, the
next regularly scheduled meeting was the July 8~", the one that we did include in for next
week was one that we originally intended to have the findings on tonight that was just
doing a brief amendment on them. So that was the only one that was continued
believe for next week. We did have a full schedule of hearings so it would not be
possible to get that on the agenda for the second June meeting but you would be on the
regular scheduled meeting for July. At which time vre would have the findings on the
rezone that is to be decided yet. (Inaudible) some discussion among the
commissioners, one of our options is to continue the public hearing and ask for the
additional information or we can close it and try to develop findings with what
information we have at this time.
MacCoy: (Inaudible) there is nothing here to make a decision on.
Manning: Do we table it or just leave it open to the July meeting?
Borup: We can continue the public hearing to the July meeting. We need a motion for
that.
Manning: So moved
Smith: Second
Borup: Any further discussion? I assume in that motion you are asking the applicant to
bring the additional documents.
Smith: Just a couple of specific things, Fairview Avenue elevation would be helpful.
Dimensions from your property lines to your building. Any other building height
dimensions, building materials. Maybe you addressed the staffs comments on the
landscaping, you can call that what the trees are, turf areas, paving, just a schematic
document showing your design intent from a site planning and a building perspective
and a building elevation would show that.
Borup: Is that clear Mr. Michener, any questions there?
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 42
(Inaudible)
Borup: So we are continuing the public hearing to July 8th, (inaudible) one other
comment for the applicant. Would you also be able to include response to staff
comments? The previous letter you referenced to if that could be included on that. I
believe we are ready for a vote, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Borup: I had meant to ask Mr. Michener, do you know at this point at about what date
you could have that in so there would be time for staff to review it prior to the meeting
enough time.
(Inaudible)
Borup: Well I think specifically staff comments response to staff comments, is there
some additional stuff you would need prior, did you understand the question. What we
are trying to do is a date for the applicant to get the information back from staff, so you
have a chance to review it before our July 8th meeting.
Stiles: The packets are typically prepared the Thursday and Friday prior to the meeting.
Borup: Does that give you time to review?
Stiles: If he meets alt of the requirements that we have outlined in the staff report I don't
think that we would have a problem. We would need to review it to make sure that they
did meet all of those requirements.
Borup: So you are saying if they comply with (inaudible)
Stiles: The elevation and the building details would tie more of a Commission action.
Borup: Would that fit in with (inaudible)
Stiles: What she is saying is she would like it maybe by Wednesday prior to the
meeting.
(Inaudible)
Borup: Well that would still be fumed in here and then
(Inaudible)
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 43
Borup: Normally the comments would be in a week before the meetings so the Tuesday
before so that would be July 15t is that the proper date? Thank you
FIVE MINUTE BREAK
ITEM #10: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 48.7
ACRES TO R-4 BY WESTPARK CO. - E. OF LOCUST GROVE ROAD, N. OF
VICTORY ROAD:
Borup: Is the applicant or his representative here?
Van Elg, Briggs Engineering, 1111 S. Orchard, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Elg: I guess we are here for the annexation request, Becky Bowcutt is in route, she is
probably over Nevada right now in an airplane. She was to be here tonight so I will fill in
as best I can. The annexation request as I understand it is an existing RT zone with the
request to R-4 zoning. The surrounding zoning is compatible with surrounding zoning in
Los Alamitos and Salmon Rapids and is contiguous with the Salmon Rapids project and
that is the route for the annexation request. According to the comprehensive plan it is
compliance, it is an excellent transition are for annexation of this type. We can get into
the lot size requirements in the next application I suppose. The proposed density for
this development is 2.87 dwelling units per acre which is consistent with development in
the Locust Grove area. It is consistent with the comprehensive plan also in that it is
right for rezoning and eligible for rezoning if the appropriate services are available. In
this case sewer and water will be made available to this property. It is identified on the
comprehensive plan map for single family use which this development will use. With
that I will open myself up for any questions for the annexation and rezone.
Borup: Any questions from any of the commissioners?
MacCoy: We have seen this property before.
Smith: I haven't seen this before.
Elg: It used to be called Highland Ranch, 480 some odd units I think it was.
Smith: Get me up to speed with the rest of the guys here. You walk me through what
you are proposing to do there. What, the greens space and so forth.
Elg: I think we will probably cover that in the next application.
Borup: That is what I was going to ask Commissioner Smith is do you feel comfortable
for waiting for the preliminary plat hearing or is that something you want covered before
we move onto the rezone?
Meridian Planning & Zon• Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 44
Smith: Are we annexing in based on this proposed plan?
Borup: Normally I guess the questions have been pertaining to the development so
don't think it would be inappropriate to continue along those lines. I think that would be
fine to go ahead and explore the preliminary plat aspects.
Elg: So we could be combining items 10 and 11 then.
Borup: As far as testimony yes, they are still two separate items but yes.
Elg: I will launch right into the preliminary plat which would be item 11 for purposes of
discussion and testimony I guess. On May 8"' a neighborhood meeting was held in
accordance with Meridian's requirements. Becky Bowcutt attended that meeting. I
believe she said that 6 people attended the meeting from the nearby area. She
followed up with a letter to Mrs. Coonse I think it was which addressed fencing and the
right to farm. There is some concern about farming and the status of farming out there
as development moves outward. As is consistent with development along the fringes.
The applicant's of the developers have agreed to provide a perimeter fencing, non-
combustible six foot high fencing around the project. They have also agreed to provide
a statement on the face of the plat which is Idaho Code 3801 that talks about the right to
farm. Those of you who may not be familiar with that it just states that in a nutshell that
the people upon purchasing these lots recognize that farming is something that needs
to be dealt with and they agree not to complain about that basically when a tractor is run
or there are obnoxious smells that might be associated with that. In any event that is
what the right to farm act statement will do on the face of that plat. So if they come
calling to do and say you have got to do something about this stinky situation you can
point their nose back at the plat and say you bought into it buddy. Another issue, is
Becky has addressed the conditions or the staffs comments as is consistent with the
normal application we receive a set of general comments back from staff from Planning
or the engineering departments. Becky has gone to great length. to address each of
those items one b~r one and you should have a copy of those on file. The letter was
addressed May 28 h to Bruce Freckleton and to Shari Stiles. I assume that each of the
Commission members, did they receive a copy of Becky's comments? Great. One of
the comments addressed the fact that about bridges. Let me go over to the map here.
There was a comment in staffs report that addressed a bridge across the Ridenbaugh
Canal. We have discussed that at length with ACRD and 1 discussed it this evening
with Karen Gallagher who was sitting here in the meeting on a ceuple of occasions.
She had indicated clearly and I also read ACHD staff report that a bridge, they do not
support the bridge crossing on the Ridenbaugh for a couple of reasons, actually 3
reasons. Number one they want the bridge further to the north. Number two the
topography of this site doesn't lend itself well to constructing a bridge there. This site is
lower than the site to the west or the west. Number three the cost of constructing a
bridge for this development is estimated at $300,000 to $500,000 which for 140 lot
residential subdivision is pretty difficult tad to swallow and spread across those lots. The
fourth item related to that would be that ACHD simply does not want to maintain a
Meridian Planning & Zon~ Commission
June 10, 1997
Page 45
bridge in that location associated with constructing a bridge right there. They are
required I believe, I have not seen engineering plans but I believe that there will be
another some sort of a crossing right here. So they are already going to be constructing
another sort of a bridge or crossing right there across the Eight Mile Lateral which skirts
the south and west boundaries of the site. The site is also skirted as you can see over
on the east by the Ridenbaugh and that is where the ACRD doesn't want the bridge
and then the Nine Mile Drain, you can't see this very well here but (inaudible) what the
owners and our engineers propose to do with that is leave that ditch open, there have
been some comments from I believe the Bureau of Reclamation indicating that they
prefer to leave that ditch open. Leaving it open adds some, there are some obvious
benefits to that in that it helps take any high ground water and drain it off the area there.
What they would like to do (inaudible) relocate that Nine Mile Drain within that open
space area that and that is one of the purposes for open space along that eastern
boundary there. It will be parallel with the Ridenbaugh Canal (inaudible). Becky's
comments address that also. We also discussed the bridge crossing, there was
concern that the bridge was necessary for life safety. Becky discussed this issue with
Kenny Bowers at Meridian Fire Department and he indicated it wasn't necessarily, he
wasn't requiring it. It was necessary in his view. Traffic, we addressed traffic through a
traffic study as required. PatriG< Dobie provided that study to us and indicated that it
would be about 1300 trips per day, a little over 1300 trips per day generated with this
development at full development. The information was submitted to ACHD for review
and inGuded in many of Mr. Dobie's comments were inGuded in their staff package that
was presented to their Commission. Ground water monitoring has occurred in the area.
According to the individuals who prepared the ground water report, I am sorry I
misplaced their name. The Department of Water Resources has indicated that their
logs or their drawings and well log reports in the area tend to support a forty foot ground
water out in that area. (Inaudible} were installed to monitor ground water in that general
area and across the site. Little or no ground water was found that would be harmful to
the development of this project. That doesn't preclude the fact that there may be
according to some of the residents who are here tonight there apparently are some
surface ground water problems that will have to be adequately addressed. The Ada
County Engineer, I don't know how many of you have seen his most recent condition of
approval that he adds. Will John actually review drainage on this too Gary? 1 don't think
he will, in any event we will work closely with Gary and we have John Priester the Ada
County Engineer's recommendations on ground water problems. Where there is a
potential of having ground within crawl spaces and basements. tt is a very effective
document that we can use to help address this issue along with Gary and our engineers
we will adequately address that. It may involve some filling, raising of sites along the
northwest corner of the property and perhaps even along the southeast portion of the
property where there is apparently some other surtace water problems in that area. In
staffs comments Becky specifically addressed item A1, which asks that you add a
condition of approval for piping variances if required. The Ridenbaugh Canal and the
Eight Mile Lateral are both sufficient size greater than 48 inches in size. To qualify for
that they be left open, if a variance is required Becky asks that you provide that as a
condition of approval for this project. We will comply. Also we will be addressing the
Meridian Planning & ZoniPfg Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 46
relocation of the Nine Mile Drain with Nampa Meridian Irrigation District and with the
Department of Water Resources. Item B1, addresses sewer 1 believe and there was
some concern I guess that we provide for sewer connection for the property to the north
I believe this location her and this location here. We have a (inaudible) Stoppello
property to the north. Item B3, Becky also asks that, we will probably need to enter into
a late comer agreement for this project for sewer. Gary would that be appropriate to
address as a condition of approval or do we simply address that as a separate issue
later on?
Eng. Smith: Mr. Chairman, Commission members, Van, I think it is best addressed at
the City Council level. They are the ones that actually approve the entering of a late
comers agreement and basically they can do that conceptually but the actual approval
of late comers agreement won't happen until there are hard costs.
Elg: Okay, we have been through that before. Item 63, there was a question about the
location of the irrigation facility as required by Meridian City ordinances this site will
have pressurized irrigation. The proposed pump location, I think Becky submitted a
new site plan or a revised preliminary plat. You will see down in the southwest corner of
the site a little box with an x in it, that is the at this time that is proposed location for the
pressurized irrigation pump facilities. That will be negotiated with Nampa Meridian
Irrigation District. (Inaudible) 612, we discussed there was some concern about a block
length requirement on South McKay drive which is this area here, I believe the culdesac
length was 4501ength and that has been revised and addressed appropriately. There is
apparently another condition of approval or a staff comment regarding block length.
