The URL can be used to link to this page

2001 11-15MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZpNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA ~~. Thursday, November 15, 2001, at 6:00 P.M. ~~' `` ~~~, City Council Chambers 1. Roll-call Attendance: X Sally Norton X Jerry Centers X Bill Nary X Keven Shreeve X Chairman Keith Borup ~3=~~~: 2. Adoption of the Agenda: -- -`~- 3. Continued from November 1, 2001 Special Meeting -Proposed Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Meridian: Continue discussion to December 6, 2001 .:t ;. ~, ~. F; ''~ ~: ~~. ,~. F: i' Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Special Meeting Agenda -November 15, 2001 ~ Pie 1 of 1 ridi - an. All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Me a' ~~_ Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings 't' please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. ~; ~? ~ ,4f ~ ~_t _. _, h.'i,. 'A • r' ~.._ `~ CITY OF MERIDIAN ~' MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ~} ~ SPECIAL MEETING ~::. ; ;~ ~; ~~ ~;~"`I AGENDA { E Thursday, November 15, 2001, at 6:00 P.M. City Council Chambers } ~ ~',~ 1. Roll-call Attendance: X Sally Norton X Jerry Centers X Bill Nary X Keven Shreeve X Chairman Keith Borup Z. Adoption of the Agenda: 3. Continued from November 1 2001 S ecial Meeting -Proposed ~~'! s p '' ~ Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Meridian: 4 f! h ~'.'. ~ Continue discussion to December 6, 2001 ;; Iii .I ~~ _ ~~ ':r= " Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Special Meeting Agenda-November 15, 2001 Page 1 of 1 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings '' ?'i please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. ,.- 'Il~f1 ~: ~ u ,~ "i .~ r~ ; i1 CITY OF MERIDIAN MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA Thursday, November 15, 2001, at 6:00 P.M. City Council Chambers 1. Roll-call endance: Sally Norton ~ Jeny Centers Bill Nary ~ Keven Shreeve ~~Chairman Keith Borup 2. Adoption of the Agenda: 3. Continued from November 1, 2001 Special Meeting -Proposed Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Meridian: Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Special Meeting Agenda -November 15, 2004 Page 9 of 1 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accammodatlon for disabil~les related to documents and/or hearings please contact the City COerk's Office at $88-033 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. .rrY9 ~ i;~_ _ :~'~FL-.... .+ -,~: } e ~Y . ~. ry' CITY OF MERIDIAN MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION `~ SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA Thursday, November 15, 2001, at 6:00 P.M. ~; ,. ~ City Council Chambers `'j°' 1. Roll-call Attendance: X Sally Norton X Jerry Centers "' X Bill Nary X Keven Shreeve X Chairman Keifih Borup 2. Adoption of the Agenda: °~~-~=z' 3. Continued from November 1, 2001 Special Meeting -Proposed ' Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Meridian: - Continue until December 6, 2001 6:00 P.M. !'+ " t '.~ =' ~ Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Special Meeting Agenda -November 15, 2001 Page 1 of 1 All materials presented at public meetings shall bec~rrre property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodati~r for disabilities related to docU~ments and/or hearings please contact the City Clerl~s Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. :y::. :i Rl i t~l ~: ;. ~~~., ~ ~-~;, ; ..~ h' -~_ 't_, !: h*. ~ f t -e ~ ~ HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY -~ ti''-', ~ MAYOR R bert D i C A Good Place to Live LEGAL DEPARTMENT (208) 288-2499 • Fax 288-2501 t ~ o . orr e ~` CITY OF MERIDIAN =' CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PUBLIC WORKS , Ron Anderson 33 EAST IDAHO BUILDING DEPARTMENT (zos) ss7-2211 • Fax 887-1297 i Keith Bird MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 ''' Tammy deWeerd (208) 888-4433 • Fax (208) 887-4813 PLANNING AND ZONING ° _; ~ Cherie McCandless City Clerk Office Fax (208) 888-4218 DEPARTMENT (208) 884-5533 • Fax 888-6854 __ NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING . ,I MERIDIAN PLANNING ~ ZONING COMMISSION f: ;.. y, ;: . ~.~ ; NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Zoning Commission of ,, °I the City of Meridian will hold a Special Meeting at City Hall, 33 East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho, on Thursday, November 15, 2001 at 6:00 P.M. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission will discuss the recommendation to the ~{ y, proposed Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Meridian. The public is welcome to attend. ~~ , ,-~; ,,~.~; y 4 t~ 'i ~' ~ ""~ ~ j DATED this 10th day of November, 2001. '~1 ~~~ ,,,,( - ~~~' '~+ ~~ &~'- WILLIAM G. BERG, JR. CI CL RK ~" ~-. u~: R _a' r!=.Y i ~'~.• ** TX C~RMRTION REPORT ** RS OF NOV 11 :27 PAGE.01 CITY OF MERIDIAN ~. " 3.-' ~' DATE TIME TO/FROM MODE MIN/SEC PGS CMDt! STATUS ~ ` 03 11/11 13:13 PUBLIC WORKS OF--S 00'14" 001 050 OK _ " "~~; 04 11/11 13:14 2082882501 EC--S 00'23" 001 050 OK _ ,f r 06 11/11 13:16 8841159 EC--S 00'23" 001 050 OK ~~ ~ 07 11/11 13:17 2088840744 EC--S 00'23" 001 050 OK ~" Y'`'~'' ~ 06 11/11 13:18 20845077 EC--S 00'22" 001 050 OK ' 09 11/11 13 19 208 898 5501 EC--S 00'22" 001 050 OK ~ 10 11/11 13:20 LIBRARY EC--S 00'26" 001 050 0K 11 11/11 13:21 92083776449 EC--S 00'22" 001 050 OK 12 11/11 13:21 208 388 6924 EC--S 00'26" 001 050 OK 13 11/11 13:22 8886854 EC--S 00'22" 001 050 OK 14 11/11 13:23 2083757154 EC--S 00'23" 001 050 OK ~~ 15 11/11 13:24 8950390 EC--S 00'23" 001 050 OK ;~ 16 11/11 13:25 Laurel EC--S 00'23" 001 050 0K 17 11/11 13:26 CHERRY LANE EC--S 00'26" 001 050 OK ,~ tx 5~~~~ P~e~~s-~ ,o~.s~ ~ ~~~e~~.,~n~~. - 7~~~- ~ `` MAYOR HU$ OF 77tFA$URE VALLEY" ~ Robert D. Currie A Good Place to Live SAL DEPARTMENT I CITY QF MERIDIAN `m~ ~&~°~'. Fax 2ea_zsnl . CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PUBLIC WORKS n ; Ron Anderson 33 EAST IDAHO BUILDBVG DEPARTMENT `' ~r` ' Keith Bird MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 (ma) 887.2211 • Fax 887.1297 i :% ~ Tammy deWeerd (208) 888.4433 • Fax (208) 887.4813 PLANNING ANp ZONING ~ u;;r ~: tea Chmic McCandless Ciry Cl~lt Of&ce Fex (ZOB) BBB-4218 DEPARTMENT ~= ~. ; a ~ ~, "q (208) 884-5933 • Fax 8883854 _ ~ . 4:~.'' ~h.~~ r NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING t`i '?', MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION ~~~, r x~ i ~"' NOTICE IS HEREBY GNEN that the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian will hold a Speaal Meeting at City Hall, 33 East Idaho, T ;~' i .. Mend)an, Idaho, on Thursday, November 15, 2~1 at 6:00 P.M. The Meridian ~ Planning and Zoning Commission will discuss the recommendation to the k ~,__ ; z:, ~, proposed Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Meridian. ~ Y'I .~ The public is welcome to attend. ~ ~ ~ DATED this 10th day of November, 2001. e ~ ~ - ~ ~°' ~ ~ WILLIAM G. BERG, JR. CI CL RK ' ~ :. ,~ ~= ~ ~ ' •~.ti+ "f ,;'~`~ i ~. 'r ~: r~ ~' I 'x~i ".'_zi I %r+: ' ;~.-..? ;.~; '~- :4 -; ,M ,::. II ;.~ +,~ '.: ;~ ~ ~' ~ r, ~2 .~ ~A ~: ** TX CONFI~ION REPORT ** AS OF NOU 111 13 16 PAGE.01 CITY OF MERIDIAN DATE TIME TOiFROM 05 11/11 13 15 3810160 /ea~~e Qos~ ~ O~~ee2,~~h~. MODE MINiSEC PGS CMD# STATUS EC--S 00'32" 001 048 OK MAYOR HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY. Robert D. Come A Good Place to Live CITY covlvcu, I~BERS CITX O~ MERIDIAN Roe AederSOa 33 EAST IDAHO Kcith Bird MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Tammy deWeerd (208) 888-4433 • Fax (208) 887-4813 Cherie McCandless Ciry Clerk Oda Fax (208) 888-4218 NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING MERIDIAN PLANNING 8 ZONING COMMISSION r.. ~' -z~ 4ecAr. DEPARTMENT (208) 2B8-Zd99 • Fan 288-256] pvsLlc woRlcs BUILDING DEPARTMENT (208) 887.221 L • Faa 887-1297 PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT (208) SBo-5533 • Fax 888.685a NOTICE 1S HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian will hold a Speaal Meeting at City Hall, 33 East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho, on Thursday, November 15, 2001 at 6:00 P.M. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission will discuss the recommendation to the proposed Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Meridian. The public is welcome to attend. DATED this 10th day of November, 2001. ~3t!"~~- ~~ ~- WILLIAM G_ BERG, JR. CI CL RK r +. B~ p,, = ~ `'~ /~ h ~~ ~• I!'.~f ~. R ~~. i% ;~ t>, ,. ~T r - ., i l ~~~ ,,w .{ t:1 ~~ .' `~. I ,j y €M, ;'< c: t' ~' t~ .:s .::'. r--~-i s HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY MAYOR Robert D. Come A Good Place to Lim CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS CITY OF MERIDIAN Ron Anderson 33 EAST IDAHO Keith Bird MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Tammy deWeerd (208) 888-4433 • Fax (208) 887-4813 Cherie McCandless City Clerk Office Fax (208) 888-4218 NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING MERIDIAN PLANNING ~ ZONING COMMISSION LEGAL DEPARTMENT (208) 288-2499 • Fax 288-2501 PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING DEPARTMENT (208) 887-2211 • Fax 887-1297 PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT (208) 884-5533 • Fax 888-6854 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian will hold a Special Meeting at City Hall, 33 East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho, on Thursday, November 15, 2001 at 6:00 P.M. