The URL can be used to link to this page

1997 10-14 MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AGENDA TUESDAY, OCTOBER 14, 1997 - 7:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 9, 1997: (APPROVED) FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AN ESPRESSO SHOP TO SELL PASTRIES, SANDWICHES, SOUP, ETC. IN THE MERIDIAN OFFICE AND CONVENTION CENTER BY SHARLA LANPHEAR (APPROVE FINDINGS; APPROVE RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL) 2. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FORA CINDI'S FLORAL IN THE FRONT PORTION OF THE OLD ZAMZOWS STORE BY CINDI'S FLORAL - 611 E. 1sT STREET: (APPROVE FINDNGS; APPROVE RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL) 3. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 8.5 ACRES TO C-G AND R-2 BY ECONO LURE N'TUNE INC. -EAST OF LOCUST GROVE, SOUTH SIDE OF E. FAIRVIEW: (APPROVE FINDINGS; APPROVE RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL) 4. REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR ECONO LUBE SUBDIVISION BY ECONO LURE N'TUNE INC. -EAST OF LOCUST GROVE, SOUTH SIDE OF E. FAIRVIEW; TABLED SEPTEMBER 9, 1997: (APPROVE RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL) 5. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED FROM SEPTEMBER 9, 1997: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF ECONO LUBE N'TUNE AUTOMOBILE MAINTENANCE AND LIGHT REPAIR FACILITY AND SCHUCK'S AUTOMOBILE PARTS STORE BY ECONO LOBE N'TUNE INC. - EAST OF LOCUST GROVE, SOUTH SIDE OF E. FAIRVIEW: PRELIMINARY FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR ECONO LOBE N'TUNE INC.: (APPROVE FINDINGS; APPROVE RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL) 6. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR APRELIMINARY/FINAL PLAT FOR RAMA SUBDIVISION BY B-II LLC -INTERSECTION OF MERIDIAN ROAD AND CENTRAL VALLEY DRIVE: (APPROVE RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL) 7. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A THEME TYPE SIT DOWN RESTAURANT BY YICK YEE FAMILY CO. - SE CORNER OF FAIRVIEW AVENUE AND LOCUST GROVE: (CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW) 8. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A SMALL, IN-HOME PRESCHOOL BY LORELL ROGERS -3426 E. FLORENCE DRIVE: (CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW) 9. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 1.8 ACRES TO C-G BY TOM BEVAN -2030 W. FAIRVIEW AVENUE: (CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW) 10. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A RETAIL SHOPPING CENTER BY TOM BEVAN - 2030 W. FAIRVIEW AVENUE: (CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING TO NOVEMBER 12, 1997 MEETING) 11. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING TO R-8 FOR ELVIRA SUBDIVISION BY RON CROW - 650 FEET SOUTH OF FAIRVIEW AVENUE, WEST OF DANBURY FAIR SUBDIVISION NO. 4: (CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW) 12. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR ELVIRA SUBDIVISION BY RON CROW - 650 FEET SOUTH OF FAIRVIEW AVENUE, WEST OF DANBURY FAIR SUBDIVISION NO. 4: (TABLED TO NOVEMBER 12, 1997 MEETING} 13. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR ELVIRA SUBDIVISION FOR 33 STANDARD R-8 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS PLUS 8 TOWNHOUSE LOTS BY RON CROW - 650 FEET SOUTH OF FAIRVIEW AVENUE, WEST OF DANBURY FAIR SUBDIVISION NO. 4: (CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW) MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION OCTOBER 14 1997 The regular meeting of the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairman Jim Johnson at 7:00 P.M.: MEMBERS PRESENT: Keith Borup, Malcolm MacCoy, Byron Smith, Mark Nelson: OTHERS PRESENT: Will Berg, Wendy Cox Dvorak, Wayne Crookston, Gary Smith, Keith Bird, Trace Rogers, H.L. and Mary Rich, Bill Geyer, Ron Crow, John Minegar, Dee R. Lynn, Larry Jarrett, Tom Bevan, Gerda Dwyer, Norma Campbell, Teny Trakel, Dennis Thorton, Glen Buday, Mark Krizenbeck, Lonnie Fox, Boyd Yee, Lorell Rogers, Joel Russell, Gary Lee, Barb Smith, Andrew Condon: MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 9, 1997: Johnson: Are there any corrections, additions or deletions to these minutes? Entertain a motion for approval please. Smith: Mr. Chairman I would like to make a motion that we approve the minutes of the previous meeting held September 9. MacCoy: Second Johnson: Motion and a second to approve the minutes as prepared, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Johnson: At this time I would like to tum the podium over to our City Attomey Wayne Crookston who has an introduction to make. Crookston: Mr. Chairman, I would like to introduce Wendy Dvorak, she will be the new Assistant City Attorney. She has prepared the findings that you have on the applications for tonight. She will take over approximately after the end of item #5. 1 will still be here until it gets too late and she will be presiding. Johnson: Thank you and welcome. ITEM #1: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AN ESPRESSO SHOP TO SELL PASTRIES, SANDWICHES, SOUP, ETC. IN THE MERIDIAN OFFICE AND CONVENTION CENTER BY SHARLA LANPHEAR: Johnson: Any discussion regarding the findings of fact and conclusions of law as prepared by our City Attomey? Would som3one like to make a motion then? Meridian Planning & Zoi~ Commission October 14, 1997 Page 2 Borup: Mr. Chairman, I move the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts and approves these findings of fact and conclusions. MacCoy: Second Johnson: Moved by Commissioner Borup, second by Commissioner MacCoy, roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: Borup -Yea, MacCoy -Yea, Smith -Yea, Nelson -Yea MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Johnson: Is there a decision and recommendation that you wish to pass onto the City Council? Borup: Mr. Chairman, I recommend the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council of the City of Meridian that it approve the conditional use permit requested by the applicant for the property described in the application with the conditions set forth in the findings of fact and conclusions of law or similar conditions as found justified and appropriate by the City Council that the property be required to meet the water and sewer requirements, the fire and life safety codes, uniform fire code, parking requirements, 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 Johnson: It has been moved and seconded to pass the recommendation onto the City Council as read by Commissioner Borup, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #2: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A CINDI'S FLORAL IN THE FRONT PORTION OF THE OLD ZAMZOWS STORE BY CINDI'S FLORAL-611 E. 1sT STREET: Johnson: Any comments regarding these findings of fact and conclusions of law? Entertain a motion for approval. MacCoy: Mr. Chairman, I recommend that the Commission accepts the findings of fact and conclusions of law. Borup: Second Johnson: Motion and a second to approve the findings as prepared, roll call vote. Meridian Planning & Zo~ Commission October 14, 1997 Page 3 ROLL CALL VOTE: Borup -Yea, MacCoy -Yea, Smith -Yea, Nelson -Yea MOTION CARRIED: Alt Yea MacCoy: Mr. Chairman, the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council of the City of Meridian that it approve the conditional use permit requested by the applicant for the property described in the application with the conditions set forth in the findings of fact and conclusions of law or similar conditions as found just~ed and appropriate by the City Council and that the property be required to meet the water and sewer requirements, the fire and life safety code, Uniform fire code, parking requirements and the 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. Smith: Second Johnson: Moved and seconded to pass that recommendation on to the City as read by Commissioner MacCoy, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: Alf Yea ITEM #3: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 8.5 ACRES TO C-G AND R-2 B ECONO LUBE N'TUNE INC. -EAST OF LOCUST GROVE, SOUTH SIDE OF E. FAIRVIEW: Johnson: Are there any changes, any discussion regarding these findings of fact and conclusions of law? Crookston: Mr. Chairman, the applicant has submitted a new or submitted some new information to the Commission. I am not sure whether it applies to the annexation and zoning and the conditional use permit. But they are significant changes to what was submitted for the prior application. Basically is an amended application, 1 would just point that out to the Commissioners and ask them to decide whether or not they want to take some action. At this time that was just recently submitted or whether or not you desire to hold that over to the conditional use permit. If there are some things that you desire to have the applicant perform or do it might be wise to have as part of the annexation and zoning, findings of fact and conclusions of law as well as the findings on the conditional use permit. Johnson: So what you are saying is we can combine the two? Crookston: You could, t think that my point is that there possibly needs to be testimony this eveni~ ig on what was recently submitted by the applicant. The hearing was only continued until tonight so the hearing is still open. 1 think that, but I cannot recall Meridian Planning & Zor~j Commission October 14, 1997 Page 4 whether or not the findings or excuse me I cannot recall whether or not the annexation and zoning hearing was left open or whether or not it was just the conditional use permit hearing that was left open. Johnson: It was my understanding it was just the conditional use permit. Borup: Mr. Chairman, I was aware of the additional things and I guess from my stand point there may be some additional things on the plat and conditional use but (inaudible) affected the annexation specifically. You are saying it could or (inaudible) Crookston: The hearing was closed for the annexation and zoning to reopen it you would have to readvertise a notice of the public hearing so the land owners or anyone from the public could testify again. If you feel that it was the application the amended application was submitted only to support the conditional use permit (inaudible) Borup: That was my assumption that it was (inaudible) Johnson: And not to the annexation and zoning. comments on that? Smith: I concur with Commissioner Borup. MacCoy: I do the same. Does anybody else have any Johnson: Well in that instance then I don't see that it need to go over and start from ground zero and renotice the whole public hearing and annexation and zoning. The one thing you could do if you feel like you want to do it is you could amend the findings of fact and contusions of law as prepared to inGude the new information if you feel it is pertinent. That is up to you. If it is valuable information and you feel it is I think it ought to be included in the findings of fact. If you think it only pertains to the next two items and not to this one then we can proceed. It is your call. Borup: I think maybe there is a potential problem because the findings, let me ask that it looks like the findings do include both the annexation and the plat conditional use. Could we go to (inaudible) Johnson: I don't know what we would gain there, traditionally we don't handle preliminary plats until we have done the annexation and zoning. That is the normal sequence, what would you gain by doing that? Borup: Well right now the findings include findings on the plat. At this point the public hearing is continued? JoY~nson: Only for the conditional use permit. Meridian Planning & Zor~ Commission October 14, 1997 Page 5 Smith: But we could amend our motion to approve these findings of fact to include the additional testimony for item 4? Johnson: You could Borup: Or could we (inaudible) and then go to item #3? Johnson: You want to go down to item 5 is that what you are saying. You can't have a conditional use unless you have annexed and zoned something. That is Borup: I understand that on four that we could not go to four. Johnson: There is a chronology here that vre have to follow. Borup: Does that affect the chronology? Johnson: It would if you go down to five. (Inaudible) Borup: Normally the public hearing would have ended last month. Johnson: But it didn't so it has to be continued tonight because that is what we said we would do. (Inaudible) Johnson: If the findings are prepared so they incude the preliminary plat as well then that is probably out of order, that is probably not proper. Because we haven't addressed those items. Borup: Are you saying adopt the findings is out of order or finishing the public hearing is out of order'? Johnson: I think it is out or order to have findings of fact and conclusions of law prepared on items that we haven't finished yet. Borup: Right, that is why I was wondering if we could go to item 5 and finish it. Johnson: What is your legal opinion Mr. Crookston? It is my legal opinion because items 4 and 5 are on the agenda that you can change the time within which you take 3, 4 and 5 up. You can put 5 first or 4 first and take 3 first. You can change the order because they are all on the agenda. Meridian Planning & Zor• Commission October 14, 1997 Page 6 Johnson: (Inaudible) I have no problem with that if you think that will solve the problem and we can move along so the public doesn't have to sit here and listen to us discuss something vue probably should have worked out before. Let's skip down to, let's leave three and skip to five ITEM #5: PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED FROM SEPTEMBER 9, 1997: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF ECONO LUBE N'TUNE AUTOMOBILE MAINTENANCE AND LIGHT REPAIR FACILITY AND SCHUCK'S AUTOMOBILE PARTS STORE BY ECONO LUBE N'TUNE INC. -EAST OF LOCUST GROVE, SOUTH SIDE OF E. FAIRVIEW: Johnson: At this time we are continuing the public hearing, I will re-open that and invite testimony from anyone that is present that would like to testify on this item or add to their previous testimony. But it is not necessary to repeat anything you have already told us. Crookston: I would like to comment Mr. Chairman that what was submitted as a change to the application for the conditional use permit was just received probably Friday so that these findings of fact were prepared even before we had that new application to consider. Thank you Johnson: You are starting to get me to lean in the direction of starting all over if we are not giving people the proper opportunity to testify and we are not, if the application is that material in change that is what we are going to be stuck with in order to do it right. Borup: Isn't that better to be determined after the hearing (inaudible) Johnson: Well you will determine part of it you won't determine all of it because there is a lot of people out there that probably testfied that aren't here tonight that aren't aware of an amended application. I would assume. Borup: Are you talking people from the public? I don't remember anyone from the public testifying on this application. Johnson: I am not sure they did, but they might have it is materially different. You can't assume that they wouldn't in all fairness. MacCoy: As we hear this gentleman are we in effect continuing Johnson: We are continuing this public hearing. Dennis Thorton, Tuston, CA, was sworn by the City Attorney. Meridian Planning & Zor~ Commission October 14, 1997 Page 7 Thorton: One thing I would like to clarify and I am operating on correspondence here but my information shows that this packet was re-submitted on Tuesday, October 7~' and not on Friday. Crookston: I am not certain as to when it was received, I believe that I got it in my box on Friday the 10"' of September. Thorton: I just have the correspondence and unfortunately Patrick McKeegan the architect involved is hunting somewhere and I hope he is having a good time. But I have a cover letter here and I would be glad to circulate it, addressed to Ms. Stiles the Planning Director that shows that this re-submission was delivered on October 7m Johnson: I appreciate that thank you. Thorton: As far as item 5 on the agenda, we took the Planning Commissions recommendations, considerations, and we teed to address each of those issues. We have re-submitted the site plan with color elevations, floor plans and site signs which was requested of our last planning meeting. We had made the revisions to the plat as were requested. We have added the fire hydrants, we have added the street lighting at Fairview and Eastern on the Wilson near the fire hydrant. We have modified the landscaping and the berm on Fairview including one tree per 1500 square feet. I apologize if I am reiterating things that you already know. Johnson: We want you to do this because we are not, it is not only for us but for the edification for anybody else that might be present. Thorton: The parking has been modified to 19 feet depth stalls, the Schucks north side, asphalt depth is 17 feet but therein we added 2 feet to the sidewalk which was recommended. This allows the curbs to act as a wheel restraint. There are 54 parking spaces as required, accessible parking spaces will be constructed marked and signed in accordance with the ADA guidelines. The proposed pole mounted sign information was included. We understand that would require separate approval. Trash enclosures will match all building construction. Individual site drainage has been shown for each tot. We had proposed it be done on a combined basis. I believe they asked us to redo that. We and I can't say we but I do know that Schuck's looked very hard at reconfiguring the building on the site and because of constraints that they felt were unacceptable and unacceptable would not be advantageous to the entire development have decided to stay with that. I will let Schucks testify to that. But as to the conditional use permit these are the things that have been done. Material is a broad term and I don't know if I would say it was materially altered. But I think what we tried to do is make our modifications and compliance with things that were discussed. I would address Commissioner Smith and say we looked very hard at making some changes in accordance with your suggestions. We believe that the site plan as submitted today is the highest and best use we can come up with. For that reason we would like to get the Meridian Planning & Zo~j Commission October 14, 1997 Page 8 conditional use permit approved. I will tum it over to Schucks and let them testify as to their Johnson: Dennis I have a question, have you itemized all the changes in your address to us this evening. Are there any in there that you didn't mention? Thorton: There are some that have reference to the plat and if you would like I will go through those now. I am not an architect, I can't tell you which should be addressed. The architect addressed these separately. Would you like me to go through those as well? Johnson: Yes go ahead. Thorton: Again, we modified the irrigation and drainage ditches, there was some concern by an adjacent property owner, some of those drainage ditches terminated on the site but we made the modifications to those to make sure that there is no flow through drainage that would be disturbed. Water and sewer service has been extended along Wilson Lane. The utility easement within the subdivision has been relocated to the eastern property line that being one utility easement. The street name Wilson has been approved and the subdivision approval is still in process. The additional four feet of right of way on Fairview has been shown on the plat and the conditional use site plan. The 25 feet landscape setback and berm on Fairview have been shown on the plat and the Conditional use site plan. We have aligned the Fairview access drive with Avest lane in compliance with ACHD standards as shown on the plat and the CU site plan. The preliminary plat map has been stamped and sealed. A five foot wide sidewalk has been added at Fairview Avenue and the investigation of the discovered irrigation pipe continues and appropriate information will be added to the final plat. That would be everything that we have re-submitted. Johnson: Well it sounds to me that what you are doing is trying to comply with our request and you have kind of taken the extra step to do that. You mentioned ACRD in the requirements, do you have their draft copy, I believe their meeting is tomorrow night? Thorton: I do not have it sir. Johnson: I just wondered if you had an opportunity to review that? Thorton: If 1 could defer that sir and respond. tf it is okay I will have Schucks come up and testify. Johnson: All we have is the draft because their meeting is tomorrow. Thorton: I have not reviewed, it I could review it while he is testifying. Meridian Planning & Zo~ Commission October 14, 1997 Page 9 Johnson: Does anyone else have any questions of Mr. Thorton at this point? Borup: I think just probably to reiterate what you said that most of what the plat changes were just complying with the staff comments and requirements. Other than the one you said you did Zook at maybe reorienting the building closer to the road, you didn't comment on that? Thorton: I don't want to because I don't think it would be fair for me to address Schuck's issue there. Borup: That 1 assume we will be talking about later. I think the same comment was on the Econo Lube Building also. Thorton: No it wasn't I don't believe. Smith: Yes it was Thorton: I apologize, I didn't pick that up. We did move our building closer to the street but (inaudible) I do recall Mr. Smith asking us if we could shift the parking to the rear, I don't recall reorienting the building itself, moving it closer to the street and then parking entirely in the rear. Borup: It looks like your building design and traffic flow does have a little more problem doing that. Thorton: From our operational standpoint we much prefer to have the stacking out front. One of the main reasons we do that is we, the parking for the handicapped is out front as they pull up we can get them into the facility without much difficulty. That helps us there. We also like the public view that there is activity there, I am not sure that is a real concern to you but it is to us from an operation standpoint. Johnson: Very good anyone else? Bill Geyer, 500 West Idaho, #265, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Geyer: I represent the Schrandt family limited partnership which owns the D and B facility mainly to the west of the proposed application. I am really here just as a matter of clarification for us because we have been in the process of negotiating back and forth with these folks for several months on swapping an ingress easement across our property with some property they have in the back. It would be the one in the front there that they are showing on the west property line right in there. My question is, is that ingress egress point something that is a condition of their approval for the development or not? I know that you saw me here before when we were processing Hollywood entertainment deal and we had to do a lot of ingress egress work in order to keep ACRD happy and also Shari. So I would just like some clarification there. Meridian Planning & Zo~ Commission October 14, 1997 Page 10 Borup: I don't know if I am (inaudible) but I believe that most of that has come from ACHD and then it makes a lot of sense to me. If you have cars wanting to go from one business to the other and not have to go back out on Fairview. I think the only reason that D & B, again I am speculating but I would think if D & B was going in now that they would require an easement there as part of your condition. So the fact that you don't already have one in place because they won't enforcing at that time probably not anticipating the growth along Fairview which I don't know (inaudible) could have anticipated that. I think it is something, I think it is going to be (inaudible) especially on the strip development along the road like that. (Inaudible) Smith: The question in my mind, does it say that the cross access easement has to be at this specified location between the two properties or can it shift back farther on the lot? I am just making a statement that I don't know that it does specify that it has to be in this particular location. Borup: I don't think ACHD has some real specfics on that. Johnson: Well their comment #7 on that draft I believe addresses that easement. It is not specific to the location. Borup: Again to be useful 1 think it needs to be in the front of the project not out back. Johnson: But that is really their call. Geyer: Chairman Johnson, I hadn't seen this prior to walking up here tonight but I think it answers the question. Johnson: I think it does answer all your questions regarding that. Borup: So with the access egress at the location specified you are going to be needed to do some removing of (Inaudible) I noticed you have concrete poured there, you have a pretty permanent. Geyer: Welf you have a good eye for it, we have had representatives of these folk walking with our store manager there and it is a very expensive proposition. Shifting everything down, I don't know 25 or 30 feet that we are going to have to do, but that is all part of the ongoing I guess business negotiation between us. Borup: Well that is what it looked like to me that was going to have to be moved unless the egress was behind Geyer: I don't think it would work very well for them, you are absolutely right. At least a couple three of those things will have to be removed. Meridian Planning & Zor~ Commission October 14, 1997 Page 11 Borup: But again if it is any consolation probably if it was in now you would have to have some spot in there for future egress anyway. Geyer: We understand, thank you. Johnson: Anyone else that would like to address this application? Glen Buday, 645 East Missouri, Phoenix, AZ, was sworn by the City Attorney. Buday: Well thank you for the opportunity again coming before the Planning Commission to help illustrate what our intent is on this parcel. I did, I think you might have a copy of this, it is called the narrative for building orientation, that might be a part of your notes. I wanted to mention is we did request, take a very careful look at orientating this building as requested. I think there were a couple of scenarios, one was to move the Schucks building closer to Fairview Avenue. And by moving it up probably around 65 to 70 feet would just create one driveway in front of Schucks so it would eliminate (inaudible). One method was to be able to move the building so that the front of the building would be in this location over here which would create a driveway, parking and parking in front of the store. We looked at that very carefully and our intent in locating our building and orienting our building is to have the building face the front of any main street. So this would take care of that issue, we would be facing the main street which is Fairview. But the thing that would be a detriment to us is to have the rest of the parking because w2 require right around 35 to 40 parking stalls. The rest of the parking would be behind the site. Our customers would have to carry all their oil or their batteries or parts behind the building. It would also create a situation where half the parking would be in front and the other half would be in the back and that would not be an ideal situation for us. So we took another look which was recommended at our last meeting was take the building and rotate it 90 degrees. What that would do is get parking over here, the front of the building here and the same amount of parking in this area. Then we would also have some parking in the back. I listed some objections to doing that and again we carefully looked at it. We had our real estate director, we had our construction director, we had myself and another corporate architect take a look at this at a staff meeting. We looked at it, we drew some sketches, ~ tried to evaluate it so that we could in fact orient the building the way you suggested it. But there were some real negatives in that regard. I will just go through them, item #1 mentions that the building entrance would be facing the rear of the Econo Lube. The door, the canopy, the signage, everything would be facing and not facing the road. So that just wouldn't work. The majority of our customers would have to drive from here to that point or around the back. So again we are almost at a 50/50 situation where our parking is behind the building or around the building. We also looked at and by doing that we also lost one parking stall. The rear of the building if we were to tum it would face D & B Supply and would face the west bound traffic or sorry the east bound traffic on Fairview. We didn't want to create that situation either because it is an attractive looking neighborhood as it is so we really don't want the back of the building facing another user. The side of our building then would be a 70 foot when you have drain gutters and no windows and it Meridian Planning & Zo~ Commission October 14, 1997 Page 12 wouldn't bee too attractive to have the side of our building facing the main street. Customers would have a tendency to parking along the side of the building because they would come in first rather than the front. The other thing, item 7 we would be moving the building about 64 feet closer to the front by which possibly blocking the view of D & B Supply and creating sort of a crowded look rather than an open look and that wouldn't work. We took at look at reciprocal access ways was mentioned just a little while ago of creating an access point right in this area. If we were to move the building and tum it this way then the access from D & B or anyone else who wants to shop in this area the direct access would be directly in front of the building The way it is set up now we would be happy to have common access easement in this area. It wouldn't be in front of the building it would still allow people to maneuver in this area a little more safely than just having one drive per access for here and here both. So for those reasons we elected to keep the building where it is. For the main reasons we want to have the building face the front of the street and we need to have our parking accessible for the customers accessible to the store and not parking around behind it. Another condition we looked at is having this look as a complete development. If we were to move both the buildings up forward in our opinion it vwuld look as though w+e had possibly two or three separate developments rather than one development. The one development being D & B Supply as well as Schucks Auto and Econo Lube. I feel that if we put this the way it is set up now we would leave the exposure for D & B we would also create a nice cross way easement into D & B which would possibly because of the way D & B's parking is laid out create even more landscaping along Fairview Avenue. In fact in some areas it could even be deeper. So rather than kind of look like more of a chopped up look in my opinion 1 think if we were to leave it that way with D & B the way it is located it would look like a master plan development rather than three separate parcels. So with that I am open to any questions you might have. Johnson: Any questions from the Commissioners? Smith: Who wrote the narrative for building orientation? Buday: I did. (Inaudible) Smith: It is not signed, there is no signature on it. Buday: Item #4 says would face west bound traffic, it should be east bound traffic. Smith: The second question I had and then I am going to defer the rest of my questions, and give Commissioner Borup a chance to speak. What dictated the Econo Lube N'Tune and the Schucks building being, one being east and one being west. What kept them from being sited the other way on the site in relationship to Fairview Avenue? Buday: Nothing to my knowledge other than it laid out that way and I think when we first presented it, can you shed light on that? Meridian Planning & Zor~ Commission October 14, 1997 Page 13 (Inaudible) Smith: I would rather not forward with any other comments until we kind of get an idea of what dictated (inaudible) one being on parcel one and one being on parcel 2 as opposed to them being flip flopped. Johnson: Let's move it along, Dennis Thorton you have a comment regarding that question from Commissioner Smith. Thorton: It was really a function of timing. Schucks came upon the site before we did and because of the constraint of the seller want to sell the entire parcel and not part of it we were willing to go forward with the acquisition and then split it up. It was an agreement between Schucks and myself and Econo Lube N'Tune that we would maintain their position next to D & B Supply. Hopefully that answers your question, it may not be a right answer but that is the honest answer. I would add a couple of things as to the issue of