That is item 11 on about the third page of the response sheet. It says blocks 1, 2 and 3
and 7 exceed the 1000 foot block length. Shari 1 don't know that block 1 exceeds that
but that is one right off of East Lake Creek Street, that doesn't appear (inaudible).. Then
I guess it would be appropriate, I was caught off guard with this condition as I was
sitting in the back. Shan has this been addressed to your knowledge?
Stiles: On number 1 yes, the remaining blocks still addressed the 1000 feet.
Elg: Two, three and seven, I will read Becky's statement on this then. Blocks 2, 3 and 7
exceed the 1000 foot block length. The unusual configuration of the parcels limit the lot
layout potential and creates longer block lengths. The Eight Mile Lateral creates a long
block since it inhibits the potential for stub street connections. (Inaudible). There again
if we were to provide a stub street or to limit that block length we would have to build a
bridge there and provide another stub. Block 7 abuts the Ridenbaugh Canal and two
micropath connections have been provided in this block to a proposed pedestrian
bridge. I didn't follow up on that previous comment. When ACRD as recommended or
didn't support the bridge across the Ridenbaugh canal it should be pointed out that they
do want us to provide or contribute to the trust fund for a pedestrian bridge across that
canal so it will provide for intra-neighborhood connections even though there won't be
vehicular access there will be pedestrian across that bridge. That is an important
element of the plan I believe. At a future date when the eastern portion of that site or on
Meridian Planning & Zon1Tg Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 47
the other side of the Ridenbaugh develops to the east they will be required to contribute
the other remaining half of that pedestrian foot bridge. Two micro paths are connected
or connections have been provided in this block to a proposed pedestrian bridge there
along the Ridenbaugh. The intent of block limitations is to minimize the walking distance
between blocks. We believe the micro path connections to this block provide the
connection. Locust Grove entrance has been relocated to align with Lake Creek Street
in the proposed Salmon Rapids No. 4. This was a concem in previous applications, I
believe even in the Highlands Ranch application if I recall. There was a proposal
(inaudible) and I think it is probably obvious why that was intended. It probably
(inaudible) or minimize some construction there. The property owner to the north was
concerned with that and concerned that he also obtained a stub street from what I
understand and we complied with both of those requirements. And aligned the street
with.this road in Salmon Rapids. With that I believe that I have addressed or at least hit
on many of the issues that may concern you and or staff. I will try to address any
questions that you have.
Borup: Any questions from the Commission? I am still a little confused on Block 7, it
says it abuts the Ridenbaugh canal. (Inaudible) Unless our plans are different
(inaudible).
Stiles: When that new stub street was added you got a new block number.
Elg: Right, I just noticed that, uve have block 8 up here and block 8 here.
Stiles: It is adjacent to the Ridenbaugh. When the revised plat was submitted they put
this stub street to the Shipley property it made that a block so they had to renumber
each of the successive blocks.
Elg: (Inaudible)
Borup: Really I think from my standpoint I would have a question for Shari then how
many of these concerns have been answered. Are there still some concerns on block
lengths or did Becky's comments answer those?
Stiles: They have addressed those in their response but they still vwuld need to have a
variance on the block lengths because they exceed the block length. As well as the
variance on the tiling of the ditches even though they meet the criteria the ordinance is
the all ditches, there is no set number. So they still would need to apply for that
variance.
Borup: You feel comfortable with their explanation with their compliance as long as they
proceed with the variance request.
Stiles: If they proceed with the variance and get the variance it is fine.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 48
Borup: That probably takes care of a lot of questions I might have had.
Elg: I guess what I would ask then is that we include that as a condition of approval.
And that variances be submitted and obtained.
Borup: Any other questions for the applicant at this time?
MacCoy: On the south side of Victory Road, I remember before we had a road go
around (inaudible) traffic pouring out there on Victory. Do you have an entry lane
design so that cars can get out of this project onto Victory?
Elg: I believe that staff's recommendations,
ACHD include a left turn lane on Victory
minimize any tuning movements on Victory.
Mr. Dobie's recommendations and those of
Road into the project for stacking to help
MacCoy: I know we had the pedestrian bridge before (inaudible) automobiles and foot
traffic. Is there also an entry lane over for the Locust. Grove?
Elg: I don't believe there is one there, although ACHD's requirements are that Locust
Grove be built out to a 6 lane road if I recall which would provide for turning movements
there. We have to provide dedicate enough for a 90 foot right of way and it seems like it
was a 47 foot street section, it is for 6 lanes is what they are anticpating on that one. So
that would provide for turning movements there.
MacCoy: Do they give you any time setting for them?
Elg: For the construction, no,
MacCoy: We are looking at Locust Grove being expanded (inaudible)
Elg: Let me see if I can address that, this is in a letter from Becky to LouAnn Coonse,
she says you had questions concerning the future road improvements on Locust Grove
and Victory Road. Ada County Highway District Plans on rebuilding Locust Grove from
Overland to Victory in 1999. This project would include reconstruction of the bridge over
the Eight Mile Lateral. The project is currently listed in ACHD's five year construction
plan. However no funding has been allocated to the project at this time. Proposed future
right of way width for Locust Grove will be 90 feet with a 70 foot road section. So Victory
Road construction is not in the ACHD five year plan, the road will be improved in the
future with a 90 foot right of way and a 50 foot road section, 4 lanes.
MacCoy (Inaudible)
Elg: Locust Grove will have 5 lanes in 1999.
MacCoy: (Inaudible)
Meridian Planning & ZonTfg Commission
June 10, 1997
Page 49
Borup: Anyone else, any other questions for the applicant?
Smith: I am curious how this green space evolved. It kind of looks to me like somebody
shut their eyes and threw these greens dots on there and they just kind of landed there.
Elg: There is no question that there is some green space that occurs that way, but you
have probably seen a lot of it. We are trying to create a buffer along the Ridenbaugh
canal there, we know that we have to deal with the Nine Mile Drain over in that area
there. That is a given of why we have the green space over there. We have a green
space in the middle which will be identified as a common area. That is designed for
drainage purposes. Becky has reviewed that with our engineers to try to accommodate
drainage throughout the site to that to handle storm drainage. The other green spaces
there, here is another drainage lot up in this area here. These other ones are simply
identified as landscape areas that the homeowners association will maintain. This one
you can see is a little bit larger than the others one, it is being reserved it is not
ident"rfied right now but it is being reserved for potential drainage their also.
Smith: So the homeowners association will maintain all of those areas. This kind of
leads me into my next comment. The letter from the Meridian School District
specifically statement Mary McPherson elementary is at 119°k capacity. This
subdivision will cause increased overcrowding in all three schools which they are talking
about Mary McPherson elementary, Lake Hazel middle school and Meridian High
School. What are you proposing to do to address that?
Elg: We aren't at this time, we encourage developers as they approach us we let them
know this is an issue. The school districts would like to address that would like to have
the legislature address that issue through the means of impact fees or something. Mr.
Borup is probably well aware of that situation. We have been in numerous meetings
with the school boards where they discuss their concerns and try to address the
problem. At this point we have no response for that, that is their standard form letter that
they send out for every subdivision be it 2 lots or 200 lots. But
Smith: This is pretty site specific, they may have a standard form letter where they might
say it is going to impact their schools and it will even if it is 2 lots. I guess I am just kind
of disappointed that this seems to be an application of business as usual we are not
going to do anything more than the minimum that we are required to do by law. So
therefore that is the way (End of Tape)
Elg: (Inaudible) 5 to 12 acres of site by the time you put up a school area and a park, if
required. It simply doesn't make sense to dedicate that kind of acreage on every project
that comes in even 'rf it was a 2 or 3 acre project there still has to be some sort of reason
to the madness I suppose to dedication of property to accommodate school facilities.
Even though we may have wanted to dedicate, even if this developgr said I would like to
dedicate 5 to 12 acres of property to you for school building they may not have
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission
June 10, 1997
Page 50
accepted it, it may not have been a piece of property that they wanted to develop in
such close proximity to this school. That is something that your comprehensive plan
map I believe addresses as far as potential locations. The school districts are certainly
trying to address that issue where the best and most reasonable school locations would
be.
Borup: Are you familiar with the current school siting, I know they had one site there
and they were talking about a second. Has that second site been or do you know?
Elg: The one across the street?
Borup: The one to the north?
Elg: I am not familiar with the second one.
Borup: Is there another one across the street?
Elg: Well I was thinking there is another one on Victory and Eagle.
Borup: An existing school or a new site?
Elg: A new school site.
MacCoy: At one time you were talking about people before you up I the northeast
comer betting part land there and then the developer north of you was going to give the
other part. I know that the school board came in and they chose to go, that was okay at
the time, but they chose to go up to the comer of Overland and Eagle for an elementary
school and that is where things stand at this time. Of course no money , no plan no
anything. They put their (Inaudible).
Smith: I don't mean to get on a soapbox here because I could be here for quite some
time. The only other question I have is what were the parameters that lead you to
develop this parcel to this particular density or proposed developing to this particular
density.
Elg: I have to admit that I don't know that, Becky would be the one who knows that. She
designed it with our engineer. 1 might point out though that the R-4 zone allows for a
minimum lot size of 8,000 square foot and the vast majority of these lots are
considerably more than 8,000 square feet. Many of them are 9,000, 10,000 square foot
range or more. So as you can see they are not maximizing the density at 2.87 1 believe
it was dwelling units per acre in the zone. They are trying to provide instead of your
standard postage sized stamp lots we are providing a little bit larger lot. Perhaps a
better product is what we are hoping for.
Borup: Any other questions at this point?
Meridian Planning & ZonT~g Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 51
MacCoy: There was a discussion the past time we looked at this land or in the
southeast corner general area. The developer providing land for a fire house.
(Inaudible) have you entered into anything else at all.
Elg: No, nothing. In Kenny's comments I didn't see anything about that either.
MacCoy: I know we are talking about one down at Hickory Corner.
Borup: Thank you, this is a public hearing and we appreciate the patience of everyone
here. I think you can see why we split half of our testimony to next week instead of
trying to do it all tonight. I there anyone here from the public that wishes to testify?
Rhonda Coonse, 2000 East Victory, Meridian, was swum by the City Attorney.
Coonse: I just have comments that I want to go down on record. This may or may not
be the appropriate time but I don't know when. So I saw the public hearing and thought I
would come. I moved to Meridian, we moved to Meridian a year ago in February from
southeast Boise and I love it here. I am not farming but I am farming but 1 am really
enjoying some animals that I couldn't have in the City. I just have a couple concerns,
140 houses to me means 280 cars coming out on Victory and Locust Grove. That much
traffic on Locust Grove and Victory there is a 4 way stop right now there. I am kind of
wondering about the traffic and perhaps a light. Mr. Elg mentioned Nine Mile Creek
(inaudible) the property is (inaudible) I am concerned about moving that irrigation water
so that I don't get irrigation. The water comes across Victory right here in a small
drainage. It is a very large open pond with power here that we have (inaudible)
sprinklers off of that. Then the water comes along (inaudible) 1 talked with the developer
because the (inaudible) open water is eroding my fence posts all along here. 1 realize he
can the that but my concern is that pond. The third concern that 1 have is with the fence
and you mentioned the non-combustible fence. He said I had a choice and I want to go
down on record I would tike a 6 foot privacy vinyl fence (inaudible). I guess that is really
about it, those are the only comments. But the water really does bother me because you
don't see this at all. It is just an open pond with a pump that I am irrigating water out of.