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission will discuss the recommendation to the proposed Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Meridian. The public is welcome to attend. DATED this 10th day of November, 2001. ~`~~~ ~a tJ'~r~a ~"~ WILLIAM G. BERG, JR. CI CL RK ~,F.~ '`. ~ ~ S6. V .h.{ `~ s .eal' ~- ~~ ~ C~ ~~ ~ ~ ~( ~ f ~~/d~l ~ ~~~~ f ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ =F~~ HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY ~ ~ ~ MAYOR A Good Place to Live LEGAL DEPARTMENT Robert D. Come (208) 288-2499 • Fax 288-2501 ~,.~,~ couNC>i. „~MB~RS CITY OF MERIDIAN PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING DEPARTMENT i T IDAHO Ron Anderson 33 EAS (208) 887-2211 • Fax 887-1297 Keith Bird MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 ~,, ~' Tammy deWeerd (208) 888-4433 • Fax (208) 887-4813 PLANNING AND ZONING '" '~` Cherie McCandless City Clerk Office Fax (208) 888-4218 D~~~~ ggg_6854 ~'" (208) 884-5533 x' .,~, ,. .~ , -~', NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING s~ a~~ Viz... °; <~: >~, MERIDIAN PLANNING ~ ZONING COMMISSION I is 1 { ~, ~' NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Zoning Commission of =' the City of Meridian will hold a Special Meeting at City Hall, 33 East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho, on Thursday, November 1, 2001 at 6:00 P.M. The Meridian .~`~ Plannin and Zonin Commission will discuss the recommendation to the h 9 9 ~rl;~° j proposed Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Meridian. n. The public is welcome to attend. i ~~~ ~ ~i ':K ~.. ..i. i ~.. '~~'+ N.. , . : DATED this 25th day of October, 2001. . ;, ~a ' !~~ ''~ ~, ~~~ ~ ~~ . ; ~,a ~°^ ,'~ r 1 liGLr- 2 ~' ~~ •' .. ~ . . CI CLERK JR BERG "4 ~ ~~1 ` 4 . , ~lILLIAM G. , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r. ~~ .. ~~ ~`~~~ ~; r'~ ~~~~ ~;i ,, . ~,,~., ~~ .,y."~~a' r ,'' ~ K la: h} ~Y r t~ i , { . 5? . ~. ;F • ~;- =~~~~ Meridian City Planning and Zoning Commission November 15, 2001 ~~,, Comprehensive Plan Hearing a~ ;rt° The special meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order at 6:00 P.M. on Thursday November 15, 2001 by Chairman Keith ~~ ' Borup. ;•~ '~'~ Members Present: Chairman Keith Borup, Sally Norton, Bill Nary, Jerry Centers, n r' ~' and Keven Shreeve. . Others Present: Brad Hawkins-Clark, Dave Swartley, and Will Berg. Item 3. Continued from November 1, 2001 Special Meeting -Proposed ~~ `` '~~ Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for the City of _,`;:,, ~ Meridian: ~'"~''! Borup: The special meeting, Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission for the ~R~ ', Comp Plan. Oh, I was supposed to read the notice. You told me that last time. (inaudible discussion amongst Commission) Borup: Discussing Recommendations for the proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Meridian. One thing, it looks like we could y~~°~~ come close to wrapping a lot of this stuff up. I did get a phone call yesterday from .. 4'~r'. Tom Kuntz, the Parks and Rec DiRector. They would like to have us include the ~,,: ~~~T Park's Comp Plan as part of --. Right. Nary: Well, Mr. Chairman, I guess we wont have a problem with that Utility Sub if we want to do that (inaudible). Borup: I told him it was a little late. I mean that we're ready to wrap it up. ~?' Nary: It sounds a lot like a frontage road to me. °;~x;:; Borup: Mr. Berg, was today the deadline to notice it anyway? No. Tuesday? ~~' (inaudible discussion amongst Commission) Borup: He wanted to include it in part of the Comp Plan. But we would need a "~ Public Hearing on that. He said the packets would be out next week. I don't know ~~ how we want --. Okay, we're solved then. Tom had talked to Will about having a ~:h,~., workshop on the 6th and then on the hearing on the 20~'? Is the 20~" before our - regular meeting? That's what I mean, prior to our regular meeting? The other '. question I've got, maybe Will could answer this or somebody. This is the first time they've done a plan for Parks isn't it? The only thing they've had before is what was included in on the Comp Plan? What is the intention of this one? Is it ~; ,. r~;~ Meridian Planning and Zoning ummission Special Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 2 supposed to be a stand-alone or is it supposed to be incorporated into the Comp ~"~`=~ " Plan? Is that right, Mr. Clark, Hawkins-Clark? ~; Hawkins-Clark: My (inaudible). ~;` Borup: I can hear you but it doesn't sound like the mic is open. Hawkins-Clark: There it goes. Right there? My understanding is that it's a stand- alone. ~, ~'~ Borup: Okay. ~~- Hawkins-Clark: Obviously there are several elements of the Park's plan that `:; would be impacting on your decisions as a body i.e. the width of the pathways. ~'; ~- They've got, I think, 3 different classifications - Borup: Okay. ~~ Hawkins-Clark: -- of pathways and things like that. It essentially, as my ~';; understanding, it s intended to stand - ~~ 3 ', Borup: So, that's not going to directly effect the Comprehensive Plan ~....~; .. amPnrimPntc wP'ra wnrkinn nn thPn7 ~~ Hawkins-Clark: The only things I can think of --. We do have a Parks and ~~ Recreation chapter in our Comprehensive Plan. ~`~~"~"~ Borup: Right. t, Hawkins-Clark: That we may want to correlate the 2 and make sure that there's no conflicting things. At least the Planning and Zoning Department, we obviously see them as being responsible for the Parks and Rec issue so we would defer to '.':,~ their plan and their commission. 3 rig'", Borup: Okay. `~'=~ ~-~ Centers: Mr. Chairman. Borup: Commissioner Centers. <: , Centers: Would it be applicable for the Parks and Recreation Commission to hold F ~;° a Public Hearing, make notes and Recommendations, and pass them on to us? ~.~<:: ,.E~y; They could hold a Public Hearing. Hawkins-Clark: I don't know. ~~ '~~ ~ <f i;-:.y ~.: ~~~ k-•^ ,, f p£#1 E ~?Id ' Meridian Planning and Zoningssion Special Meering x~ ~' Plovember 15, 2001 ^~ Page 3 `- Centers: They couldn't? ~~5 , (inaudible discussion amongst Commission) .~'. Borup: But, they haven't had a Public Hearing though. ~., ': ~ ~ :; , ~ ~ r~ Centers: So, it has to be with us? Okay ;~'.r:- ~; :~> Nary: Mr. Chairman. The Parks Commission can have a Public Hearing, couldn't they? ~'~~ (inaudible discussion amongst Commission) ¢ ~;~ Nary: Oh, they have had Public Hearings as well? So, this would be essentially a ~' ~~_ courtesy because of the things that interact with the Comprehensive Plan and ~.. folding that in? yp ,i ~'. Centers: Then why don't they give us their recommendations and notes? t Borup: That's what's coming next week. Centers: Okay. I thought you meant tonight. Nary: But, is there a concern that they've had adequate Public Hearing? Has ~~'`°~: there been any concern that we're folding it into the Comp Plan without having a "` `~~ Public Hearing as to whether or not someone thinks those park plans have something to do with the Comp Plan? :F '°~'~~~~ Borup: Brad just mentioned - ~'~~~ Nary: They probably don't. '' Borup: -- they're both stand-alone Comp Plans. So, they're not --. So, the only thing to concern about is if there's any conflicting language between the section in ours that mentions Parks and their other. .:~ 5 , Nary: Okay. Hawkins-Clark: I'm relatively confident. I've looked at the initial draft but I haven't 4.ri , reviewed theirs in detail - Borup: That's something that staff can work out before it goes to City Council anyway, isn't it? '1` Hawkins-Clark: We could. I didn't talk with Tom. My guess is maybe he was just n`•,;( giving this body an opportunity to - ,,..~.. };; '. FT' ~{; .~ . Meridian Planning and Zoning~ssion Special Meering November 15, 2001 Page 4 _ _ Borup: No, he wanted us to hold a hearing. Hawkins-Clark: To actually hold it? Okay. r: :: Borup: Yes. Hawkins-Clark: Well, you know more than I do. Borup: He wanted me to set it up. I said, no contact the clerk's office. Nary: It would appear to me that maybe the most appropriate way for our body to handle that is simply to make reference in the document as sort of inclusive of . ~;`; the other Comp Plan. Then when it goes to the City Council, they can hear it all, ,; if they want to. Whether they want to fold it in or incorporate it or something like "''~ that. That would make sense to me. What do you think, Brad? ~~ Hawkins-Clark: I agree. I think a reference to their plan, I think is a great idea. ' ~' Nary: If we have suggestions like what Chairman Borup is saying, something that conflicts or something that seems to be inconsistent between them we can make note of that and make that Recommendation as well. Borup: Okay. I think we're in agreement. We'll do the hearing, --. It sounds like ?