moving the parking into the rear. I think to a certain extent we had some security issues there that I don't think have been mentioned. By moving the buildings forward having the parking in the rear of the structure not so much us because we are Gosed at night. But I think Schucks is open a little later in the evening. It is dark, you wou-d have people walking behind the building. I think having it in the front and the lighting in the front, I think you have some safety issues as well. I would again go along with Mr. Buday that the uniformity of the these locations and proximity to D i3< B make it much more presentable. I drove up and down Fairview today and I looked at sites that were Gose to the street. I looked at sites that were far from the street. I really think the presentation of the landscaping and the maintaining of the facilities was more important than the proximity to the street. That is my own personal opinion. Any other questions? Johnson: Your questions for Mr. Thorton or Mr. Buday? Your follow up questions? Smith: Maybe just a comment, I think discussion regarding the proximity to the street has nothing to do with getting it close to the street versus far away from the street. It has to do with getting the parking off the street in the rear of the building. That is the driving factor behind this. It is not how close you get to the street. Thorton: You asked me to address the ACRD, I am probably killing that, memorandum and I have reviewed it. These site speck requirements have been incorporated into our plan. So we don't have any difficulties with those requirements. Johnson: Any other questions? Borup: Mr. Chairman, 1 guess I am beginning to wonder how pertinent they are all at this point. That is pertaining to the narrative. I think really what the applicant is trying to say or at least what I gain from this is they have decided on a building and that is what they want to do and they decided that is what is best for them. Meridian Planning & Zo~ Commission October 14, 1997 Page 14 Buday: Can I comment on that Borup: One thing would have answered three fourths of your questions and that is a different building design. I am not talking something radically different I am talking a building the same design that you have on Ustick near Five Mile. That particular building has a comer entrance with the windows down both sides, kind of a dual frontage and that would answer a majority of your questions we were talking about orienting and not wanting the front face and (End of Tape) Thorton: That was a concern too a safety concern for all parts. Borup: I had some notes on some of the other but I don't think it would serve any purpose to make any other comments at this point. So 1 have none. MacCoy: I have one, just a comment working the other way because I looked at the same thing (inaudible) and one of the things I will give you cxedit for because that is what (inaudible) was that fad that trying to get the parking where we wanted it was going to create a problem for you. But I like the idea about the securities (inaudible) the very heavy point of my view point in that you did take consideration for your customers on the (inaudible) and I thought that after doing that study 1 went back to what you had come up with. I do share Mr. Smith's and Mr. Borup's comments on this though. It is pretty well uniform in our view point on this. Johnson: Any further comments? Smith: Yes, I would like to take exception to one of your statements earlier about the floor plan and the fad that the floor plan is designed how it is and that is just the way it works. Well you are going to have to, I am going to have to apologize because this is not how 1 was trained to do design work. This is just not good design, this whole site is bad design. That is my opinion, you stated your opinion and 1 am giving you my opinion. You have a huge raw piece of ground here, you have two building owners who are in very cooperative very able very capable to work together and to end up with what we have here I think is a substandard approach. It is a substandard solution. I don't think it addresses the site specific issues that are specific to this site. I think that this just amplifies the problems with cookie cutter design, cookie cutter architecture that we can (inaudible) and plop it on any site anywhere in Boise anywhere in the United Stated and expel it to work. It doesn't address the concerns that were brought up by myself or the other commissioners at the last meeting. That is to avoid the typical strip development that we get up and down Fairview Avenue. I don't think that this cross access easement here is given that is exactly where it has to go on this property line. I think it can be slid anywhere up and down there and you can still get cross access between these sites. We have another agenda item on the agenda tonight which is the property right next to yours and they have a cross access agreement with your site and it is going to be in the same location. We may as well just pave another swath of asphalt Meridian Planning & Zo~ Commission • October 14, 1997 Page 15 down outside of Fairview and say this is where it is going to be because it is going to be all the way down to where the City limits meet with Boise. We are going to end up, nobody is going to be able to tell where Boise stops and Meridian starts because everything on Fairview is going to look exactly the same as it does today. Just strip development, no creative design solutions done to addressing any siting issues or building design. And I am not even going to get into the building design. But just from a site planning standpoint I am very disappointed. 1 have to state that I strongly disagree with the statement that reorientation would be inferior to the site plan that was presented at the meeting. I strongly disagree with that statement. I don't know that just tuming the building 90 degrees is going to solve it. Obviously it doesn't work but more important than that to me is that it doesn't work with the concerns and the things that I was trying to solve with it. I just think that with some creativity we could have had a solution here that worked for you and it worked for the Commission. But I just can't support it the way it is now. I am going to have to go on record stating that and just to finish up and I am going to shut up. But, we also talked the last meeting about pole mounted signs versus monument signs. The statement that it would be nice even though you are not required to do so to kind of set a precedent for development along Fairview and come up with some kind of collective agreement between yourselves and Econo Lube and develop some kind of a monument sign so vue don't end up with these big pole mounted signs. You have signs plastered all over the building here. 1 don't, to me I don't know that you even need a pole mounted sign in addition to the signage you have on the building. If you have a pole mounted sign or a monument do you need the signage on the building too the size that it is. There is signs on two sides of the building I don't know if it is on the other end of the building or not I assume it is. On the Schucks anyway. 1 don't know how we could have more signage on these projects than we do now. There is going to be, I am not impressed with the signage package as presented either and I can't support that either. Thorton: Mr. Smith, I understand your concern and I can feel it I really can, with all due respect to you and the rest of the Commissioners we did try, we tried very hard to get it to work. And it isn't the best way to do it you are absolutely right. If we had more property if we had this and that it would work out better. We tried to take what we were given and what I know that the Corporate Board for CSK Auto would approve and that we could go on and build here and have it built by, have it closed by the end of December and go ahead and build and have it built in about two months. So we are trying everything possible to make that work. But with what vue had to vwrk with this is what we feel our best plan is. If you have another way that we could present this I would be happy to take a look at it. But by moving the building up it doesn't work because our parking again is in the back. And tuming the building East doesn't work because the front of it doesn't face the street and I can't go and redesign the building because it becomes an economic issue, we have a certain budge to work in, a certain amount of money we can spend for the property, a certain amount of money we can spend for the building. All of this stuff goes back to our finance Committee it goes to a Bo~~rd of Directors and it is all voted on. We have to be within a certain amount of monies per square foot. So to go back and change it and I understand your concern and I think if I Meridian Planning & Zo~j Commission October 14, 1997 Page 16 was in your position I would want the ver best for your community but I am trying to give you the best. If the signage is a problem we would be happy to go ahead and look at a monument sign. I think we can work something out. I want to build here, we want to be here vve want to be a part of the community. Again wB are desperately trying to fulfill the needs of the community but given the restraints that I have this is the best I come up with. Again vue would be happy to take a look at a monument sign if you don't want two pole signs up there and try to work with the landscaping. When we have the cross way easements there will be a little jog in the drive it is not going to be a straight drive because our parking along Fairview doesn't line up with the parking by D & B Supply. There will be a little curve in there and it will give you probably another 30 or 40 feet of depth of landscaping. I am willing to work with you, but my hands are tied in certain respects. That is where I am at. If there are any other questions? Johnson: Dces anyone from the public, anyone else out there that wants to address the Commission on this application? Any further comments before 1 Gose the public hearing? I will close the public hearing at this time. This public hearing was on the conditional use permit for construction of Econo Lube n'Tune automobile maintenance. What is your pleasure, what would you like to do. MacCoy: Mr. Chairman, the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts and approves these findings of fact of fact and conclusions of law. Johnson: What we need to do is have findings of fact and contusions of law prepared on this. Borup: I believe we do have preliminaries don't we? MacCoy: Yes we do. Johnson: We have preliminary findings prepared Crookston: Mr. Chairman, you have preliminary findings on both the annexation and zoning and the conditional use permit in one document. Johnson: So the question is what action to do you want to take on those preliminary findings of fact and conclusions of law. 1 didn't mean to intemapt you Commissioner MacCoy if you started something. Borup: So we are back to item 3? Johnson: Well w•e have one document here to deal with at this point. We have had the public hearing on the conditional use permit, we have a document that incorporates findings of fact on both the annexation and zoning and conditional use permit. Meridian P-anning & Zor~j Commission October 14, 1997 Page 17 Borup: I know Commissioner Smith, I don't think necessarily would agree with this. This still has to go to City Council and I don't know if it is true in all situations but I am not sure how much City Council pays attention to what we do here anyway. Essentially the whole process is gone through again. I don't think they read all the minutes that thoroughly that they (inaudible) Johnson: We have to assume they do. Borup: Maybe it just (inaudible) I think that is the approach we have been taking. Johnson: A follow up on what you are saying, they do put a lot of credence and a lot of stock on what we recommend and what we gather here as testimony in these meetings. In most cases they follow our recommendations they don't always but in this case they could make an exception. Borup: The new testimony that has just been given is going to be in the minutes because they are going to have the opportunity (inaudible0 Johnson: A lot of that is clarification material it is in response to our questions a lot of it is. Borup: My thoughts pertaining to the siting issue is, I don't know I have mixed thoughts. But pertaining to some stuff Commissioner Smith had brought up I think, I don't know where you turn it around. There are a lot of things already established there along Fairview. I think what they are proposing is consistent with what is next door to them. I guess later on we will see if it is consistent with what is going to the east. Mr. Thorton made a comment that would hold a lot of credence with me. He mentioned that one of the things that could make a big difference (inaudible) is not necessarily how much parking there is in front of it but the landscaping that goes with it. I would agree with that. I know that a lot of that, they have a landscaping plan, but a lot of that is still worked out with staff. But that may be an area to give some encouragement to is a top notch job on the landscaping that can make a difference on how the front of a building is perceived. With all of that I don't feel that it would serve any purpose to have new findings on this. I would be in favor of proceeding ahead if at the very least maybe we need to make an amendment to the findings we have (Inaudible). Johnson: Are we ready for a motion? Borup: I would like to ask Commissioner Smith if he feels he would like to add an amendment to the findings we have or would you like to express your opinion on the voting, I mean wait until the vote? Smith: I think in'egardless of how I feet about any of this I think the findings of fact need to be amended to incorporate tonight's testimony. I can certainly understand the applicant's budgetary constraints that they have to deal with but I also find it unfortunate Meridian Planning & Zor~ Commission • October 14, 1997 Page 18 not only on this project but on innumerable projects that means that we as the public that is what we have to live with. I honestly don't feel that good design has to cost anymore than bad design, I have believed that for a number of years. I really don't know what to do other than to voice my position on it by how I vote. So I am not going to be the one that makes a motion to move the thing forward. I guess that is all I am going to editorialize on that. MacCoy: I will make one comment, unfortunately I have the same problem you have Mr. Smith from the standpoint I wasn't trained either along this line and if I had been given the change to redesign I would have done something different. But we are at a point in our discussion this evening that we are going to have to go with what is given to us by the applicant. Not that (inaudible). We are not in the business of telling them how to design everything. Smith: I think that is what is so frustrating is that I was trained to design and I am not getting paid to do it in this particular situation but I know I can just see potential here and that is what is frustrating to me. MacCoy: Agreed Borup: Question of counsel, what is the best way to incorporate can we just say incorporate testimony into the findings, what is the best way to handle that? Crookston: You can incorporate the testimony that was given tonight into the can-ent findings of fact and conclusions of law. Or you could direct the City Attorney staff to change the findings and separate them into a set for the annexation and zoning and a set for the conditional use permit. However to do that you would still have to have another meeting on it so that you could review them and adopt them separately. But you could adopt the testimony and just have it inserted into these findings of fact and approve them tonight and they would be modified but you would have the approval of the findings of fact as being modified. I do not recommend that, I recommend if you desire to have the findings of fact and conclusions of law bifurcated between each applications and incorporate the testimony that was given tonight particularly for the conditional use permit. I think you are much better off to direct us to separate them into two sets of findings of fact and contusions of law and act on them at a subsequent meeting. Borup: I would agree that would be a cleaner maybe more proper way to do things but I don't know that the results would be any different. If it is still going to come to the same results I don't know why the applicant needs to wait another month. So somebody needs to, can we get a stab at moving this along. Mr. Chairman I move the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts and approves these findings of fact and conclusions of law, modifying them to include the testimony giver, tonight on this application. Meridian Planning & Zon• Commission October 14, 1997 Page 19 Nelson: Second Johnson: We have a motion and a second, any further discussion? Roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: MacCoy -Yea, Smith -Nay, Nelson, Yea, Borup -Yea MOTION CARRIED: 3 Yea, 1 Nay Borup: Mr. Chairman, I move the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian hereby decides that the property set forth in the application should be approved for annexation, zoning and issuing a conditional use permit under the conditions set forth in these findings of fact and these amended findings of fact and conclusions of law. That if the applicant is not agreeable with these findings, amended findings of fact and conclusions is not agreeable with entering into a development the property should not be annexed. There shall be no development or use whatsoever of the property set forth in the application being used for anything other than a planned commercial development for retail if the annexed zoned general retail and service commercial. Such is a (inaudible) prior to commencement of construction. Nelson: Second Johnson: All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: 1 Nay, 3 Yea Johnson: Now to carry on this confusion, item 3, do we have to revisit that. Crookston: You just need to have a vote on it. What you acted on were the findings of fact and conclusions of law as they pertained to the conditional use permit. Johnson: Lets revisit No. 3 then, findings of fact and conclusions of law with respect to the annexation and zoning of the 8.5 acres. It is C-G and R-2 Borup: My motion was for annexation. Johnson: I thought we incorporated that in there. Borup: My motion included (inaudible) Johnson: Then I would say we have done that, would you agree Mr. Crookston? Crookston: I would Johnson: At this point we need to do item 4 Meridian Planning & Zor~ Commission October 14, 1997 Page 20 ITEM #4: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY BY ECONO LOBE N'TUNE INC. -EAST OF FAIRVIEW; TABLED SEPTEMBER 9, 1997: PLAT FOR ECONO LOBE SUBDIVISION LOCUST GROVE, SOUTH SIDE OF E. Johnson: Any discussion? Would anyone like to make a motion? Borup: The plat is pretty cut and dry (inaudible) I don't think we really had any trouble or discussion on the plat. Smith: The only thing I would have to say about the plat would just be, it would just, the only reason I would oppose it is just because the flexibility of being able to address same of the site planning issues that have been brought up earlier. So that is the reason I would have an exception to it. Johnson: Anyone else? MacCoy: I agree with Mr. Smith. Borup: Mr. Chairman, I move that we approve the preliminary plat. Nelson: Second Johnson: We have a motion and a second to approve the preliminary plat, all those in favor? MOTION CARRIED: 2 Yea, 2 Nay, Tie Breaker Vote -Yea ITEM #6: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR APRELIMINARY/FINAL PLAT FOR RAMA SUBDIVISION BY B-II LLC -INTERSECTION OF MERIDIAN ROAD AND CENTRAL VALLEY DRIVE: Johnson: At this time I will open the public hearing and invite the applicant or the applicant's representative to address the Commission. Mark Krizenbeck, 3959 Muldoon Ptace, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney. Krizenbeck: We requested this little plat in the interim because Nahas is doing a full development there and we want to build another motel on the existing site. We can't do it fast enough if we have to wait for Mr. Nahas to do his subdivision because he can't tell us when he is actually going to get it done. It may be as long as he has tried to get the shopping center there again. So we just requested this existing plan so we could proceed with plan specification and try to start construction on the new motel. We have received the City's comments and we really only take exception to one of them. Johnson: Have you responded to those in writing as stated there? Meridian Planning & Zon,Commission October 14, 1997 Page 21 Krizenbeck: Yes we have Johnson: Do you have them in your packet anyone, I haven't seen them. KrizenbecK: Hubble Engineering answered the questions and were suppose to deliver them. Johnson: Do you have a copy with you? Anyway is this your only copy? Krizenbeck: 1 have one. Johnson: If you want to go ahead and proceed with your comments regarding (inaudible) Krizenbeck: The design on the motel is not complete, we are looking at adding 64 units. It is real close so we can get that full number of parking places on the site or not and still meet all of the requirements of the industrial park. If we can't we will apply for a variance. The motel has a lot of airport business we have a phone in the airport (inaudible) we have two vans we send people to the airport and pick people up. And take them where they need to go in the morning. We also have a lot of trucking business whereby we pick people up over at Yellow Freight and additionally people don't come to work until 9:30 and by that time there are only one or two people that come to work at 7:00. There is a 24 hour desk and at 9:30 the maids come in. By that time a lot of people have already left. Here again we are not saying we can't get the parking, the design is not done but the last time vre looked vve have room to add a few more but I am not sure how many we can get. Johnson: Is there any more to your verbal presentation? Any questions at this point from the Commissioners? MacCoy: Well I am wondering if your new addition is going to look like the present addition? Krizenbeck: It will be a little bit different? MacCoy: It is not going to match? Krizenbeck: It will be vinyl siding, but it has more architectural features. Nahas has already looked at the preliminary thing and he likes it and we have to go through their design standards for the thing. We also have to probably present it to the City and get it approved there. So we will go through all of these things and we will get it so everybody likes it. MacCoy: We don't have any elevations or anything of that nature in our packets? Meridian Planning & Zort~ Commission October 14, 1997 Page 22 Krizenbeck: All we did was show him some pictures that the franchisers have about what the motels look like. We are looking at doing amicro-tel which is a new franchise (Inaudible). It may end up being another kind. This is not really, we didn't come prepared to do design review or anything on this, we are just trying to get this so we can get to that stage. Smith: This application is just for a preliminary plat, we have to go through another conditional use permit to review the design of the building. Krizenbeck: (inaudible) Johnson: Not if it is already zoned we don't (Inaudible) Smith: (Inaudible) Johnson: No, it would be handled from that point on by the Building Department. It is already zoned. MacCoy: Are you going to have a restaurant in this place? KrizenbecK: No MacCoy: Do you normally have any restaurants? Krizenbeck: no MacCoy: What about a conference room of any nature? Krizenbeck: This one doesn't have a conference room I don't believe, just rooms. MacCoy: That is too bad I would like to see a (inaudible) Johnson: Any other questions on the plat? Borup: Where does the existing subdivision end right now at Lot 9? You are making a new subdivision out of a lot that is in an existing subdivision, is the other are unplatted at this time? Lonnie Fox, 8440 Middleland Drive, Boise, was swum by the City Attorney. Fox: The replat is dividing lot 6, Block 4 of Central Valley Corporate Park No. 3. We have divided the lot for purposes of financing for Mr. Krizenbeck. The reason we have shown these lots this way as that he has a cross access agreement with Lot 8. The old existing lot 7 is a drainage lot that will stay. The new lot #8 will be a drainage lot as well, Meridian Planning & Zon•Commission October 14, 1997 Page 23 I am sorry Lot #11 will be a drainage lot for Central Valley Corporate Park No. 6 which will be submitted for your, we will be applying for that next week. Smith: So when you say drainage lot you mean it is going to be unbuildable? Fox: Yes Borup: So the purpose here was you needed more land for the other motel building but you did not need a whole lot. Fox: Correct, Borup: So you are doing a resubdivision taking just the land you need (inaudible) going into drainage which will again be somewhat incorporated into his next phase. Fox: I don't think we had anything on the existing subdivision that is why there was a little bit of confusion (inaudible) Smith: Mr. Chairman, 1 was a little confused on the access, there is a 30 foot wide access easement between lots 11 and 10 and then the egress from the site on Lot 9 on the south side of the lot was a drive right adjacent to that. Would those be adjoined and combined into one drive when the new motel gets constructed? (Inaudible) this is the existing drive coming out of the hotel this way, this is the access easement here which we would end up with two drive ways here right next to each other. (End of Tape) Krizenbeck: (Inaudible) tech review they told us we had to use the same driveway, we can't put a new one. So that will be used for landscaping and a little bit of parking with the red that you have got marked in them. That 20 foot easement there is really Nahas's drainage easement to get water into this big retention pond. Smith: So it shouldn't be labeled an access easement. Krizenbeck: I don't know if it is labeled an access Smith: It says 30 foot access easement. Krizenbeck: I think it is an access for the water as far as I can tell. It is a drainage easement and they have told us they have a big drainage pipe going in there. Part of our conditions with the Nahas' was that we couldn't do anything there until they put their drain pipe in. Smith: Well access easement implies site access. Meridian Planning & Zon•Commission S October 14, 1997 Page 24 Krizenbeck: We are using the same driveway that is already there. Smith: That was part of my concem and then my other concern now is in how this process all comes together is we seem to be losing a significant amount of parking spaces here going from 71 required down to 50. Not knowing that the building department is going review for (inaudible) the zoning requirements for the number of spaces. I am just concerned that we get adequate parking on this parcel. I don't think that a deviation of about 25% is an acceptable number to reduce (inaudible). Krizenbeck: We are not deviating that much. Smith: Well 71 were required, we are already as the site is designed now we have 62, proposed resubdivision will reduce this number to 50. Krizenbeck: I think at the time the motel was built the number of parking places or required was the number of rooms plus one so that was 62. That is the existing Best Western, the existing Best Western the way that we have the layout we will still have 62 parking places. We are doing a cross parking easement. Smith: So those 12 parking spaces on lot 10 will remain? Krizenbeck: Right, and then the way the architect has the preliminary thing laid out he has got 65 for the 64 rooms. He has got a plan that shows that. Then we, he hasn't really tweaked it yet, we might be able to get more in it. If we can't we might have to build less rooms. If we can't get a variance when it comes time we will have to build less rooms to get the parking. We realize that we have to have enough parking to accommodate our customers. It doesn't do us any good to not have the parking because people won't come. Borup: You are saying there is going to be an additional 65 spaces in the preliminary plat at this point. Krizenbeck: That is on top of the (Inaudible) that is what she did because of the drawing the line it put them on the other piece of property because of the way the subdivision went. It was just subdivided so we could get a loan on two pieces of property basically. Smith: Mr. Chairman, I have a question, what is the best, do we normally review siting and parking and all of that on a plat application? Johnson: I don't like the word normal because nothing is normal around here. But normally we would have an annexation and zoning and review like we did with Econo Lube tonight where we would have elevation or site and everything. But they are already, this property is already annexed and zoned and gone through that process. All they are doing is asking us for the preliminary plat at this point. The opportunity for us to have them adhere to our ordinances in terms of number of parking spaces and all of Meridian Planning & Zor~ Commission October 14, 1997 Page 25 that now rests with the building department because there is no design review committee in the City of Meridian. So all they have to do is comply with the ordinances from this point on because that property is already zoned, and their request to put the building there complies with the zoning. Smith: Okay, then am I to understand then that the building department will review for compliance with the number of parking spaces. Johnson: Yes Smith: And if they did deviate from that then they would have to apply for a variance before going through the Building Department. Johnson: Yes, with the City Council. Variances are addressed by the City Council not by Planning and Zoning. Smith: Should we have had a footprint and a parking layout on this application? Johnson: Would that have been helpful is that the question? Smith: Yes Johnson: Yes, but we don't have it and it is not really required at this point Smith: I am just trying to learn the steps here. Johnson: Sure, it would be very helpful to us if we had that. This is what leads to design and review boards, this very thing. Because you are shooting in the dark really as to what kind of building you are going to end up with. Any further questions or comments? Thank you both, anyone from the public that would tike to address this application? Any further comments before I close this public hearing? Hearing and seeing no one then t will close this public hearing at this time. We need to pass a recommendation onto City Council if that is your pleasure to approve or not to approve. Smith: I don't know how the other Commissioners feel about this but I would feel a lot better if we had some more information on how this parcel is going to be developed. I am going to make a motion that we ask the City Attorney to draw up findings of fact and conclusions of law on this Johnson: We don't have that on preliminary plats. Smith: Then I would like to make a motion that we forward this to the City Council for their review and approval and ask that the applicant provide at a minimum a building site plan and elevation showing the architectural character of the buildings for the City Council's review. Meridian Planning & Zort` Commission October 14, 1997 Page 26 Borup: Second Johnson: We have a motion and a second, any further discussion? I think our City Engineer has a comment? Eng. Smith: Mr. Chairman, I just make a comment from my stand point and my opinion that this is an application for a preliminary plat and that is all it is. As you pointed out there is no conditional use permit requirement as I understand it. The construction of this facility is an allowed use within this zone and that the only thing that is going to the Council from this point is a recommendation for approval or denial of the preliminary plat. No different than any other subdivision that is proposed whether it be residential or commercial. Borup: Well I agree with that too, that is the same thought I had. They could have brought this in with not even mentioning the motel say they want to do this subdivision with no other information even needed to be given. Johnson: But we do have a motion and the motion has some stipulations and we have a second, so we need to vote on the motion. So as the motion stands, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #7: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A THEME TYPE SIT DOWN RESTAURANT BY YICK YEE FAMILY CO. - SE CORNER OF FAIRVIEW AVENUE AND LOCUST GROVE: Johnson: I will now open the public hearing and ask the applicant or the