Then I haven't seen (inaudible) Thank you
Borup: Any questions?
Smith: Is your concern about the pond that you will still be able to access irrigation
water from it?
Coonse: Yes, they just came in this Spring, I don't know who did this but they and I
don't know if this is Nine Mile, it is not the Ridenbaugh but I don't know if this is the Nine
Mile. They actually brought some back hoes in here across Victory and laid down a
bigger culvert here. They have had problems apparently in the past, I have only lived
here for a year, a little over a year. They have had problems here with the water backing
Meridian Planning & Zo~g Commission
June 10, 1997
Page 52
up into, there is a huge farm over here in the fields over here. I believe they put in a
bigger culvert here but this water comes through here and it sits in a good size pond
there. 1 am afraid, I can understand he can (inaudible) how do you the a pond.
Borup: I have a question, is the pond on the other property?
Coonse: It is right down the middle.
Borup: The pond does show on our plat but it doesn't show it, it shows it on your
property, other than maybe (Inaudible) Is that straddling the property also?
Coonse: The fence line goes actually (inaudible) fence line really
(Inaudible)
Richard Wade Coonse, 2000 East Victory, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Coonse: I think what she is trying to say is (inaudible) This is the back side of our
property, right now it is a pole barn fence, It comes straight down and that pond is right
in this corner here and our fence cuts across diagonally here. Half of the pond is on his
side half is on our side. This pond irrigates our 6 acre pasture and also our two acre
property. It actually is our sprinkler system to our lawn. So it is pretty important that we
have water access. We don't know how this stuff works, I am sure the developer has it
where we still have to have that water coming through there one way or another. That
is just a concern of our. I think what she was talking about the other concern was I
believe this is so narrow here on Locust Grove Victory is a little wider but it looks like to
me right now there are only two exits coming out right here there is going to be a lot of
traffic and congestion once this is fully developed rf they don't do something over here
or have another access. It is going to be really tough. Right now it is 50 miles an hour
along Victory and that will probably slow it up to maybe 35 miles per hour. I think most
people will go down Victory to Eagle and cut across and hit the freeway and head
toward Boise, I think that is the way most people work. So we are going to have a lot of
traffic right here in front of our place. And I think that was the other concern she was
talking about. That is all I have, any questions?
Borup: Anyone else?
Ruth Fritts, 2384 East Victory, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attomey.
Fritts: I have a concern on the traffic also. We were told that in their census that they
prepared that they were figuring 10 trips per day per household coming out of that
subdivision. Figure two cars, two people, to and from back and forth to the store once
they got home, take the kids to soccer practice, come back.
Smith: Excuse me who are you referring to when you say they?
Meridian Planning & Zon• Commission
June 10, 1997
Page 53
Fritts: Briggs Engineering, this is Becky Bowcutt. So again as the other people
mentioned your freeway access is through Victory, not off of Locust Grove until they
finally do something with Locust Grove. My other concern was in a letter we received
from Briggs Engineering they addressed the restriction of one story homes on two
adjoining lots adjoining Victory and 6 adjoining lots adjoining the SE comer of the
property which is our property which is right here. The developer has agreed to specify
single story restrictions to preserve the adjoining neighbors view corridor. That had not
been addressed tonight. What they were talking about the Ridenbaugh about building
up those lots if you build up those lots you might as well have a two story house. So
that is a concern of ours.
Smith: Excuse me, the site slopes off quite a bit to the east.
Fritts: Yes, it is these adjoining lots here (inaudible). That culdesac right now is a
swamp, you cannot drive up there. The Ridenbaugh leaks into that property area, we
don't have to irrigate up there at all. I don't know what they are going to do as far as
drainage there to get rid of that so they can put houses in there whether a drainage pipe
will take care of that. But that is a concern there.
Borup: Your house is fronting on Victory?
Fritts: Yes sir it is.
Borup: I was just curious how far away those lots are from your residence.
Fritts: They are going to be about I would say 300 feet from our house. There is a 200
foot pasture area, there is probably another 100 foot to our house. They have in their
letter that they have agreed upon a 6 foot chain link perimeter fence, I would like to
know if that is the only fence that they are going to put up since we have livestock out
there. Am I going to have to go out there and clean the fence when the neighborhood
adjoining is complaining because my livestock is pooping in their yard. The other
concern was in that census they were talking about that Briggs Engineering was talking
about on the roads in the year 2000 I believe she said that there was going to be 5500
cars pass on Victory Road. That is a lot of cars for that area when there has been no
money allocated to widen that road. It is currently a 2 lane road at the moment. That is
all the concerns that I have.
Borup: Any questions of the Commissioners? Anyone else wish to testify?
John Shipley, 2770 South Locust Grove, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Shipley: Commissioners, this isn't the first time that this situation has cropped up. It is
getting better. But it has been about 4 years and 1 am pretty well (inaudible) My
property is 195 foot frontage and it goes clear back here to the Nine Mile lateral. So that
Meridian Planning & ZonTfg Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 54
means that this whole property of mine here will be houses on my property line. I have
about 5.2 acres in there and I raise some cattle. Mostly a summer cattle grazing
situation. This property line here is also a drain ditch even though nobody has ever
addressed it as a drain ditch. It is a farmers drain. Our water from the Eight Mile Lateral
here pops out somewhere here in a weir box. It comes across their property and dumps
into our frontage ditch here which services four or five other properties baGc there. It
services Mr. Babbitt's property next to mine and Barker's (inaudible). I want to make
perfectly Gear that we need to not have our water rights infringed or the way it comes
out of the canal weir and everything needs to be piped or do something to this area right
here. Approximately somewhere about there is one of them little white pipes that they
take water level on. Last January I happen to see the man taking the water level there
and noted that it was 6 foot at that time in January when the canal wasn't running. If
some young people buy a lot there and build a house there they ought to be protected
ahead of time for that situation so that this will probably have to be piped. This is the
Nine Mile Drain right here. It will probably have to be piped there and we wilt make sure
that the type of fences that are put in there are non-combustible because I do bum my
ditch line and fence line and my ditches and stuff in there. I wouldn't want to have those
people buy all these lots here and build alt their nice houses there and get mad at me.
That is going to be quite a few of them isn't it because it runs water there all summer
long and dumps in right here at this point into the Nine Mile. When 1 irrigate my land
because the geology of the area is river roGc you get a subterranean flow through. I
ducks nest along here along the baGc of these properties because there is water there
all of time. It is water and I can prove it by the basement in my house is a swimming
pool all summer long because when the water comes in the Eight Mile Lateral three
weeks later I have water in my basement. It has been that way for the last 24 or 25
years that I know about. The previous owner had the same problem. We have high
water so we need to probably protect those people that are (inaudible) whatever way
the engineers can do it. Yet, when they monitored my well all last summer I have a well
that was put in 1897 and I have a newer well that was put in 1951 or 5 or somewhere
around there before I moved there. The 1897 well they monitored it all last summer at
40 feet. My well that t, it is over Loser to this property, that I pump off of is only 45 feet.
I have water there so we know that the cattails are growing here. and all of those things
are absolutely something that exists when high water exists. For all intensive purposes
this is fine for me because when I want to subdivide later 1 will have a place to access
this. When the guard rail on the canal up here blocks my view my driveway is right here
and if there are a lot of people coming out then that guard rail gets into my sight pattern
and it is pretty dangerous for me. My daughter's car has a bent up front fender right
now on account of that. So we know it is dangerous. They are going to widen Locust
Grove some time in the future to 90 feet. That will probably do away with that part of
the Nine Mile Lateral and the Eight Mile Lateral that comes through there because they
are going to have to cover it. Those are considerations that you people that are
okaying this and everything some of you weren't here these other times. There was at
one time a 37 acre school supposed to be somewhere over in here that Mr. Johnson
was dickering with the school district about and he didn't negotiate it. One time he
promised to buy my property in front of City CounGl and he didn't negotiate it. I never
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 55
heard from him again, there are people in here (Inaudible) my wife and I went out and
found a place and then decided we couldn't do anything about. I thought he was going
to come talk to me about it after he made those statements in front of City Council. They
took the pictures of my old beat up house and how it was kind of a slum and that
nonsense to try and make it appear that they were doing me a favor. Then he never,
kind of like a breach of something or other. A few other things went on, so if we are
going to trust somebody and give them an opportunity (inaudible) get everything down
100°k. Ms. Bowcutt said no two story houses along there and kind of thing. Whenever
CC&R's come in they need to point that out. If you are going to okay something like this
you need to remember the things that were said about the school district. And talk to
the man that they didn't negotiate with. A few of the other things that went down four
years previous.
Smith: Mr. Shipley were you told that there was going to be only one story houses along
your property?
Shipley: Yes, but that was over the telephone, I didn't get a letter to that effect. I didn't
get one of these plats sent to me in the mail like she said also. Those are things that I
discussed and at this point I don't believe anything anymore. When somebody tells me
something and it don't happen I become rather apprehensive. ff somebody told you. they
would buy you property and never discussed a price. Went in front of City Council, this
had already went to City Council and it got held up there because of the street problem.
Three other times I had to go to the Highway District and tell them why are you going to
put a street out on my corner to get away with not building a bridge was why they were
doing it. But there wasn't exactly enough space between my corner and where the
canal come in there to do it. They thought they could get a variance or something, but
then that ruined my setbacks on my property. So 1 wouldn't be able to do something
with my property. So 1 went to the Highway District for the fourth time now and each
time they get another engineer they don't tell the engineering company what has
already went down. Believe me it is getting to be kind of ridiculous to have to keep
coming down here and coming down here and explain these things. So when you guys
get around to okaying this thing make sure everything is written down and done right
because there will be people that will end up with high water tables like I have.
Clifford Babbitt, 11881 West Amity, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Babbitt: I am going to make mine kind of short fellows. I am glad to see this redone over
here on Locust Grove here to match up with Goldsmith's here. I am pretty well happy
with most of it other than my concern is that I am over here this side of Shipley, I do
sometimes have cattle that I bring in and once in awhile (inaudible). The other concern
was this water right here which has to do with the weir coming out of the ditch here.
Which when they leveled all of this they cut it way down. There is a water problem here
and probably a little of it is from my irrigation ditch here that (inaudible). It would
probably help if it was piped it v~rould probably help some of the water problem. That is
all I have to say about it.
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 56
Nancy Hanson, 2460 East Victory Road, was swum by the City Attorney.
Hanson: Actually I wrote a letter that I did not submit earlier, did you just want me to
read it or give it to you and summarize your comments.
Borup: That would be appropriate if you submit that and then vre can get copies. And
then get some highlights.