~~ it°s preferable to have a workshop. That's 2 more extra meetings for us. No, it ~~~~ ~:~ isn't. °< (inaudible discussion amongst Commission) ~~'~ Borup: Unless there's something real controversial, the whole thing should be ;~ ~~' ~ able to handle in one evening, if they can do an explanation. Then we'll go into it ° and hopefully get it done in an hour. Is that the consensus? ~_~' Nary: Okay. .s Borup: We would rather have it as a Public Hearing on the 6th then. Do I need to call Tom? z~; (inaudible discussion amongst Commission) ~ ~~~s'~ Borup: That's what I asked earlier, when the deadline was. ,~. ,..,_ ;y :' Berg: You said the 20th. Borup: He told me the 6th. `~:'' ~~ ~~.; ..rF $< F~x~ r. . T. t ,., Meridian Planning and Zoning~ssion Special Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 5 Berg: He wanted the 6th until he found out he couldn't meet the deadline to do notices. Borup: I thought the deadline would have been today. Nary: It sounds to me, Mr. Chairman, that we could do it as you suggested where they can give us their input. They can tell us where they may be some concerns. We can evaluate that. We can put the notice for the 20th if there are people that want to provide some input to it, only on that particular issue. Borup: Okay. Looks like that's what we're - (inaudible discussion amongst Commission) Borup: So, it looks like we'll probably be on the 20th then. Okay. How about back to the other Comp Plan? I think we've covered the heavy issues. Those were only a small part of the whole amendments. Do we have some others that we need to address? Norton: Mr. Chairman. Borup: Commissioner Norton. Norton: Is this on? Steve Siddoway asked us to review the outstanding draft plan policy issues dated September 25th before this meeting. I've reviewed that and we've handled most of everything. Maybe Brad could update us on things that they would like to see updated or changed? Brad, we've handled the neighborhood centers, the USPA, the land use. Is there anything else that you think that we really need to pay attention on from this memo? . ~~~~~r ~ { J ~S ~ }~ ~ bY~ - ~ ~~a - : 'r S ~r1~ ~._. y ~; ~.. ~~, . ~ - ,~,- w_ , -: ~~ , . <~ '~ ~.~ ~~ _ y} z S , ~ ~i~ ~<.r F.,~ ` FM nY v~ r ,~'~ '; ~f.~ "S^ b 'fy }r/ } Y ;Y t# G r~'~ ~1'f ~s:. ~; ` n ~. . yY ~f ' r R^.~ ' ~ ~. V Hawkins-Clark: Commissioner Norton, Members of the Commission. I guess I would say --. I'm assuming that Steve said at the last meeting that essentially we wanted to hit a laundry list of everything that was outstanding from all written and verbal testimony. There certainly are some key issues outside of those 3. particularly on the page 1 of that September 25th memo, those 5 items which I think maybe in some respects have been taken care of. Certainly No. 5 has. No. 3 regarding the hookup to City owned water was one of the outstanding issues. That was brought up at the last meeting where BCA did give to you a memo that wasn't new information but it did hit their concerns about what has not been addressed yet. That would be No. 3 there. I think that's sort of just 2 wings of the same bird, that idea of City owned services and developing in the impact area. It's really not taken care of by just removing the Urban Service Planning Area boundary because it does still leave open this whole question about whether you want the existing policy to change. Essentially that's what it is because the existing policy is essentially no development in Meridian's area of impact outside the city limits without hooking up to city services. My understanding is if you are 4 ~ t ~~~x~ {r~vy'y , t .,. _. F T iT 'fyr~eH ?f.cr ~i~yt`~y.3~ `a~_~11``{.e'F`t~~ 3 e pS~~ATha def.*=f., ~ n~,?~ C(f't ~r~'~i~ ~Svt z ~.-s!r„ ~ - - e ~Y< t" x i-t; _'K'~:Li I ~ i ~ .j ~: ..Sp. ~~ ff ~f ^ ~' ~T 3 ~ "~~is3 t y1'~'1'. rt,~ ~ ~+S a~Ln-.~ ~ . ~ a5 x 4 1~ ' ~~Mx ~ rt ! ~ a ~~..~;. - ~ -st + t iJ„ J ~' :! -~ '.i r ~ ~..~' ~y ~. ~.~: ~ ~ ~ ' kY ~ Y ~ _ ~~,~w L B 4 ..s '! ~~ ,, ~s vF.1 ~ ..M _'ai17~ u~. T' SS .~A1yM J ~ ly~1-. t ~ ~ ~1 ~~. ~ t 1. k {f* ! a rG rt-0b"P. .y a'St~y''!' SI~, is ! 1:f za X Ft-t ~vf rC~ _ ~- n~ .~y z ~ j~~x -5 ' [ ~' }F~i ~ r #„ ~~~. c, a ~~~ F !'~'~~~ r ~,,c ~ t ~ '~ 3 r - a f ~~ N i .. ^~ t - ~*~s~~~~ „~ u~'i" ~~k~k. ~) ti~ .~j i. 5: riy ~- _ ~ 7 ~r HK` 3, R ~ij+,a ~ k S,t',,, xy~' v by nE 14t-' -F G+~ ~' ~..~ ; 1 - ~rl~ 1 y . ~ ,,~~-~ ~yp t 4 w4 as ~ ~; i ~ I ~1 ~~~ ~ ~~ .1 a~ F S. t t.~r +?~~ I,, } z ~~` ~ r• ~~~ ~` ~ ~ ~ s~'~r~~ ~~i x „ r f~. . - TS z'~ ~~ '{: ,~ kr~SwS t . Qh; '~ ~{ ~xi~ ! ~ ~ ~ tr 1 a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~4 ~' ~+:~g ~'. ~ ~ r I ~ t _ 2 .... Y, '.{.. ~t~ .' 17Ti J I ~~ ~~ ,. f ` s~'.~,~e ~'h ~..~ ~wh ~{, • ~~ T '' y' ~ ~ ~ - $ ~ {. ~t r f'i ~; ~.';:: ~~ Meridian Planning and Zoning~ssion Special Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 6 ~~~~-- in agreement with that then there's no change because that's how the current y1~:i._~:~_ Comp Plan reads. But if you are in agreement with the issues BCA has brought up then that would need to be addressed. I guess that's maybe one key one. That involves really 1, 2, and 3 on page 1. We did get a request in writing to designate an area for a sledding hill in Meridian. You might want to give that ~: some consideration too. ~. ~~ hj Borup: Do we have to supply the snow too? Hawkins-Clark: Yes and the hill. f Norton: I understand snow is going to Puerto Rico from Alaska. Maybe we could ask them to drop some off. 3~, ` ~ Borup: The hill would be a lot easier to provide than the snow is what I mean. x; _`~~'~"~ Norton: I think you're right. - Hawkins-Clark: I think some of the others were if you're just in agreement and ty want to Reco nize those a lot of those on a e --. The Trans ortation Air Quali P9 P 9 stuff, you know it comes from COMPASS. Some of that in their memo. We felt k (y' s ~ that it was good input from Charles Trainer and Ollie Bonoctar over there. If you '" ust want to basicall mcor orate their memos or incor orate them as art of this ` 1 Y~ P P P r September 25~'. However you want to handle that. They were outstanding and ~ ~w;,.. haven't necessarily gotten any of your feedback yet. ~; ~~ Borup: Which items were those? ~} `°~ Hawkins-Clark: I was referring specifically to the Transportation Air Quality ~~,. ~' section on top of 3. _~ ~#: ` ~~ Borup: Okay. F ,!R Hawkins-Clark: Those were the items from COMPASS. If you do choose to make a final motion tonight, there is that No.6 on the last page referring to our June 1St memorandum that had just a lot of textual and grammatical and outline type of ~, . k issues that we just wanted to be sure to get in there. Maybe the best route would } `' are in here, you could just hit those, rather than saying the ones that you are ~" ~r comfortable with. Maybe that might be easier, I don't know. Centers: Brad, some of these you didn't make Recommendations. Ithink item for item, we need to go through it. Don't we? That's what it looks to me like. Norton: It looks like it's just notes that were brought up at the Public Hearings. Meridian Planning and Zoning~mmission Special Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 7 Centers: Yes. Hawkins-Clark: Certainly, they are issues that the public has brought up that we would not just put into the plan that goes onto the City Council without you having some kind of input on. Centers: Right. Hawkins-Clark: Some of them really could have some impact. If that's your - pleasure, I'm certainly willing to do that. Centers: What do you think Bill? Nary: What I was going to say is, just looking at the first page. No. 3 and 4, and I agree both in your memo and the memo that we Received from the Building Contractor's Association, certainly focus on that as something pretty significant. It has been a significant issue. I guess I'll throw my 2 cents in at this point. I've never been an advocate of fractionalizing sewer and water service. When asked, I've never said that was a great idea in my book. On the other hand, I've also been concerned that the City Council in the past has used that rule to restrict any development. It essentially says we can't come to the table unless you're going to hook up to the water system and the sewer. We're not even going to talk to you any longer unless you're going to do it period. There is no negotiation. There is no discussion of alternatives. There's no nothing. I guess I have a problem with that. I think there should always be the ability to discuss that option. The City - Council always has the discretion on annexation and allowing development and all those things. I just am a little concerned in creating, or continuing with a rule that's been in existence that may or may not always make sense in the particular development. It may not always be the right thing to do. I guess, I'm always afraid of having a rule for the sake of a rule when we should always be willing to look at what alternatives exists. That being said, my personal feeling is that I can't think of many situations that it's going to make sense to allow aprivate - water company or a private sewer system to operate depending on what it is because I think service can get very problematic. It can be very problematic for the users and the costs can be quite a bit higher. There are some down sides. guess, my preference would be is that the language be maybe not quite as restrictive. That it would say something more in the line of preference would be for developments to be attached to the sewer and water system of the City. Something more in that vein so it's clear that that's what we want. But, it's also clear that that's not the only option because I've seen that over the last 15 months where we've had projects that they were willing to pay for it or they were willing to move the trunk lines. They were willing to do that to get some development done or they were willing to be able to even operate their own system because it was just far enough removed that it still made sense. It still might make sense for the City to allow it. What is happened is that because we have that policy in place, we don't even want to talk about it. I just think we ~~ "G ~~' ~ tb''. ~ ~~ rid ', r {x~;~ ~~zij ~~ ~?9i-~~ {l~~yty~i ~ .. ~ ~ Zs F~ _ x r 7~ `P~ YRi~T ~~l ~ '~ } r ta'+~,i"w i 1 ~ t ~'~ ;gJz~ ~ :~ ~ ®`;wi h r,v~` f~~~ " - "i r ti. g =~~ ~ ~ ~ ~.~ -~ ~; t ~-"e, V3~ ~ , f,'~'f'~ u~'k'4 i~ ¢Y i~ it y' - , : , ?J m'j7 ~ ~ `:d. ~ v Y jl ~'~~ ~ 'm f ~ ~ & ~ r.. lt~l',~,f+ 4 _- ~ '~ ? _' ""tr "' C .