applicant's representative Boyd Yee to address the Commission at this time. Boyd Yee, 1811 Mace Road, Eagle, was sworn by the City Attorney. Yee: Well I think you have the package that I brought in, there was some elevations and some pictures and there was the application. In the mean time we have reviewed the comments from the engineers and the planning director and so forth. We don't have any issue with any of the comments that have been provided. Last Friday I met with the tech committee at the Ada County Highway District. They were not privy with this drawing so the only comments that they had on their tech review was that this driveway be 225 feet from Locust Grove which it is that there be 50 feet back up from the parking lot entering Fairview which there is. (Inaudible) there is a signed cross parking easement cross transportation which needs to be filed or recorded before ACRD will have occupancy permit. So those are the only three issues that ACHD had and we don't have any issue with those either. Meridian Planning & Zor~ Commission October 14, 1997 Page 27 Johnson: Thank you Mr. Yee, questions from the Commissioners? MacCoy: I will start off, is your establishment a chain? Yee: It is a relatively new franchise started about 3 or 4 years ago. There is one just finished in Pocatello, there is one being built in Idaho Falls now and I think there are ten of them operating in Utah and Arizona. By next year I understand the folks that are franchising these will have another 15 on board. MacCoy: I recognized the name that is the reason I was wondering. It says here, just curious here, is that American food or are you going to have all kinds of food? Yee: Well the name of the restaurant the franchise is called Wingers and their featured item are buffalo wings either as an appetizer or as a meal entree or as a combination with ribs or as a combination with barbecued chicken and some sandwiches and pasta dishes. MacCoy: Since you have a chain, is your building construction (inaudible) is it is a standard, it is a terminology we use in the business anyway. Is it one that you are following a path in somebody else's place. Yee: Right, obviously when we bought the franchise they also supply you with a (inaudible) drawings and so forth. What we are building is actually a prototype which basically if you look at the elevations depending on how you face the building it could be a north or south elevation for the entry east and west and the backs and so forth are always the way depending on how you site the building. MacCoy: What is your construction? Yee: It will be stick frame, it has kind of, it looks like a trolley car with kind of a unique entry way. The outside is drivet is has some nice furnishings on the inside.. Did you see some pictures? MacCoy: Yes I did, I noticed your ceiling in the place is (inaudible) and your floor probably was picked the same way. Yee: This design is approximately a little over 3000 square foot. The people that franchise this, their intent was to build a restaurant that would work for secondary sites or smaller communities. The thought in mind for the square footage and the construction so forth was that you wouldn't have to pay an arm and a leg like you do in Boise to build a restaurant. I think conceptually what they are trying to do really fits well for the town of Meridian. MacCoy: Yoe have said here this evening and I guess you get the feel that we are concerned even though we don't make that decision that we are concerned about Meridian Planning & Zo~ Commission October 14, 1997 Page 28 signage. You will run into that, the fact that there is no flashing lights. We much prefer to see you do a monument sign versus a pole sign. What do you have on your plans? Yee: I think some of the buildings I have seen do have a pole sign out. But they are done well they are in muted colors, it is kind of a dark green, it is kind of an oval with the word Wingers in it. I think the way we fronted the building whether it is your issue or the City's issue we could probably live without the pole sign. It would be nice to have it, we could work with a monument sign. Whatever the City would like I am sure we will try to accommodate them. MacCoy: It is just my personal feeling that a monument sign really adds class to a place a pole sign, everybody has pole signs and we have problems with it all the time. Yee: You will realize with this site though there is a tum barricade in Fairview, Highway 30 on Fairview and so at times a monument sign may lose its effect because it is at car level and depending where you put it. If you are going from east to east a monument sign may or may not buy you anything because you can't tum at the driveway. MacCoy: 1 am just asking you to take a look at it because you can do various things with a monument sign as well. It is not completely a dead issue. You are in parcel 2 I guess and parcel 1 is going to be a video store of some kind. Is there any tie between the two of you? Yee: No MacCoy: You are a completely separate operation. You have read the staff comments and you have no problem with those and so on. Yee: I think it is a matter of coordination with the fire department and maybe the water department on some issues that we would be doing hand in hand with Hollywood rather than duplicating the two comments. I think we will just have to sit down and coordinate them with Hollywood Video and the separate agencies. MacCoy: I was just concerned with such things as parking lot lighting and glare and the ADA requirements for the handicapped and things of that type which we do spel- out. But some people (inaudible) and they don't understand what we are talking about. Just to underscore some of this stuff for you because we are going to be (inaudible). I am going to pass on for the time being. Johnson: Thank you Malcolm, anyone else? Borup: Maybe just a question for my own benefit, just curious on how you decided on this siting on this plan? You have got your building moved right up, this is a topic that we covered here. I am just wondering, was there a thought process that went through there, it looks real attractive. Meridian Planning & Zo~ Commission October 14, 1997 Page 29 Yee: I don't know if you saw the color rendering for Wingers it has quite a fagade on it and you would like to have as many people see it as possible. (Inaudible) Yee: So obviously we were kind of Johnny come lately and Hollywood Video had been through the process and so forth. So when they sited their building it just kind of said to us to make our front visible by a lot of folks and we had to be up there as near as we could be. Borup: I agree with that, I think the building itself is a good part of your signage when you get Gose to the road like that you don't need a lot of other (Inaudible) Then I had a question for the City Engineer, 1 noticed there was a comment from the water department on this and other applications about water line in Fairview, is that something they felt was necessary. Staff said the water would come in from Locust Grove, I just wondered why the water department was thinking different. Is he looking down the road, that road was just paved. Eng. Smith: Mr. Borup, we have been trying to establish a water line on each side of Fairview because of the width of the road to eliminate crossings of Fairview for service lines. We have some properties to the east of this project that have got segments of water line and vve are trying to get those water lines connected. Borup: So you are saying the water department is desirous of having a new water line put down Fairview? Eng. Smith: Down Fairview on the sides of Fairview. Borup: Isn't that what he said, didn't I read that right? Eng. Smith: Was that a comment from the Water Superintendent? Borup: Yes, that was from the Water Superintendent. Shari said that the water would come in from Locust Grove I believe or Bruce probably, they had combined comments. Eng. Smith: I talked to the Public Works folks about bringing it in from Locust Grove, we hadn't made any comments about Fairview. Borup: That is Bruce's specific comment, he says water service shall be (inaudible) Locust Grove . 1 guess I was just curious about a new line down, he mentioned it in other applications here too. Was that a long term desire of the water department? Eng. Smith: I guess it has been & project to the west of this property that we maintain some water lines on the south side of Fairview in order to provide service. Where we Meridian Planning & Zoni~ommission October 14, 1997 Page 30 have been able to come into this project and into Wilson Lane off of Locust Grove. It hasn't been a serious of situation of providing an adequate service to the properties that are developing. When the properties to the east of D & B develop there will need to be loop of water line come back out to Fairview and then we get back into Fairview again as far as the supply con'idor. I don't think it is a serious situation at all with this project with Wingers. Borup: Well I wouldn't think so with their proximity to Locust Grove, I was just looking at the overall future development. I was more somewhat curious about he had mentioned that in others too. Yee: Well when you bring it up it is kind of a comment that ACRD made too. They are a little reluctant. I think Fairview is one of those roads that has been paved within the last five years and I have talked to Intermountain Gas and they have said that they don't have the ability to cut into Fairview but they would find (inaudible) they don't think that ACHD is going to let them cut into Fairview. So you may have the same problem here in trying to run a water line if you are outside the easement of cutting into Fairview. Borup: That was my thought also. Johnson: Anyone else? Smith: Mr. Chairman, I don't mean to be nit picky but I am going to be anyway. The pictures show kind of a corner entry and what the plan depicts is a center entry building. (Inaudible) But we are not going to have a ramp with railings? Yee: No, I think that was because when they shot the elevations and so forth and for Mr. MacCoy's benefit 1 think that was an ADA standard that they had to ramp up for wheel chairs because of the elevation of the building. It was (inaudible) this will not be ramped up. Smith: Towards the top at the parapet, this is all drivet? Yee: No I think that is the white tile. Smith: I would like to see actual elevations with heights and materials called out on them being submitted for the City Council when they review it. Yee: Are they on the elevations that I submitted? Smith: All we have is this picture, Yee: I did submit the elevations and the floor plan and everything right out of the plans out of the prototype. The call outs are on those elevations. Meridian Planning & Zor. Commission October 14, 1997 Page 31 Smith: Then, regarding the sign, your comment about coming from the east, west on Fairview and being able to see a sign and pull into this driveway. There is an island or a barrier there that vwuld prevent you from fuming left into this drive. So you would have to go up to Locust Grove and tum south on Locust Grove anyway and come in from the rear. But I think just the nature of the way the building was designed, the sign on the building is a very predominant element. It looks like to me if these doors, you assume these doors are (inaudible) five feet tall. I think a pole mounted sign or even a monument sign would be fighting this sign on the building and I' don't even know that you would want to spend the money to build another sign. I think this is really all the signage you need. It is pretty predominant. It is a predominant piece of the architecture of the building. I think the materials and the architecture is going to be complimentary to what is being done over at the video store with the colors and so forth so they will work well together. One thing I would suggest is extending your sidewalk out to the sidewalk along Fairview. If somebody is walking up and down the sidewalk or somebody comes over from across the street and sees Wingers over at Fred Meyer they cross Fairview they really don't have any sidewalk access to get to you building. They are going to have to come down the drive, through the parking lot or across your landscape berm. Yee: That is not going to be a problem, we would be more than happy to do that. Smith: I would suggest maybe looking at that. What is the material indicated between the parking lot and building where it says service area? How is that area going to be treated? Yee: That is going to be a sidewalk. Smith: That is all concrete all the way around Yee: You can see our trash area we are going to try to hide it with (inaudible) the trash enclosure should be the same construction of the building. We envisioned hiding the garage with landscaping, you can see little areas for trash. Smith: Well just how those things get banged around you probably want to build those out of masonry and then you would be stuccoing that to match. Yee: We kind of envisioned having like two of those little trash enclosures on wheels and then they are ramped down on this service area. So we physically have to pull them down and pull them down the ramp and then the truck picks them up and (inaudible). Smith: I am not sure I am familiar with that you are referring to. That is the extent of my comments. It is unfortunate that we didn't have the elevations and the floor plans that were submitted. Johnson: Anyone else? Meridian Planning & Zo~j Commission October 14, 1997 Page 32 Bill Geyer, 500 West Idaho, #265, Boise, was swum by the City Attomey. Geyer: I really if I can want to direct this to Mr. Smith. The one requirement that Commissioner Borup brought up about this 8 or 10 inch water line going across Fairview is something that is news to us. We Borup: Let me clarify that, that was not a requirement that was just a recommendation from the water department. The requirement specifically said from Locust Grove I mean the staff comments said it would come from Locust Grove. Geyer: So it is not a requirement of the development to put in the water line along the south side of Fairview? Borup: That is not my understanding that is just something the water department said they would like to see and apparently it is a someday thing more. Geyer: Alright so we don't have to put that in. (Inaudible) Eng. Smith: Not unless they would like to. Geyer: We decline. The only other thing that we wanted to say was on behalf of Dick Schrandt and myself we have been involved with this property now coming on 3'h to 4 years and we have taken a lot of time in trying to develop an overall site plan that will be integrated. In fact we have now twice passed on one of the earlier applicants just down the road wanting to do something just a little bit higher and better use for that comer because we think it is an important intersection in the City of Meridian. We have been willing to bear the financial burden of waiting until that person came along and here he is. We hope that what has been submitted is acceptable and can get approved because we think it is going to be a great use for the City. Johnson: We appreciate your comments thank you. Anyone else that would like to address the Commission on this application? Any further discussion? If not I will close the public hearing at this time. Smith: Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a motion that we ask the City Attorney to draw up findings of fact and conclusions of law for this project. Borup: Second Johnson: We have a motion and a second to have the city Attorney prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Meridian Planning & Zo~ Commission • October 14, 1997 Page 33 ITEM #8: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A SMALL IN-HOME PRESCHOOL BY LORELL ROGERS - 3426 E. FLORENCE DRIVE: Johnson: At this time I will open the public hearing and ask the applicant or the applicant's representative to come forward and be sworn please. Lorell Rogers, 3426 E. Florence Drive, Meridian, was swum by the City Attorney. Rogers: Good Evening, I have prepared some comments that I hope will answer the questions or concerns that you Council members will have and also people in the community. I am requesting a conditional use permit so that I can have an in home preschool which consists of only five children. First of all to tell you about my background I received a Bachelors of Science from Brigham Young University with a degree in Early Childhood Education. I have also spent ten months as a teacher in a day care and preschool facility in Pullman, Washington. Which was last year. The education and actual work experience I have are my evidence that I have competence as a teacher of young children. I believe because of that competence that 1 have something to give a contribution to make to the members of my community. I feel that the in home preschool is the best way that I can do this. For you people on the City Council I would ask that you reference the site plan that was prepared that shows our lot and our house. If you will notice on the east side of the house is the entrance to the preschool. It shows a proposed fence and a gate that we vwuld like to put in before we open the preschool. Secondly my spouse and I have put in many hours of thoughtful preparation for this preschool. We first searched for an area that we knew that we could have one. We planned the design of our house to include a separate room specifically for the preschool with its own entrance which you will see on the east side of the house. It has its own entrance and a half bathroom and a driveway that can accommodate all five cars if all five parents were to arrive at the same time so there would not have to be any street parking. We have planned for the preschool to be in operation only 4 days a week for three hours a day and that would most likely be from 9 am to 12 noon. There will be no preschool in operation on evenings or weekends. It is important to note also that as I mentioned before we will be constructing a fence so that the parents and children can access the preschool through a gate in that fence. Therefore once the children are inside the fence and attending preschool they will either be inside my house or in the fenced backyard. The children will only be outside in the yard for a maximum of 30 minutes. So any noise created by the children should really be minimal. My spouse and I have tried to go through all the proper channels and to follow the policies and procedures required by the City of Meridian. We have tried to do all that we can do at this point to ensure the operation of the preschool will not adversely affect the quite nature of the neighborhood as it is important to us to have open friendly relationships with our neighbors and to be good neighbors to those around us. Finally, I am ready to follow the rules and regulations required that are necessary to obtain a conditional use permit. I did receive a copy of the comments that v~ere made by City officials and local agencies about what would need to be done before it could be opened up for operation. I am willing to comply with that and any others that may be deemed necessary later on. Meridian Planning & Zor~ Commission i October 14, 1997 Page 34 It is my hope that because of these things that 1 will be able to granted a conditional use permit for this purpose. Does the Council have any questions? MacCoy: 1 would like to start it off because of several things. Your fence is what? Rogers: It has to be made out of wood. MacCoy: For what height? Rogers: Six feet MacCoy: And the gate you show on your layout here are those gates lockable? Rogers: They can be if needed, we can make it so they will be locked if needed. It is not constructed yet. MacCoy: 1 just want to make a comment on that because children are pretty good at opening all kinds of things. I think you are best off to make them lockable open to adult only. Rogers: That will be a condition, I have had situations in my previous where we had problems with that. So yes I will be very mindful of that. MacCoy: Are you planning on having any handicapped children at your place? Rogers: No MacCoy: No future plans to bring a handicapped or you are not going to advertise to take handicapped children in other words? Rogers: I do not plan to. MacCoy: I was going to ask about your background. You said you read the report that is good. I like the fact that you did state your time of operation because that bears on the noise factor for your neighbors and everything else. Correct me if I am wrong, you are not going to have any signage? Rogers: It is prevented by the covenants of the subdivision and I plan to comply with covenants in the subdivision so there will be no signage. MacCoy: This home is being built right now? Rogers: It is finished at the time the application was submitted it was still under construction but it is finishad we are living in it. Meridian Planning & Zor~ Commission • October 14, 1997 Page 35 Johnson: Anyone else? Borup: I didn't have any questions other than we received quite a few applications for day care centers and in home, this is the most professional application that I have seen since I have been here. Rogers: Mine technically is not a day care Borup: I realize that but still an in home (inaudible) your application has been very professionally prepared. Rogers: Thank you Smith: I would have to second that. Mr. Chairman I have not so much a question, why are we building residential neighborhood in light industrial zoning. 1 don't understand. Johnson: Because it is permitted, see that big gray spot on the map that is all light industrial and that is where they live. Smith: It doesn't make sense to me. Borup: (Inaudible) and they chose to do it. Johnson: Okay, would anyone else from the public like to come forward at this time? Roy Russell, 477 Renee, Eagle, was sworn by the City Attorney. Russell: I am here to just support Lovell in her application. I work for Holland Realty and we built the house for her. I worked really closely with Ramon Yorgason the developer and he is very much in support of the preschool in his subdivision. I think it is really great that a young professional that has the qualifications and education is willing to take care of our grandchildren in my case and children in some of your cases. It probably is really good because it is not going to create additional traffic. And people in the subdivision can take advantage of the quality of education. I think that there is still openings for one or two more so if any of you have any needs you might contact her before the night is out. Smith: Actually Mr. Chairman, I do have one more question for Lovell. You had mentioned in here that you wanted to care for your own children too would that be in addition to the five children? Rogers: No they will have to be included until they are old enough to enter in public school because by that time they won't even be incuded in it. While my children are that age or younger even while they are babies they will have to be included in the five. Meridian Planning & Zor~ Commission October 14, 1997 Page 36 Johnson: Anyone else? Any further discussion? If not I will close the public hearing at this time. MacCoy: Mr. Chairman, I move we have the City Attorney prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law for this project. Borup: Second Johnson: A motion and a second to have the City Attorney prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #9: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 1.8 ACRES TO C-G BY TOM BEVAN - 2030 W. FAIRVIEW AVENUE: Johnson: I will open the public hearing at this time and ask the applicant to address the Commission. Tom Bevan, 4202 N. Marcliff, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Bevan: Thank you for the opportunity to address the Commission this evening. We have submitted the application and have reviewed the comments that came as conditoins of the application. We agree to all of the findings and all of the comments. Except we do have a little question on item 14, we weren't sure exactly how we could show compliance with that specific item. It said the orientation of the buildings would not appear to lend themselves to very desirable curb appeal, visibility for tenants wishing to locate here. We would look at anything that would come forward about how to change the design or anything like that. I don't exactly know how to show compliance with that except for to say that we are open to any suggestions. It is a small frontage on Fairview so we try to develop the square as a square so it is deeper and not so much on the front of Fairview. (Inaudible) As you can see our ideas are a little bit of a change from what Fairview is now. We don't have the huge stores that both sides of Fairview are trying to develop both sides of Fairview. What we have is smaller retail outlets and we are not really going for large anchor tenants, the big national chains or anything. We are going for more of a regional, perhaps local type retail businesses. We have smaller retail in the front and a little bit larger retail in the back. Some of the suggestions were that from the fire department if we could sprinkle the buildings then we could eliminate the 20 foot fire easement around the outside of it. So I think we are going to try and do something like that. We just got the comments on Friday so being that Monday was a holiday we didn't get a chance to talk too specifically about some of the changes recommended but we didn't see any problems with any of them presented there in the documents. The elevations, as far as elevations go you can see it is (Inaudible) siding. The most similar is if y:.w are familiar with Boise Town Square Mall the two Gap stores, Gap kids and regular Gap they have the drivet and we are trying to do a little bit of a fancier front. We Meridian Planning & Zo~ Commission October 14, 1997 Page 37 are trying to do a bit of a more upscale retail area. It is like a small square based after smaller retail shops. Similar to what the Gap is now, some are the same size, some are a little bit bigger. The outside appearance would look somewhat similar. Now these, this (inaudible) basically what we are trying to do is develop as a said a more of a smaller retail for smaller retailer so the (inaudible). Kind of breaks up the pattern guess you could say on Fairview. The monument sign is what we prefer on the outside on Fairview instead of a pole sign and then we would have signs on the building itself. Johnson: Okay, Tom is that it? Questions from the Commission? Borup: You said that item 14 was the only one you had question on in staff comments? Bevan: Yes, everything else we agree with 100%. Borup: (Inaudible) I was just curious on the comment, it was not staff comment, but the address needed to be changed. I believe that was the fire department. Bevan: If it needs to be changed (inaudible) Borup: I do have a question (End of Tape) Borup: Do you coordinate that with Econo Lube? Bevan: Not yet, we want to do a cross access but we could do it deeper in the lot to break up that as Mr. Smith was saying earlier he didn't want a strip all the way down. We would actually prefer the cross access to be deeper in the lot. So as their stores are deeper they could come right over into our little square there. Borup: The way they have it right now is (inaudible) lined up with theirs where it comes in the middle of your first building, Bevan: We could move that we could do some adjusting. What we are trying to do right now is work on the annexation and zoning. Borup: I am kind of jumping ahead here. Bevan: Then we could answer those concerns Borup: I think you have done a lot of what we have talked about trying to do is orient the buildings closer to the front. Bevan: We can even bri~~g them closer to the building them closer to the building then they are. Meridian Planning & Zo~ Commission • October 14, 1997 Page 38 Borup: Well, all you have is a driveway between them and the berm now. Bevan: Yes Borup: I think you have addressed it, that is why I was curious if there had been any discussion with the others on the cross access (inaudible) Bevan: No sir not yet, but we would do that. Johnson: Anyone else? MacCoy: What about your building construction? Bevan: It would be stick frame with a drivet exterior, stucco type. MacCoy: Your roof is going to be flat? Bevan: It would be sloped and then the water would be into our drainage system. MacCoy: What about colors? Bevan: The colors would be like a gray similar to the Gap store that is there now that is by the Boise Town Square. They have like a gray drivet. We tried to depict it there, that might not be the best way to do that. We can get you samples of the drivet itself (inaudible). MacCoy: I wanted to, plus the fact that you did one of the best jobs yet I have seen on your handicaps. You put your comers and your bigger areas where we need them for the handicap and you used them the right way. And you put them next to (inaudible) so t give you credit for that. Did you say what you are going to have for retail? Bevan: Well we are negotiating with some local retailers but we haven't signed anybody yet. We are trying to do is to stay away from the big names. More of a square, if you are familiar with the European type of square it is more ma and pa type businesses, not ma and pa but smaller businesses. Not to say that there might not be a bigger business like a video store or something come in. But we are not actively going out looking for franchise type businesses. Obviously we have to fill up the development but if we can find local or regional businesses that would be interested in participating in that is what we like. We are trying to change it up a little bit. MacCoy: You did say that you read the staff comments and you had no problem with them. Meridian Planning & Zori~ Commission October 14, 1997 Page 39 Bevan: No problem except item 14, I am not sure, I don't really understand it so I don't know how we can comply with it. I don't know if they didn't like the way it looked from the street or something. But we are open to anything they suggest. We want to have a nice looking development. MacCoy: I suggest you come back in here to staff people and (inaudible). I am sure they had something in mind. Bevan: That is what I was thinking. I just got the documents Friday so I haven't, with the holiday on Monday I didn't get a chance to talk to staff to find out what they meant. We would comply with everything here with the understanding if they understood 14 better we would sure comply with it. I don't know exactly what they are looking for. Borup: I would think what they are saying, a lot of the staff comments were things that specifically need to be complied with and the other things are just comment, more of a personal comment of theirs. Not necessarily a specific requirement because they didn't anything specific. Bevan: That is what I thought, it wasn't specific so I don't know how to comply with it. But we comply with everything we can. Borup: I think they were wanting to put forth their opinion on that. Bevan: And we appreciate that and we would be open to anything they would recommend specifically. MacCoy: I think the best approach is to come in here and see if they do have anything in mind that you can get that cleaned up. The lighting on your property, do you have pole lighting or what? Bevan: Yes, they have a lighting plan, they asked us to coordinate with the Meridian Public Works Department on the lighting plan. That is what we will do we will go with their requirement. We want to have a well lit parking lot obviously and we would go with the recommendations whatever they (inaudible) MacCoy: What I was coming to was the fact that the lighting is a real concern. We wanted it non-glare and didn't create a problem with neighbors and other drivers and so on. So we didn't actually (inaudible) already there. WE want you to be sensitive to that. Bevan: We sure will, we want to have a quality development, we don't want to have glare, something that is real glary anyway, so a softer light. MacCoy: That is all I have Meridian Planning & Zor>~ Commission October 14, 1997 Page 40 Smith: Mr. Chairman, I think my comments are more geared to design issues and site planning things more so than annexation and zoning. But we seem to be clumping these together so maybe I will go forward. Johnson: I think that is a good idea because normally we would incorporate all of this testimony into item 10 as well. Smith: Was the drive location dictated by ACRD, I don't recall any comments? Bevan: No it wasn't spec~cally dictated by them. Smith: I have some issues with the site plan as presented. Borup: ACRD did say they wanted the driveway to align with Dixie Drive. Bevan: Yes they did do that. Smith: The whole site is predominately going to be asphalt. The whole site is predominantly going to be asphalt on this site and way more than it needs to be. I think it is just kind of how the site was perceived to be