Hanson: Mostly it is being discussed tonight as if it is approved for the annexation and
that is my concern more than anything is that I would rather it not be zoned R-4. I would
rather it not be annexed because if it is in the City limits than your largest lot would R-2
and I still think they should have 1 to 5 acre acreages if you develop it all. That is what I
would prefer in that area. I think that would fit better with your Comprehensive Plan of
having a buffer zone between the large farms and the City. Also wre do still have
concerns about the water that as you bring in atl of these houses that the wells don't go
dry, wre don't want to have to pay for another well. We have concerns about the traffic,
they have told us that any houses that abut our property and at this point, this
development does not border our property, one of the other developments did.
Smith: Could you clarify who you were referring to regarding houses abutting your
property.
Hanson: The Briggs Engineering told us, there was a letter from Becky that said that it
would be single story houses.
Borup: Could you point out the location of your house approximately? You say it is not
on that map, you are on Victory Road right.
Hanson: (Inaudible)
Borup: How many acres do you have?
Hanson: We have 4 acres and then with the (inaudible) it is just right in here. It borders
Victory and goes to the canal, it is just like a triangular piece of property. It, with the
easements that go along with the canal I think it is really 6 acres. That is basically my
testimony and what I said in the letter also. I would comment that next time when you
do this, it is really difficult for the people in the audience to know what is going on when
you have this thing. If you could put it to the side we could see what people were
pointing out and also still watch you. Thanks.
Borup: Any other testimony from the public? The applicant, any other comments you
would like to make?
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 57
Elg: I will try to be really brief here, there have been a number of issues addressing the
drainage along the south boundary of Mr. Shipley's site. And the potential pond that
according to our preliminary plat appears to be located off onto another property. Aside
from that there may still be drainage issues there. I am not familiar with that piece of
property right there in that swampy area there enough to know if that is a condition that
exists all of the time or how we are going to address that. I did read Becky's statements
which I am sure she had addressed with our engineers. She has indicated that we will
address the issues through berms and or piping. One other thing and as I mentioned
earlier, the relocation of the nine mile drain along that eastern boundary is going to help
with lowering the recharge rate on that ground water there west of the Ridenbaugh
Canal. It will naturally catch a lot of the drainage that wants to percolate out or seep out
of the Ridenbaugh Canal, catch it and drain it. So I am sure that has some bearing on
the reasons behind the relocation of that drain ditch and leaving it open along that
Eastern boundary. With some indication of traffic concerns and speed on streets. In our
traffic study we recommended to ACHD or Patrick Dobie might indicate that all of the
traffic information was provided by Dobie Engineering. Pat Dobie not Briggs
Engineering routed to ACHD who concun'ed with his findings to my knowledge. Yes it is
correct, under normal conditions a development the normal traffic patterns are 10 trips
per day per household. As I stated earlier we estimate about 1300 plus trips per day
coming out of the project. There. was some concern about the number of trips on
Victory, the 5500 trips is a substantial number of trips. Currently I think the estimated
count or the actual counts on Vctory are, they exceed 4000 trips per day now on Victory
at this point. I don't believe that, certainly we can't disqualify the fact that they will see
additional trips per day and traffic generated on those streets. It comes with
development, it comes with, it is a natural byproduct of that development. But what
most fail to understand is that those trips per day come in, they don't come in surges.
They are not 1300 trips per day that come in and out in two or three time slots, they are
spread out over the course of a day. There are peak hours during that time where they
will see an increase. That traffic is spread out. As far as house height, I have to admit I
am not familiar with that requirement and the only suggestion I would have is if they
have one that if anyone has a fetter from Becky, perhaps Shari before you leave, did
Becky submit that letter to you about dwelling height?
Stiles: (Inaudible)I don't know if that was part of Becky's discussions at the
neighborhood meeting or if that was on a prior application.
Elg: That is great, I think if we have one, I don't have one, I didn't see it, this is new to
me. I am not telling you that Briggs is not aware of it, Becky is probably very much
aware of it. I would suggest that we submit the letter if they are willing to part with it or
get a copy from Shari and would certainly be glad to enter that into the record. Briggs
Engineering and the developer will stand by anything that they have addressed with
these people. We are not trying to pull the wool over anyone's eyes and when I hear
comments in the background that Briggs is lying again or someone is lying I am
offended with that. That certainly doesn't help with development and it doesn't help. We
are used to that and we will deal with it. As I stated we will certainly address any of the
Meridian Planning & Zon~g Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 58
drainage issues, we will address those with Gary Smith the City Engineer. We certainly
can't develop a house that has that is located in a swamp, we are aware of that and we
will address the issue. Concerns about the cattle, we will place the right to farm
statement on the plat. There is not a whole lot else that can be done to our knowledge.
This is an old problem that goes on and on when you develop on fringes. We will
certainly try our best to deal with the situation and provide these folks with the freedoms
that they need to continue on with the practices that they are so accustomed to and
comfortable with. We hope that this helps to address that and we hope that the fencing
issues will adequately address their concerns. One other statement was made about
the preference to see 1 to 5 acre lots. From an economic standpoint that simply doesn't
make doesn't help and it is not economical in the sense when we are providing City
sewer and water is available there won't be individual or private wells there, we will be
pumping out of the existing irrigation facilities connecting to City water and connecting
to City sewer. So it should not have any affect on the existing wells in the area. And the
fact of the matter is that if you develop a project with 1 to 5 acre lots the feasibility of
extending sewer and water to each of those lots just doesn't pan out economically for a
project of this size. Wfth that I will conclude my remarks. I appreciate your time and if
you have any questions I would be open for those.
Borup: Do any of the commissioners have any final questions?
Smith: I guess I just have a comment about the development, Mrs. Hanson's letter
quotes part of the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and I am going to read that, "Existing
rural land uses and farm/ranches shall be buffered from urban development expanding
in the rural area by innovative land use planning techniques. New urban density
subdivisions which abut or are proximal to existing rural residential land uses shall
provide screening and transitional densities with larger, more comparable lot sizes to
buffer the interface between urban level densities and rural residential densities." I see
no innovative land use planning techniques exhibited ih this proposal. And I certainly
don't see any buffer zones, screening, transitional densities or any of that which I
believe would be achieved through a development of lower density. I think this is a
problem not only with this proposal but it is a problem with every development that
comes before this Commission. We just, we are kind of in that transitional period where
we have those issues come up and we have to draw the line somewhere I think.
Personally I just can't see putting a development of this density out in the middle of a
rural area that this one is being proposed in. I think it is more appropriate to be located
closer to the urban center of Meridian as oppose~t'4o out farther on the periphery. I think
this particular site would be more suited to mower density development. That pretty
much sums it up.
Elg: Can I make a comment, I think the thing that you need to remember Commissioner
Smith is that this is a, it falls within the area of Impact, it is right for development at
densities addressed. It is compatible with surrounding zoning, Los Alamitos, Salmon
Rapids all are R-4 zoning densities. It is consistent with patterns of development in the
area and have already been approved. The lot sizes although it is R-4 zoning what we
Meridian Planning & Zon• Commission
June 10, 1997
Page 59
are requesting the lot sizes exceed the minimum lot standards for the R-4 zone
significantly. Therefore the densities is not nearly what we could get through that zone.
We have accommodated buffering in some locations and we are providing for screening
with fencing requirements. It may not be the, I guess that is a judgement call as to what
the screening should be. We are complying with Meridian's ordinance along Locust
Grove for screening, landscaping, buffers along that street. As you can see we have
very limited amount of frontage on any street. But in each of those situations, each of
those conditions we are providing for the required landscaping and buffering along
those areas. We believe that it is consistent and crompatible with patterns of
development for the area. And with the simple fact that we are not developing or
maximizing the zoning that is requested. We believe that it is somewhat of an innovative
concept. We are not trying to pillage the property with the maximum amount of density
on it, we are coming with larger lot sizes. Not every development can afford the amount
of park site or open space area that has been provided with this one. One of the
problems with a project this size is that this is 50 some odd acres (inaudible) you get a
scale problem in trying to put that type of a project onto a piece of paper. Those lots as
you look at them on that large piece of paper look rather small. They are compared to
any development within Boise City, Meridian, they are good sized lots, they are decent
lots. We believe they are consistent and it is good planning.
Smith: I do have one question with staff, this right to farm issue that has come up
regarding the complaints that may arise from future homeowners regarding adjacent
neighbors with cattle or whatever, that when they buy their home they have to sign
something that says they have the right to farm (End of Tape)
Stiles: (Inaudible) a note that can be added to the plat, I know in another case just
recently it was the Council's decision that they would have to physically post the
property with that restriction. How well that is going to work I don't know. I don't know if
by placing that note on the plat if it is any kind of a deed restriction, it just puts them on
notice that there is adjacent agricultural uses and they shall not be considered a
nuisance or cause for complaint.
Smith: So that transfers to every future land owner after the first
Elg: Correct, it is a part of the title process. The other thing that could be added aside
from setting it up as a note on the face of the plat you can also require as a element in
the restrictive covenants.
Borup: Any other questions from the Commissioners? At this time I would like to close
this public hearing. We are on item 10 which is a request for annexation and zoning.
This does require findings.
Manning: Mr. Chairman, I move that the City Attorney prepare findings of fact and
conclusions of law.
Meridian Planning & Zon• Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 60
MacCoy: Second
Borup: It has been moved and seconded to prepare findings of fact and conclusions of
law for annexation and zoning of the request by Westpark Co., all those in favor?
Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: 2 YEA, 1 NAY
ITEM #11: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR
SHERBROOKE HOLLOW SUBDIVISION BY WESTPARK CO.:
Van Elg, 1111 S. Orchard, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Elg: t guess at this point I would just, it would be appropriate to say that I enter all of my
previous testimony into this one.
Borup: We appreciate that. This is a new public hearing, does anyone from the public
have anything new they would like to add?
Fitzgerald: If they want to incorporate it just indicate that they want to.
Smith: Can we make like a blanket motion? I would like to make a motion that
Fitzgerald: Well in terms of their testimony, if they want to incorporate it.
Smith: They need to do it?
Fitzgerald: Is that agreeable to everybody? Everybody is saying yes so all of your
testimony will be incorporated into this public hearing. Unless there is any further
comment or testimony.
Borup: Okay, we have this to deal with. Let's close the public hearing. We do need
findings on the annexation before we decide on the preliminary plat. So would
someone like to table this?
Smith: I make a motion that we table agenda item 11 pending completion of findings of
fact and conclusions of law on item 10.
MacCoy: Second
Borup: It has been moved and seconded, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Fitzgerald: I think we need a date certain on that?
Meridian Planning i~ ZomTig Commission •
June 10, 1997
Page 61
Smith: I amend my motion to include tabled until our Commission meeting on July 8.
MacCoy: Second
Borup: Motion and second to correct the motion tabled to July 8 meeting, all those in
favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Borup: That concludes the public testimony for tonight, for the Commissioners vre do
have one other item. Apparently no notice went out, I found out yesterday afternoon that
vre do have another meeting scheduled and apparently no one else knew that. Can we
verify the time, it is 6:00. Wednesday the 18"'.
Manning: I move we adjourn.
MacCoy: Second
Borup: All those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 11:16 P.M.