^'7d'? .1~ !' ~ ::`y ": :f - _ ~ yr .. ~,y x ~ y ~~~y,~ ~~ 1;'?~,~ ..ice ~. 7~ .,f~- ".;, _ r , q(_,, yam.. ~ - , /.S `~ ~ ~:9 •• ; k * . • I ',. t ~ t ti ~"i''!'~,1 ~ lf'r ~~f,~ y" ~ !p'~'tf'~`.3 -; r tea- ..[ ~ a µ i .i ~ f{ 3_ t aaS•T~.T ~-~'4 s ^~~~~ ..~ ~, ~~ dYl}~:~ c f ~k~. ~ y }4~5.,~ ' ~y~~~. ~ ~ fi ~F''c ,~ ~ ~ { ~ ~ f~z:J-~t~~P~~d III ~. ~ ~ I f C~" +~. '.~. 'u.,yt~ o'C':~ . ,,,n.a , v.8ye~. f ~ k ~ ~ ~ ~~5..r-; {~" r v E.~~l s ~I , ~' "~ A xr ,.~ ~~ ~O ~ it ~~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~~.~ 'f ~ ~,. 5~, ,~ ..~.~~ ,~' j~~ '4 J r ~..~ 1 1 { Y } y'k~~~~t~~v' ~ `~t6 ~~ ~ ~ + ^h'` S ~ ~. ~ y ~ ,. ~~. _ m #,' y ~., ~1 ~ti'. ~ ~ L '2" ~r, K. ~ _ - K. ~ ~ ~~ yiz ~u r ' 1 ~ ~v~`" T~ ~ -frr'~ _grzN , ~~ ~>r~.$r.~~~ ~2 "lj.rN~t~~ ~~ M~'tb~~* "~$, y"~::{x ~~~~ ~ Y~ } ~... y ~ 4~ ,~, ~ ~ t~? ~ ~ 4~ n~ 1~~ ~' x `: .~ #k ~ti "r ,~• ym -. - s,, - .. ~~ - 4k~rs f l . 'k ~ F". 3~a•i ,. s ~ Yx~t '~.~=fl~e~ ~ 171 ~ .JkY~~fF '~ I~I l+r~;+-'t 7 ~~~+•`'~~ , f 1 ~~kk ~,~x ,... cAR .~ ,. .,. ,. .. L_ ~a,. .... .. r7 ~. ~.~.,, x~c,. w.r a.°FrA.q n ~? }k Meridian Planning and Zoning Ca'nmission Special Meering ~ ~ November 15, 2001 ,i, Page 8 ~~ should talk about it. I guess that's my 2 cents is I prefer to see the language softened to allow at least a discussion of some options rather than just creating a system that has a rule that may or may not make sense based on the individual application. 1. Borup: Commissioner Nary, are you talking about projects that have been F~ annexed or are applying for annexation? Are you talking projects that may be ~'` Ty outside the Cit limits in the area of im act? °,~~r y p `~~ Nary: I guess my thought is, it wouldn't apply to situations most of the time that are in the City to this point because they're already (inaudible). ~~ ~ Borup: Right. 1 Nary: It would only (inaudible) predominantly in the area of impact. I guess there ~~s:: ~~ °~~~ could be things within the City limits where you have septic systems. Is that what you're talking about? Borup: No. I'm thinking of a project that wants --. A subdivision that wanted to go in without annexation. Are you including those in there then? ~: :. ~; Nary: Okay. So, you're talking about something say, in the area of impact that ~~ ~ would simply only be coming to the City (inaudible)? Borup: A medium density subdivision that would, say, would not be contiguous to the City. So, they couldn't have annexation. But they would like to go ahead. So, do we allow them to run City sewer? ~~: Nary: Right now the policy says they have to. Doesn't it say that if they want to ~~ be annexed they're going to have to? Borup: Right. .~~. ,.~ _,}; Nary: All I'm saying is - ~~~ Borup: What if they can't be annexed? ~ ~„ ~'"' Nary: What do we do now? ,_ Borup: We don't annex them. t` ~. `t; Nary: Right. I don't think that would change. I guess all I'm saying is if we're talking about a policy decision, then a policy decision that just says here's the ~`~ ! rule and there is no other discussion beyond this rule. My personal feeling is that the rule sometimes may or may not fit the situation. If we have a policy that e5` a~f1 F' 4 : F;.. -1 ,` r _~:~ ~ ~ Meridian Planning and Zoningssion Special Meeting November 15, 2001 _ Page 9 ~, prohibits us even talking about it, then I don't think we're being very responsive to ~; . _ the needs of the community. ~`''~ Borup: I'm trying to think if the City has ever had a situation that that would apply ~~ to. t Nary: We probably haven't because we have a rule that says we're not going to -' , do it. They probably don't come forward. The circumstances that I could see that ^y situation occurring is where things are on the far edge of the impact area. It's not i' -~ practical or reasonable and not likely that we're going to be able to get those Y. types of services there within the next year or 2. That it might be 5, 7 years out to get to that. They would like to operate a system independently of the City system .> = and be able to go in now. Again, I don't know that it would matter much. Borup: That's not a lot different than what Boise was doing 20 years ago. You put ;~` ~~_ in septic tanks and the developments put in dry line sewers out in the streets. } ~' Then when the sewer came out there, the connection was made. ~i:.'~' ,y Centers: If they're not contiguous, we're not going to annex them anyway. ,: ~`~~~~~~~ Borup: Right. We've had some that were contiguous, City Council --. The developer was willing to put in sewer lines. The answer was no. ~'~'~ Nary: Like I said, I guess I just look at it and one of the issues that we're being asked to look at is this policy choice. Like I said, and I've said more than once, i:. ~ _~- -~th~; not just here. I'm not really in favor of these types of things in general. I am in ~~~~```~~ favor of talking about those options. It appears to me that the policy has become I the end of the discussion. I think in our Comprehensive Plan it would make some a ~~ sense to use language that is a little bit more Receptive to alternative proposals. _ Language like preference and things like that. :: `'' Borup: I think that makes sense. <~~,~~~~ Nary: It makes it clear in the plan that that's what we want but it isn't the end of it. F.,~; At least that's what my perception has been is that times have come where we 4.`'~I have simply looked at that rule that says if you're bringing us something that's an ~~ ~ ~' alternatives - 4 . . ~`. Borup: You're still saying on projects that would annex in the City? .,: ; , tirt: '~ Nary: Sure. (inaudible) if you're not going to hook up, we're not going to look at you. ~'K:= Borup: Water normally hasn't been a problem? ~`` 3 ~. =_ ,, . r a i~ `: Meridian Planning and Zoning~ssion Special Meeting ;;~~_:;', November 15, 2001 ~'~`:;5,? Page 10 .~~ ~ Nary: I think they should at least have the ability to present it. We don't have to r accept it. We don't have to agree with it. I just think that we need to be at least a little more open about evaluating those situations because there may be ones 9:;;~ ~.~. that it makes sense. It may be ones that make sense for a limited time. They may .}. make sense for that particular project until we're there with our services. I don't '~ ~' know. I just really hate such hard and fast language in a Comprehensive Plan fi ~_~~~~' when what we're suppose to be doing is talking about big picture things and how things would look and what our preference is and what we would like to see - happen. Then we'll talk about other things as well. I just have a real concern with the changing market place that we have out there in being so inflexible with something like that. Whatever that's worth. ~~ <_ s* ~ Borup: Any other comments on that? 4 ""~'~ Centers: You can't argue with that. I mean, if we want to listen them or the City wanted to listen to them. I agree with that. I mean, how can you argue with that? That would include No. 4 too Bill. <~~' Nary: That's what I said, 3 and 4. N, ~~ '~ ~ 1~~ Centers: You just strike out 4 really. 3 4 .'n ~~ Borup: Lets take a look at a specific --. Do we want to take a look at the ~~ paragraph that had that language? I don't think the notes referenced it, did they? ,,j Norton: No. .:i Borup: Does anybody know where that is then? =:~-~ (inaudible discussion amongst Commission) `r a--~ Borup: Wouldn't that be good to look and see what the language was before we "` ' ~~ try to change it? _'' `'~~ Nary: That's always an option. F `K ~~ Borup: Do you know where that is Brad? r °„'-.. -, .~,=~ Hawkins-Clark: Chairman Borup. If you have our June 1St supplement, -- `` ~ Borup: Yes. 4i ~"` Hawkins-Clark: Do you have that? '`, ~~' Borup: Yes. The table's just not big enough. ,~. ~~.s~ .:, Meridian Planning and Zoningssion Special Meeting November 15, 2001 ;,.. Page 11 Hawkins-Clark: Yes. There's an attachment B which is sort of the laundry list :~_ going page by page, down each one. Borup: Yes, here we go. What page number? Do you know? ~~~; ~: t'„ " Hawkins-Clark: It's discussed I believe in --. I'm trying to think. On page 7. Shreeve: What was the date again? ~~~~=~ Hawkins-Clark: June 1, 2001. It's the - ,::,> ~:: I Borup: Is that this cover sheet? ~ Hawkins-Clark: It's the supplement --. Yes, that's a part of that supplement. Our ~, _ memo is actually just before that in the larger supplement. You had the main "'' ~ bound document. Then you had a larger supplement that had the attachments to `i that. ~,;~ (inaudible discussion amongst Commission) ,, Anderson: They weren't stapled together. Mine is all over the place. ~`~~~ inaudible discussion amon st Commission (~ 9 ) 4 ,;?' ~ ! Centers: Comprehensive Plan update? ' ~~-' t: Hawkins-Clark: Yes sir. That's the one. Yes. ~,~ . ~~ (inaudible discussion amongst Commission) ~~ ~ ': Centers: That's the one I had some highlights on. Hawkins-Clark: There are a couple of attachments in that. It's page, at the top of page 7 of attachment B if you look at the footers. (inaudible discussion amongst Commission) ~,;; ~ ~ Hawkins-Clark: We've cross-referenced the plan, the bound plan here. _~ Borup: That's referring back to 84, right? Hawkins-Clark: CorRect. „~F Borup: Okay. Which paragraph are we looking at? Hawkins-Clark: On page 84? . , is ;,r . ,., , i ~'' d "~ `F`+T ;~'' 415~~ ;: =e S. . ~;- , ;~; ~~ o ~ j Meridian Planning and Zoning~ssion Special Meering November 15, 2001 Page 12 -_, Borup: No, on page 7. ,; `;,, Hawkins-Clark: On page 7, the very first paragraph. It references page 84. ~.~N.