laid out. Part of the problem I see here is on the west side and east side of the site what we have indicated there are trash collectors and inevitably that is going to look like the back side of the building. It is just - going-to be unattractive. What was submitted the application-was-just a photo of a building which is quite a bid difference for an elevations. I think it is, I can understand your difficulty in being able to respond to item #14. Design is a subjective issue and what would be a good design to me may not be good design to you and vice versa. I think again it is really hard for anybody to say what it is going to look like from the street because vue don't have any elevations that tell us what it is going to look like from any side of the development. But even though a couple of these buildings were gull forward on the site I think the perception from Fairview Avenue as you look at the site is still going to be one of parking because there is so much asphalt on the site. What you are going to see is a couple of buildings here floating in a sea of asphalt. The European square approach and that is, I can see a quad kind of concept starting here but it is all filled up with a parking lot. You are going to have to cross the parking lot to get from one building to the next. Almost seems like to me that it might be better to pulls some retail space up to the front with these two 1200 and 1500 square foot buildings and maybe put them together. One of the things and this is just my education and my background is you are really limiting yourseff to the tenants you will be able to bring into these buildings and if they ever expand or have a need for more square footage they are really going to be pretty limited if they are in one of these three smaller buildings. You really give yourself more flexibility and you tenants and what you can do if your tenants expand and get smaller. You have a building more designed into a bay approach like the larger building here. But these things are some of them are pretty small and it is kind of uisjointed in its planning. Meridian Planning & Zo~ Commission October 14, 1997 Page 41 Bevan: Well Smith: As far as the straight shot through the site that would be as easy as flipping the two rear buildings over and making you have to zig zag through the site to solve the cutting through problem. I think some of the site planning issue problems go even farther than that. There is just too much asphalt on the site. There is too much dedication to the automobile here. Do you have an architect that you have hired to help you design this? Bevan: Yes, Dean Briggs is the engineer. Smith: No, his is not an architect he is an engineer. He has no design training and doing this kind of design work. He is an engineer and he engineers. He doesn't do building design and site design other than subdivisions and things like that. I don't know how you can develop a project of this size without having an architect or somebody who is trained to do this kind of design work. No disrespect to Dean Briggs, but he is just not, his training just isn't in this kind of design projects. Bevan: Well first of all by the comments we are required to have an architect and we will have an architect to design the specific buildings. As far as the asphalt, even in comment #10 they are saying we don't have enough parking. Smith: How many parking spaces do you have? Bevan: What they require is every 200 square feet they want 1 parking space and we are a little bit shy of that. But what (inaudible) We are going to redesign it to get some more parking here by pushing this back. But they are telling us that we don't have enough parking. Borup: I think you read that wrong, they are saying the parking you have exceeds the minimum requirement just based on square footage. Bevan: (Inaudible) Borup: I see what you are saying, they are saying some of the sizes don't meet (inaudible) the 25 or the 9 by 19 may not. Bevan; As I say we can, we had plan on redoing some of it anyway based on some of the comments. We only had the comments for one day so we do have to go back and redesign a little bit. What we are trying to do is give you the concept of what we are trying to do and ask for the annexation and zoning approval. We can come back when we do these comments when we comply with these comments 1 think you will see it shape up a little better than what it is right now. Meridian Planning & Zor~ Commission . October 14, 1997 Page 42 Smith: My opinion is you need an architect not just to design the building for you, you need him to do some site planning for you and study how the best way to lay this site out is and address some of these aesthetic issues not just from the buildings themselves but how the site is laid out. Get some more landscaping on the site as opposed to so much asphalt. Design and orient the buildings in such a way that we don't have the sides of the buildings or the east and west elevations which are visible from Fairview looking like the back sides of buildings. 1 have seen numerous developments laid out on this design approach and 1 can't in good conscience sit here and tell you that I think it is a good design approach because I don't. I think there is some, I think concepts of having different buildings and breaking up the massing of the sites of things are valid and I think you can still achieve that. But I think there is some basic layout in planning some things that need to be looked at and addressed. Bevan: I agree with you, as I said as we do the comply with the comments here I am sure that it will take a little better shape in the face of the actual building permit we can address some of those. Like I said we are just trying to do the annexation and zoning change now. We are requesting that be approved and we can move based on these conditions being met and then we can certainly answer some of those concerns. Smith: I don't have any more questions or comments at this time. Johnson: Anyone else? Thank you Tom, this is a public hearing, anyone that would like to address the Commission on this application? Any comments from staff? At this time I will close the public hearing. The public hearing we are addressing at this point is annexation and zoning only. Borup: Mr. Chairman, I move that we have the City Attomey prepare findings of fact and contusions of law on this application. MacCoy: Second Johnson: We have a motion and a second to have the City Attorney prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #10: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A RETAIL SHOPPING CENTER BY TOM BEVAN - 2030 W. FAIRVIEW AVENUE: Johnson: I will now open the public hearing and ask Mr. Bevan to address the Commission and be sworn once again. Tom Bevan, 4202 N. Marcliff, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney Meridian Planning & Zor• Commission October 14, 1997 Page 43 Johnson: Mr. Bevan, a lot of what we normally cover in the conditional use permit we have already covered. If you have additional comments you are certainly welcome to make those. But we would appreciate it if you would volunteer to incorporate all of your previous testimony into this hearing as well. Bevan: I would do that yes. Johnson: Any additional comments? Bevan: No, just the, I guess the only thing I would say or what we haven't said is we are willing to work on the design issues at the time as we flush out the and answer the comments that were provided us. I think a lot of that will be answered. Johnson: Commissioners questions or comments? Borup: You did say the building design would be similar to the Gap building over on Milwaukee (inaudible). Smith: Mr. Chairman, I can appreciate what Mr. Bevan is trying to do here, I appreciate that he is trying to do a quality development here. But I feel that just what I have seen from the site plan that we are quite a ways away from coming up what I would consider to be an acceptable plan for that. I would really like to encourage Mr. Bevan to retain the services of a design professional to help him plan this site in a way that could address some of the concerns that were mentioned tonight and help them design these buildings. I think there is more work that needs to be done before I feel comfortable passing this onto the City Council. Johnson: Any other comments? Borup: I don't have the expertise on the design and planning I applaud the applicant for trying to do something different here. We are looking at a different look than what we are used to seeing. Probably the main design concern I have is the backs of these buildings with delivery access. That could get to be a pretty unattractive view. So I' don't know if they have given any thought to (inaudible). Bevan: Actually have, the 20 foot perimeter was told to us by the Fire Marshall that we had to do that. But as I talked to his office he said we could do away with that if we sprinkle the building. So that is what we plan to do is that and extend (inaudible). Borup: So that is the direction you are leaning at this. point. Bevan: Yes sprinkle the building and then (inaudible) do some landscaping on the back side or something like that. We want to do a quality development and we don't want the backs to be unsightly at all. If we did that instead of the trash receptacles of the building (inaudible) looking from Fairview you wouldn't see that. Meridian Planning & Zo~ Commission i October 14, 1997 Page 44 Borup: It would be on the ends of some of the others (inaudible) Bevan: I think you see with this type of construction with that type drivet system if you see the Gap if you are going down Milwaukee that is actually the back of the store. It looks pretty attractive (inaudible) Borup: That is what I was thinking (inaudible) Bevan: They hide their trash receptacle as wB would ours. We would hide it and it would be the drivet type (inaudible) In that area of the City they use the back as frontage on the road and obviously the entry we would consider the back, it is in the parking lot entry. It seems to work well there and that is why I went with the drivet system. Borup: Well there is at least at this point a site plan developed the property to the west of you so that may be, do you have access to that information at all (inaudible) not much. But that may be something you want to incorporate into this plan (inaudible) Johnson: This is a public hearing, is there anyone else that would like to enter testimony on this application? Cheryl Todd, 1010 N. 20~", Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney Todd: I have been working with Tom a little bit, I am Cheryl Todd and I actually have been working as an agent on that property with Homeland Realty. I know that both Tom and Bill Cafferelli they have been wanting to proceed on coming up with a good plan that would better bring in small retails. They do have a couple names of people that are looking at doing some leasing. We aren't allowed to reveal that information yet, possibly by next meeting we would be able to do so. There is a big change with having the sprinklers within the retail spaces it will allow for the frontage to look a lot better. Having that little fire access all the way around that plaza really decreases the amount of frontage of the building to Fairview. (Inaudible) it doesn't allow for a lot of exposure to Fairview so it is a little chopped up visually speaking. So by putting the receptacles in the back of the buildings and some of them are going to have to be even the front side because of the place and the cutting of the different. But that would be screened with some type of chain link fencing that would again have the dividers in it so it is not just chain link looking into a receptacle but rather a screen and then possibly some landscaping as well. So in the comments it is required that Mr. Bevan does have a landscape architect as well. One idea is possibly do kind of a gazebo area center so when you drive in and possibly a fountain of sorts or something. But something to give it a central focus of a gathering place and then to sprawl out from there. Of course these changes needed to be resubmitted to show some of those things. Although we are here to adapt a design currently that would need to be changed certain things. But at least the concept is here and the compliance is here as well. i~ny questions? Meridian Planning & Zo~ Commission October 14, 1997 Page 45 Johnson: Thank you, anyone else? I will close the public hearing at this time. MacCoy: Mr. Chairman, I move we have the City Attorney prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law for this project. Borup: 1 have a question for the applicant, I know you haven't had Johnson: Do you want me to reopen the public hearing? Borup: (Inaudible) You were talking about a redesign of the project. Smith: I would like to see us continue the public hearing and give the applicant an opportunity to work with someone to help address some of these design issues that we have with the site planning and the building design (inaudible) how all of this is coming together. Borup: The direction I was leading to, two things, that is why I wanted to ask the applicant what type of time schedule they were looking at. Also if they were looking at doing some redesign if it would be, if next month would give them time to do that. If it did then again we could prepare preliminary findings. Smith: My personal opinion is there such a magnitude of issues that I am looking at (inaudible) presenting some to us that addresses these things. 1 don't think it is just a minor tweak here and a minor tweak there. Borup: Mr. Chairman, that is why I want additional comments from the applicant. Johnson: At this time I will move that the motion died for lack of a second and will re- open the public hearing at this time on item #10. Borup: Mr. Bevan, do you have any comments on that. What type of time frame do you have on the project? Bevan: To do what the comments or what? Borup: On the construction of it. Would taking one more month be a hardship? Bevan: The only, when I would have to submit to be on next month's meeting, would I have to submit by next Thursday was it? Borup: I think, that is someone needs to clarify that. The application needs to be in that far advance. Johnson. We don't have to Gose the public hearing we can continue it. (Inaudible) he is still going to lose a month. Meridian Planning & Zo~ Commission • October 14, 1997 Page 46 Borup: 1 think his question was does he have to have it in by next Thursday which is the deadline on a full application where it is just additional information it doesn't need to have that much lead time does it? Johnson: Mr. Crookston? Crookston: I do not believe that there is a time requirement for submitting new material. I think there is a time requirement for a new application. Bevan: We could certainly do it next month, I am not exactly sure what you want me to do. I was going to do the, what was suggested. Borup: Well for one you were talking about going to sprinkler system and that eliminates the (inaudible) and also I assume gives you the possibility for some larger buildings too in there. That would I guess be one item. Then Commissioner Smith's comments, don't know to what extent, you would have to look at your project and the feasibility of it if that is something that can be looked at. Is three weeks enough time to do that. Bevan: I believe so. I can do all of the items that were suggested by staff. I could do those within 30 days. I am not exactly sure I have a handle on what you want me to do. If you maybe had some suggestions in writing of what design you want to see. It is kind of, you are saying do it different, how do I do it different, what specifically should I do to do it differently? Smith: Mr. Bevan I think at some point in time you are going to need to hire an architect. Bevan: I have to do that, that is what they told me to do and that is what I am going to do. Smith: I am not trying to drum up business for my profession or anything but you best do it sooner than later because these people are trained to address these design issues and the exact concerns that I brought up. And it is not, as 1 said before it is rrot just building design it is site planning too. I think you can, I don't know if you have a working relationship with anybody but certainly sit down and go through some of your ideas and goals and objectives for your project with a qualfied professional and they can work with you in developing a plan that you can mention some of the things that were addressed at the hearing tonight. They can respond to those issues and you can take care of the site planning, how the site is planned and laid out. At the same time you are getting the buildings designed and a concept for how they are going to look and get some. It is always helpful to have the materials of the buildings called out, the height of the buildings, signage. Just some of the key design elements of the project. I think there is some opportunities here, I think you have a good concept in mind but I just don't think that it is quite getting pulled off. I think if you had an opportunity to work with Meridian Planning & Zo~ Commission October 14, 1997 Page 47 somebody that they can pull it together and you can end up with a really fine project here that satisfies everybody's concerns and meets your goals. Bevan: That is what I am agreeing to do in the comments it says I should have an architect and a soil scientist and I should have a landscape architect. I am agreeing to do all of that. So the fact, what you are saying is I should do what the comments say. Nefson: May I make a comment here, I think what Mr. Smith is saying is you submitted a site plan that you at the time of submission you are going to change because you are going to move buildings, you discussed the courtyard concept. We already know we wanted to change several things so it seems kind of getting ahead of ourselves to proceed too far knowing that the thing we know most about is that a lot of things are going to change. I think what he is requesting is that we see a little bit more of what those changes would be. And a lot of those changes sounds like you have already thought through to a point. And then he is suggesting also that maybe you already expect to hire architectural services perhaps to design the building itself. I think he is suggesting that you have them look at that a little earlier than you had planned. Smith: They can help you with all design aspects of this project. Bevan: I know that is what I was saying I was going to do that. All I was asking for tonight that the annexation and zoning be approved and then Smith: We have done that (inaudible) Bevan: I guess what we would request is that part of the hearing then the conditional use permit be continued for one month and then I think we can answer some of your concerns there. Borup: I think that is what the Commission would be more comfortable with. For one of the main reasons that was mentioned earlier we do not have a design review committee, this is the only opportunity for that. The alternative if we want to do that to have one more step for everybody to go through. We feel to take a little more time here we can probably eliminate that other step. But to do that we need to have the building design and some elevations and just some preliminary stuff. Which at this point we don't have. I think we are familiar with the building you are talking about and it has some nice design appeal but it still doesn't show (inaudible). I don't have quite the concern that Commissioner Smith does on the layout, I think the courtyard design is something that is kind of unique, it is nice to see something different. But (inaudible) to take a look at and see what there is there. From my standpoint and I think others we would like to see something on some elevations. Bevan: Sure I understand and we would be glad to do that. Borup: That vwuld take care of at least my comfort level a lot better Meridian Planning & Zo~ Commission October 14, 1997 Page 48 Bevan: We would be glad to do that, we just wanted to show the concept of the square. It is not, you don't want to have an exact square but we are just trying (inaudible) so by next meeting we will have more of the design work done. MacCoy: I would like to throw this into you, unless you have somebody on tap right now one month I think is a little shy. Because yourself you don't have work waiting to come to your you may have to get a hold of an architect (inaudible) Bevan: Well I spent most of this morning talking, we do have some, my partner Bill Cafferelfi is a contractor and he has architects and I talked to him and I talked to some of them and they seem to think they can do it. He is the building of the buildings and he knows that better than I do. Unfortunately his wife had a medical emergency tonight so he couldn't be here so I just presented the concept. But he has more of the specifics as far as the construction. Borup: I think part of your concern is you wanted to make sure you had the zoning and annexation before you proceeded ahead (inaudible) I would hope you felt comfortable with that aspect of it. The conditional use still is, you are in an area that has adjoining (inaudible) Crookston: I think that what has transpired is great but the City needs to have the new information at least a week before the next Planning and Zoning meeting so the staff has an opportunity to consider it. Johnson: I think our next meeting will be Wednesday the 12"'. Crookston: Will you are saying he should have it in by the 31 ~` of October. 1 would agree with the 3151 Bevan: I think we can do it, as I said my partner would know more about that as far as time frames. Borup: If there is a problem than you can request a table to the following meeting. Johnson: Just send a letter and ask it be deferred to the next meeting. Anybody else, this is a public hearing and it is still open here. I will close the public hearing at this time. I will re-open, we are going to continue the public hearing. We need to do that to a date Certain. Smith: Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a motion that we continue this public hearing to the next Commission meeting to be held on November 12`". MacCoy: Second Meridian Planning & Zo~ Commission • October 14, 1997 Page 49 Johnson: We have a motion and a second to continue the public hearing for a conditional use permit for Mr. Tom Bevan to November 12 our next regularly scheduled meeting. All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #11: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING TO R-8 FOR ELVIRA SUBDIVISION BY RON CROW - 650 FEET SOUTH OF FAIRVIEW AVENUE, WEST OF DANBURY FAIR SUBDIVISION NO. 4: Johnson: At this time 1 will open the public hearing and ask that the representative for Mr. Crow address the Commission at this time. Gary Lee, JUB 250 S. Beechwood, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Lee: The applications before you this evening I will lump all of my testimony in the first public hearing and reaffirm it later if that is okay with the Commission. Johnson: Sounds good to me. Lee: There are three parts to the applications. The first being the annexation and rezone request. The request is for an R-8 zoning residential. The second part of the public hearing is a preliminary plat for residential subdivision. And the third part is a conditional use permit to allow a planned unit development for this development. The Elvira Subdivision consists of 33 single family residential lots. The range in size between 6500 and 14,000 square feet. The development also include 8 townhouse lots ranging in size from about 3400 square feet to 5500 square feet. There will be 6 common lots scattered throughout the development. The overall site density on this 10.84 acre parcel is about 3.8 units per acre, a little bit less than four. The project is located south of Fairview Avenue about 650 feet. West of Danbury Fair Subdivision and it is situated in a portion of Section 7, T.3N. R.1 E. The applicant is Ron Crow, the current property owner is his mother Ruth Crow. As I stated before the intended use for this particular development is residential. Currently the property is zoned RT and it is situated in Ada County. It is sun'ounded by City zones. Again the request is for R-8, there is some commercial general lying just to the north of this particular project. There is R-8 development to the east, there is some R-15, an apartment complex just to the west side and some additional R-8 to the South there. It does abut City limits, it will be provided with access through Washington Avenue on the west boundary. There will also be a stub street towards the north end called Badley Avenue and will eventually connect to the existing Badley Street existing to the west. It will be served by water and sewer which is available adjacent to this site. There is a sewer trunk currently situated along Cathy Street running north south. It also ties into sewer lines along Five Mile Creek. The Five Mile Creek shown on the exhibit on the easel traverses through the property and it is a designated area for future pat~~ways. (End of Tape) pathway from our development in a couple of different locations. The one on the north is where Badley will Meridian Planning & Zor~ Commission • October 14, 1997 Page 50 cross Five Mile Creek. At that point there is connection with the future pathway. In addition there is a piece of right of way along the south portion of the property which I assume is called Washington street on that development just immediately south of us that will provide some public access to the Five Mile Creek pathway as well. There is an existing farm bridge that crosses the Five Mile Creek Drainage at the south boundary that will either be update or either replaced depending on the integrity to allow for some pedestrian access. To the east side which is Danbury Fair Subdivision there is a couple of connection points for pedestrian pathways. One of them is the SE comer of our project which can connect and one on the northeast comer of our project. Right now it is a sanitary sewer easement which can (inaudible) sometime in that future. City services are available, water, sewer. We have met with Ada County Highway District and reviewed the street designs and they are favorable in this particular concept. I have reviewed the City Staffs comments. I really have no concerns on any of the comments. I just wanted to make a point known on their first site specific comment about the location of sanitary sewer. This is kind of a detailed item but there is like I stated before an existing sewer line along Cathy Street that we will have to accommodate in our location. The typical corridor (inaudible) west side of centerline but in this case it is going to have to be on the east because of its present location. We can probably work that detail out with the City Engineer. The conditional use permit portion as stated before was for a planned unit development and the reason we requested that after reviewing with Shari Stiles is to allow the 8 townhouse units that are situated along the southwest side of the property. The idea there, give me just a moment. This particular rendering was prepared just to give you an idea on what could be placed on those townhouse units. They are fairly narrow complex. This particular one that you are looking at it is a 2 story. Although the developer owner thought it would be best to leave it up to potential buyers to build either 2 storys or single story or a (inaudible) depending on what his market would be. These particular lots are fairly deep so it allows some pretty good flexibility on what can be done in there and the (inaudible). We have allowed enough width in there I think they are 28'x5 feet wide on the average through there. That would be ample room for a duplex unit. If there are any questions I would be glad to address those at this point. Johnson: Questions from the Commission? Borup: Mr. Chairman, could you address staffs comment on Carlton Avenue? As far as setback if Carlton was extended (inaudible) Lot 2 of the townhouse area. Lee: Are you speaking of the Ada County Highway District special recommendation. That came up during the tech review. The feeling was that Carlton may or may not extend. We don't know what the condition of the property to the south is or will be in the future. Although there would be room to put a turn around in there we did look at a conceptual layout for that parcel and possibly 2 or 3 lots. As far as the setback on that last unit we would tike to see that, if that is going to be imposed, t am not sure it will be. That it be setback from a turnaround .n lieu of going all the way through Cathy Lane which is private. Meridian Planning & Zo~ Commission • October 14, 1997 Page 51 Borup: It is a turnaround at what point before it gets to the project you mean Lee: Right there at the end,of Carlton where that is the west boundary, that is where the right of way ends now. Borup: And I did find the comment it was from ACRD. Lee: It was one of their special recommendations. Borup: My copy has a pencil change. (Inaudible) Lee: We didn't know what that property was going to do if it does anything. It wasn't required from ACHD's standpoint to extend Carlton. Borup: Did you receive a copy of David Stevenson's comments? That is an adjoining homeowner. He would like to see the area become a City Park. You had mentioned somewhat of a greenbelt area through there but I don't think you expanded on too much and what your plans were for that for Five Mile Creek. Lee: The Five Mite Creek we are not planning on constructing in the greenbelt. It is a designated pathway that the City of Meridian has dedicated in their pathway plan (inaudible) we will grant the easement for that. Borup: How about the bridge, the flat bridge (Inaudible) is that the same one that you are showing on the crossing there? Lee: Yes it is, we would enhance that if it is to a structural condition that can be, add hand rails that sort of thing. Borup: Do you know what condition that is in? Is that supported on footings? Lee: I don't know if it is for sure, it has been there for quite a while. Borup: I have some comments here, at least the resident thought that was pretty sound structure. I just wondered if it is was on any footings. Lee: It doesn't appear to be in that photograph, I didn't like I said analyze it myself. Smith: It looks like where the townhouses are proposed just how the adjacent parcel has been developed it seems like it would be more appropriate to have single family lots there again. It Icoks like I laid opt four lots 75 feet wide, 124 feet deep that wasn't taking into account any setbacks on Washington or extending Carlton Avenue. I do recognize Meridian Planning & Zo~ Commission • October 14, 1997 Page 52 that there is an adjacent apartment complex but this, the location of the townhouses seems like we are plunking this use right in the middle of other single family homes. A more appropriate location for what I would consider, it would still be in the R-8 but it is more of a transitional kind of residential occupancy would be to have town homes in this Block 2 between Cathy Street and apartment complex. I guess and I don't want to make assumptions but if I had to it looks like maybe this block 1 over here was just kind of a little chunk that was left over and maybe you didn't want to extend Carlton Avenue or something. I would like to see Block 1 broken up into four lots, single family and extend Carlton Avenue out there. Lee: We looked at that possibility and we talked about that at numerous times on putting town houses along the existing apartment complex. And I agree with you from a transitional standpoint it might be better. However the problem we run into here is the amount of depth in the property. The private street we were proposing along that townhouse project lends itself to work better in this particular case. We tried to go with a local street in there. It is going to start (inaudible) make a much wider looking road because there is (inaudible) Smith: I am sorry, I meant just eMending Carlton Avenue east. The lot configuration in that manner there. Lee: Carlton is not on our property. Smith: Well it is an adjacent street there though. Lee: That is private property, Carlton ends right at the west boundary of the town house project. Smith: Well that wouldn't work then. MacCoy: (Inaudible) making that land for a different type of arrangement (inaudible) Lee: Too much crammed in the zone? MacCoy: Well you look at some of this stuff and it is pretty tight compared to some of the other blocks you have here. Johnson: 3.78 isn't very high density, so what is your point? MacCoy: WeII I just thought it would look better (inaudible). Lee: well the market is the other aspect too. The town house market is somewhat soft compared to the starter home single family house. Ron Crrnnr is interested in town houses r,imself to build. We talked about having more town trouses, we