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
1
CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
o ~y
JR., Cf~Sf CLERK = 8EA3,
d~'
MEF~AN PLANNING & ZONING COM~SION
AGENDA
TUESDAY, JUNE 10, 1997 - 7:00 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD MAY 13, 1997: ~p~~`~%
1. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR A CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT FOR A CAR WASH WITH FUEL FACILITIE BY STEVE LYONS
& STEVEN BAINBRIDGE: ~Ppmve- a/x,esi~d-~~~'~f~~
Qp,O/-ova~ ~PC(J'~-ntnes,-clafi~7`p C'/C
2. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR
OUTSIDE SEATING BY WILD WEST BAKERY ~ ESPRESSO - 815 E. 1ST
STREET: Glodc p/~1
3. PRELIMINARY FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR OUTSIDE SEATING. BY WILD WEST
BAKERY 8 ESPRESSO: prav e ern ~ ~ /~ ~ ~'/~-
~~pnve, i'e ~-~. d~v~ ~ ~ ~
4. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A REZONE FROM R-4 TO L-0 BY
MERIDIAN ASSEMBLY OF GOD -1830 N. LIND R ROAD:
5. PUBLIC H RING: R QUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A
NEW CHURCH BUILDING BY MERIDIAN ASSEMB Y OF> GOD - 1830 N.
CINDER ROAD: L~/ ~' ~`/a7in.c~. ~ ~p.~,~ Op..~.Z ~~ ~ C/ (_
6. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A
TRUCKING TERMINAL BY DONOVAN BROTHERS COMMERCIAL
CONSTRUCTION -,S. OF PIN STREET, E. OF NOLA ROAD:
~/o~e ~/~
7. PRELIMINARY FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A TRUCKING TERMINAL BY DONOVAN
BROTHERS COMMERCIAL CONS RUCTION: ~- ~~ ~
~~~~ CLmen~ed ~~~'~ C/C ~'z- ~ ~8~
$. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A REZONE OF 1.4 ACRES FROM R-8 TO
C-G BY ROGER MICHENER - 519 E. FAIRVIEW VEyUE:
9. PUBLIC H RING: R UES FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A
MULTI-TENANT RETAIL CENTER BY ROGER MICHENER - 519 E. FAIRVIEW
AVENUE: ~.~,.,, fjh~ ~l~ ~r-~ ~, E%/t
10. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 48.7
ACRES TO R-4 BY WESTPARK CO. - E. OF LOCUST GROVE ROAD, N. OF
VICTORY ROAD: ~~i~t~ c2~~7Tthcy Pv~,eFra~.e ~'/.~ ¢ ~%
1 L PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR
SHERBROOKE HOLLOW SUBDIVISION BY WESTPARK CO. - E. OF
LOCUST GROVE ROAD, N. OF VICTORY ROAD:
CITY OF MERIDIAN
PUB~C MEETING SIGN-U~HEET a~ "'`~ " ~``` t
~`.~ t ~ >t
_~~-;~ ~~
a,..._
344 - `~ ? v ~
NAME PHnNF Ni1M~~t
CITY OF MERIDIAl~
PUB~C MEETING SIGN- HEET ~~~`~~`~°
NAME PHONE N MB R
2/2
~~
~E _7-l~~~c~~ ~,~~r. X98-660
iv~L
~G"Za f - (/i,
8y ~dS~
~, v~a;v ~, ~ is rte- l~ v.ovQ.~ R ,ro}~,,•s 2e~ to°t 3~Y- 7777
BEFORE THE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
WILD WEST BAKERY AND ESPRESSO
APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR
OUTSIDE SEATING, SIGN ON SIDEWALK AND OTAER AMENITIES
815 EAST 1ST STREET, SUITE B
MERIDIAN, IDAHO
PRELIMINARY 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,
i
Z ~ ~ , 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:
PRSLIMINARY 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.
The Applicant is not the owner of the property. The owner of the
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Paqe 1.
WILD WEST BAKERY AND ESPRESSO
property is Hunter Investment, Ina., and it has oonsented to the
application for the conditional use permit.
3. Pursuant to the application, the request is for a
conditional use permit for the following:
a. Two small tables with umbrellas and four chairs for
outside seating in the front of the bakery and espresso
shop. The tables and chairs are to be placed next to the
building of the public sidewalk;
b. Placement and display on the sidewalk of one
sandwich sign measuring two feet wide, five feet high on
nine inch legs. The sign will be a blackboard displaying
daily specials;
c. Placement of two whiskey barrel planter boxes;
d. Window boxes located on ledge of the building under
front windows;
e. Awnings for windows; and
f. Permission for location of trash receptacle located
behind and to the west of the building for use by the
Applicant and other occupants of surrounding properties.
One portion of the property, Suite A, is presently used as a
newspaper publication and sales office. The other portion of the
property, Suite B, is presently used as an espresso shop and bakery
with accompanying sales and service. The Applicant operates the
espresso shop and bakery. 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 (OT) Old Town. In the
ZONING SCHEDULE OF USE CONTROL, Section 11-2-409 B., Bakery Stores,
Retail Stores and Restaurants are listed as conditional uses in the
(OT) Old Town District. A conditional use permit was. previously
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 2.
WILD WEST BAKERY AND ESPRESSO
granted for the operation of an espresso shop and bakery with
accompanying sales and service; however, as the property is located
in the (OT) Old Town District and the above-described additional
uses are integrally related to the operation of an espresso shop
and bakery with accompanying sales and service, a conditional use
permit for the above-described additional uses is required.
5. The (OT) Old Town District is described in the Zoning
Ordinance, 11-2-408 B. 12. as follows:
(OT1 Old Town District: The purpose of the (OT) District
is to accommodate and encourage further expansion of the
historical core of the community; to delineate a
centralized activity center and to encourage its renewal,
revitalization and growth as the public, quasi-public,
cultural, financial and recreational center of the City.
A variety of these uses integrated with general business,
medium-high to high density residential, and other
related uses is encouraged in an effort to provide the
appropriate mix of activities necessary to establish a
truly urban City center. The district shall be served by
the Municipal Water and Sewer systems of the City of
Meridian. Development in this district must give
attention to the handling of high volumes of traffic,
adequate parking, and pedestrian movement, and to provide
strip commercial development, and must be approved as a
conditional use, unless otherwise permitted.
6. The property is located at 815 East lat Street, Suite B,
Meridian, Ada County, Idaho.
7. The Assistant to the City Engineer, Bruce Freckleton, and
the Planning and Zoning Administrator, Shari Stiles, submitted
comments which are incorporated herein as if set forth in full.
Their comments included, but are not limited to, the following:
a. The building on the property is one of the many
existing in the City of Meridian's Old Town District. It
is to be noted that all uses in the Old Town District
have been stated as Conditional Uses. This property was
recently reviewed under the application of Hunter
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 3.
WILD WEST BAKERY AND ESPRESSO
Investment, Inc. for a conditional use permit for general
commercial uses. The outdoor seating was not submitted
as part of the original application. The Applicant, in
addition to outdoor seating, is also proposing
utilization of a "sandwich sign," a temporary sign which
is not currently allowed under the City's existing
policies. The Applicant also requests an "amendment" to
the conditional use permit to allow a garbage receptacle
behind the building to be used cooperatively by
surrounding property occupants.
b. Each tenant shall obtain a Certificate of Occupancy
prior to opening for business;
c. 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 signage proposed is not in conformance with
existing policy and the Uniform Siqn Code;
d. Any new construction shall be in compliance with the
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and all required
Uniform Codes;
e. 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. The Applicant is to locate dumpsters
so as not to impede fire access. The existing dumpster
site needs to be enclosed in accordance with City
ordinance;
f. The Applicant shall supply the Public Works
Department with anticipated sewer and water usage for
analysis in determining whether additional assessment
fees should be charged. A re-assessment agreement will
be entered into with the Applicant prior to issuance of
a Certificate of Occupancy;
g. The property does not provide any off-street
parking. A vacant dirt lot south of the building is
being used for parking. The Applicant should obtain a
signed agreement with the Valley Shepherd Church of the
Nazarene, if possible, to allow parking on the Church's
property;
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 4.
WILD WEST BAKERY AND ESPRESSO
h. A minimum five feet wide unobstructed pathway is to
be provided at all times between any planters and the
outside seating area; and
i. The conditional use permit shall be subject to
review upon ten (10) days notice to the Applicant. An
approval of transfer will be required for any new owners.
8. 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. Utility street cuts in the new pavement are not
allowed unless approved in writing by the District;
b. The Applicant is to provide a minimum of a five feet
wide unobstructed pedestrian pathway on the sidewalk west
of the planters abutting East 1st Street. The Applicant
is to submit a design showing the location of the seating
arrangements to District staff;
c. No addition to the building is proposed with this
application and none is approved; and
d. No driveways are proposed with this application and
none are approved.
9. Central District Health Department, submitted comments,
which comments are hereby incorporated herein as if set forth in
full; that Central District Health Department will require plans to
be submitted for a plan review of any food establishment.
10. Meridian City Police Department, Meridian Fire Department
and Meridian Sewer Department submitted comments, which respective
comments are hereby incorporated herein as if set forth in full.
11. There were no further comments or testimony given at the
hearing.
PRELIMINARY CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 5.
WILD WEST BAKERY AND ESPRESSO
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.
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 set time period for which a
Conditional Use may be in existence.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 6.
WILD WEST BAKERY AND ESPRESSO
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
of Meridian, and the record submitted to it and the things of which
it may take judicial notice.
7. 11-2-415 C of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development
Ordinance provides in relevant part:
The following activities and types of signs shall be
expressly prohibited in all districts except as provided
by this Ordinance:
3. Signs placed on any curb, sidewalk, post, pole,
electroller, hydrant, bridge, or tree except
official public notices as posted by a public
officer;
4. Signs which are placed in any public right-of-way
except publicly owned signs, traffic signals,
directional signs, and signs which direct and guide
traffic and parking on private property but bear no
advertising matter;
8. Conditional Use Permit is defined in the Zoninq and
Development Ordinance as follows: "Permit allowing an exception to
the uses authorized by this Ordinance in a zoning district."
9. Use is defined in the Zoning and Development Ordinance as
follows: "The specific purposes for which land or a building is
designated, arranged, intended or for which it is or may be
occupied, maintained, let or leased."
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 7.
WILD WEST BAKERY AND ESPRESSO
10. A variance is defined by the Zoning and Development
Ordinance as:
A variance is a modification of the requirements of the
Ordinance as to lot size, lot coverage, width, depth,
front yard, side yard, rear yard, setbacks, parking
space, height of buildings or other Ordinance provisions.
A variance shall not be considered a right or special
privilege, but may be granted to an applicant only upon
a showing of undue hardship because of the
characteristics of the site and that the variance is not
in conflict with the public interest.
(Underline emphasis added.)
11. As Section 11-2-415 C of the City of Meridian Zoning and
Development Ordinance specifically prohibits the placement of signs
on any curb, sidewalk or public right of way, and the display of a
sandwich sign on the sidewalk is not a "use" within the definition
of that word in the Zoning and Development Ordinance for which a
conditional use permit may be granted. The grant of a conditional
use permit is not applicable to the Applicant's request for
authorization to display a sandwich sign on the sidewalk. To
obtain authorization to display such sign on the sidewalk, the
Applicant needs to secure a variance.