~ `~= ~~~%~' Norton: Okay, add to the end - s-; ~'~}~~ Hawkins-Clark: In actuality that particular reference is going to go away all `s~`'' together because you have now eliminated the Urban Service Planning Area on the map. That's your Recommendation so in fact, the associated text will likely be ~n °h` gone too. Other than the fact that there is still an Urban Service Planning Area. i;° .. It's just not reduced. It's equivalent to the impact area. ~° .~ ~k~'"'`~ Norton: So, essentially we need some kind of information put into the Comp Plan saying --. ry' ';1 . Borup: I thought we wanted to talk about the language on requiring the City owned - ~,, ~_ ~ ~~ Norton: Yes. Hawkins-Clark: Right, but if you look at where that references. It references in the ,~ ,~~ text --. It references aparagraph - Nary: Mr. Chairman. It references a paragraph that we've recommended to be =~` eliminated in its entirety. ,< ~ ~ Borup: Okay. Nary: I think what was brought up in these memos was that it's still not clear if that's - '~- Norton: We need to add some language -- 4~: s;, . . ~ „~ Nary: We need to add some language that says do we need to do that? 'F~E_ Norton: Lets diRect staff to do that. _~. +-- " Nary: It would appear to me --. I guess what I would suggest is that since the Urban Service Planning Area is eliminated, --. In our Recommendation it's eliminated in the context that it was brought up in this draft, but it still exists on the map. ~; -Y Hawkins-Clark: CorRect. ~> ._, ~:. ~~; 1, 1,,: ,.. . ~;', :.. - . ~,: ~.: F ,: ;;;:: ~;:. z~;;.,: „. r ;; ~~ ,.,- ~,. ;; - ~, ~.,: 5" r ~;- y ~:. t ~`~-<: " ~ • ti. :< ~..; fi . -;; ; ' r-_._:.. x:; s'- ~ 4~~. ~. j ~~~ ,, Jt M1.~_W`I r ~5 `f~' { •F ` i~'~EE'h'~ ; -~~1 f ~ ., y c Sd 'j t' F F ~~ ~. ' • S - y1 ~• . -_ ~•_ v '~` r ~i, ' s i ~. ~„ Meridian Planning and Zoning~nmission Special Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 13 Nary: There needs to be a reference to what it is. In that reference it can indicate that the City of Meridian has a preference that development be attached to the City water and sewer services but may consider other options as proposed. May consider other options as applications warrant. I think there was some language I saw in, I think on this page 7, attachment B that says the City fully Recognizes the often unpredictable dynamics of the market place. The need may arise which demand an expansion to this growth area. That same reasoning is the reason that I'm saying we need to at least be open to those proposals that may have some alternative that's attractive to the City. In defining the urban services, what it is, and it's on the boundaries of the impact area. We may also want to at least reference that although our preference is that a development be attached to the City water and sewer, it's not a prohibition and that we would certainly consider because of the unpredictable dynamics of the market place. The same language that's used here about the third paragraph of that section on page 7. Do you see where I'm at Brad? Hawkins-Clark: I do. Nary: Because that's all I'm saying is you never know. We certainly don't want to say we're never going to talk to you about it otherwise. We've already got that language. That might be the best way to insert it because we'll have to define the USPA in some concept. It's just not the concept that was originally proposed. What do you think? Norton: I think that makes a lot of sense and that covers the first page of this memo. Because you can't really go back to any of these other Comprehensive Plan updates because we just nixed a lot of stuff last time we met. There's not a lot of consistency because it's either you or Steve. I'm assuming that you and Steve get together and come up with the ideas, the motions. What I would like to see tonight as kind of give you some free rein, put together the motions that we put together. Update this whole thing and come back to us and let us look at it real quick and send it on to City Council. Borup: That's what I was just going to ask. I kind of thought that's --. I can't remember if we discussed that very much but, we'd like to see everything down - Hawkins-Clark: That you have made to date? Borup: Yes. Hawkins-Clark: I guess my point earlier was that there are still several things in this - Norton: We're still discussing those. -v. w~ L~"a'~ ~ .gyp ~1~~~ .: 7~L.~.. ~ `~ V ~i~i ~ '~• a, ~ '"-~~"`'d q ~ t~S3~t~•'~~C'' ~~ ~ e ~~ ~ I `r ~ ! ~, ~ 4~~~5 t ~ (x ~ v ` " - v ~ ' ~4 ~ ~ - ,, ~~r~ t n ~w r Ott ; ~J"FW~ 7 ~ ~ ,~ ~~; {{ K ~ ~'~ ~ r+,i: ~~ ~„~„~"~ - ti .'ia ~ a.~ sisk ~~~~ A~' 4~~ J arty .. + a • ~. ;~;. ,rte ~, , ~:,> •. ~ x 1 ~: Irv * y t r a~~ - J ` T ~'~ ~ ti ~E~ ",~.~ ~' !t 1 ~t~F~ tT ~ .rr ~Sn13" ~ k2 r# •= ~ ~Er s ~ z ~r x ''~: ~- x }~ #~y'k+~j~~~y5 ~~~' ~ ~~t ~ ~S ~S•aK.~hw Ett' ~~:k~ Y ~ 7d5tT II~' ~ A'. lF,l ~ ~ . '~ '4jf ;tI f. 4 ~ , i ,~ ~. ,. ,~'"# Fd~ ~ 14* S:`-~~~ f ,~~s~ ~ 'I ~', ~ Sk'9i: 'l~f~t„ ~c c~~.~JO'i f r ~. °~`~ " ~~t?a - ` °~ ~' ~ ,~ x ,:,,r"" a ~x 1 ': a }. ~.~ ~~l~t r5'Y-,~~w ~~.~t ~t~'97. ~I ~ '3Z~Y ~ -.i ~.. i ~ j, ...,y, 2 ~~ 2 ~ ~ .:.. ~ s e x .i t u 1'4 51 ~ ~ 1~i ' ~ ~ 3^~9 r }~r "SuK,r"fie~d'A~ r Fa, ~ _ r .. . ,. ._-.,. ~~~t •r~r~~ ~,. 0 i~ly~~ ri. ~ . _ _. .. ,,,. ~y ,~((yy,~ 33~,i 1 t is .. .~_ ....~ Y.£ a.. - . trr •~~, ~ ~. ' <'~:; • eJ' , _ t.. Meridian Planning and Zoning mmission Special Meeting November 15, 2001 - Page 14 :.. Borup: We'd still like to get through those tonight. ~_ Hawkins-Clark: Okay. s ~ "~` °`-f { Borup: But, we're running --. We've got 25 minutes. Hawkins-Clark: Sure. Borup: What would be the best? Do you want to hit on those that you think would ~~ pertinent? Well, you already have, the list that you went through. ~~ f~ ~~ I Norton: We already - _ Borup: That's what we're doing. We're going back through and trying to - ~, ``' Norton: All of page 1. t. ~'~`ti l Centers: Mr. Chairman, Brad. I guess what Commissioner Nary said was that we 3 just don't want that sentence included on page 84, which I looked up. We don't 9 „°! need any other language in my opinion. Did you read it? S" Norton: It's totally out because we - Centers: The proposal was to add the sentence in connection to City owned. We ~` just don't want it. I think that's our consensus. ~~~ '~ `~.r~=i Nary: I think what we had talked about though is that with our Recommendation ~=~`'~' that that Urban Service Planning Area not be used as that restriction inside the area of impact. We're still going to need to have some definition of what it is. It's still on the map. Centers: Right. _~~. `, ~~ Nary: It's still in the guideline but it's --. We still have to define what it is. Just <``~ simply use that as the opportunity to say we may have a preference to one but ~.,,, w~ is we're certainly not restricted to - ~~~' Borup: Do you mean on the City services or the USPA boundary? Nary: City services. Well, USPA boundary is just the area of impact boundary. Borup: Right, that's what it's been in the past. I'd like to make that fairly strong. I ~:~~' think we need to say that normal and the procedure is that the services would be ~~`` available, whatever language needs to say that. ``` Shreeve: Mr. Chairman. ~;.: ,. '~~: 'Y 1 .-~ .h~. tiJi,'.i.~. s, ~'.. f '~ - ~ .I :e. ~ . ~ ~'; ~F <. ~~ 1 ~~ i ' ~> W ran : ,x .: :, •~~ ~ :~ e. } yt~~ ~~ ~ ~ , ~i, ~ ~ ~ . • 1 5 t~ ~=,~ , ~: s` :<~ ::, ..`~~ . - t_ ~~;'~ =t;: t, ,,.. } F,, ,~ y .,, 'r-. ~. ~I ~:, ;. :>~ '. Meridian Planning and Zoningssion Special Meeting • I~Iovember 15, 2001 Page 15 Borup: But something that would not exclude another alternative. Shreeve: I agree with that. I would Recommend that somewhere in there as well, we put that we will entertain other possibilities. (inaudible discussion amongst Commission) Shreeve: Excuse me. However, with the intent that at some point in time they become City services. Borup: Oh, definitely. Shreeve: That they are transferred over the water rights, the sewer lines, -- Borup: It would have to be designed and planned for that. Shreeve: -- pump stations --. Absolutely because I think ultimately I think that that would be in the City's best interest to have that. Borup: Definitely. Like I say that's the way Boise did it in west Boise. (inaudible discussion amongst Commission) Shreeve: That way the developer knows up front that at some point in time, it may revert back to the City. Borup: No, not may. It will. I think it needs to be real strong. Shreeve: Right. Exactly. Borup: I can't think of a situation where it would even happen. Hawkins-Clark: Chairman Borup. There are 3 current applications of fairly sizable magnitude that are before the City Council or have been in the Recent past. Westborough Subdivision on the corner of Locust Grove and Chinden. Borup: Okay. Hawkins-Clark: 40 acres. These have been before Ada County Commissioners and have come through the City Council. Powder River Subdivision. Lee Centers, on the south side of Victory, Meridian Road. West side on Meridian Road that's 140 plus acres. Certainly Keltic Heights. These are large Ada County applications within our area of impact are proposing private wastewater systems and some of them United Water. Some of them maybe pull our water down. i~'4 k~ .. ~) AS,w~ 3.9: . 3 .' } } ~ p] ~ 7 ` :9 ' -: ~ Meridian Planning and Zoning~mmission Special Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 16 ~; some of them wells. The bottom line is do you want urban development in the area of impact? I think that's what we need to hear from you. What I just heard - ~~ ~ Borup: The 3 that you mentioned, Keltic Heights and I guess even the others in that North Meridian Planning Area which is kind of a separate thing. ~. ~~ ~ s,-, Hawkins-Clark: Powder River is on the south side. { ~r, Borup: Right. ~; ~;i ~ ~ Hawkins-Clark: In a way, they're - ~'~~Yr~ ~;. Borup: That's what I mean. That's off by itself. _ .