talked about residential and the final design we have come up with is about as efficient as we can Meridian Planning & Z~g Commission October 14, 1997 Page 53 make it on this particular piece of property and meet the goals and the desires of the land owner. Borup: I think we can agree (inaudible) Smith: Have there been any discussions with the property owner to the south as far as what his plans are for developing that vacant lot. It just seems natural to infill with a couple of lots there. Then my idea would work. Lee: I didn't talk to the landowner personally but Mr. Crow, he knows him quite well. At the time he didn't have any firm ideas on what he wanted to do with the property. Smith: Don't misunderstand me 1 am not opposed to the town homes per se I am just puzzled as to where they are located on the property. I thinkrf they were over here next to the apartment complex it would in my mind be pretty straight forward. Borup: Is that apartment directly to the west of the townhouses now? Lee: It is north of the Borup: What is west of the town houses? Lee: There are some of those older lots in the City for some residential houses in there older ones. Borup: So the apartments are all north of Washington? Lee: I think there are some duplexes in there someplace. I can't tell you exactly which lots they are. Borup: That is fine (inaudible) Lee: It is a mixture in that whole neighborhood. In any event the design that is before is the preference of the landowner and developer. Johnson: Any further questions? Thank you Mr. Lee, we may call you back. This is a public hearing, would anyone else like to come forward at this time? D R Lynn, 1154 Cathy Lane, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney. Lynn: I am the sole owner of the private street Cathy lane, Meridian. It is a private street because it is too narrow. After I completed it and offered it to the County it was not accepted on that basis. I live in a two story house, (inaudible) my first plan was to build on Lot 7, 1184 Cathy Lane and cons~Jer the pruperty my retirement home. I would have done so by this time but teamed about the proposed use of the property adjoining Meridian Planning & Zo~ Commission • October 14, 1997 Page 54 mine and changed my plan to tract house quality for 1184 Cathy Lane. That also changed my interest in owning the street Cathy Lane. I will sell it if I find an interested party. As part of this street project I had to build a culdesac at the end of State Avenue. The cost was $20,000. The street added approximately $25,000 to the project. This is a firm price because I have that much invested. I actually have more in it because of the sewer line and water taps and everything that I paid for. I own property on Franklin Road and understand the ins and outs of public versus private road construction. In the case of public there is in place an easement for the expected need of more space. The State paid me a reasonable for needed extra footage on Franklin. No easement exists on Cathy Lane except an easement in favor of the homeowners association which does not exist. A homeowners association is provided for in the bylaws recorded in Ada County as part of Catherine Park Subdivision. I have checked the legalities of building a fence at the far edge of Cathy Lane. It is legal and 1 have a letter from the City Engineer to establish that fact. I have placed mail and garage services at the beginning of the street because I don't want more traffic than necessary on this street. I believe Meridian's police are as good or better than most. But on private property we lose the advantage of an investigation in case of accident. A serious consideration as far as insurance liability. It is paramount that traffic on Cathy Lane be as limited as possible. Should Mr. Crow opt to purchase Cathy Lane for the sum I have invested I would require guarantee the street will be accepted by the County for their maintenance. I would request two years time to sell the house I am in and move into the stairless one on Lot 7 before the streets are connected. I realize this is just a request and should he opt to purchase the street he wouldn't have to honor that. Had the homeowners association been in place the net proceeds to each lot owner after all taxes and insurance, recordings and so forth would have been $6002 but I am at this point the sole owner. Smith: Can you Garify a couple of things for me? You access Cathy Lane off of State? Lynn: Yes, that is the culdesac I had to construct and pay for and everything in order to build a private street. Smith: How wide is Cathy Lane? Lynn: It is 30 feet, the County would require 60 before they would take it and maintain it. Smith: Does that stop short of Washington Avenue? Lynn: It stops, I don't know I have had it surveyed, yes I think it is (inaudible) Smith: (Inaudible) Lynn: You mean Washington Averse coming through, oh definitely, a long ways from Washington Avenue. Meridian Planning & Zor~ Commission . October 14, 1997 Page 55 Borup: I guess I wasn't sure what your concem was? Are you concemed about extra traffic on Cathy Lane or your private Cathy Lane? Are you concemed about traffic from this project going there? Lynn: This is my concem, this is the one thing that I would very definitely protect. Borup: Now, I may have understood this wrong but I didn't think there was any access to private Cathy Lane from this project. Lynn: I am just assuring and reassuring that there wouldn't be because I have had pressure in that direction. Johnson: Is there anyone else that would like to come forward at this time? H.L. Rich, 512 East Carlton, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney. Rich: My concem is this piece of property that we are discussing the right (inaudible) I live at 512 East Carlton which is the dead end of Carlton. The comments were made today, I would like to see single dwelling houses at the end of Carlton adjacent to my property. That has been my main concem for years. The second concem we brought (inaudible) was Mr. Parks who was the developer of Cathy Lane prior the Stutzman's owning it. The agreement was at that time there would be no two story houses in that area. I have discussed with Mr. Crow that single dwelling homes adjacent to our property will keep the continuance of property value and appearance all in routine with (inaudible). The townhouses that are two story or better should be moved out on the other side of Washington. I have also been concemed that 33 houses brings in a total of about 66 vehicles going in and out of there every day. That means that we have 66 more children in that area. The two streets Washington and Carlton are both restricted by McFadden's property. The intersection on Washington Square at 5"' and Washington is heavily congested with the apartments on the north side of Washington. So what this brings into the picture is the fact that with the traffic coming from Washington Square and Mr. Crow's property is going to increase property a great deal. Which would make it hazardous to kids living in that particular area since there is no access to any•other streets including Fairview. The fencing since the Washington Square apartments have put in chain link fence 6 feet high adjacent to Mr. Ron Growls property I would like to see the same type of fencing go all they way down the property line rather than have a high maintenance cedar fence put in. I think that will cover about all of my comments. Johnson: I have a question, I am a little confused. Are you opposing the project or just the development of town houses or two story homes? Rich: Town houses and twro story homes. Borup: I had a question too, you said you lived at the end of Carlton. So there are three other properties surrounding you, are they all single family homes also? Meridian Planning & Zo~ Commission • October 14, 1997 Page 56 Rich: Yes sir Johnson: Anyone else? Barbara Smith, 1124 Cathy Lane, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attomey. B. Smith: One of my concerns is extra traffic in the area. There are not a lot of ways out with so many houses. 1 am not opposed to houses coming in, I would just like to see more access out. I live at 1124 Cathy Lane next to D. Lynn. I bought my house and the view I had was a falling down bam that I loved, a propped up old barn. I hate to think of looking at town houses and I am going to get their parking lot. So if it happens 1 would like to see something to obstruct the view, 1 would also like to see the end of Cathy Lane blocked off (inaudible) it just can't handle the traffic if it were to come. Thank you. Johnson: Any questions? Thank you Gerda Dwyer, 1093 Crossbill Court, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney. Dwyer: I am not against the project and I am talking about me and my husband and the court I live in and I am the representative of that court, Crossbill Court. We are not against the project, we don't want any town houses and iwo storys because it is one story family homes. Plus there are only two entrances, you go out (inaudible) Stonehenge and Crossbill and you go from there to Fairview and then to Pine and that is the only two entrances in and out, Fairview and Pine Avenue. Then you have to swing around to go to Franklin Road and then you get to Eagle or downtown Meridian (inaudible) so people are concerned about the traffic too. That is the main concern. We are not against the project and town houses but you need more entrances. That is all I have to say. Johnson: Thank you, any questions? Anyone else? Andrew Condon, 992 East Crossbill Court, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attomey Condon: All the comments that lady just made here I agree with 100°h there are a couple of additions that I would like to make. to talking with my neighbor I had one question and maybe the engineer can answer this for me, there is a 20 foot easement between my place and my neighbors place here which is at the end of Crossbill Court. That goes into the Elvira subdivision, is that 20 foot easement included? Does it goes in there, does the City have access to that across the property way. If so how can that be made into a pedestrian pathway if it belongs to the City? (Inaudible) Meridian Planning & Zo~p Commission • October 14, 1997 ~! Page 57 Condon: Was that the pathway that you were referring to? That is something that we would not like to see happen. Again (inaudible) stressing the fact that we would not like to see, we don't oppose the project but to keep up the townhouses and the multilevel dwellings having them all single (inaudible) is what we would like to see. There has got to be a way to make an access going from whatever the street -name is Cathy to Fairview or out to Badley or something. Other questions regarding actual dwellings themselves, what is the average square footage (Inaudible). Johnson: We can answer those a little bit later, he will sum that up (inaudible). Borup: I believe they are the same as your subdivision. Condon: Also, I don't know if you have been out there. The fence its starts almost clear down at Pine and goes all the way up, except it conveniently stops right here at the edge of mine. I don't know if that was put in by each individual house owner all the way up through or not. That was one concern that the fence be completed up through the end of my property and then up until the next area here. Johnson: I think you have lost me on that one would you show us on the map? Condon: (Inaudible) the 20 foot easement is right here and here is my lot, Danbury Fair this is 120 feet long. The fence is all the way down here along Pine Street pretty much I don't know if that was put in by the Danbury Fair Subdivision or not but it was not completed up to there and then there is also a back part along Rountree that was not completed. This is going to be done up here pretty soon with the new car wash that is going in and the other thing that was talked about a few months ago. So I was just wondering who was responsible for this particular 140 foot of fence. If that fence was completed all the way across this could not be a pedestrian access. Johnson: I believe that is sewer easement is that not true Gary? Eng. Smith: Yes Mr. Chairman, that is a 21 inch sewer that goes through there. Johnson: So it can't be fenced right? Eng. Smith: No, it is supposed to be a common lot in Danbury Fair Subdivision with an underlying sewer easement for the City of Meridian. That is the sewer that serves Danbury Fair and other properties to the south. Condon: So it could not be fenced but it could be made into a pedestrian pathway is what you Eng. Smith: I don't know what the surface is right now, does it have a surface on it? Meridian Planning & Zo~ Commission . October 14, 1997 Page 58 Condon: The surface is just sod, it wasn't put there by the City or anyone else, it was put there by myself and my neighbor just to make things look better than bare dirt. I guess those were my main concerns. Nelson: I understand the people not wanting the two story dwellings but can you clarify why you don't want the town houses, even a single story town house? Just out of curiosity. Condon: All of Danbury is single level, there are a couple multi-level houses on the SE side I think. Everything in here is all single level dwelling. The town houses, I used to live in one and it is much different compared to a normal single dwelling. It adds more to the property value of the surrounding homes to have a dwelling rather than the town house type, even though it is considered a home it is not quite the same thing. Nelson: Thank you Johnson: Anyone else? Mary Rich, 512 East Carlton, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney. Rich: A comment on the two story houses, I am just concerned because of the population growth and the fact that the ones in the neighborhood at this time are not maintained. It has been a nice neighborhood and they have built numerous two story homes or I can't remember what we called them. They are run down and they are not being kept up like 1 think they should be in the community. I think they look more like low income housing and Johnson: Are you talking about two story homes or are you talking about multi-family? Rich: The apartments, multi-family. I think it would increase the population in that area too much. We have a lot of people in that area and the access is poor to get in and out. Johnson: Thank you, anyone else that hasn't had an opportunity? Gary, would you like to make a couple of comments and specifically if you would talk about the square footage. Lee: The square footage we have identified in accordance with the R-8 zone standard. On the preliminary plat there is a table that identifies size and the number of lots of that particular size. Each lot has been labeled with a certain symbol to identify which lot is going to be which size. Briefly in summary the 1001 square foot minimum we have 3 ident~ed. The 1101 we have 4, the 1201 we have 8, the 1301 minimum we have 18. Then the town house lots we identified 800 square foot minimum and there are 8 of those. These houses again it is in an R-8 neighborhood, there is apartment complexes thers, it is an older neighborhood, there are a few dupl€xes. There is quite a mixed used of property all over that area. So the type of house we are going to be marketing in Meridian Planning ~ Zo~ Commission • October 14, 1997 Page 59 this area is the smaller home, it will be similar to what Danbury Fair has been. It is going to be real difficult for someone to come in and build a 2 story 1000 foot house and maintain the 800 square foot on the ground level. So the market is going to dictate the size. Although it doesn't prevent someone who wants to build a larger house to come in and build a larger house. Generally the City has appreciated that and larger houses end up being two story houses. We would like to keep that option open. As far as the town houses, these particular lots are fairly deep. The actual town house unit itself is 122 feet in depth. That is going to allow for a fairly substantial rear yard or additional set back along that west boundary. A typical rear yard setback is 15 feet in R-4 and R-8 zones. This particular area, it will more likely be 30 to 35 feet setback so it is going to give some separation to the neighbors. In addition they are town houses, they are individually owned just like any other house. There will be pride of ownership just like you would a single family dwelling. It is not a multi family unit like the apartments are. We talked about traffic a little bit. We have met the requirements of ACHD on access, we have allowed for future extension of Badley which we have no corrtrol over when that might be built or but it will be built some day and will provide some additional relief in that area. There was a question brought up about the look of the town house from the property owners across the street from Cathy Lane. There will be a landscape buffer installed between Cathy Lane and the private driveway that we propose. There was a question brought up about how Cathy Lane terminates at Washington. Right now the private driveway known as Cathy Lane ends right at what they dedicated as Washington Avenue, you can see it on the preliminary plat. So it abuts public right of way on both ends north side and south side. On the pathway that the gentleman discussed at Danbury Fair, that was an item that was brought up at Ada County Highway District as a possibility for future uses pedestrian pathway. The original concept there was just for a sewer easement and to provide the 20 foot of pavement that is normal for sewer easements. But it could double as a pedestrian access and probably makes pretty good sense to get some circulation out of Danbury Fair to the pathway. Are there any other questions? Borup: I have a few, could you clarify if there is any access from this project to the private Cathy Lane? You indicated that the right of way stops, does there plan to be any access from this? , Lee: The plan wasn't to provide any access to Cathy Lane, there is no need to do that. Borup: That was my understanding but I think it was the concem of several of the people here that there would be traffic coming down the private Cathy Lane from this project. You are saying there is no access, you have the landscaping buffer between and there is no access to the comer there at Washington (inaudible). Lee: Cathy Lane terminates in public right of way right now, where Washington Avenue is. Borup: I don't see where your plan indicates that. Meridian Planning & Zon~Commission • October 14, 1997 Page 60 (Inaudible) Borup: At this point there is,no indication that is ever going to be completed. Lee: (Inaudible) Borup: So at this point right here you have access to your private drive, but this would be landscaping (inaudible) this direction either. Questions on the, I know ACRD recommended a pedestrian pathway on that 20 foot easement. Their recommendation was to Meridian staff as City staff commented on that anymore? Lee: Not that I know of. Borup: I know that has been encouraged in other subdivisions (inaudible) One other question on the town house area you had indicated you could have possibly 30 feet or so setback in that yard. I know that again was a concern of some of the neighbors there. What would you feel the feasibility would be to have something maybe in the covenants requiring a 25 foot setback along there, is something like that feasible? Lee: Certainly, I think that would be a good idea. Borup: That might alleviate some concerns about the house being too close (Inaudible). I would I guess recommend that you consider that. Have they gone to the point in the plan design that they know what they have designed for (Inaudible) Lee: We looked at some designs and this is just one of probably thousands of designs that could work on there. That is what is shown on this conceptual plan on the footprints. Borup: This is drawn to scale on here. Lee: We can certainly add the 25 foot setback requirement in the covenants for that reason. (End of Tape) Smith: (Inaudible) don't feel the town homes belong where you have them sited there and I can certainly sympathize with the problems of developing that little chunk there. Maybe it just doesn't get developed now with the rest of this and you wait to work out an arrangement with the owner to the south on Carlton Avenue there to be able to develop four single family lots there. I just don't think it is appropriate given the adjacent uses. Johnson: Have you visited tha site? Meridian Planning & Zor~ Commission • October 14, 1997 Page 61 Smith: No, I am just going off of what I see on the map. Borup: How much property is that to the south there do you know? Lee: If you look on the vicinity map Borup: There doesn't look like there is much there. Lee: There isn't Borup: Is there one single lot is that what is there. Lee: You might get two. Borup: I mean right now it looks like it is one lot. Lee: I would think so compared to the ones next to it if you look on the vicinity map. Johnson: If you have another question you need to come up to the mic. Dwyer: Answering your question about town houses you know 1 lived in apartments I never lived in town houses and I don't go putting people down living in town houses or apartments because I have done the same thing. But why put them there, I think they can pop up anywhere. Just like the big cities anything pops up anywhere. People have the money they put anything there and we shouldn't destroy the beauty of Meridian. We all came here from somewhere. f came here from California through Hewlett Packard and all my friends live in Eagle and I never got there because it is too expensive. But why put town houses, that looks there funny to have town houses there. (Inaudible) people go more, come and go, come and go. And you don't want that. I agree with that, I am from Germany, I lived very poor we had less than you have here. But why, you have everything here so why do it. You shouldn't have town houses with regular houses, that looks funny because people don't stay there. They maybe just have it on a lease, a year lease or they come and go. Then you have only iwo entrances,'think about that two entrances. One to Pine, that is not even a main street you have to, the traffic. I go to Meridian it took ten minutes to get on First Street just by Paisanos to make a left turn. You see what is going to happen. What are you going to do in an emergency, everybody is going to get killed or something. (Inaudible) just put regular homes there, no town houses. (Inaudible) I pay my taxes and I support the community. Thank you very much. B. Smith: Just because the town houses are for sale does not mean they won't become rentals. Meridian Planning & Zon~ Commission • October 14, 1997 Page 62 Johnson: It doesn't mean they will either. Anyone else? I will close the public hearing at this time. We are only on 11, annexation and zoning. We need findings of fact and conclusions of law. MacCoy: Mr. Chairman, I move we have the City Attomey prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law for this project. Borup: Second Johnson: Moved and seconded we have the City Attorney prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law, all those in favor'? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #13: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR ELVIRA SUBDIVISION BY RON CROW - 650 FEET SOUTH OF FAIRVIEW AVENUE, WEST OF DANBURY FAIR SUBDIVISION NO. 4: Johnson: I will now open this public hearing and invite the applicant or Mr. Gary Lee to address the Commission. Gary Lee, JUB Engineers, 250 S. Beechwood, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney Lee: I would just like to reaffirm the previous testimony during the annexation proceedings and I would entertain any additional questions you might have. Johnson: Any questions of Gary? Anyone else that would like to add something on the preliminary plat? Andrew Condon, 992 East Crossbill Court, Meridian, was swum by the City Attorney. Condon: All I wanted to ask was this. I understand the first part that is for rezoning from whatever it used to be from RT to R-t3. This part here is for the layout the way it is proposed? So you are proposing this without all the testimony that we have. given so far is just for townhouses and that sort of stuff? Can you chop up certain parts or are you going to say okay that is the way it is. Johnson: Well, what the Commission normally does (inaudible) they will normally table this item until the findings of fact are prepared and addressed. Anybody else. (Inaudible) Johnson: It is called the American way, that is what it is called. This is America (inauuible) Meridian Planning 8~ Zoni~Commission October 14, 1997 Page 63 (Inaudible) Johnson: We have rules and regulations, vue haven't done a thing here, we haven't approved anything. All we are doing is gathering testimony. This Commission doesn't make any decisions. What we do is pass recommendations onto the City Council. You get another opportunity at another public hearing to talk to the City Council and those are the people that actually decide, they make the decision. (Inaudible) Johnson: I am closing the public hearing. What would you like to do with item #12? Borup: I would like to table this to November 12"'. Smith: Sewnd Johnson: We have a motion and a second to table item #12 until our next meeting November 12, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #13: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR ELVIRA SUBDIVISION FOR 33 STANDARD R-8 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS PLUS 8 TOWNHOUSE LOTS BY RON CROW - 650 FEET SOUTH OF FAIRVIEW AVENUE, WEST OF DANBURY FAIR SUBDIVISION NO. 4: Johnson: I will now open the public hearing, Mr. Lee? Gary Lee, JUB Engineers, 250 S. Beechwood, Boise, was sworn by the City Attomey Lee: Again I would like to reaffirm my testimony in the previous two public hearings. The conditional use permit application is for a planned unit development for 33 •single family and 8 town house units. If you have any questions I would be glad to answer them. Johnson: Any questions for Mr. Lee? Anyone else? I will close the public hearing. MacCoy: I would like to table this to the next meeting so we can have findings of fact Johnson: We need to have findings of fact on the conditional, you can make a motion to table it but standard procedure would be to have findings of fact prepared on this too. MacCoy: Mr. Chairman, I move .nat we have the City Attomey prepare the findings f~f fact and conclusions of law for this project. Meridian Planning & Zor~ Commission October 14, 1997 Page 64 Borup: Second Johnson: We have a motion and a second to have the City Attorney prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law; all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: 2 Yea, 2 Nay Tie Breaker Vote Yea Nelson: I motion to adjoum. Smith: Second Johnson: We have a motion to adjoum, all those in favor'? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea MEETING ADJOURNED AT 11:15 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) APPROVED: JIM JOHNSON, CHAIRMAN ATTEST: WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., CITY CLERK BEFORE TAE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ECONO LUBE N'TUNE INC. ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 8.5 ACRES TO C-G AND R-2 BY ECONO LUBE N'TUNE INC. AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A CONSTRUCTION OF ECONO LUBE N'TUNE AUTOMOBILE MAINTENANCE AND LIGHT REPAIR FACILITY AND SCE~JCK'S AUTOMOBILE PARTS STORE 1915 E. FAIRVIEW AVE., EAST OF T,OCUST GROVE, SOUTH SIDE OF E. FAIRVIEW MERIDIAN, IDAAO REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The above entitled matters having come on for public hearing on September 9, 1997, at the hour of 7:00 o'clock p.m., the Applicant, appearing through ita representative, Patrick McKeegan, and again at the October 14, 1997, public hearing at the hour of 7:00 o'clock p.m., the Applicant, appearing through its representative, Dennis Thornton, 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. FINDIN(i8 OF FACT 1. A notice of a public hearing on the application for the conditional use permit and application for annexation and zoning was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to said public hearing scheduled on September 9, 1997, the first publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; that the matter REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 1 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 was duly considered at the September 9, 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 1915 S. Fairview Avenue, Sast of Locust Grove on the south side of E. Fairview. The property is described in the application for annexation, zoning, and the conditional use permit, which description is incorporated herein as if set forth in full. The Applicant is not the owner of record of the property. The record owner of the property is Lawrence Tuckness, and he has consented to the application for annexation, zoning, and the conditional use permit. 3. Pursuant to the application, the property is located within the City of Meridian at 1915 E. Fairview Avenue, east of Locust Grove on the south side of E. Fairview. The property is presently zoned by Ada County as RT, Rural Transitional, and is currently used as a single family residence with numerous outbuildings and corrals. The Applicant requests annexation of the property and that the property be rezoned as detailed below. The application for annexation and zoning is not at the request of the City of Meridian. There are three proposed uses for the property as follows: a. The first proposed use of the property is to subdivide the north 2.576 acre portion into four lots, and the Applicant requests the property be rezoned to C-G. The REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 2 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 northeast lot is to be used to operate an Econo Lube N'Tune with an automotive lubrication and tune-up facility of approximately 2,800 square feet. The north east lot is to be occupied by a Schuck's automotive supply store of approximately 8,000 square feet. The south two parcels are to be sold for commercial use. b. The second proposed use is to sell the 5.951 acre southern parcel, and the Applicant requests the property be rezoned to R2, as either one parcel with future development as a residential PUD or further subdivision the responsibility of the buyer. c. The third proposed use is as a right-of-way to be dedicated to the Ada County Highway District for the extension of Wilson Lane. The right-of-way is to be divided between the main northern and southern parcels described above, taking one-half the 60 foot right-of-way from each of the two parcels. Public utilities are to extend in the right-of-way. The Applicant presented a site plan depicting the location of the Econo Lube N'Tune, the Schuck's automotive supply store, and the remaining subdivided parcels. Further, pursuant to the application for a conditional use permit, the Applicant agrees to pay any additional sewer, water or trash fees or charges, if any, associated with the use, whether that use be residential, commercial or industrial. 4. Patrick McReegan, .representative for the Applicant, testified substantially as follows at the September 9, 1997 public hearing. It was his understanding that the City had requested that the southern six acres be withdrawn from the annexation request and the R-2 zoning request south of Wilson Lane. He agreed with the City's request because it would still leave a legal lot of record in Ada County and allow Applicant to go forward with the REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 3 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 subdivision process. Based on his understanding of site specific comment number 6, the City would not be allowing a common storm drainage system. Because Econo Lube N'Tune and Schuck's would like to be allowed a common storm drainage system, he requested that dialog be left open so it could be discussed further. The intent behind one shared system was to save money and resources and to have a common system that would have the joint easement and agreements in place. Be indicated, however, that if the City absolutely will not allow a common system, Econo Lube N'Tune and Schuck's would be willing to put in separate systems. Access agreements between Econo Lube N'Tune and Schuck's had been reached allowing Econo Lube to have access through Schucks' property. Mr. McKeegan had with him a map or site plan for indicating the relocation of the driveway as requested by the highway district, connecting Econo Lube and Schuck's, giving each access to the other's property. 