12. 11-2-413 A provides in relevant part:
In addition to all other regulations ae specified in this
Ordinance, the following provisions shall be adhered to:
3. Required Trash Areas: All trash and/or garbage
collection areas for commercial, industrial, and
multi-family residential uses shall be enclosed on
at least three (3) sides by a solid wall or fence
of at least four (4) feet in height or within an
enclosed building or structure. Adequate vehicular
access to and from such area or areas for
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 8.
WILD WEST BAKERY AND ESPRESSO
collection of trash or garbage as determined by the
Administrator shall be provided.
13. 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 ordinances of the City of Meridian, 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. The request for a conditional use permit for one
sandwich sign to display daily specials does not
constitute a "use" as defined by the City of Meridian
Zoning and Development Ordinances or to which a
conditional use permit would apply, and, therefore does
not constitute a conditional use for which the grant of
a conditional use permit would allow such use.
b. The other specified uses, as set forth at paragraph
3. of the Findings of Fact, hereinabove, would in fact,
constitute conditional uses and a conditional use permit
would be required by ordinance;
c. The uses would be harmonious with and in accordance
with the Comprehensive Plan and the ordinances of the
City of Meridian if the conditions set forth herein are
complied with, but the Zoning and Development Ordinance
requires a conditional use permit to allow the uses;
d. The uses are or will be designed and constructed to
be harmonious in appearance with the character of the
general vicinity; that if the conditions set forth herein
are complied with the uses 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;
e. The uses would not be hazardous nor should they be
disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses if the
conditions are met;
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 9.
WILD WEST BAKERY AND ESPRESSO
f. The property has sewer and water service already
connected, but the Applicant may have to pay additional
fees for the uses;
g. The uses would not create excessive additional
requirements at public cost for public facilities and
services and the uses would not be detrimental to the
economic welfare of the community;
h. If the conditions are met, the uses 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; and
i. The uses will not result in the destruction, lose or
damage of a natural or scenic feature of major
importance.
14. 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 Ada County Highway District, the Meridian Police
Department, the Meridian Fire Department, the Meridian
Sewer Department, the Central District Health Department,
and other governmental entities, which requirements
specifically include, but are not limited to:
1. Sach tenant shall obtain a Certificate of Occupancy
prior to opening for business;
2. 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;
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 10.
WILD WEST BAKERY AND ESPRESSO
3. All signage shall receive design approval of the
Planning and Zoning Department;
4. Unless the Applicant secures a variance, A-frame
and other temporary signs shall not be permitted
and shall be removed upon three days notice to the
Applicant;
5. Sign permits shall be required for all signage;
6. New construction shall be in compliance with the
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and all
required Uniform Codes;
7. Screen trash enclosures shall be provided in
accordance with City ordinance, specifically
including Section 11-2-413 A of the Zoning and
Development Ordinance;
8. The Applicant shall coordinate dumpster site
locations with the City's solid waste contractor;
9. The Applicant shall locate dumpsters so as not to
impede fire access;
10. The Applicant shall supply the Public Works
Department with anticipated sewer and water usage
for analysis in determining whether additional
assessment fees should be charged;
11. The Applicant shall enter into a re-assessment
agreement prior to issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy;
12. The Applicant should obtain, if possible, a signed
agreement with the Valley Shepherd Church of the
Nazarene to allow parking for the property on the
Church's property;
13. The Applicant shall provide a minimum of a five
feet wide unobstructed pedestrian pathway on the
sidewalk west of any planters abutting East 1st
Street;
14. The Applicant shall submit to the Ada County
Highway District a design schematic showing the
location of the seating arrangements; and
15. The Applicant shall submit and obtain approval from
Central District Health Department of their plan
for the food establishment.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 11.
WILD WEST BAKERY AND ESPRESSO
c. The conditional use shall not be restricted to a period
of authorization but may be reviewed and is subject to
review upon ten (10) days notice to the Applicant, for
violation of any conditions imposed herein, other
conditional use applications, or the ordinances of the
City of Meridian.
15. The above-conditions are concluded to be reasonable and
the Applicant shall meet these conditions.
16. It is recommended that if the Applicant meats the
conditions stated above, that the conditional use permit be granted
to the Applicant for those uses specified in paragraph 3. of the
Findings of Fact, hereinabove, except for the placement and display
of the sandwich sign.
APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONB 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
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
CHAIRMAN JOH]
BORUP
SMITH
MACCOY
MANNING
1SON (TIE BREAKER)
VOTED
VOTED
VOTED
VOTED
VOTED
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 12.
WILD WEST BAKERY AND ESPRESSO
DECISION AND RECOIQ~tENDATION
The Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the
City Council of the City of Meridian that, except for the placement
and display of the sandwich sign which use is in paragraph 3b. of
the Findings of Fact, it approve the Conditional Use Permit for the
rest of the uses specified in paragraph 3. of the Findings of Fact,
hereinabove, 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 should be subject to review upon notice to the
Applicant by the City.
NOTION:
APPROVSD:~ DISAPPROVED:
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 13.
WILD WEST BAKERY AND ESPRESSO
> ~
BEFORE THE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
STEVE C. LYONS AND STEVEN J. BAINBRIDGE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR
FULL SERVICE CAR WASH WITS FUEL FACILITIES
835 E. FAIRVIEW AVENUE
MERIDIAN, IDAHO
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The above entitled matter having come on for public hearing on
May 13, 1997, at the hour of 7:00 o'clock p.m., the Applicants
appearing through their representative, Bob Daugherty, 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 May 13, 1997, the first
publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing;
that the matter was duly considered at the May 13, 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. The property is located within the City of Meridian at
835 E. Fairview Avenue, Meridian, Ada County, Idaho. The property
is described in the application which description is incorporated
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 1.
LYONS AND BAINBRIDGE
herein. The Applicants are not the owners of record of the
property. The record owners of the property are Lamont Kouba and
Lynn Kouba, husband and wife, and they have consented to the
application for the Conditional Use Permit.
3. Pursuant to the application, the property is presently
vacant. The proposed land use is to construct a full service car
wash having two detail bays and a retail space with fuel
facilities. The southern portion of the property will remain
conceptual in nature and subject to the conditional use permit
process prior to development. The Applicants agree to pay any
additional sewer, water or trash fees or charges associated with
the proposed use of the property.
4. The property is currently zoned (C-G) General Retail and
Service Commercial. in the ZONING SCHEDULE OF USE CONTROL, Section
11-2-409 B., Commercial, automobile washing facilities and
automobile service stations are permitted uses on property zoned
(C-G) General Retail and Service Commercial. However, 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 the operation of an automobile washing
facility with fuel facilities on the property is required.
5. The (C-G) General Retail and Service Commercial district
is described in the Zoning Ordinance, 11-2-408 B. 11 as follows:
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 2.
LYONS AND BAINBRIDGE
(C-G) General Retail and Service Commercial: The purpose
of the (C-G) District is to provide for commercial uses
which are customarily operated entirely or almost
entirely within a building; to provide for a review of
the impact of proposed commercial uses which are auto and
service oriented and are located in close proximity to
major highways or arterial streets; to fulfill the need
of travel-related services as well as retail sales for
the transient and permanent motoring public. All such
districts shall be connected to the Municipal Water and
Sewer systems of the City of Meridian, and shall not
constitute strip commercial development and encourage
clustering of commercial development.
6. Conditional Use Permit is defined in the Zoning And
Development Ordinance, City of Meridian, Idaho as "Permits allowing
an exception to the uses authorized by this Ordinance in a zoning
district."
7. Bob Daugherty, a representative of the Applicant,
testified substantially as follows. The property had been
previously approved for a conditional use permit for a retail
building. Since the grant of the prior conditional use permit, the
owner of the property has entered into an agreement to sell the
northern portion of the property to Mr. Lyons and Mr. Bainbridge,
the Applicants. The Applicants desire to construct on the property
a full service car wash facility with two detail bays and a retail
space at the front of the car wash with fuel facilities. Although
the presently proposed development and use of the property is
different from that previously proposed, the Applicants believe the
presently proposed development and use are acceptable under
Meridian's Comprehensive Plan and an appropriate use for the
property. The previously proposed development of the property
consisted of the use of the full 3.98 acres of the property;
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 3.
LYONS AND BAINBRIDGE
however, the Applicants propose to split off the northern .888
acres of the property for the presently proposed use. The
Applicants will be granted an easement for parking on the southern
portion of the property which property will be owned by the present
owners of the property, Mr. and Mrs. Kouba. The Applicants do not
have any problems with the comments from the City's staff. The
Applicants believe they have met all of the required setbacks and
other requirements for the proposed use.
8. Bob Daugherty further testified substantially as follows.
The conditional use permit previously granted required cross access
agreements to the east and to the west for the adjacent commercial
property located along Fairview Avenue; namely, Roundtree Chevrolet
and Meridian Auto Sales. With regard to this application, the Ada
County Highway District recommends cross access easements to the
property to the south. The Applicants have attempted to obtain
clarification from the Ada County Highway District concerning its
recommendations. The Applicants desire to continue the cross
access agreements as originally recommended as part of the prior
conditional use permit application. The Applicants have secured
one cross access agreement for a 40 feet roadway easement on the
parcel of property occupied by Roundtree Chevrolet, which property
is owned by the Johnsons. The Applicants have made arrangements to
grant the cross access easement to the west of the property
occupied by Meridian Auto Sales. The Applicants do not believe
they need to secure easements or agreements for cross access for
the property located south of the property. The 40 feet easement
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 4.
LYONS AND BAINBRIDGE
extends the entire length of the property's eastern boundary and
provides ample access for the southern portion of the property.
Additionally, a 40 feet access for Fairview Avenue was originally
designed, but the Ada County Highway District recommended this
access be reduced to 36 feet. The Applicants have reduced this
access to 36 feet; however, the Ada County Highway District now
recommends an entryway that is 24 to 30 feet in width. The
Applicants desire to have access for larger vehicles to the
southern portion of the property. The Applicants anticipate
Roundtree Chevrolet will develop the property located to the south
of their current car lot. The Applicants maintain that additional
traffic flow will warrant the 36 feet wide access from Fairview
Avenue, which was previously approved and which the Applicants
desire. With regard to the comment from the City's staff
concerning sidewalk and curbing, the Ada County Highway District
requested the deposit of money into the trust fund. However, based
upon the Applicants' discussions with City staff, the City desires
the construction of the sidewalks and curbs as part of the
development of the property. The Applicants are willing to
construct the sidewalks and curbs with the development of the
property.
9. In response to a question from Chairman Johnson, Bob
Daugherty testified substantially as follows. The sidewalk would
be 150 feet in length, which is the entire frontage of the property
along Fairview Avenue.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 5.
LYONS AND BAINBRIDGE
10. In response to questions from Commissioner MacCoy, Bob
Daugherty testified substantially as follows. The hours of
operation will be from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. The Applicants'
discussions with City staff have related primarily to the
conditions imposed under the conditional use permit previously
granted. They do not anticipate a change in the conditions
previously imposed. They previously addressed the issues
concerning the lighting of the property. The primary concern with
the lighting of the property was the impact upon the adjacent
residential property from the lighting of the previously proposed
buildings located at the southern portion of the property. Under
the present proposal, the southern portion of the property will not
be developed. The northern portion of the property will be
developed. The future development of the southern portion of the
property remains subject to the conditional use permit process.