{ Nary: I guess, Mr. Chairman what I would say is that's even more of a good example of why we need to at least consider those types of things because --. I - , ~~ ~ ~'~'` wasn t here for the 2 of those but I think I was for Keltic Heights because it I ~ ~ sounds familiar. .<?; - Borup: That was the shoestring annexation. ~z ~~, .., Nary: Oh, is that what that was? I think we need to consider those things because we are basically, one Ada County Commissioner vote away from them ~' approving those types of development and we have no control over the outcome `' on it. I would much rather entertain that, maybe with that type of restriction that over a time period so that they can amortize their cost. Over a time period. That ~~~~'~=~~` way they can build it now. We have control over the outcome, what it looks like, what the development's going to be. The City of Meridian has that control and ~ `~. allows that. At some juncture we're going to take over that water and sewer system so that if we can't provide it, we have an avenue to allow it rather than at some point the Ada County Commissioners may say, we're going to approve ~~ ~~, those things and we have no control over what it is. ~. ~,; Borup: I have the exact same concern. ~~ Nary: I would rather at least come to the table and talk about it instead of pointing , k"" ~ at a rule that may not work and hope and pray we always have 2 Ada County "'~'~ ~ Commissioners that agree with us. I guess I wouldn't say it's allows urban development, but it allows the City to maintain control of development in it's ' impact area. I would be afraid to loose that. So, I wouldn't want to use this rule to prohibit any discussion and then we lose the control over our impact area ~` because we're not allowing it and the county does. ~~` Borup: Has there been any staff discussion on that very thing? That's the same . ~: concern I have, to get it out of our control. Has staff always felt that the county will go along with us and deny them. ~~ gt'; S ~ ,;`{ mmission Special Meeting Meridian Planning and Zoning .~7 ` November I5, 2001 ~ ~.`' Page 17 ~~ Centers: It's worked so far. Hawkins-Clark: Chairman Borup. There has been some. For the most part I think staff is of the opinion that, that we need to annex if we're going to provide those 4,` ~~ }~~ ~'~ services. Not to allow them to --. I mean, you've got tremendous costs also .,~,: r~~ involved in the change over from a --. What do they call those? Borup: The community systems? Hawkins-Clark: Package plant systems to the City sewer. Again, we're not just ~~~=` ~ talking about water and sewer. We are talking about fire and police, and all ,~ ~ services. They have concerns right now about the existing City limits and these k'' ~ ~ ` fringe areas. You are talking about quite an impact on them as well because of ~ ~ the greater distances. ' Shreeve: Not to put words in Bruce's mouth but I know the engineering department has been against these outside services. Maybe refresh our memory, Bruce, just summarize what the engineering department's thoughts are on that. r ~~, FReckleton: Commissioner Shreeve, I'll take a stab at it. Brad Watson has been ~° the point man in our department for that. The cost is a big thing. These package t' -'~ systems, we have not seen that they have proven out very well. ~. Borup: But, it wouldn't be anticipated that the City would take over that, would it? ~:~ FReckleton: No. ~~~ Borup: When the services come? ~t +~E Shreeve: That would just simply be abandoned as far as the treatment the °' package treatment would just be abandoned or whatever. You just get the raw ' ,.,., affluent? Fr , x,.. `~ `' ``' ~` FReckleton: CorRect. ~ ~` Shreeve: The cost would be at the homeowners to abandon that and make i4r' whatever --. I guess because I can see the engineering department's point but yet I can also see the need to help control to negotiate. If the homeowner's xn~ association from the very beginning says hey, there could potentially be a cost `' '`~ for you to do whatever it takes to get it to the City, both have won. The -' 1; homeowner's go in knowing that there's going to be cost. 7, ~` ;':; Nary: Again, I wasn't inviting Brad to call me because I understand the City's f ~ perspective of it. I just want the discussion. That's all. I mean, it may not work. It ~- s may nit he nrartical_ That's ~kav_ The City still has the control over what thev ~. x I .~: ;. Meridian Plannin and Zoning c`,'ummission Special Meeting g November I5, 2001 Page 18 ~~ choose to annex. My preference, and I think everybody on this Commission has .y~~-~Y' heard more than once that we annex it. Because I think we need to control our ~'~'`` growth. The way we control it is by having that control over that property. How we F~ '- do that is by annexing. If this is another method to give the City Council the ~~: impudence to say we should just annex this property and move forward and have them hook up to the City sewer as a part of it. Then that's fine too . I just want the discussion because there may be circumstances that it may work. Like I said, that language in the memo is exactly what I think, market place bears that out. It 4 . ,~ may make sense. It may not. That's okay. We just need to have that flexibility to <-':; be able to do that. ~'_=«,~: Centers: Mr. Chairman. Wouldn't there be times Bruce, when their water system ~~~ would be welcome? ~'>:-f~ (inaudible discussion amongst Commission) `~: Borup: If they had a well up to City standards? ' ~::,:; Centers: Yes. FReckleton: Yes, if their wells were built to City municipal standards and that sort of thing. Yes. Centers: Right. I think that's what Commissioner Nary is saying then. We could ' ~~~ ~~ ~~ `i have that option, that they wouldn't have to hook up to our City water because they had their system. " '' Borup: That would be one of the requirements - Centers: Right. . ..,_ Boru : --that it would meet Cit s ecifications. p Y p ~`'~~''~ Centers: So, I think talking about it is the way to go and not make it black and ,, ;f ` white, either or. Borup: So, who's going to draft that wording? .{ ;ti , Centers: I think Brad knows where we're coming from. Then you're going to do ~., ,,,.' ~ some - ~z. Hawkins-Clark: Yes, on that item, Commissioners I will essentially take that Urban Service Planning Area paragraph on page 84 and tweak it and bring across to you the idea that annexations are still required for ultimate services that you want to leave open the alternative, that's in the City's best interest. Don't exclude other alternatives if it's in the City's best interest. ~, _~ , ~> ~~ f , ~ 3 i ~ ~ G ~ s r j ae ' 3 E ~ ~~ ~~ I 4 ..+• ~ - .i; S ~ X ~ ~ ! ~ ~' .a:~ ' Z ~ 1k j ~l ~¢ A_a ~ ~~ ~ J ~. ~~ - _ ~. -. r. q:: ~ , t ~ Meridian Planning and Zoning 1, mmission Special Meeting November I5, 2001 Page 19 ~. Centers: Excuse me, Brad. The other items, when you address them if you could ~_~ refer to the page and paragraph -- ;~,~ - ~: Hawkins-Clark: Okay. ~ . {:, Centers: -- of the Comp Plan. Then we can just I think one more meeting we'll be done won't we? { Borup: I hope so. } ~° ~ -s , Centers: Right. r ^. = Hawkins-Clark: If I could, just one more on that, Chairman. ¢.: x~ ' Borup: Yes, that's what I was going to ask. Another item or on the same thing? ~; Hawkins-Clark: Kind of along the same lines. I know that there's just tons of ~'' ~` paper flying at you on this whole process. There was an August 30 memo that ''~ ~~~-' Steve Siddoway and I did about just the Urban Service Planning Area. On the ~yy •"' Y, ~~° ve last a e, we threw out that the idea of this se arate zonin ordinance ry pg P 9 amendment that would essentially look at the adequacy test when new ~~ ' a lications come in. So, lets sa ,when the annexation applications come in, we PP Y have an adequacy test that we would run through that would guide each service. -~ If you want me to --. Maybe I could just include some of that in our final motion ~~`~ memo next time, if you're comfortable with that rather than talking about it tonight. Do you want me to do that? r ~~ Borup: Any questions from the Commissioner ? ~~" Nary: No, I think that makes sense to me. Borup: Okay. `; ~ Hawkins-Clark: Okay. ~'~ Borup: Did we cover pretty much most of --? Norton: Mr. Chairman. ~:~ ;~ Borup: Commissioner Norton. ;,, '~~~~`~ Norton: On page 2 regarding the land use, I've been looking at 7, 8, 9, and 10 ~~•'° where it all refers to chapter 7D, various sections. I'll be glad to research that and ~~~,k. report back but as I looked at them, they don't have really much effect at all. Some of these comments don't --. I know these are comments of people at the ~~' y; ~~, 5 ~i+H! Meridian Planning and Zoning ommission Special Meering November 15, 2001 Page 20 Public Hearing but they don't refer to what the intent was. For instance, No. 8 - where it talks about perimeter fencing, creates an artificial boundary. They are talking about actually in the Comp Plan, it's for the developers to keep the ~~ construction debris away from the neighborhood. Some of these - Borup: I think the Planning and Zoning department has required that as a -:~ -~ permanent also. Norton: Great, so we don't have to worry about these because it makes sense to ' " ' have a permanent fencing for the construction (inaudible). _~ ~:~n~ Borup: I see what you're saying. (inaudible discussion amongst Commission) Norton: Some of these aren't pertinent anyway. I mean, they're comments that `' people have made but they have misinterpreted maybe what the Comp Plan ~, ~ was. As for the Transportation Air Quality COMPASS, I think that's something ~ ~~~ that either we want to discuss today or later. There is an issue of some extra kr; glossary terms that should be defined. I think we should define extra glossary rt ti{s; terms. Mark Estes letter dated August 20~", on page 9 has a list of those terms ". ' that should be added to the glossary. Other than that, I don't see any other problems of doing some kind of a quick motion tonight. ~~ x': Borup: Were there any other --? When we started this, we talked about a lot of ';':'"~ these things were from the BCA letter. Did we cover the points on that? } ~~;, ~~,_;~~ ?