5. Patrick McKeegan, representative for the Applicant, further testified as follows at the public hearing. The highway District requested that Applicant remove the access easement from the northern two lots on the bottom of the site plan going through the common lot line between lots 3 and 4 to Wilson Lane, due to concern about long term cross through traffic through private property for people wanting to avoid the light at Locust Grove. In response, Applicant took the utility easement from Wilson Lane to the northerly lots, and moved it to the easterly property line. REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 4 ECONO LUBE N'TUNS, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 This will extend Applicant's utilities from Wilson Lane to the east property, the utilities for Schuck's and Econo Lube coming down that easterly access or utility easement. Additionally, Mr. McKeegan indicated Applicant answered the remaining comments in writing to Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to the City Engineer, and Shari Stiles, the Planning and Zoning Administrator. That correspondence, dated September 5, 1997, is'incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 6. In response to questions by Commissioner Borup, Mr. McKeegan, representative of the Applicant, testified substantially as follows. The Applicant has not yet determined its plans for the two remaining lots on the property since it is not the owner of the property and it is not subdivided. The Applicant is currently negotiating with a user in the area that would be using the property for outdoor storage of materials. Mr. McKeegan assured Commissioner Borup that the use would be compatible with a C-G zone. Access for the two lots will be off Wilson Lane, but there will be no access via Wilson Lane across the .remaining two lots for the two northern lots. Also, an easement through the center of the. property is undesirable in case a future purchaser wants to build through the center of the two lots where the easement would be. Under the conditions of approval, the Applicant will improve the curb and put in a gutter on its side, improve the asphalt plus 12 feet of the southern half. Additionally, the Applicant will improve Wilson Lane similar to that behind D & B supply to the east REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 5 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 property line. The Applicant will also have a cross access agreement with D & B's parking lot to the west, and D & B has also expressed interest in the back piece of the property, but nothing has been finalized. 7. In response to comments by Mr. Thom Myall posed in his September 4, 1997 correspondence, incorporated herein as if set forth in full, Mr. McKeegan testified substantially as follows. The blocked ditch that runs through the Applicant's property will be tiled and kept active if it serves any downstream users. The Applicant will also maintain access to lots three and four as required by State irrigation law until such time as those people decide they do not want to use the water. The Applicant also intends to use. the water in the ditch for pressurized irrigation if there is enough water volume to do so. The drainage ditch that comes across Wilson Lane to the southeast corner of D & B's property will be tiled where it crosses under the street. Boxes will also be installed. All the run off water on the Applicant's property will be retained on that property. Applicant Econ Lube N'Tune is extremely sensitive about hazardous materials, and so always constructs its lube pits with five different levels and layers of protection, with no drain. The pit is designed to contain all of the total fluids that are on site in case there is some kind of a catastrophic event and then they would be removed. All tanks are secured and are double sealed. Schuck's only has small containers of hazardous materials on the premises; and so REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 6 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 there is a very low probability that any sort of contamination would result therefrom. The Applicant will comply with all the health department regulations and has already done level 2 tests on the site to make sure there is no contamination prior to moving onto the property. 8. In response to questioning by Commissioner MacCoy, Mr. McKeegan responded substantially as follows. Exterior lighting for Econo Lube will consist of the minimum the City requires since its hours are from approximately 7:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m., and it therefore has no need for site lighting or security light. Schuck's is open from approximately 8:00 a.m. until 9:00 p.m. and so they will have a wall pack type of light on timers with some sort of shielding to prevent the lights from shining into other properties until they shut off automatically at a reasonable hour. Econo Lube's signage will be different from that of Schucka', and they will apply for separate design review and signage permits on the property. If the City desires a monument sign, that will be requested, but the Applicant's first choice is a pole sign. In response, Commissioner MacCoy stated that the City does not want a pole with a blinking light system on it. Additionally, Commissioner MacCoy stated that the Applicant's ADA parking was taken care of, but he made the suggestion that since vans are loaded from the back or from the right side, there should be an area on the right side for unloading wheelchairs. 9. In response to questions from Commissioner Smith, Mr. REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 7 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 McKeegan testified substantially as follows. Because Econo Lube requires 50 feet from the building to any curbing or edge of parking, if the Applicant were to move the parking area in the front to the rear, the building would still be 50 feet away from the parking area, which would just be for stacking space for two ears to the front of the building. Commissioner Smith replied that he believes there are opportunities for a more attractive street side elevation and that it seemed that moving the parking would be a viable alternative to the site planning. In response to further questioning by Commissioner Smith, Mr. McReegan responded that he was unaware Applicant was supposed to submit information on what the buildings will look like, but thought there is a separate design review application to address that information. Econo Lube's building will be a split face block in two tones of light brown with a red canopy and a red cap band. The signage on the building will be red. Commissioner Borup then commented that there ie no design review, but the City Council decides these issues so this must be submitted to City Council. Mr. .McKeegan then indicated he would submit the information on the materials. The Schuck's building will be in gray earthtones with stucco-like material, a red canopy and red banding with blue accents. 10. To further questioning by Commissioner Smith, Mr. McKeegan responded that the building would not be a tilt up pre- cast, but a wood frame with synthetic stucco material. The height of the Econo Lube is 18'8" at the highest part, and 16'8" at the REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 8 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 rest. Schuck's is 19 feet at the parapet. The Applicant will move the building back to accommodate the 19' requirement for parking space length. The Applicant will be installing a 3 1/2 foot landscape zone on the west side of the Schuck's building and a landscape buffer on the east side abutting an existing residential zone. There is a zero set back on the west side because it is an existing commercial zone. The Applicant will be placing a berm in front of D & B in a 25 foot setback including a tree per 1500 square feet of asphalt as required by the City. The construction of the periphery fence on the residential side will be constructed of either 6 foot wood cedar or masonry to match the building. Commissioner Smith replied that masonry would be better because of its longevity and durability. He would like to see some effort made to put the buildings at the front of the property to avoid the look of strip development. Commissioner Smith also suggested that Econo Lube and Schuck's work together to develop a monumental type sign to be shared by both businesses instead of putting up two. To this suggestion, Mr. McKeegan asked whether the signage allowance for each business would then be combined so that if 100 square feet of signage were allowed for each, then a sign done in combination would be 200 square feet. To this, Commissioner Smith indicated he did not know, and this should be reviewed with staff. 11. Dennis Thornton, also a representative of Econo Lube testified substantially as follows. Econo Lube prefers to have its. buildings moved forward, however, the choice was made to instead REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 9 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 enter into a cross cut agreement which allows patrons of D & B to drive through Schucks' lot. In response, Commissioner Smith commented that he believes moving the buildings up holds more weight than the connection to D & B. Mr. Thornton continued his testimony substantially as follows. The Applicant is very cognizant of environmental issues, recycles, and carefully and expensively constructs its pits, at a cost of $22,000 per pit to prevent leakage. In response to further questioning from Commissioner Smith, Mr. Thornton replied that the parking does not need to be moved to the back because the berm will minimize the impact of the sight of the parking up front. Commissioner Smith responded that only the first row of parking will be blocked until a car is parked there. 12. Commissioner MacCoy then commented that he likes Commissioner Smith's suggestion for the access to D 6 B'e property and that D & B has been very cooperative in helping achieve the access. 13. Glenn Buday, a representative of Schuck's Automotive, testified substantially as follows. Schuck's would like to move closer forward, too, but with their entrance on the front in the center of the building, they want to assure that their customers coming out of the store with batteries and other heavy items can reach their care quickly. Schuck's would like to put in a 30 foot driveway instead of a 25 foot driveway to provide safer ingress and egress for customers. In response, Commissioner Borup suggested REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 10 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 the building be turned the other direction, making it 70 feet closer to the road, leave the egress to D & B, and get the parking on the aide, leaving the rear for overflow parking. The entrance %ould be left where it is or moved elsewhere. Mr. Buday testified that he would look into that suggestion and discuss it with the corporate architect. 14. In response to a question by Commissioner Smith, Mr. Buday testified substantially as follows. The plan proposed is a standard building foot print. 15. In response to a question by Commissioner Smith, Mr. Thornton testified substantially as follows. The plan proposed is a standard building foot print, but there are three or four configurations which can be used. 16. In response to questioning and comments by Commissioners Borup and Smith, the Applicant's representative, Mr. Patrick McKeegan testified substantially as follows. Applicant has the exterior elevations on the Econo Lube project and they will be delivered to the Commission. The site issues will be worked on with the Planning and Zoning Administrator before the next meeting and be submitted as part of the next packet for review by the Committee. Applicant's main concern is having enough parking on site to meet the requirements. There is a requirement for 54 parking spaces, but that is based on the whole building being occupied by retail apace. In actuality, half the building is storage space, which is one space per 1000, so using that figure, REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 11 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 Applicant is overparked. Schucks' goal is to provide 40 spaces for overflow. 17. Commissioner Borup commented that he believes tying into D & B is worthwhile, but the main problem is that Econo Lube needs 50 feet of stacking which needs to be worked out. To this, Mr. McKeegan testified substantially as follows. The parking lot just has to be shuffled, and Applicant would also like to maintain cross access to the property to the east when it develops. There remains a question as to whether a row of parking will exist along Fairview so the driveways align or if the parking is eliminated in front of Schuck's and the driveway pulled down farther, affecting parking on the person to the east. 18. To a question by Commissioner Smith, Mr. McReegan testified substantially as follows. If across access agreement is required farther back than the front row of parking, then it may be in the middle of the property, which will adversely affect a future builder if that becomes commercial property because it would run through the center of their building. 19. Glenn Buday, a representative of Schuck's Automotive, further testified substantially as follows. Building elevations for Schuck's were submitted with the application packet. Commissioner Smith responded by making a motion to continue the public hearing to October 14, 1997, asking that the Applicant look at and work with staff on redesigning the site plan addressing the comments and concerns that were addressed at the hearing and to REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 12 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 present building elevations to the Commission. 20. Any additional site plans and information on building heights presented at the continuation of the hearing on October 14, 1997 are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. If additional public comment and/or testimony is given regarding the additional site plans and information on building heights at the October 14, 1997 hearing, these preliminary findings of fact will be amended accordingly. 21. There was no further testimony given at the hearing, and it was continued, as to the Conditional Use Permit, until October 14, 1997. 22. The Assistant to the City Engineer, Bruce Freckleton, and the Planning and Zoning Administrator, Shari Stiles, submitted comments on the annexation and zoning request, general comments and site specific comments. Their annexation and zoning comments, general comments and site specific comments are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. Their comments on the annexation and zoning request included the following: a. The request for C-G along the frontage of Fairview Avenue is consistent with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. The City Council has indicated in past proposals that residential development within this section is not desirable. It would not appear that a zoning of R-2, with minimum lot sizes of 18,000 square feet, is appropriate for this area. As the owner/applicant has no known plans for the property, the portion of land south of Wilson Lane should not be annexed until a development proposal is presented and the City may determine whether annexation into the City is desired. b. A development agreement incorporating detailed conditions REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 13 ECONO LURE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 • C of approval is required as a condition of annexation. Their general comments included the following: a. Any existing irrigation/drainage ditches crossing the property to be included in this project, shall be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9-605.M. Plana 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. b. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this 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 Applicant is to determine the seasonal high groundwater elevation, and submit a profile of the subsurface soil conditions as prepared by a soil scientist with street development plans. d. The Applicant is to provide five-foot-wide sidewalks in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-9-606.B. Water service to this development is contingent upon positive results from a hydraulic analysis by our computer model. e. The Applicant is to submit a letter from the Ada County Street Name Committee, approving the subdivision and street names. The Applicant must make any corrections necessary to conform. f. The Applicant ie to coordinate fire hydrant placement with the Meridian Public Works Department. h. The Applicant is to respond, in writing, to each of the comments contained in this memorandum and submit to the City Clerk's office prior to the hearing date. Their site specific comments included the following: a. The overall boundary of the Annexation and Zoning request is approximately 8.5 acres, of which Econo Lube Subdivision occupies the northerly 2.5 acres. The remaining 6 acres, lying south of Wilson Lane, is to remain as is under this proposal. b. Sanitary sewer service. to this site will be via an REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 14 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 extension of an existing mainline located in Wilson Lane. Approval of this application needs to be contingent upon our ability to accept the additional sanitary sewage generated by this proposed development. The Applicant will be responsible to construct the sewer mains to and through this proposed development. The subdivision designer is to coordinate main sizing and routing with the Public Works Department. Sewer manholes are to be provided to keep the sewer lines on the south and west sides of centerline. c. Water service to this site will be via extensions of an existing ten-inch diameter main located in Wilson Lane. The Applicant will be responsible for constructing the water mains to and through this .proposed development. The subdivision designer is to coordinate main sizing and routing with the Public Works Department. d. The Applicant has indicated on the Preliminary Plat map that the source of the landscape irrigation system will be from an existing well. Will the well be able to provide enough water for the irrigation of each lot's irrigation system? e. High-pressure sodium streetlights will be required at locations designated by the Public Works Department. All streetlights shall be installed at the subdivider's expense. Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants. f. Storm drainage must be retained within the boundaries of each lot. No combined storm drainage systems will be allowed. g. Please indicate the centerline of East Fairview Avenue and dedication of additional needed right-of=way (54' from centerline) on the Preliminary Plat map. h. D & B Supply's requirements called for a minimum 25-foot- wide berm beyond required right-of-way along Fairview Avenue. The Owner/Applicant shall construct a berm adjacent to the south right-of-way line of Fairview Avenue a minimum of 25 feet in width ranging in height above the grade of the adjacent parking area from two feet to four feet. The Applicant shall indicate landscape setback requirement on the plat. The Fairview Avenue berm will be landscaped and sprinkler irrigated in accordance with the detailed landscape plan to be submitted by developer and approved by the City. Said REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 15 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE~ INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 plan shall be submitted for review and approval prior to the submittal of the final plat map. Each individual lot shall provide a minimum of one three-inch caliper tree per 1,500 square feet of asphalt. A letter of credit or cash surety will be required for the improvements prior to signature on the final plat. i. ACHD policy requires that access from Fairview to this development be located to align with Avest Lane. Although their report indicates the alignment is to be with Dixie Lane, staff believes this is an error and should indicate Avest Lane. j. The preliminary plat map is required to carry the stamp, signature and date of the Professional Land Surveyor that has done the preliminary design. k. Please revise the Preliminary Plat map to show that the new 30-foot portion of Wilson Lane is to be "dedicated" to ACRD, not "Vacated." 1. Permanent easements will need to be dedicated across the subdivision for extension of public utilities. m. The Applicant will be required to construct curb, gutter and five-foot-wide sidewalk along the frontage of Wilson Lane, and five-foot-wide separated sidewalk along the frontage of Fairview Avenue. n. During the design phase of D & B supply, it was discovered that there is an existing underground irrigation pipe that runs parallel with Fairview Avenue, that is independent of the ditch and pipe that is visible from the surface. The subdivision design engineer should contact the Public Works Department for further information. o. All parking stalls are to be a minimum of 9'x19' with 25' driveways. The 16'-6" stalls adjacent to the proposed Schuck's store are not in compliance and need to be revised. Compact stalls may only be approved with the approval of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Based on a square footage of 10,800, 54 parking spaces are required. p. The Applicant will provide signage for handicapped accessible stalls in accordance with ADA. q. All signage shall be in accordance with the standards set REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 16 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 forth in Section 11-2-415 of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance, the Uniform Sign Code, and 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 3 days notice to the Applicant. Sign permits are needed for all signage. Council may want to specifically review individual signage. r. Screened trash enclosures are to be provided per City Ordinance. The Applicant shall coordinate dumpster site locations with the City's solid waste contractor, Sanitary Services, Inc. Applicant shall locate dumpsters so as not to impede fire access. s. All uses shall be developed under the conditional use permit process, with detailed site plans to be approved for each individual lot. 23. The Applicant,'s representative, Patrick McKeegan, responded in writing to the annexation, zoning, general and site specific comments of the Assistant to the City Engineer and the Planning and Zoning Administrator through a letter dated September 5, 1997. This responsive letter is incorporated herein as if set forth in full. Mr. McKeegan's responses to the annexation and zoning comments included the following: a. It is Applicant's understanding that the City will annex the portion of the property being subdivided without the portion south of Wilson Lane being annexed. The owner has agreed to the dedication of the portion of the property for Wilson Lane. The portion south of Wilson Lane will be greater than five acres so it will still be large enough to qualify as a lot in the County R/T zone. I do not know of the owners plans for that property except that it is expected to be a residential use. The R-2 zone request was at the direction of the property owner. Mr. McReegan's responses to the general comments included the following: REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 17 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 a. It is Applicant's understanding that the open ditches on this property serve only this property. Applicant may use some of the irrigation for a pressurized irrigation system. Ditches that will not be used will be covered. Any ditches that remain active will be tiled per the referenced ordinance and the irrigation district's requirements. b. It is Applicant's intention to use the existing well for landscape irrigation if it has enough capacity. c. Information on the seasonal high groundwater elevation was included in the soils report submitted with the application. The high ground water, as tested on August 13th, was encountered at 8-8.5 feet below existing grade. This should be close to the seasonal high. This will be below the anticipated building footings and lube pit floor structure.. The Tube pit uses a five layer waterproofing system that prevents migration of liquids in from both sides of the pit walls and floor. d. Sidewalks will be installed on Fairview Avenue and Wilson Lane as requested. e. There will be no streets within the subdivision. The subdivision name has been submitted to the Committee for approval. Mr. McKeegan's responses to the site specific comments included the following: a. The Applicant has not tested the current well system yet because the home on the property is occupied. If the capacity is adequate we intend to use the well for irrigation. b. It is Applicant's intention to have a common storm drainage system for the north two lots (Econo Lube and Schuck's) to minimize the cost and gain economy of scale. They would be installed and maintained through a joint easement between the parties that would run with the land. If this is not desirable, Applicant will install separate systems. The detailed drainage systems for the south two lots will be determined when the lots are sold. At this time it appears that the lots may be sold to one owner. c. The centerline of East Fairview Avenue and dedication of REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Paqe 18 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 additional needed right-of-way will be added to the Preliminary and Final Plat maps. d. Landscape setbacks will be shown on the Plat. The interior landscaping will be installed as requested. The requirement for surety is acknowledged. e. Applicant acknowledges ACHD requirements that access from Fairview to this development be located to align with Avest Lane, and will install its egress point in conformance with the ACHD requirements. f. Applicant will revise the Preliminary Plat map to show that the new 30-foot portion of Wilson Lane is to be "dedicated" to ACHD, not "Vacated". g. Applicant will construct the curb, gutter and sidewalk as requested. h. The building will be moved 2.5 feet north to allow for the 19 foot parking stall length. 24. Joe Canning also responded in writing to the annexation, zoning, and site specific comments of the Assistant to the City Engineer and the Planning and Zoning Administrator through a letter dated September 5, 1997. This responsive letter is incorporated herein as if set forth in full. Mr. Canning's responses to the annexation and zoning comments included the following: a. After reviewing the Meridian Subdivision Ordinance, i would have no objection to deleting the land south of Wilson Lane from the annexation request. Mr. Canning's responses to the site specific comments included the following: a. The well's capacity is unknown at served as the drinking water source present on the project site. Furthe well capacity is planned during landscaping during the project development phase of the project. this time. It has for the home that is r study regarding the the design of the construction plan REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 19 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 b. The centerline and right-of-way may be added to .the preliminary plat. c. The revision of access location to Fairview would also be planned to be added to the preliminary plat. d. I had not noticed in the submittal data provided by the city the requirement that the preliminary plat carry a land surveyor's seal. I understood the boundary description was required to be sealed. e. The preliminary plat will be revised to show that the new 30-foot portion of Wilson Lane is to be "dedicated" to ACRD, not "Vacated". 25. The Meridian Police Department, the Meridian Fire Department, the Meridian Sewer Department, the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District, and Central District Health submitted comments, which respective comments are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 26. The Ada County Highway District has or may hereafter submit comments. Its submitted comments, if any, are incorporated herein as if set forth in full, and its comments hereafter submitted shall be incorporated herein as if set forth in full when submitted. 27. There were also comments by Thom and Barbara Myall by way of correspondence directed to the City of Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission, dated September 4, 1997. Their letter is incorporated herein as if set forth in full. Mr. and Mrs. Myall's comments included the following: a. The Myalls are landowners of approximately 18 acres immediately adjacent to the subject land on the west side, 1470 Locust Grove Road, consisting of a private residence and agricultural land. REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 20 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE. PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 i • b. The Applicant's proposal does not appear to be in compliance with 1.5, 4.SU and 5.16U of the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. A plan for complete development of all lands shown on the Generalized Land Use Map for all developers would be most helpful. The subject land also appears to be the land commonly referred to as Idaho Foreign Trade Zone (FTZ) and therefore we question whether R-2 zoning is compatible for the south 6 acres. There is no development plan shown for those six acres. We have been told in the past by the City of Meridian that you will not annex open land without a concrete development plan. c. St appears that Meridian has or may soon have competing and conflicting uses in this area without thoughtful and careful planning. Furthermore, it is unclear what the City's plan is for Wilson Lane. Whether that street will continue east to lot 1 of Pleasant Valley Subdivision to the Treasure Valley Business Park, whether every eastern property owner will request Fairview access as they have now, and whether ACRD will approve is unclear. It appears that the City is approving classic strip development with all of its associated problems. The City of Meridian has or will have piecemeal development all along the south side of Fairview, which is identified as an eastern entryway to the City. d. The irrigation water delivery system crosses the southern 6 acres of subject land requested to be zoned R-2. This irrigation water delivery system must be protected for users of the water. There appears to be no plan for piping this water in the Econo Lube subdivision. e. The irrigation waste water system crosses 8.5 acres in numerous places, carrying wasted irrigation water from 52 acres east of this land. This amount of waste irrigation water needs to be taken into account in the plans and drawings. This is a concern of ours due to the previous construction of D & B Supply where this was not taken into account until the construction of Wilson Lane was almost completed. f. Currently all road runoff from Wilson Lane runs above ground and within 25 feet of our domestic well. The additional road water runoff, which, in the future, could be carrying additional hazardous waste from the proposed auto repair shop will compound our concerns for safe drinking water from our well. REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 21 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 28. There were no other comments by the public at the September 9, 1997 hearing regarding this application, and the hearing was continued until October 14, 1997. 