11. With regard to the lighting of the northern portion of
the property, Commissioner MacCoy commented that the lighting
should be placed so as not to create a problem for the drivers on
Fairview Avenue. Mr. Daugherty responded that he does not believe
the Applicants would have any objection to entering into an
agreement to eliminate or minimize the lighting impact upon
Fairview Avenue.
12. In response to further questions from Commissioner
MacCoy, Bob Daugherty testified substantially as follows. City
staff had indicated that a fence along the southern portion of the
property may be a requirement of the grant of the conditional use
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 6.
LYONS AND BAINBRIDGE
permit for this application. A chain link fence with slate was
originally contemplated along the southern property line between
the adjacent residential property and the property.
13. In response to questions of Commissioner Borup, Bob
Daugherty testified substantially as follows. The site plan for
the development of the property is adjusted to accommodate the 35
feet setback, which causes the location of the fuel station to be
moved slightly. The 40 feet roadway for the property is actually
located on the property occupied by Roundtree Chevrolet. The
specific location of the cross access easement to the west is
dependent upon and will be determined based upon the future
development and use of the southern portion of the property. The
requirement for cross access for the property located south of the
property would not necessarily be satisfied by the 40 feet roadway
to the east of the property. There is a required 20 feet buffer
strip between the property and the residential area located south
of the property, so the 40 feet roadway does not connect to the
property located south of the property. Because the proposed
development and use of the property does not include the southern
portion of the property, the Applicants do not believe the Ada
County Highway District has fully examined the application.
Further, because the southern portion of the property is not
included in the proposed development and use of the property, the
Applicants do not believe a cross access easement to the
residential property to the south should be a requirement of the
requested conditional use permit. The property has ample access
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 7.
LYONS AND BAINBRIDGE
with the 40 feet roadway to the east of the property for purposes
of the proposed development and use of the northern portion of the
property. Further, he does not believe a cross access easement for
the residential area located to the south is appropriate, because
it would connect a definite commercial use with a residential use.
There presently exists no specific plans for developing the
southern portion of the property. The Applicants have every
intention to construct the car wash and associated facilities at
their earliest possible convenience. They have secured an
architect who is presently working on the plans for the car wash
and associated facilities. Upon securing approval from the City
Council, they intend to start construction.
14. Commissioner Smith commented substantially as follows,
with regard to the design of the site plan as presented. He has a
problem with the location and design of the parking stalls along
the 40 feet access roadway. As located and designed, the vehicles
would back into the access roadway. If the southern portion of the
property is developed, vehicles backing into the access roadway
will create a traffic hazard. Further, the stacking space
available to the vacuum bays and express lanes appears inadequate,
especially for the volume of vehicles on Saturdays. As a result of
a high volume, the line of vehicles would extend into the access
roadway.
15. In response, Bob Daugherty responded and testified
substantially as follows. The Applicants have taken Commissioner
Smith's concerns into consideration in the design of the site plan
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 8.
LYONS AND BAINBRIDGE
given the limitation of available space. The Applicants believe
ample space is available. There will be three lanes into the car
wash, and there are staging areas in front of the vacuum bays, both
of which provide ample space for the volume of vehicles.
Additionally, the 40 feet access roadway is four lanes under the
Ada County Highway District's standards. The Applicants' intention
is to designate the parking spaces along the access road as
employee parking. Consequently, there will be limited trips per
day to and from those parking spaces.
16. In response to another question from Chairman Johnson,
Bob Daugherty testified substantially as follows. The Applicants
have determined that 15 vehicles could be stacked in the three
staging areas before the vacuum bays and another six vehicles in
the area entering the car wash tunnel.
17. Bob Daugherty further testified substantially as follows.
With regard to the requirements from the DEQ (Idaho Department of
Health and Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality), the only
thing which needs to be completed is hard surfacing the area, which
will be accomplished with the construction of the car wash and
associated facilities.
18. Joe Numbers, a representative of the Applicants,
testified substantially as follows. The structural shell of the
proposed building is metal. The north and east sides of the
building will be faced with concrete masonry units (CMU). A glazed
the will be used as a trim or as an accent piece. Along the
bottom of the front of the building, a split face CMU would be used
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - page 9.
LYONS AND BAINBRIDGE
which will be ribbed with a CMU band to meet the metal awnings in
the front. The remainder of the building would be a smooth faced
CMU block.
19. In response to questions of Commissioner MacCoy, Joe
Numbers testified substantially as follows. The walls on either
side of the car wash tunnel will be of CMU block. The CMU block
has good sound attenuation properties. There will also be a
fiberglass shield over the top which is designed primarily to
shield the structural components from the water. With regard to
the noise from the car wash equipment, he does not believe the
noise is very much, although he would defer a specific response to
the Applicants' representative from the car wash equipment
supplier. However, the location of the proposed building is set
back approximately 90 to 100 feet from Fairview Avenue.
20. Commissioner MacCoy commented that the Commission is
concerned with a facility becoming a nuisance to the community.
21. Joe Numbers further testified substantially as follows.
The Applicants are considering a 50's type of theme for the car
wash facility. The design of the building accommodates the display
of antique cars. Also, there is a small 17 feet in diameter patio
area. The Applicants anticipate placing tables and awnings in the
patio area to provide the customers a nice location to wait, which
provides a visually attractive scene from Fairview Avenue.
22. In response to questions of Commissioner Smith, Joe
Numbers testified substantially as follows. Two faces of the
proposed building will be fully constructed of CMU. The walls
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 10.
LYONS AND BAINBRIDGE
! •
along the west and south sides of the proposed building will be
constructed of metal and CMU. He anticipates that a portion of the
CMU will be painted either white or an off white. The trim is a
glazed blue CMU.
23. Bob Daugherty further testified substantially as follows.
The actual vacuum units will be housed within the proposed building
and ducting would run from inside the building to the vacuum bays.
The location of the vacuum unit within the building should reduce
the noise quite a bit.
24. In response to a question of Chairman Johnson, Bob
Daugherty testified substantially as follows. To his knowledge the
Applicants have no intention of installing any type of loud speaker
system.
25. Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to the City Engineer, and
Shari Stiles, Planning and Zoning Administrator, submitted general
and site specific comments, which comments are incorporated herein
as if set forth in full. Their comments included that the property
was annexed last year with an application by Lamont Kouba. A
conditional use permit was granted for a retail space with some
office/warehouse space on the southern portion. Their general
comments included the following:
a. Any existing irrigation/drainage ditches crossing or
adjoining the subject property shall be tiled per City
Ordinance 11-9-605 M. The ditches to be piped are to be
shown on the development plans. 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 Works
Department;
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 11.
LYONS AND BAINBRIDGE
! •
b. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems
within the project will have to be removed from their
domestic service per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517.
Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as
landscape irrigation;
c. The Applicants will need 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;
d. The Applicants will need to provide fire access and
hydrant locations in accordance with the Uniform Fire
Code and Meridian Fire Department policies. Any needed
fire hydrant will need to be in place and activated prior
to issuance of a building permit;
e. The Applicants will need to coordinate dumpster site
locations with the City's solid waste contractor, and
located dumpsters so as not to impede fire access. All
dumpsters are to be provided with a screened enclosure;
f. A minimum thirty five feet landscape setback beyond
future right-of-way is required. The Applicants are to
provide a detailed landscape plan including berming
details for approval prior to obtaining building permits.
Sidewalk/curbing should be installed along Fairview
Avenue to provide a finished appearance. Ada County
Highway District has requested that money for the
sidewalk be deposited into a trust;
g. The Applicants are to provide curbing and
underground sprinkler system for all landscaped areas;
h. The Applicants are to provide temporary fencing to
contain debris during construction;
i. All paving, striping and signage of parking lot is
to be in accordance with Meridian City ordinances and the
Americans with Disabilities Act;
j. Lighting shall not illuminate adjacent residential
properties or cause glare, as determined by the City of
Meridian;
k. A development agreement outlining detailed
conditions of approval was a condition of annexation.
All uses shall be developed under the conditional use
permit process;
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 12.
LYONS AND BAINBRIDGE
•
1. 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 Applicants. Sign permits are needed for all
signage;
m. Any new construction shall be in compliance with the
Americans with Disabilities Act and all required Uniform
Codes; and
n. The Applicants are to provide a revised site plan
meeting all staff and agency requirements prior to public
hearing before the City Council.
Their site specific comments included the following:
a. Sanitary sewer service to this development shall be
from an existing main that is in place along the west
side of the site. The Applicants shall be responsible to
construct the sewer mains to and through this proposed
development. The Applicants are to coordinate sewer main
sizes and locations with the City of Meridian Public
Works Department. Development plans shall be reviewed
and approved through the Public Works Department.
b. 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 proposed development. The Applicants
have preliminarily discussed using an existing well on
the site for use in the car wash. If this is done, with
the approval from Idaho Department of Water Resources, a
meter will need to be installed to measure actual
contribution to the sewer system. The Applicants shall
enter into a reassessment agreement for sewer and water
fees prior to obtaining a building permit;
c. Water service to this development shall be from an
extension of the existing eight inch diameter main
installed along the southerly side of Fairview Avenue.
The Applicants are responsible for extension of water
service to and through this development. Water service
to this development is contingent upon positive results
from a hydraulic analysis by the City's computer model.
The Applicants are to coordinate routing with the
Meridian Public Works Department. Water lines shall be
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 13.
LYONS AND BAINBRIDGE
located on the north and east sides of the roadway
centerlines;
d. Pressurized irrigation is to be provided per City
ordinance. Any proposal for a supplementary connection
from the City's water system to the pressurized
irrigation system will need to be reviewed closely due to
the size of the area to be watered. The Applicants shall
provide a statement as to the ownership of, and operation
and maintenance of the pressurized irrigation system;
e. The Applicants are to dedicate four additional feet
of right-of-way on Fairview Avenue, 54 feet from the
centerline. The Applicants are to furnish a copy of
recorded warranty deed for dedication of additional
right-of-way prior to applying for building permits;
f. The Ada County Highway District policy requires that
access from Fairview Avenue to this development be
located on the east side, and that cross access
agreements be entered into for the properties east and
west of the property;
g. Eighteen three-inch caliper trees are required for
this development. Trees may not be located over the
existing sewer line or over other utilities. A detailed
landscaping plan, including sizes and species, will need
to be submitted for approval with the building permit
application;
h. The Applicants are to submit a copy of the recorded
easement agreement for access from the Roundtree
Chevrolet property and to the southern portion that is
not being developed at this time;
i. The Applicants are proposing to split the Fairview
frontage property from the remainder of the parcel. This
parcel is eligible for a one-time split; however, the
proposed split will leave the back portion with no legal
frontage. The Meridian City Council will have to approve
of the private roadway concept and actual splitting of
the property; and
j. The Applicants are to indicate any existing FEMA
floodplain boundaries on the site plan map, and/or any
plans to reduce said boundaries.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 14.