~~'~''~ Norton: Which date? rfl ,r Borup: That's where I'm - { , Hawkins-Clark: That was not dated Chairman, Commissioner, If you're referring 9Y"~~:~! to the one that was handed out at the last meeting. ~ }~~~ ~ r Borup: Yes. :; ~ ~ Hawkins-Clark: The November 1 meeting. That was just a blank, no letterhead, °,x `~ corRect? ~j Norton: Yes. ~~ Hawkins-Clark: Yes, it was no letterhead. I think the bullet points with bold 6 ~'i ~~~ (inaudible). I'd be happy to go down and hit ours. We did talk about this as a '" staff, if you want - ~$.. . _. _~: ~; i ~~,~ ~ ~~ ~>~ dt ~ ` ~ j I {1 t ~ {..~ r e~a ~ i~{ ! _ i _ ~ ~ ` ~~~~ ` a ~ ~ ~ &5 ~, 99 ~. I ~ ~ r~~ l S ~ 'x . I __ f71 { ^.~l ~ ~'. I! 1 ~Yr 3 5- . P ~ ~ t h rick 1 - e,=,y u 'jam ; -. . ~~~ ~~~z~~ «r~Y ,: ~~ ,~~ ~~ F ~~ S ~ y yc-. of ~y ~, . -.t.~=: ,,:V.: ~~ ,~ ~~~~ ~:~ . +F ~~ ~, ~:,~~ . S, iw , k ,,, _ ~~; ~' ~:~ ~ "~~ ~~r t,,. of ~,~F r ~ ~'~~ + c..~ ' ~';.~, ~ ~N~~ ~a ~M r ,.;~ r '~~ s ~--,4 ~': zL'u .~f ~-~« ~,~ ~' ~.~,~ ,, , ; r~ ~}'~!~ _~ ~ ~ ~~~y ~~ ~~ } ~ '' ~~~~~ - ~~p5 ti F' r'rku`a t, ~~ F r .~ ~ ,, k ''J S .. _ -.}~~ ~~ << ~. "'>> '~ r , .~. °z~; •n ,~~ : ~ ~~ t . - ~. ..a:,'.l~ ~; :, 4,o- ~~ ~-"~ r; . ~; : ~ .~. ~~~~ -~-~ ` r ~~~Y i F., .~ l Lam.,',. ~` - _ ~~~ ... ti ~ '.1 Y y ~ ! ~ l ~ . Y~ ' ~ NCB s F I~.~~ ! U ~ , i, s `: ~~ ` -_ ~~ %- ~' ~:` ~. ~'' ~ '~~ p ~~ ~,. j Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Special Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 21 Borup: That's what I was wondering. Would that be faster? We do have Mr. Eaton here that we could call up for a couple minutes if the Commission would --. Which would be more efficient? Hawkins-Clark: I believe it's, the Public Hearing, -- Borup: We can call for - Hawkins-Clark: Okay. Borup: -- the public testimony part but we can call up for special --. We've been calling for any special testimony. Hawkins-Clark: I could just go down it. Unless there's things to add on to here. Borup: I guess, my only question would be is there items that we have not addressed. I don't want to repeat everything. Hawkins-Clark: I believe there are Chairman. Borup: Okay. Yes, -- Eaton: Mr. Chairman, thank you. John Eaton from Building Contractor's Association. From that list, you have talked about the mixed-use, the City owned services. We had from the (inaudible) letter that you had originally Received, I think it was fairly lengthy. There was some question there about in fill development and some incentives that should be provided maybe more clearly in that. Probably the biggest one left, the ACARD memo also had some questions about the - *** End of Side One *** Eaton: There were also some landscape questions that we had. I thought that was a little too restrictive to see that in there. I think you've addressed the pathways. I went back and researched that and I just couldn't find where it came from. I apologize for that. I don't know if Brad found that or not. I couldn't find it. The Parks plan, you said you were going to have an additional hearing. The glossary, Commissioner Norton addressed. Those were the extent of our concerns and those were issues that we had raised previously. They're not any new issues. Centers: So, it's primarily 2? The in fill with incentives and the cul de sacs not allowed. ^i' i7 Y :ri n4 r}~,4f•„ ~ t > Ih~~~I ~ ~~ 4~'~ .1x n-' e~ -< 4~1 .A r"Y .fit ~ r{, r .. r ~4t° ~,~ FU's p'k ;` su"'"'~"~`^ d f6~ s~,~ ~4 r i e a ~~ L '1 ~ ~ ;, ~ .: r o ~ , 111 ``dd fS r~. ~ t-~ ~ „~ .~~~µ +.,,~. `+.h~.~ r:,sc ~~`~fr~l•t•cF~ I I~' Q+~ ~T c ~ 4 .. 3 S iN _, L is :- i'bV.T }~,71::~ ~ ~ Y N 1 r ..., .=v ~ t ~P{~ ~~7t~ ~ ~~* '. ~ M c`4.Ny ~5 t~'~ F T i~•A~~1~ .3' F S~~r ley = . i ` re.s s14ytiW- w~ ~Y' ,9k *'', = R ~ ,~"tl'`3 a~='`~' -.. e ~ ~,.Y ~ 5 ;,per'' ~,`~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ > A r ,' .;." W tl ~i? '~ .. a i r i R i ' ~~_' ~ ~ t! r tx w~: ~~ « ~~ ~; ,yid: t ~ i ~;; 1` ~ it ~ # '{F ~.fj AY =~ i~ i1~ 5 7 , r: -i .~ )~ ~' ja 1 ~ F~ ~rt~ '~ f ~ ,T ~ti ~~~'L~'ni3Cs~ Q~ ~ ~ ,C~~{"~';k ~j'~ J},27^,p~ {n a ~;_1 ~` ~. r ~ Y ~ ~_4 i 4^ y ~ 'K tx ~ r ,~ r ~: 7, ,~~~~' F S Y I i ~ ~r~,,7d ,c ~ _ r r ,. .. <. •. ~ r;{ wit ~ ~ ¢ s t~~~~c..~i3s F~ _ a BtT;~ cy'. ~ -~~t'~fl~~"~' ~ ~3i ~C 2F ._~~ ~;~»i4 }i~`'~ ,I ~.~~ ,'. ~+ ;- r } a>.,cc ~ ~ #~~ ~ t - '3 ~~ jet ~~ a .: _~- a'r~ ` i ~:i, Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Special Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 22 ^~'' `K" Eaton: Yes. I think those are probably the 2 biggest. There were some concerns ,.5'. on the landscape requirements but that's a pretty lengthy thing and you guys >;-:~z.j have had that discussion in the past I believe. You may want to stand on that. ~~~` ~ Borup: Okay. Thank you John. Centers: Thanks. ,.r ..,<< Borup: Anything to add to that Brad? ~,_ s~~~~~ Hawkins-Clark: Chairman. I would ust, the North Meridian Plannin Area, there . ,.~ j g ''~ has been a couple of requests that as you know this 12 mile study area that's r~ _ going on to just leave the Comprehensive Plan, 1993 Comp Plan as it currently has the land designations and not include any of the proposed Comp Plan until ` «~~y yC~ u~~.C W~~~ ~ ~~ ~~~ N~~~C~~ ~~ ~d~ ~ y~~~.y ~~ ~. ~~~ ~~~~~~.y ~~, ~~ ~a~ ~ ,,~~ ~a~~ ~~y going to be coming down the pike. You as a body will Receive Recommendation } a: from that committee that's reviewing that 12 north mile area. Our feeling is that if `'' '~'~ ~' we do Receive development applications, in the mean time, after this is adopted by the City that we would like to see a current draft in place, rather than the 1993 ' ~ one in place. ,~:. ~ Borup: As long as we're not restricting the amending process to 12 months, go ~~ back to 6 months like we are now, I mean those are such all encompassing area. '~~ We've got an opportunity to amend the Comp Plan again. Isn't that where you're I ~~ going? °`"~`` Hawkins-Clark: Right. '-' _~ Borup: You're saying just go ahead and do an amendment to incorporate whatever that study comes up with? That makes the most sense to me. .~ Nary: Right. Mr. Chairman, if for some reason that something happens quicker, I ;~ mean, it still has to go through the hearing process at the City Council level anyway. They may catch up, but it would make more sense to move along with ~'~` what we think the new things are and substitute later. ~. Borup: I don't think they're going to have anything that 6 months to do the amendment is going to cause a problem on because the sewer is not there. t ° Okay. t,~.-~ _ ~s~'' Nary: Maybe it doesn't have to be if the other --. 'ra~. ~'~~ ~ Borup: Are we ready to --? w- . t:; ; }a : , Centers: Did you want to address those 2 items that Mr. Eaton talked about? _.,.. ,~ .,.~,.. x rt4 h~ a A y li.f t k ~ `~ ~~ ~ ~?fY {, 4 Y Yr~.i. ~ ~I'- ~#uh ,~ h ~, .~ ~ ~~~~3 . -M:~ f " ,~ 1 ~ ,ti ~~~'3~ >-b ~~ L Y.u f1 'prr err &rjc;:~ t, ,-, ~, <. fir;,. ¢t ~ ~..,~.~ L. j~L.. ~~y~ve, ~. ~~, k ~~ ~::~ r~ • -~m ,~ ~ ` :~, ~. ~; ~~ ~~, . r; _ ~ , 'ti a ~ ~~~~ ~. ,~. ' ~'~~;' F kt ~~ ~" , ~r,: t ~x ~. ~, ~ .t ~. r ~js;?..:~ ~ ;. -L t' ~ ~~~ ~ h n . Y~ ~~ tl Y -A~ _ .~~ ' ,,~ ^~ 1 l r~ ~i~~~ ~, ~~ a, ., ~o~ s. ~~~<~ `"~ x - ~ r ;,- z vq~i~. . ~, ~:-~ ,. r , ., f ,.,..y ~1h1,t ;~~~~ ,~ ' ~ 3 _,~ ~,° ~~K ' ~ ~,~, ;h~ s .~ ~ z . ~ '{.: z'= ~ ~ ~ ~~ r + ~~~~ ~_ '.G FR~~.} '~ r l l 4~ Al LL~ ~ { _. ~ C; ~. _ _.. ~~ . ,.., t rh 4U 4 t, F r~ r _~, ,.3 t~~ fl i y~ ~~ _ f` ,ty" .. ~~ ... ~ rl Meridian Planning and Zoning~mmission Special Meering November 15, 2001 Page 23 Borup: I think so, yes. You mean and have that included in on the comments? Centers: I guess what he's speaking of is the in fill development to provide incentives to the developers. I would be in total agreement. Hawkins-Clark: Chairman, if I could, there's --. Yes. We have in the new Planned Development Ordinance that was adopted in March of this year. We do have incentives in that ordinance. Certainly we totally support the idea of incentives. Centers: Yes. Okay. Hawkins-Clark: For in fills, there's not a question there. I'm just pointing out that they are currently in the Planned Development Ordinance. The only thing is that if you're not doing a Planned Development as an in fill then those incentives aren't there. Borup: Okay. Hawkins-Clark: If you just have that little 5 acre piece that you want to do a single use only you're not doing a Planned Development then you don't get the benefit of the incentives under the current Planned Development Ordinance. Centers: Right. Hawkins-Clark: If you want to, we could certainly tack some of this language into , the plan. I can do that for your next meeting. Borup: Good. Centers: The cul de sacs, I guess the way I would like to see it is if the fire department could show specifically why a cul de sac should not be allowed in a subdivision, something along those lines. I don't know how the rest of the Commission feels about it. Shreeve: Mr. Chairman. ^ Borup: Go ahead. Shreeve: I would like to comment on the cul de sac issue. Again, just to throw a little personal flavor in, but we personally look for cul de sacs. We have little kids. I think to go with the idea of totally abolishing them, which it does not say that but I think to more or less, for lack of a better way of putting them. To abolish them is not good. To limit them, I don't believe is necessarily good. I'm not a proponent of having one street with a bunch of branches heading off that are nothing but cul de sacs because there certainly needs to be some connectivity ~t ~~ f, n, ~ r ~ .. (~. ,,~~.