29. A resubmittal of the Application for annexation, zoning, and a conditional use permit containing additional information requested at the September 9, 1997 public hearing, via letter from Patrick Mc Keegan dated October 7, 1997, was received by Shari Stiles, Planning and Zoning Director on or about October 8, 1997. The additional information is incorporated herein as if set forth in full. Specifically, the resubmitted Application .includes the following information as revisions to the preliminary plat: a. Delineation of modifications to the irrigation/drainage ditches. The ,plan maintains irrigation to drainage from existing undeveloped lots effected by this project. Approval from the Irrigation District is in progress. b. Water and sewer service have been extended along Wilson Lane. The utility easement within the subdivision has been relocated to the east property line. c. The street name (Wilson Lane) has been approved. The subdivision approval is still in process. d. The additional 4 feet of right of way on Fairview Avenue has been shown on the plat and C.U. site glan. e. The 25' landscape setback and berm on Fairview Avenue has been shown on the plat and C.U. site plan. f. Alignment of the Fairview access drive with Avest Lane in compliance with ACHD standards is shown on the plat and C.U. site plan. g. The preliminary plat map has been stamped and sealed. h. A 5 foot wide sidewalk has been added at Fairview Avenue. i. Investigation of the "discovered" irrigation pipe REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 22 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 continues. Appropriate information will be added to the plat map. 30. The resubmitted Application also included Econo Lube N'Tune and Schuck's color, exterior elevations, floor plans and site signs. In addition, the following information was in the resubmitted Application as relates specifically to the conditional use permit: a. Fire hydrants will be placed as requested by the Meridian Public Works Department. b. Street lights will be located at the Fairview egress point and eastern fire hydrant on Wilson Lane. c. Landscaping has been modified to add the berm at Fairview Avenue and one tree per 1,500 s.f. of asphalt. d. The parking has been modified to provide 19' deep stalls. At Schuck's north side the asphalt depth is 17 feet with 2 feet added to the sidewalk. This allows the curb to act as a wheel restraint. The required number of parking spaces (54) have been provided. e. Accessible parking places will be constructed, marked and signed in accordance with ADA guidelines. f. Proposed pole mounted aignage information is included for pour information. It is our understanding that the aignage will require a separate approval. g. Trash enclosures will match the building construction. Dumpster sizing and location will be in conformance with Sanitary Services, Inc. requirements. h. Individual site drainage has been shown for each lot. i. At the Public Hearing Schuck's was requested to review their building placement. Schuck's reviewed relocation of the building.. Attached is a narrative addressing the reasons for the location shown on the revised site plan. 31. Additionally, Schuck's submitted a narrative summarizing their evaluation of reorienting their building on the site as REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 23 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 requested by Commissioner Smith at the September 9, 1997 meeting. The narrative is incorporated herein as if set forth in full. The narrative specifically set forth the following information: As requested at the September 9, 1997 Planning and Zoning meeting, we have evaluated the idea of reorienting our standard 7,000 square foot building to face east and move the building closer to Fairview Avenue. After numerous discussions and review of the plans we have determined that the reorientation of the building would be inferior to the site plan that was presented at the meeting. It would be inferior for the following reasons: a. The front of the building including entrance, exit, canopy sign, windows, entrance parking and main lighting would face the rear of the proposed Econo Lube store, in lieu of facing Fairview Avenue. Thia would be undesirable. b. The majority of the customers would have to drive to the rear of the property to park, in lieu of all parking in front of the store. This would create a non-friendly parking lot layout for our customers. c. We would loose (sic) one parking space. d. The rear of the building (100) feet would face west bound traffic on Fairview Avenue. e. The side of our building (70) feet which has drain gutters, no windows or special treatments would face Fairview Avenue. This is not an attractive look for the surrounding community. f. Customers would tend to park along the side of the building instead of the front because it would be the first accessible parking space when entering the parking lot. g. The building would set approximately 64 feet closer to Fairview, which would create a crowded appearance to the development. This would block the visibility to both; the proposed Econo Lube to the east and the existing D & B Lumber store to the west. We have a reciprocal access agreement and a approval of the site REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 24 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 plan and proposed building location from D & B lumber, any deviation from this would not be acceptable. We would like to keep the building orientation so that the front of the building faces Fairview Avenue and that all parking would be accessible from the front of the store. 32. At the October 14, 1997 public hearing, Econo Lube N'Tune's representative, Dennis Thornton, testified substantially as follows. The Applicant took the Planning Commission's recommendations, considerations, and tried to address each of those issues. The Applicant re-submitted the site plan with color elevations, floor plans and site signs which was requested at the last planning meeting. The Applicant made the revisions to the plat as were requested, adding fire hydranta, street lighting, modifying the landscaping and the berm on Fairview including one tree per 1500 square feet. The parking has been modified to 19 feet deep stalls, on the Schuck's north side, asphalt depth is 17 feet but 2 feet was added to the sidewalk as recommended. There are 54 parking spaces as required, accessible parking spaces will be constructed marked and signed in accordance with the ADA guidelines. The proposed pole mounted sign information has been submitted. Trash enclosures will match all building construction. Individual site drainage has been shown for each lot. Schuck's looked very hard at reconfiguring the building on the site and because of constraints that they felt were unacceptable, determined it would not be advantageous to the entire development. The Applicant tried to address the concerns of Commissioner Smith, and REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 25 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 looked very hard at making some changes in accordance with his suggestions. The Applicant believes the site plan as re-submitted is the highest and best use. Changes to the plat include modification of irrigation and drainage ditches, water and sewer service has been extended along Wilson Lane. The utility easement within the subdivision has been relocated to the eastern property line that being one utility easement. The street name Wilson has been approved and the subdivision approval is still in process. The additional four feet of right of way on Fairview has been shown on the plat and the conditional use site plan. The 25 feet landscape setback and berm on Fairview have been shown on the plat and the Conditional use site plan. The Applicant has aligned the Fairview access drive with Avest lane in compliance with ACHD standards as shown on the plat and the CU site plan. The preliminary plat map has been stamped and sealed. A five foot wide sidewalk has been added at Fairview Avenue and the investigation of the discovered irrigation pipe continues and appropriate information will be added to the final plat. 33. In response to questioning by Commissioner Smith, Mr. Thornton testified substantially as follows. He does not recall the request for moving the building closer to the road being directed at Econo Lube at all, but only to Shucks, and Commissioner Smith must be mistaken. Therefore, Econo Lube did not look at reorienting the building. The Applicant prefers to have the stacking out front so that the handicapped parking is out front REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 26 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 and they can be taken into the facility without much difficulty. The Applicant also likes it to look to the public as if it is very busy. 34. Bill Geyer testified substantially as follows. He represents the Schrandt family limited partnership which owns the D & B facility to the west of the proposed application. He would like clarification on the ingress easement his partnership has been truing to negotiate with the Applicant for several months. Mr. Geyer asked if the ingress/egress point is something that is a condition of their approval for the development. Commissioner Borup replied that most of the requirement for the cross access has come from ACRD, but it makes sense. He feels that the cross access needs to be out front, not out back of the property. 35. Glen Buday, representative for Schuck's, testified substantially as follows. Schuck's does not want their parking to the rear of their building so that customers buying batteries and other heavy items can reach their cars quickly. Mr. Huday read the Schuck's narrative for building orientation submitted by Schuck's, and elaborated some on parking and building orientation. (See paragraph 31 above for the complete text). 36. Commissioner Smith responded by asking what originally dictated how the buildings would be situated on the property. Mr. Thornton again testified substantially as follows. Schuck's found the site first, and then an agreement was arranged so that Econo Lube N'Tune would maintain Schuck's position next to D & B Supply. REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 27 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 He also added that there are security issues involved with moving the parking to the rear because the businesses are closed at night. But because Schuck's is open a little later in the evening, people would be walking behind the building in the dark, causing safety concerns. 37. Commissioner Borup then commented that he believes Schuck's narrative shows they just decided on a building they want and determined that it is best for them and easiest, not beat for anyone else. He likes the building at Ustick and Five Mile in Boise with a corner entrance and windows on both sides, and parking on the sides. 38. Commissioner MacCoy commented that he shares Commissioner Borup's and Commissioner Smith's concerns with the building orientation. 39. Commissioner Smith then commented further as follows. He does not appreciate Mr. Buday's comment that the floor plan is designed how it is and that is just the way it works. He does not believe that the plan shows good design work and the whole site is bad design. Since this is a case where there is an empty piece of ground with building owners who are very cooperative, very able, and very capable to work together, to end up with the plan as submitted is a substandard approach. He believes this just amplifies the problems with cookie cutter design, cookie cutter architecture that anyone can take a business and plop it on any site anywhere in Boise or anywhere in the United States and expect REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 28 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 it to work. That approach does not address the concerns that he or the other commissioners have about the site, and avoiding strip development. He is very disappointed and strongly disagrees with the statement that reorientation would be inferior to the site plan that was presented at the meeting. He thinks that with some creativity there could have been a solution that worked the Applicant and the Commission. However, he will not support the site plan the way it is presented. In addition, he believes a monument sign is sufficient and the pole sign designs submitted are not needed. There is more signage on the building than is needed, and he will not support the signage package as presented either. 40. In response to Commissioner Smith's concerns, Mr. Thornton testified substantially as follows. The Applicant wants to build in Meridian, and will do all it can to comply with the wishes of the Commission, and he agrees it isn't the best way to do it, but the Applicant does not have enough property to make it work out better. The Applicant is trying to get everything approved by December so that building can begin and everything will be built within two months. The Applicant would be happy to look at any other suggestions, but has budget restraints that prevent the building from being the way the Commission wants it. if signage is a problem, the Applicant will look at a monument sign. 41. There was no further testimony at the October 14, 1997 public hearing. 42. The property included in the annexation and zoning REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 29 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 application is within the Area of Impact of the City of Meridian. 43. The parcel of ground requested to be annexed is presently included within the Meridian Urban Service Planning Area (iJ.S.P.A.) as the Urban Service Planning Area is defined in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. 44. The property can be physically serviced with City water and sewer, if applicant extends the lines. 45. Meridian has, and is, experiencing a population increase; that there are pressures on land previously used for agricultural uses to be developed into residential subdivision lots and other uses. 46. The following pertinent statements are made in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and are specifically applicable to this Application: 1. Under ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY CENTERS at page 17 Retail, commercial and office development are frequent partners within Commercial Activity Centers. In order to support residential and industrial developments, areas should be set aside as Commercial Activity Centers and their development carefully guided. Various commercial activity centers are designated on the generalized land use map. Planning policies pertaining to commercial activity centers are presented in the land use chapter of the plan. MIXED-PLANNED USE DEVELOPMENT AREAS at page 17 Mixed use is a planning category which refers to the coordinated development of several major uses as part of a single project, such as specialty REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 30 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 retail/commercial, variable density residential, offices, motels, industrial, service, commercial, and public and semi-public uses. Certain areas have been designated for mixed-planned uses. The development of mixed and planned compatible land uses should be carefully guided through specific project plans, in accordance with the mixed-use policies contained in the Land Use chapter of the Plan. Economic Development Goal Statement Policies, Page 18 1.1 The City of Meridian shall make every effort to create a positive atmosphere which encourages industrial and commercial enterprises to locate in Meridian. 1.2 It is the policy of the City of Meridian to set aside areas where commercial and industrial interests and activities are to dominate. 1.3 The character, site improvements and type of new commercial or industrial developments should be harmonized with the natural environment and respect the unique needs and features of each area. 1.5 Strip industrial and commercial uses are not in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. 1.6 It is the policy of the City of Meridian to support shopping facilities which are effectively integrated into new or existing residential areas, and plan for new shopping centers as growth and development warrant. (Emphasis added.) 2. Under LAND USE EXISTING CONDITIONS, Page 21 Commercial and retail areas are established along major arterials, and include small commercial center and individual businesses. Uses include retail, wholesale, service, office, and limited manufacturing. Area of Impact, Page 22 REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 31 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 Comprehensive Plan Man The proposed future land use delineations for the impact area are shown on the Comprehensive Plan Map - Generalized Land Uses, The land use element is based upon these objectives: 4. Planned mixed uses along I-84, Franklin Road, U.P. Railroad, and Fairview Avenue corridors. (Emphasis added.) COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY CENTERS, Page 25 In all cases, the locations of Commercial Activity Centers should be guided by performance and developments standards. These standards consider, among other aspects: 1. Traffic Volume and Type 2. Trip Generation 3. Impacts on Arterial Street System 4. Proximity to Other Commercial Development 5. Impacts on Neighborhood Residential Areas 6. Accessibility of Site 7. Parking Demands 8. Pedestrian Circulation 9. Available Utility Systems 10. Aesthetics (Design Considerations) 11. Use Impacts Upon Other Adjacent Uses 12. Internal Circulation Design 13. Drainage COMMERCIAL POLICIES, Page 26 4.6U Community shopping centers will be encouraged to locate at arterial intersections and near high-traffic intensity. areas. (Emphasis added.) Page 28 5.16U A variety of coordinated, planned and compatible land uses are desirable for this area, including low-to-high density residential, office, light industrial and commercial land uses. REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 32 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 5.18U Existing residential properties will be protected from incompatible land-use development in this area. Screening and buffers will be incorporated into all development requests in this area. Rural Areas, page 29 Land covered by this policy section has characteristics which generally allow for agricultural and rural residential activity due to the existence of irrigation systems, soil characteristics and relative freedom from conflicting urban land uses. Where community growth creates pressure for new development, it must be recognized that agricultural land can no longer economically continue to be identified or used as agricultural land to the exclusion of orderly city growth and development." 3. Under TRANSPORTATION, Paqe 43 Existinc Conditions a. Cherry Lane/Fairview, East of Meridian Road, is listed as a principal arterial b. Locust Grove, Franklin to Ustick is listed as a Minor arterial. 4. Under COMMUNITY DESIGN, at Page 71 Community Identification Goal Statement Create visual quality and functional identity for the City of Meridian and its surrounding environment. Policies 1.1 All commercial and industrial developments should be reviewed by the City for adequate site planning. 1.3 Open space areas within all development should be encouraged. REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 33 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 1.4 Major entrances to the City should be enhanced and emphasized. Unattractive land uses along these entrances should be screened from view. Special Community Desicn Areas Goal Statement 2.1U Require businesses and government to install and maintain landscaping. 2.2U Encourage area beautification through uniform sign design that enhances the community. 2.3U Encourage the beautification of streets, parking lots, public lands, and state highways. 2.SU Encourage the use of attractive open space, landscaping, lighting, and street furniture for the benefit of the public. Entryway Corridors Entryway corridors are arterial roadways entering the community that introduce both visitors and residents to Meridian. City-designated gateway arterials include the following streets: c. Fairview Avenue (East entrance) Entryway corridors are a community's front door. It is acknowledged that the corridor's trees (or lack thereof), commercial signage, and site character provide the first, and often times the most lasting, impression of the entire community. Therefore, the entire community and, most specifically its governing bodies, have the right and the responsibility to guide the development and redevelopment that occurs along entryway corridors. REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 34 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 Entrance Corridors Goal Statement Promote, encourage, develop and maintain aesthetically-pleasing entrances to the City of Meridian. Policies 4.2U Support ACRD corridor development standards for the entryways to the City. 4.3U Use the Comprehensive Plan, subdivision regulations, and zoning to discourage strip development and encourage clustered, landscaped business or residential development on entrance corridors. 4.4U Encourage landscaped setbacks for new development on entrance corridors. The City shall require, as a condition of development approval, landscaping along all entrance corridors. Ouality of Environment Goal Statement Policies 5.2U Ensure that all new development enhances rather than detracts from the visual quality of its surroundings, especially in areas of prominent visibility. Neiahborhood Identify Goal Policies, 6.1U All Meridian neighborhoods will be served with sidewalks, curb and gutters, and functional streets. 6.4U Limit the conversion of predominantly residential neighborhoods to nonresidential uses, and require effective buffers and mitigation measures through conditional use permits when appropriate nonresidential uses are proposed. 47. The property is included within an area designated on the Generalized Land Use Map in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan as a Mixed/Planned Use Development area and a commercial designation is just to the west of the parcel. REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 35 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 48. The requested zoning of General Retail and Service Commercial, (C-G) is defined in the Zoning Ordinance at 11-2-408 B. 11. as follows: "(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 highway or arterial streets; to fulfill the need of travel-related services as well as retail sales for the transient and permanent motoring public. All such districts shall be connected to the Municipal water and Sewer systems of the City of Meridian, and shall not constitute strip commercial development and encourage clustering of commercial development."; 49. That Section 11-2-409, ZONING SCHEDULE OF USE CONTROL, B, Commercial, lists commercial uses allowed in the various zoning districts of the City; that Automobile Repair Shops and Retail Stores are both listed as conditional uses in the General Retail and Service Commercial (C-G) district. 50. That Planned Development is defined in 11-2-403 B, at page 20 of the Zoning Ordinance booklet, as follows: "An area of land which is developed as a single entity for a number of uses in combination with or exclusive of other supportive uses. A PD may be entirely residential, industrial, or commercial or a mixture of compatible uses. A PD does not necessarily correspond to lot size, bulk, density, lot coverage required, open space or type of residential, commercial or industrial uses as established in any one or more created districts or this Ordinance." and a Planned General Development is defined as follows: "A development not otherwise distinguished under Planned Commercial, Industrial, Residential Developments, or in which the proposed use of interior and exterior spaces requires unusual design flexibility to achieve a completely logical and complimentary conjunction of uses and functions. This PD REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 36 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 classification applies to essential public services, public or private recreation facilities, institutional uses, community facilities or a PD which includes a mix of residential, commercial or industrial uses." and a Planned Commercial Development is defined as follows: "Any development in which the principal use of land is for commercial purposes." 51. That in 1992 the Idaho State Legislature passed amendments to the Local Planning Act, which in 67-6513 Idaho Code, relating to subdivision ordinances, states as follows: "Each such ordinance may provide for mitigation of the effects of subdivision development on the ability of political subdivisions of the state, including school districts, to deliver services without compromising quality of service delivery to current residents or imposing substantial additional costs upon current residents to accommodate the subdivision."; that the City of Meridian is concerned with the increase in population that is occurring and with its impact on the City being able to provide fire, police, emergency health care, water, sewer, park's and recreation services to its current residents and to those moving into the City; the City is also concerned that the increase in population is burdening the schools of the Meridian School District which provide school service to current and future residents of the City; that the City knows that the increase in population, and the housing for that population, does not sufficiently increase the tax base to offset the cost of providing fire, police, emergency health care, water, sewer, parka and recreation services; and the City knows that the increase in population does not provide sufficient tax base to provide for REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 37 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 school services to current and future students; that the industrial and commercial developments do provide taxes for providing fire, police, emergency health care, water, sewer, parks and recreational services for people that are here, and which will come here. 52. That pursuant to the instruction, guidance, and direction of the Idaho State Legislature, the City may impose either a development fee or a transfer fee on residential property, which, if possible, would be retroactive and apply to all lots in the City, because of the imperilment to the health, welfare, and safety of the citizens of the City of Meridian. 53. That Section 11-9-605 G 1. states as follows: "Planting strips shall be required to be placed next to incompatible features such as highways, railroads, commercial or industrial uses to screen the view from residential properties. Such screening shall be a minimum of twenty feet (20') wide, and shall not be a part of the normal street right of way or utility easement." 54. That Section 11-9-605 L states, in part, as follows: All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing, or lying adjacent and contiguous, or which canals, ditches or laterals touch either or both sides of the area being subdivided, shall be covered and enclosed with tiling or other covering equivalent in ability to detour access to said ditch, lateral or canal. 55. That 11-9-607 A, of the Subdivision Ordinance, states in part as follows: "The City's policy is to encourage developers of land development and construction projects to utilize the provisions of this Section to achieve the following: 1. A development pattern in accord with the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan; REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 38 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 5. A more convenient pattern of commercial, residential and industrial uses as well as public services which support such uses." 56. That 11-9-607 E, of the Subdivision Ordinance, states in part as follows: "A PD shall be allowed only as a Conditional Use in each district subject to the standards and procedures set forth in the Section. A PD shall be governed by the regulations of the district or districts in which said PD is located. The approval of the Final Development Plan for a PD may provide for such exceptions from the district regulations governing use, density, area, bulk, parking, signs, and other regulations as may be desirable to achieve the objectives of the proposed PD, provided such exceptions are consistent with the standards and criteria contained in this Section." 57. That 11-9-607 F, of the Subdivision Ordinance, states in part as follows: 1. Planned Developments - Planned developments shall be subject to requirements set forth in the Zoning Ordinance and also subject to all provisions within this Ordinance. 8. Financial Guarantees - The developer shall poet financial guarantees for all approved on-site improvements if required pursuant to 9-606 C." 58. The Applicant submitted an Application and materials and documentation for a conditional use permit to construct and operate an Econo Lube N'Tune facility on the property; that such Application, materials and documentation on the conditional use are incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full; that the Applicant submitted materials on the conditional use request and did reference how the Econo Lube N'Tune facility would be operated; there were comments from the public which pertained to the annexation and zoning and to the conditional use permit, and REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 39 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 such are incorporated herein as if set forth in full for purposes of the application for the conditional use permit. 59. That proper notice was given as required by law and all procedures before the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council were given and followed. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. That all the procedural requirements of the Local Planning Act and of the Ordinances of the City of Meridian have been met; including the mailing of notice to owners of property within 300 feet of the external boundaries of the Applicant's property. 2. That the City of Meridian has authority to annex land pursuant to 50-222, Idaho Code, and Section 11-2-417 of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian; that exercise of the City's annexation authority is a legislative function. 3. That the City Council has judged these annexation, zoning and conditional use applications under Idaho Code, Section 50-222, Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, Meridian City Ordinances, Meridian Comprehensive Plan, as amended, and the record submitted to it and things of which it can take judicial notice. 4. That all notice and hearing requirements set forth in Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian have been complied with. 5. That the Council may take judicial notice of government ordinances, and policies, and of actual conditions existing within the City and State. REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 40 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 6. That the land within the proposed annexation is contiguous to the present City limits of the City of Meridian, and the annexation would not be a shoestring annexation. 7. That the annexation application has been initiated by the Applicant with the consent of the property owners, and is not upon the initiation of the City of Meridian. 8. That since the annexation and zoning of land is a legislative function, the City has authority to place conditions upon the annexation of land. Burt vs. The Citv of Idaho Falls, 105 Idaho 65, 665 P.D 1075 (1983). 9. That the development of annexed land must meet and comply with the Ordinances of the City of Meridian and in particular Section 11-9-616, which pertains to development time schedules and requirements, and Section 11-9-605 M., which pertains to the tiling of ditches and waterways. 10. That the Applicant's proposed use of the property is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, and therefore the annexation and zoning Application is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. 11. The Applicant has stated and represented that its intention is to construct and operate an Econo Lube N'Tune auto service facility; that there will also be a Schuck's automotive parts retail store on the adjacent lot; that the area is designated in the Comprehensive Plan as a Mixed/Planned Use Development area which requirea planned use development; the Applicant has requested REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 41 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 zoning of General Retail and Service Commercial (C-G), which does allow for a commercial planned development,. 12. That it is concluded that since the Applicant has suggested that it would develop the property as a planned commercial development and since the Comprehensive Plan, under LAND USE, Mixed-Use Area at Locust Grove Road and Fairview Avenue, in 5.16U, states that all development requests will be subject to development review and conditional use permit processing, and the City should have-control over any uses that are to be placed on the land, it is therefore concluded that the development should be conditioned on being developed as a Commercial Planned Development, which is allowed in the General Retail and Service Commercial (C-G) district. 13. That, as a condition of annexation and the zoning of C-G, the Applicant shall be required to enter into a development agreement as authorized by 11-2-416 L and 11-2-417 D; that the development agreement shall address, among other things, the following: a. Inclusion into the development, including but not limited to, the requirements of 11-9-605 1. C, Pedestrian Walkways. 2. G 1, Planting Strips. 3. H, Public Sites and Open Spaces. 4. K, Lineal Open Space Corridors. 5. L, Pedestrian and Bike Path Ways. 6. M, Piping of Ditches and 11-9-606 7. Bicycle Pathways. 8. Storm drainage. REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 42 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 9. Sidewalks and Pedestrian Walkways. 