LYONS AND BAINBRIDGE
20. The Ada County Highway District submitted comments on the
subject application, which comments are incorporated herein as if
set forth in full. Its comments included the following:
a. The Applicants are to dedicate 54 feet of right-of-
way from the street centerline of Fairview Avenue
abutting the parcel 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 compensated 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. The value of the
right-of-way will be offset against road impact fees that
will be payable before a building permit is issued;
b. The Applicants are to pave the driveway easement
abutting the site's east boundary its full required width
to at least 30 feet beyond the new right-of-way of
Fairview Avenue and install pavement tapers with 15 feet
radii abutting the existing roadway edge;
c. The Applicants are to provide a recorded cross
access easement for the parcels to the south to use the
property for access to the public streets prior to
issuance of a building permit or other required permits;
d. The Applicants are to locate a 30 to 36 feet wide
driveway on site from the 40 feet easement a minimum of
40 feet south of the new right-of-way of Fairview Avenue;
e. The Applicants are to construct a five feet wide
concrete sidewalk on Fairview Avenue abutting the parcel,
and locate the sidewalk one foot within the new right-of-
way of Fairview Avenue;
f. Utility street cuts in new pavement less than five
years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by
the Ada County Highway District; and
g. Other than access point(s) specifically approved
with this application, direct lot or parcel access to
Fairview Avenue is prohibited.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 15.
LYONS AND BAINBRIDGE
21. The Meridian City Police Department and the Meridian Fire
Department submitted comments, which respective comments are
incorporated herein as if set forth in full.
22. The Meridian Sewer Department submitted comments, which
comments are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. Its
comments included that the project will require coordination with
the Meridian Sewer Department and the pretreatment program during
construction and operation.
23. Central District Bealth Department submitted comments
which comments are incorporated herein as if set forth in full.
Its comments included that after written approval from appropriate
entities are submitted, it can approve the proposal for central
sewage and central water; that runoff is not to create a mosquito
breeding problem; and that it recommends stormwater run-off flow
into a grassy swale before discharging to the subsurface.
24. The Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District submitted
comments, which comments are hereby incorporated herein as if set
forth in full. Its comments included the following:
a. The Nampa 6 Meridian Irrigation District's Five Mile
Drain courses through the southwest corner of the
project. The right-of-way of the Five Mile Drain is 100
feet; 50 feet from the center each way. The Applicants
must contact the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District for
approval before any encroachment or change of right-of-
way occurs;
b. The Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District requires
that a Land Use Change/Site Development application be
filed for review prior to final platting;
c. All laterals and waste ways must be protected;
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 16.
LYONS AND BAINBRIDGE
d. All municipal surface drainage must be retained on
site. If any surface drainage leaves the site, the Nampa
& Meridian Irrigation District must review drainage
plane;
e. The developer must comply with Idaho Code Section
31-3805; and
f. It is recommended that irrigation water be made
available to all developments within the Nampa & Meridian
Irrigation District.
25. There were no other comments by the public regarding this
application.
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 Applicants' property.
2. The City of Meridian has authority to grant conditional
uses pursuant to Idaho Code Section 67-6512 and pursuant to 11-2-
418 of the Zoning and Development Ordinance of the City of
Meridian.
3. The City of Meridian has the authority to take judicial
notice of its own ordinances, other governmental statutes and
ordinances, and of actual conditions existing within the City and
the State.
4. The City of Meridian has authority to place conditions on
a conditional use permit and the use of the property pursuant to
Idaho Code Section 67-6512 and pursuant to that section conditions
minimizing the adverse impact on other development, controlling the
duration of development, assuring the development is maintained
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 17.
LYONS AND BAINBRIDGE
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 set time period for which a
Conditional Use may be in existence.
6. The Planning and Zoning Commission judges this
application for a conditional use upon the basis of guidelines
contained in Section 11-2-418 of the Zoning and Development
Ordinance of the City of Meridian and upon the basis of the Local
Planning Act of 1975, Title 67 Chapter 65, Idaho Code, the
Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, and the record
submitted to it and the things of which it may take judicial
notice.
7. Section 11-2-418 C of the Zoning and Development
Ordinance of the City of Meridian 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 and a review of the facts presented and the
conditions of the area, assuming that the above conditions or
similar ones thereto would be attached to the conditional use, the
Planning and Zoning Commission concludes as follows:
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 18.
LYONS AND BAINBRIDGE
a. Although an automobile washing facility with fuel
facilities are permitted uses on property zoned (C-G) General
Retail and Service Commercial, 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 the operation of an
automobile washing facility with fuel facilities on 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 the
development will have a vehicular approach to the property
which shall be designed to decrease interference with traffic
on surrounding public streets;
e. The Applicants 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 Applicants 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 Applicants will cause the property to have a
vehicular approach 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
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 19.
LYONS AND BAINBRIDGE
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 conditional use shall not be restricted to a period
of authorization but may be reviewed annually, upon
notice to the Applicants, for violation of any conditions
imposed herein and other conditional use applications;
c. The Applicants shall meet the requirements of the City
Engineer's office and the Planning and Zoning
Administrator, which include the following:
1. Any existing irrigation/drainage ditches crossing
or adjoining the subject property shall be tiled
per City Ordinance 11-9-605 M. The ditches to be
piped shall be shown on the development plans.
Plans must be approved by the appropriate
irrigation or drainage district, or lateral users
association, with written confirmation of said
approval submitted to the Public Works Department;
2. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems
within the project will have to be removed from
their domestic service per City Ordinance Section
5-7-517; however, wells may be used for non-
domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation;
3. The Applicants shall 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;
4. The Applicants shall provide fire access and
hydrant locations in accordance with the Uniform
Fire Code and Meridian Fire Department's policies.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 20.
LYONS AND BAINBRIDGE
Any needed fire hydrant (s ) shall be in place and
activated prior to issuance of any building
permit(s);
5. The Applicants shall coordinate dumpster site
locations with the City's solid waste contractor,
and locate dumpsters so as not to impede fire
access. All dumpsters are to be provided with a
screened enclosure;
6. A minimum thirty five feet landscape setback beyond
the future right-of-way shall be required. The
Applicants shall provide a detailed landscape plan
including berminq details for approval by the City
prior to obtaining building permits. Sidewalk and
curbing shall be installed along Fairview Avenue;
7. The Applicants shall provide curbing and
underground sprinkler system for all landscaped
areas;
8. The Applicants shall provide temporary fencing to
contain debris during construction;
All paving, striping and signage of parking lot(s)
shall be in accordance with Meridian City
ordinances and the Americans with Disabilities Act;
10. Lighting shall not illuminate adjacent residential
properties or cause glare, as determined by the
City of Meridian;
11. As a development agreement outlining detailed
conditions of approval was a condition of
annexation, all future uses or development of the
property, whether the northern portion or the
southern portion, shall be developed under the
conditional use permit process;
12. 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 must receive design approval from the
Planning and Zoning Department. A-frame and other
temporary signs shall not be permitted and will be
removed upon three days notice to the Applicants.
Sign permits shall be required for all signage;
13. Any construction shall be in compliance with the
Americans with Disabilities Act and all required
Uniform Codes;
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 21.
LYONS AND BAINBRIDGE
14. The Applicants shall be responsible for the
construction of the sewer mains to and through the
development. The Applicants shall coordinate sewer
main sizes and locations with the City of Meridian
Public Works Department. Any development plans
shall be submitted to the Public Works Department
for its review and approval;
15. 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
development;
16. If the Applicants receive approval from the Idaho
Department of Water Resources to use an existing
well on the site in the car wash, the Applicants
shall install a meter to measure actual
contribution to the City's sewer system;
17. The Applicants shall enter into a reassessment
agreement for sewer and water fees prior to
obtaining a building permit(s);
18. The Applicants shall be responsible for the
extension of water service to and through the
development. Water service to this development
shall be contingent upon positive results from a
hydraulic analysis by the City's computer model.
The Applicants shall coordinate routing of the
water service lines with the Meridian Public Works
Department. Water lines shall be located on the
north and east sides of the roadway centerlines;
19. Pressurized irrigation shall be provided per City
ordinance. The Applicants shall provide a
statement as to the ownership, operation and
maintenance of the pressurized irrigation system;
20. The Applicants shall dedicate four additional feet
of right-of-way on Fairview Avenue, 54 feet from
the centerline. The Applicants shall furnish to
the City a copy of the recorded warranty deed for
or other documentation evidencing the dedication of
additional right-of-way prior to applying for
building permits;
21. Eighteen three-inch caliper trees shall be required
for this development. Trees shall not be located
over the existing sewer line or over other
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 22.
LYONS AND BAINBRIDGE
utilities. A detailed landscaping plan, including
sizes and species, shall be submitted to the City
for approval with any building permit application;
22. The Applicants shall submit a copy of the recorded
easement agreement for access from the Roundtree
Chevrolet property and to the southern portion of
the property which is not being developed at this
time;
23. The Applicants proposal to split the northern or
Fairview frontage property from the remainder of
the property and the concept of a private roadway
shall be subject to approval by the Meridian City
Council; and
24. The Applicants shall provide information of any
existing FEMA floodplain boundaries on the site
plan map, and any plans to reduce such boundaries.
d. The Applicants shall meet the requirements of the
Meridian Police Department, Meridian Fire Department,
Meridian Sewer Department, Central District Health
Department, and the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District.
e. The Applicants shall meet the requirements of the Ada
County Highway District, which include, but are not
limited to the following:
1. The Applicants shall dedicate 54 feet of right-of-
way from the street centerline of Fairview Avenue
abutting the parcel 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 Applicants shall pave the driveway easement
abutting the site's east boundary its full required
width to at least 30 feet beyond the new right-of-
way of Fairview Avenue and shall install pavement
tapers with 15 feet radii abutting the existing
roadway edge;
3. The Applicants shall provide a recorded cross
access easement for the parcels to the south to use
the property for access to the public streets prior
to issuance of a building permit or other required
permits;
4. The Applicants shall locate a 30 to 36 feet wide
driveway on site from the 40 feet easement a
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Paqe 23.
LYONS AND BAINBRIDGE
minimum of 40 feet south of the new right-of-way of
Fairview Avenue;
5. The Applicants shall construct a five feet wide
concrete sidewalk on Fairview Avenue abutting the
parcel, and locate the sidewalk one foot within the
new right-of-way of Fairview Avenue; and
6. Other than access point(s) specifically approved by
the Ada County Highway District, direct lot or
parcel access to Fairview Avenue is prohibited.
f. The Applicants shall provide a revised site plan meeting
all staff and agency requirements prior to public hearing
before the City Council.
9. The above-conditions are concluded to be reasonable and
the Applicants shall meet these conditions.
10. It is recommended that if the Applicants meet the
conditions stated above, that the conditional use permit be granted
to the Applicants.
APPROVAL OF FIRDIROS OF FACT ARD CONCLUSIORS OF LAN
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
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
CHAIRMAN JOH1
BORUP
SMITH
MACCOY
MANNING
SON (TIE BREAKER)
VOTED
VOTED
VOTED
VOTED
VOTED
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 24.
LYONS AND BAINBRIDGE
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 Applicants 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 should be subject to review upon notice to the
Applicants by the City.
MOTION:
APPROVSD:~ DISAPPROVED:
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 25.
LYONS AND BAINBRIDGE