10. Greenbelt. 11. Pressurized Irrigation. b. Payment by the Applicant, or if required, any assigns, heirs, executors or personal representatives, of any impact, development, or transfer fees, adopted by the.. City, as agreed to by the Applicant in statements by its representative during the public hearing. c. Addressing access linkage, screening, and buffering. d. An impact fee, or fees, for park, police, and fire services as determined by the city. e. Appropriate berming and landscaping. f. Submission and approval of any required plats. g. Submission and approval of individual buildings, drainage, lighting, parking, and other development plans under the Planned Development guidelines. h. Harmonizing and integrating the site improvements with the existing residential development. i. Establishing a 35 foot landscaped setback as suggested under the Comprehensive Plan and landscaping the same. j. Addressing the comments of the Planning Director. k. The sewer and water requirements. 1. Agreeing that the Meridian Comprehensive Plan is applicable to the land and any development. m. Traffic plans and access into and out of the development. n. Meeting the representations made as part of the application and hearing process. o. And any other items deemed necessary by the City Staff, including design review of all development, and conditional use processing as required under the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. 14. That Seetion 11-2-417 D of the Meridian Zoning Ordinance states that a development agreement should be recorded in the REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 43 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 office of the Ada County Recorder and take effect upon the adoption of the ordinance annexing and zoning the property, or prior if agreed to by the owner of the parcel. That it has been the experience of the City that development agreements are difficult to enter into prior to the annexation ordinance being passed; that it is concluded that the development agreement shall be entered into prior to the final plat being approved and prior to issuance of any building permits. 15. That it is concluded that the annexing and zoning of the property is in the best interests of the City of Meridian and should be enacted. 16. That regarding the conditional use permit request for the Applicant, Econo Lube N'Tune, it is concluded as follows in paragraphs 17 through 31. 17. 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. 18. 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 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 REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 44 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 time period for which a conditional use may be in existence. 19. Section 11-2-416 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 Uae may be in existence. 20. This Application for a conditional use has been judged 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. 21. 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: a. The use, 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 REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 45 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 with the Comprehensive Plan but the Zoning Ordinance requires a conditional use permit to allow the use; c. The use is designed and is to be constructed to be harmonious in appearance with the character of the general vicinity; that 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; e. The property has sewer and water service already connected, but Applicant may have to pay additional fees for the use; f. The use would not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and the use would not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community; g. If the conditions involve a use, activity, conditions of operation person, property or the excessive production of glare or odors; are met, the use should not process, material, equipment or that would be detrimental to general welfare by reason of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, h. The use will have vehicular approaches to the property which shall be so designed as not to create an interference with traffic on surrounding public streets; and i. The use will not result damage of a natural or importance. in the destruction, loss or scenic feature of major 22. 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 conditions (listed in paragraph 22 of the Facts section above) of granting the conditional use be required, which REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 46 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 conditions are incorporated herein by reference. 23. The above-conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the Applicant shall meet these conditions. 24. As a further condition of the conditional use permit, a development agreement should be entered into regarding the development of the retail uses and such is hereby made a condition of the granting of the conditional use permit. It is recommended that if the Applicant meets the conditions stated above that the conditional use permit be granted to the Applicant. 25. That the requirements of the Meridian City Engineer's office, Meridian Fire Department, Central District Health Department, and the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District, shall be met and addressed in a development agreement. 26. That Applicant and the City should address the requirements and policies listed on Page 28 of the Meridian Comprehensive Plan for the mixed-planned use development and all proposed uses shall obtain conditional use permits. 27. That all ditches, canals, and waterways shall be tiled as a condition of annexation and if not so tiled, the property shall be subject to de-annexation. 28. That the Applicant will be required to connect to Meridian water and sewer and resolve how the water and sewer mains will serve the land; that the development of the property shall be subject to and controlled by the Subdivision and Development Ordinance and the development agreement. REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 47 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 29. That these conditions shall run with the land and bind the applicant, owner, and their assigns. 30. With compliance of the conditions contained herein, the annexation and zoning of General Retail and Service Commercial (C- G), and the issuance of a conditional use permit would be in the best interest of the City of Meridian. 31. That if these conditions of approval are not met, the property shall either not be annexed and the conditional use permit shall not be granted or the property shall be de-annexed and the conditional use permit revoked. APPROVAL OF FINDINOS OF FACT AND The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONER BORUP COMMISSIONER MACCOY SMITH COMMISSIONER NELSON CHAIRMAN JOHNSON (TIE BREAKER) VOTED ~~-- VOTED fv I 1 x VOTED ~ 4tj/t~~'q VOTED ~ ~ ~.j ~ / ~o VOTED ~^- ~ REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 48 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 DECISION AND The Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian hereby decides that the property set forth in the ,application should be approved for annexation, zoning and issuance of a conditional use permit under the conditions set forth in these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law; that if the Applicant is not agreeable with these Findings of Fact and Conclusions and is not agreeable with entering into a development agreement, the property should not be annexed. There shall be no development or use, whatsoever, of the property set forth in the Application as being used for anything other than a Planned Commercial Development for retail, even if annexed and zoned General Retail and Service Commercial (C-G) , and such is approved by the City of Meridian prior to commencement of construction. MOTION: APPROVED: DISAPPROVED: / \J ~~ r r1~ ~N~ REVISED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 49 ECONO LUBE N'TUNE, INC. - ANNEXATION AND ZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Revised 10/23/97 BEFORE THH MSRIDZAN PLANNING AND ZONING SSARLA LANPHEAR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AN ESPRESSO SHOP TO SELL PASTRIES, SANDWICHBS, SOUP, ETC. IN THE MERIDIAN OFFICE AND CONVENTION CENTER LOT 1, 3CHOOL PLAZA, SUBDIVISION tl MERIDIAN, IDAHO FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The above entitled matter having come on for public hearing on September 9, 1997, at the hour of 7:00 o'clock p.m., the Applicant, Sharla Lanphear personally appearing, 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. FIIfDI1fQ3 OF FACT 1. A notice of a public hearing on the application for the conditional use permit was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to said public hearing scheduled on September 9, 1997, the first publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly considered at the September 9, 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 Lot 1, School Plaza, Subdivision ~1. The property is described in the application which description is incorporated herein. The FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 1. SHARLA LANPHEAR - CONDITIONAL US8 PERMIT Applicant is not the owner of record of the property. The record owner of the property is Varn Chitwood, and he has consented to the application for the conditional use permit. 4. Pursuant to the application, the property is presently located within the Meridian Office and Convention Center. The proposed use of the property is to operate as an espresso shop and sandwich shop mainly to service the employees and others in the Meridian Office and Convention Center. The Applicant presented a site plan depicting the location of the espresso and sandwich shop within the new Meridian Office and Convention Center. Further, pursuant to the application, the Applicant agrees to pay any additional sewer, water or trash fees or charges, if any, associated with the use, whether that use be residential, commercial or industrial. 5. Sharla Lanphear, the Applicant, testified substantially as follows at the public hearing. The Applicant proposes an espresso and sandwich shop located within the new Meridian Office and Convention Center. 6. In response to questions of Commissioner Borup, Ma. Lanphear responded and testified substantially as follows. The approximate square footage of the proposed espresso shop is 200 feet. In response, Commissioner Borup commented that the dimensions appear to be close to 10 by 20 feet. 7. In response to questions of Coaimiasioner MacCoy, Ma. Lanphear responded and testified substantially as follows. That most of the pastries sold will be ordered in pre-made, but that FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 2. SHARLA LANPHEAR - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT deli sandwiches will be prepared on site. Me. Lanphear has seen a copy of tha staff report and does not have any problems with staff comments. S. In response to questions of Commissioner Johnson, Ma. Lanphear responded and testified substantially as follows. The espresso shop will opernte from 7:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. daily and there will be no sit down facility. 9. Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to the City Engineer, and Shari Stiles, Planning and Zoning Administrator, have submitted comments, which respective comments nre incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 10. The Meridian Fire Department, Meridian Police Department, Meridian Sewer Department, Central District Health Department and Nampa 6 Meridian Irrigation District submitted comments, which respective comments are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 11. ACHD submitted comments outlining site specific requirements as recommendations for conditions of approval to the City of Meridian as follows: a. Replacement of unused curb cute on Carlton Avenue with standard curb, gutter and 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk to match the existing improvements. b. Replacement of damaged curb, gutter and/or sidewalk on Carlton Avenue and 2 1/2 street with new curb, gutter and concrete sidewalk to match existing improvements. c. Construction of a 24 to 30-foot wide curb cut driveway on Carlton Avenue aligned with 2nd Street to the south. d. Construction of a 24 to 30-foot wide curb cut driveway on 2 1/2 Street approximately 130 feet north of Carlton Avenue. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 3. SHARLA LANPHEAR - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT e. Other than the access point(s) specifically approved with this application, direct lot or parcel access to Carlton Avenue and 2 1/2 Street is restricted. 12. There was no further testimony given at the hearing. 13. The property is currently zoned (L-O) Limited Office District. In the ZONING SCHSDULS OF USB CONTROL, Section 11-2-409 B., Commercial, Restaurants are listed as a conditional use in the L-O District and, therefore, in the L-O District a conditional use permit for the operation of a Restaurant is required. 14. The L-O, Limited Office District is described in the Zoning Ordinance, 11-2-408 B. 7 as follows: 1L-O) Limited Office Districts The purpose of the (L-O) District is to permit the establishment of groupings of professional, research, executive, administrative, accounting, clerical, stenographic, public service and similar uses. Research uses shall not involve heavy testing operations of any kind or product manufacturing of such a nature to create noise, vibration or emissions of a nature offensive to the overall purpose of this district. The L-0 District is designed to act as a buffer between other more intense non-residential uses and high density residential uaea, and is thus a transitional use. Connection to the Municipal Water and Sewer System of the City of Meridian is a requirement in Chia district. 15. Conditional Uae 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." 16. The use proposed by the Applicant is a specifically allowed conditional use in the Zoning Schedule of Use Control, 11- 2-409 B. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 4. SBARLA LANPBBAR - CONDITIONAL USB PERMIT 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 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 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 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 Uee, the Commission and Council may prescribe appropriate conditions, bonds, and safeguards in conformity with thin 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 mny prescribe a sat time period for which a Conditional Use may be in existence. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 5. SHARLA LANP9BAR - CONDITIONAL USB PBRMIT 6. This Application for a conditional use has been judged 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: a. The use, 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 but the Zoning Ordinance requires a conditional use permit to allow the use; c. The use is designed and is to be constructed to be harmonious in appearance with the character of the general vicinity; that 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; FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 6. SHARLA LANPHEAR - CONDITIONAL USS PERMIT e. The property has sewer and water service already connected, but Applicant may have to pay additional fees for the use; f. The use would not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and the use would not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community; q. If the conditions involve a use, activity, conditions of operation person, property or the excessive production of glare or odors; and are met, the use should not process, material, equipment or that would be detrimental to general welfare by reason of traffic, noise, omoke, fumes, h. The use will not result in the destruction, lose or damage of a natural or scenic feature of major importance. 8. Aa 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 Coamnission that the following conditions of granting the conditional use be required, to wit: a. The conditional use, pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance, shall not be transferable to another owner or lessor of the subject property or to another property; b. The Applicant shall meet the requirements of the City 8ngineer's office, the Planning and Zoning Administrator, Meridian Fire Department, Meridian Police Department, Meridian Sewer Department, Central District Health Department and Nampa 8 Meridian Irrigation District and other governmental agencies submitting comments; c. The conditional use shall not be restricted to a period of authorization but may be reviewed annually, upon notice to the Applicant, for violation of any conditions imposed herein and other conditional use applications; d. All ordinances of the City of Meridian must be met, including but not limited to, the Uniform Building FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Paqe 7. SHARLA LANPHEAR - CONDITIONAL US8 PSRMIT Code, Uniform Fire Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, the Fire and Life Safety Codes, all parking and landscaping requirements; e. screened trash enclosures will be required per City Ordinance Section 11-2-414.A.3 The Applicant shall coordinate dumpster site locations with the building owner and the City's solid waste contractor, Sanitary Services, Inc. Dumpsters shall be located so as not to impede fire access; f. The Applicant shall obtain a certificate of occupancy prior to occupying the proposed space; g. 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, the Uniform Siqn Code, and shall receive design approval of the Planning and Zoning Department. A-frame and other temporary signs and banners will not be permitted and will be removed upon 3 days notice to the Applicant. Sign permits are needed for all signage; h. All building construction or remodeling shall be in compliance with all required Uniform Codes. A letter of compliance with Central District Health Department regulations shall be obtained and provided to the City prior to opening for business; and i. 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. The owner of the building needs to enter into a re-assessment agreement for the entire building prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 9. The above-conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the Applicant shall meet these conditions. 10. It is recommended that if the Applicant meets the conditions stated above that the conditional use permit be granted to the Applicant. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 8. SHARLA LANPHHAR - CONDITIONAL US8 PBRMIT APPROVAL OF FIRDIRtiB OF FACT ARD COxCLU8IOR8 The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions. MOLL CALL COMMISSIONER BORUP VOTED COMMISSIONER MACCOY VOTED COMMISSIONER SMITH VOTED p/~nom` ~~~~'' C~TRMAN JOHNSON (TIE BREAKER) VOTED ~`~ ~/ FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -Page 9. SHARLA LANPHSAR -CONDITIONAL USS PERMIT • DECISIOIf AND RECOIUIENDATION The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council of the City of Meridian that it approve the Conditional Use Permit requested by the Applicant for the property described in the Application with the conditions set forth in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law or similar conditions as found justified and appropriate by the City Council and that the property be required to meet the water and sewer requirements, the Fire and Life Safety Codes, Uniform Fire Code, parking requirements, landscaping requirements, and all Ordinances of the City of Meridian. The conditional use should be subject to review upon notice to the Ap licant by the City. MOTION: APPROVED: DISAPPROVED: 1Jl~~l~~ FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 10. SHARLA LANPHEAR - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT • BBFORS TBS MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION CINDI'S FLORAL CONDITIONAL USS PSRMIT FOR A CINDI'S FLORAL IN THS FRONT PORTION OF THS OLD zAMZOws sTORs 611 BAST 1ST STRSST MSRIDIAN, IDAHO FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The above entitled matter having come on for. public hearing on September 9, 1997, at the hour of 7:00 o'clock p.m., the Applicant appearing through its representative, Diane Tipton, 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. FI1tDIHOS OF FACT 1. A notice of a public hearing on the application for the conditional use permit was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to said public hearing scheduled on September 9, 1997, the first publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly considered at the September 9, 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 611 Sast 1st Street. The property is described in the application which description is incorporated herein. The Applicant is not the FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 1 CINDI'S FLORAL - CONDITIONAL USB PBRMIT owner of record of the property. The record owner of the property is Zamzows, and it has consented to the application for the conditional use permit. 4. Pursuant to the application, the property is presently used as a 2amzowa retail store, selling retail items to the public, the back portion of the property existing as a mill. The proposed use of the property is to operate a Cindi's Floral in the front portion of the property, selling plants, fresh and dried floral arrangements, and gift items. The back portion of the property is to remain a mill. The Applicant presented a site plan depicting the location of the proposed use. Further, pursuant to the application, the Applicant agrees to pay any additional sewer, water or trash fees or charges, if any, associated with the use, whether that use be residential, commercial or industrial. 5. Diane Tipton, the representative of the Applicant, testified substantially as follows at the public hearing. The Applicant proposes a Cindi's Floral at the site as a lxation from which to do business, delivering flowers to Nampa, Caldwell, Meridian, Saqle and Suna. Currently, the Applicant has a Cindi's Floral located at Fairview and Milwaukee in Boise, rated one of the top 500 FTD shops in the nation. Sxpansion into the Meridian area will allow Cindi's to service its custoassrs in this area more effectively. Further, the Applicant would like to bring its business to Meridian and be a part of the community. 6. In response to questions of Commissioner Borup, Ms. Tipton responded and testified substantially FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Paq CINDI'S FLORAL - CONDITIONAL USS PSRMIT comments regarding parking and landacapinq ware confusing to her since it was her understanding that the City of Meridian had landscaped Sast 1st Street two years previously with trees and bricks inlaid, so she was surprised that the City would want the landscaping redone. The Applicant was willing to look at what else could be done, but was unsure where there would be room to put in more landscaping. In response, Commissioner Borup commented that he believed the landscaping was done more for Sast 1st Street than the individual properties. 7. in response to Commissioner MacCoy'a inquiry regarding the comment on the requirement for additional landacapinq, Shari Stiles, Planning and Zoning Administrator, indicated that the comment required additional landacapinq in the pnrking area prior to obtnininq a building permit. 8. In response to Shari Stiles' comments, and to questions by .Commissioner MacCoy, Ma. Tipton responded and testified substantially as follows. The Applicant's only change would be electrical, and so only an electrical permit would be sought to facilitate the use of a cooler and a computer system. The Applicant did not yet have a landscaping plan. The Applicant will put a few shelves up, install a cooler, and will build a work table, keeping the existing shelving the way it is. Applicant was .drawn to the site by the charm of the older building, and plane to keep the rustic aura .intact by performing no renovations. In response, Commissioner MacCoy expressed his appreciation for the praservntion of older buildings. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 3 CINDI'S FLORAL - CONDITIONAL USS PBRMIT 9. To further questions by Commissioner MacCoy, Ms. Tipton responded and testified substantially as follows. The Applicant desires to place benches in front of the store on the public sidewalk for pedestrians to sit on but has not yet measured to see if the required 8 foot clearance would be complied with. The Applicant intends to use the existing eignaqe, and will do whatever the City wants in regard to eignaqe and ordinance compliance. 10. In response to questions by Commissioner Smith, Ms. Tipton responded and testified substantially as follows. On the map of the site submitted along with the application, the squiggly line indicates the mill area to the rear of the property. There is also a paved parking area, and a paved area used for the mill. 11. Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to the City Sngineer, and Shari Stiles, Planning and Zoning Administrator, have submitted comments, which respective comments are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 12. The Meridian Fire Department, Meridian Police Department,. Meridian Sewer Department, Central District Health Department and Nampa ~ Meridian Irrigation District submitted comments, which respective comments are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 13. There was no further testimony given at the hearing. 12. The property is currently zoned (OT) Old Town District. In the ZONING SCHSDULS OF US8 CONTROL, Section 11-2-409 B., Commercial, Retail Stores are listed as a conditional use in the OT District and, therefore, in the OT District a conditional use FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 4 CINDI'S FLORAL - CONDITIONAL USB PSRMIT • permit for the operation of a Retail Store is required. 13. The OT, Old Town District is described in the Zoning Ordinance, 11-2-408 B. 12 as follows: i -.1 Ord Town District: The purpose of the (OT) District is to accommodate and encourage further ~oP delineatetha historical core of the community; _ centralized activity center and to a ublic 4 quasi public, revitalization and growth as the p 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. 14. 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." 15. The use proposed by the Applicant is a specifically allowed conditional use in the Zoning Schedule of Uae Control, 11- 2-409 B. COIiCLUSIOWS OF L1U1 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 property. 2. The City of Meridian has authority to grant conditional uses pursuant to Idaho Code Section 67-6512 and pursuant to 11-2- FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 5 CINDI'S FLORAL - CONDITIONAL USB PBRMIT 418 of the Zoning And Development Ordinance of the City of Meridian. 3. The City 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 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 Uae. The Commission and Council may prescribe a set time period for which a Conditional Uae may ba in existenae. 6. This Application for a conditional use has been judged 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 87, 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. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 6 CINDI'S FLORAL - CONDITIONAL US8 PERMIT 7. Section 11-2-418 C of the Zoning And Development Ordinance of the City of Meridian seta 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: a. The use, 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 but the Zoning Ordinance requires a conditional use permit to allow the use; c. The use is designed and ie to be constructed to be harmonious in appearance with the character of the general vicinity; that 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; e. The property has sewer and water service already connected, but Applicant may have to pay additional fees for the use; f. The use would not create excessive additional requirements at public coat 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; and FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 7 CINDI'S FLORAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT h. The development of the property 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 granting the conditional use be required, to wit: a. The conditional use, pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance, shall not be transferable to another owner or lessor of the subject property or to another property; b. The Applicant shall meat the requirements of the City Engineer's office, the Planning and Zoning Administrator, Meridian Fire Department, Meridian Police Department, Meridian Sewer Department, Central District Health Department and Nampa 6 Meridian Irrigation District and other governmental agencies submitting comments; c. The conditional use shall not be restricted to a period of authorization but may be reviewed annually, upon notice to the Applicant, for violation of any conditions imposed herein and other conditional use applications; d. All ordinances of the City of Meridian must be met, including but not limited to, the Uniform Building Code, Uniform Fire Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, the Fire and Life Safety Codes, all parking and landscaping requirements; e. A minimum of one (1) three-inch (3") caliper tree per 1,500 square feet of asphalt is required per City Ordinance Section 11-2-414.D. Additional landscaping will be required prior to obtaining a building permit. f. Applicant will provide a screened trash enclosure per City Ordinance Section 11-2-414.A.3. The applicant shall coordinate dumpater site locations with the City's solid waste contractor, Sanitary Services, Inc., locating dumpatera so as not to impede fire access. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 8 CINDI'S FLORAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT g• All driveway and parking areas shall be paved, with all driveway accesses approved by the Ada County Highway District. Paving, striping and signage of the parking lot is to be in accordance with Meridian City Ordinance and the Americans with Disabilities Act. Driveway widths shall be 25 feet wide and parking stalls shall be 9x19' in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-2-414. Graveled driveways, parking and access are not permitted. The railroad corridor shall be preserved, with no parking encroachment of this area. h. The Applicant shall obtain a certificate of occupancy prior to occupying the building. i. All signage shall be in accordance with the standards sat forth in Section 11-2-415 of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance, the Uniform Siqn Code, and 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 3 days notice to the Applicant. Sign permits are needed for all signage; j. All building construction or remodeling shall be in compliance with all required Uniform Codes. k. 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. 1. The Applicant may place benches in front of the building eo long as a minimum of 8' clear area is maintained. 9. The above-conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the Applicant shall meet these conditions. 10. It is recommended that if the Applicant meats the conditions stated above that the conditional use permit be granted to the Applicant. APPROVAL OF FI11DI~8 OF FACT AIiD COIfCLUSIOliB The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts and FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Paqe 4 CINDI'S FLORAL - CONDITIONAL USS PBRMIT approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions. ~QLL CALL COMMISSIONER BORUP VOTED COMMISSIONER MACCOY VOTED COMMISSIONER SMITE VOTED _voII~A,,.~~ voTED "i~yl~~ FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 10 CINDI'S FLORAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DSCISIOII AND RSC0104SNDATION The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council of the City of leridian that it approve the Conditional Use Permit requested by the Applicant for the property described in the Application with the conditions set forth in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law or similar conditions as found justified and appropriate by the City Council and that the property be required to meet the water and sewer requirements, the Fire and Life Safety Codes, Uniform Fire Code, parking requirements, and the paving and landscaping requirements, and all Ordinances of the City of Meridian. The conditional use should be subject to review upo' notice to the Applicant by the City. MOTION: APPROVED: DISAPPROVED: ~~,'1`~ ~ FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 11 CINDI'S FLORAL - CONDITIONAL USS PERMIT