~( y (- ~~'t' .rw~~ l F ~ 4 ~. -~ ~ .SAS ~ ~ - _ :. .f ~;~.~ ~'r`+f ~~~k~~` '„~~- ~ G ~Y,~~}~~ 5 -~ 1 "~ 1 'f ~'. _ e.: S u. Y.F )1 _ y # °e ~ ri~~. i i t r'~ O '-~fp4~ '~1k~sM~ L~'' I ~ ~ ~~~a~~ ~ ~ ~'I".rigx ~K .Y-w~ ~~rs~iv r ~ ,~",~.', E: E a ~Y a0 ~ s~re'~1 ~' ' ~+' ~' ~ ~. . ~ ~ ~, ~ - i is '. s~ r r ., ~~, ~ ~ rr a~~ ~E 3. ri ~F s r "c i "S;~ ~$ .sa-; ~i ~~ 4f. -:5~ r~~'. Sy~~`k3 ~ rr~y ~ ;'~ ~: ~ ,~ t y ' F$ ~.""}§ w k ~36~i5~r$ ~f'=~o 1 s w ~s ~w rc~,~ i1 a ~e - _ c - t irn', f ~ I~ ~ Y.t~~ {~Y ^N.. _ ~~~ ~I ~ ~MF~~ a- f Y.4"^'~f~l "~ 4-- air, T ~<~; 1 ` 1 ~ ~ I ~~ ;mss ,~ gym. ` ~i i ;., :r G c cz ~ ~K~ w ~ F ~ ~ qty, t ~"" i ~ ~ fy FPS i . , : ~. Spa k ~'~4~N ~~~' 7!lr.Md~r4 i~ ~ t ;~i?~'~'4 ~f~{26 .P6`~ ? :.4._ ...,+ 5 .. _ .. ~: ~ tai;"~ _: •- ., r'd_: Y' ~ J... ~' .'. :-: ~~`:•, a'f .~.3 - e t ~ Yr24, Ef. ~ L ~ W I k~ ~' ~ ,t. 4 ~ 1f<f ~y.R i _j~ fw :~ h i'G ..Vr4f~ 3.4 ~ ~ 51 '' T ~i. < 2I EWiS Y ILyF.` :K. 1 4\ ~YJ.'I` ~hX a'fiW ~ +Y+h ` tom' lam/ ~4,' R. ': -. ~ ~.~ '. ti i~~~~ ' ~i. n ~~ 3~t~'~~~~t I ~~ 9 ~,~i ~j ~ I~a ~[ ,,rF~~ ~ F r~ .~~Z •..1 pT u-.. _ ! y~ 7 ~+~, ~ S ~_. ti '+~~ ~ + -`4.ts ~ 3.'31 fl.,. ! ~~~~~ i ',!S^~,~,}Uv1, ~~'l'~x ~. ~~.. ~'; ~ p' ~ 7 ' v "-$ ~ ~r ~ ~' ~ ~-i~~yy ~ ~ r~apfi~, ar~'~~~{ '' S~ ~ lf"s`~~ZE~S LX>-..tr-+~ q wu r j.1, +~: ~' F '~' n~Y~a,. ~6 t ~' ~l =.+ 4 t ..~ a'S r.,, .rk 5 ~ li ~~.hy f 3trc v3.-4v 5 _. FAT ~ a ._ h yy .. , _ ,, r y.~ya ~,.k"~'t~, i F ~L I k~ a'' ~`~~ ~ei!K~k~ ~~ ~, F ~ , ~ ~~ r7 r ~ {.I '' t ~C*q +yti.~y~f ~ v~ ~ ~ a~ _~ ~ +, ~~~Y s,v~hc ~~i ~"r^i ~`,. C-, _ v v ~ a ..t..-,K~+c~.~a yt ~ . c ~~. 7}. r of .- ~'{i. .. ~ S w ~~ - .. e - .t ,~, -0 .. 7 - r v _ F., °.r: -.~ n _ ~:. ~ ,. 3C ... .-;. .,. e ' ,,,_-. ~ i...H ~ z~-.-~, ~.r;.r ~;Ixldr ~o~'.~.:°, ~~W~'.,~~;~~~f,?J.fi~7~..k.r~:.~.= ... ~.. .. - . ~e,;: _ ~ ~ gym - C^ .. ~~ r '' :;:.~~;. 3 fi "y ;~ ': :~; ~; ~:s q~~ ~, ~ `~~ ~; ~~t ~ ~,:>` s f a, ~ = ;~ 'iYr ~: ~.~,;~ <<. <t;, ' ~ ~~~, ;,;~K~ ;,.: ~~,!3 b~i.,... Meridian Planning and Zoning L4mmission Special Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 24 but I think there is some wisdom. I think there is some application and not just because of existing land use patterns. There's times when cul de sacs are just good sensible community neighborhood places that families with little kids like to go to where they're safe. For example, we live on a cul de sac that has a pathway connecting at the end of our cul de sac to a neighboring street. So, there's still that connectivity for walkability but it's no traffic in relationship to cars. I think we need to tone down the language and allow cul de sacs reasonably. Like, I say, I'm certainly not a proponent of a thoroughfare with branch cul de sacs. I think they should not be as discouraged as I believe the language says. Nary: I guess, to add to that, I would concur. I think that there's a need for all different types of uses. You can get the same connectivity. Maybe that needs to be clarified that the connectivity can be done through alternative methods like pathways. Those are things that we do currently. There's a good use for those as well. I guess I concur with Commissioner Shreeve that it would make some sense just to make sure the language is clear that we're still looking at all varieties of land uses and allowing a variety of land uses. Again, we have that preference for connectivity but connectivity can be achieved through other means than just a road. Hawkins-Clark: Chairman Borup. If I could just clarify. The reference is strictly applying to the neighborhood centers. That little quarter of a mile. Borup: That's what I was just wondering. Hawkins-Clark: Just that little quarter of a mile area of the neighborhood centers. That's the only place that it refers to no cul de sacs. That's the only thing we're talking about. We're just saying no cul de sacs within those centers. If you are comfortable with that, then we don't - Borup: That doesn't need to be addressed then. Hawkins-Clark: We don't feel there's a problem. We did talk about that with the BCA. We're happy to clean up that language because I can see where it was a little unclear in our text. We can clean that up to say you know certainly cul de sacs will be reviewed just not within that neighborhood center quarter mile area. Borup: I think that's what the letter said. It just said it was unclear as to whether it applied to all or not. I think that clarifies that. Okay. I don't think we're looking at adjourning this to the end of our other meeting. the 29~' would be our next regular scheduled - Nary: No, we don't have one. It's only the second and fourth remember? We only work so much for free. Borup: What am I saying? ~, ~ '~ ~ '€ Meridian Planning and Zoning~mmission Special Meering ~?.; November 15, 2001 ~' Page 25 ~ ~;~ ~,y{~~II (inaudible discussion amongst Commission) F ~ '~~i Nary: So, the 6th of December. ~;~ Borup: Oh, the 6th of December, right. Is that what --? Yes, the 29th was an open . . L~'~ Thur~rlav ~ ,~ }', '~ ~ Norton: Mr. Chairman. ~~~ ~s' ~;' r Borup: Commissioner Norton. ~.,,~:.; Norton: We've had several motions that we've made over the last 2 times we .~: have addressed this issue plus tonight's comments. Can staff put together a draft ~ ;~ . ,;;' of what we have been Recommending for that meeting so we can review it? ~ ~;~ ~~ ~ i -t,~z= Hawkins-Clark: You bet. ~ ~ Borup: Okay. So, we're looking for the 6th? , s ~:;, - Norton: For the 6th, yes. Including the glossary and your No. 6, referencing your ~~'~~'~ memo of January 1St, which now we've totally blown apart with the various motions we've been making. If you can kind of gather everything together that ,~' ~ ; would help us to maybe get this off our agenda and onto City Council. ~ aw ,.~. zt. Hawkins-Clark: Commissioner Norton. Just a single memo that summarizes all M~ ~~'``'' the motions to date regarding the Comprehensive Plan. What about the map, do ~~~`' ~~ you need any update on that? Are you comfortable with the fact that - ~~ '<~', Borup: Didn't we just make the 3? 4 4 :# ~ ~~~, ~: Hawkins-Clark: -- your changes last time - ~ I 4 ,~ ', Norton: Yes there weren't very many changes to that map. :.~,,;. , 4 ~,~~ Borup: We did 3 changes to the map. ~~ ~~ ~` (inaudible discussion amongst Commission) ~. ~= i ~~', Norton: I think we're pretty clear on that map. ~, ~ '"{ ~ ~~~ Hawkins-Clark: So, we're just talking about the text policies and motions only? ~: i Norton: Yes. ~4 ~ ~ Hawkins-Clark: Pull everything to date together into asingle --? ~,. ;: ~d, ,,,~~.. ~~ ~ ~y ~ gp ~i ~ ~{ g,~~ :.~x4 i ! ~ Rrf'-A 4 ` I ~~~1, tiY } ~ f y .777! S , ~~ q ' ~ ~ 4 . ~ ~ ., 3fI I ~ i _ t. E ~ f ~~ ' ~~ , ~ ' e ' ~ ~ n 1-. +'' ~ ~~~ C 1 1 ' ~ [ ~ ~ [ °. ~': ~T *~ Meridian Planning and Zoning ommission Special Meeting November 15, 2001 `~%, ; Page 26 Norton: Yes, that would be great. Hawkins-Clark: Okay. ~~ Borup: You may want to have those maps changed before it goes to City ~,; : Council. I don't know. Norton: Because we had that frontage area too that we - Borup: Yes. ~'~~- Hawkins-Clark: Along I-84, right. Borup: That's not a real hard thing to do is it? t Hawkins-Clark: No, we can do that and probably for the Public Hearing notice it '~~", would be clearest if we had a final map. ~' Borup: Okay. We didn't have a motion yet did we? ,_: ., Norton: Not yet. 4f;' "~ Borup: Also, in line with that is the 20th was the Park Comprehensive Plan ~ meeting? From what I gather we would rather not have a workshop. Just have ~. '~" them all at the same meeting. then that would be at 6:00 prior to the other =~ meeting also? ::;-,: F. F'. A3,''~} I Centers: On what date? f. :: , y'.i:~ Q..... .... Th.. 7Ath ..F 1'1.......,...L...- n~ Nary: Right now we don't have very much scheduled on that I don't think. Borup: No. r (inaudible discussion amongst Commission) ,_ ~: Borup: I'm still talking about holding it at 6:00 prior to the other meeting. ~~ Nary: Right. But, I mean, if it were to take longer. Borup: Oh, right. (~ ~ Nary: We'd have this room full of people to talk about the Parks we might need a -~ Y ~ little bit more. ~;, s~_ ~~-~ ,~~ . ,-;;:~ d~ ~~~ •~ ~; Y >; '`~;, <;~. , ~':' ~4_; ..,, F, ~ . ~~. ~~Y ~ yy4~ ~I.. Y f '+ R ,~~. ~ . '~i~ ~;:~ ~; ~ . ~~ Meridian Planning and Zoning ~fiimission Special Meeting • November 15, 2001 Page 27 Borup: Right. We'll have to play that by ear. Okay, do we have a motion? Nary: Motion to adjourn this meeting? Borup: Yes. Nary: To adjourn the special meeting and - Borup: To a date? Nary: To December 6~', 6:00 for further discussion of the Comprehensive Plan. Shreeve: Second. Borup: Motion second. All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) APPROVED: 0_-~ ~~/ ~ /[~~ K TH BORUP, CHAIR AN DATE APPROVED ~~~~~~~-~p~ ~.71 ~t'1~t~~~Ri ~;j~ ~ .G q,y ti~A~'f ~1.~ ~ A,.q: ATTESTED ,x ~ ~~'~ ~~ ,. ~ ~ ~, :~ ~f ~ ~ z , t+~' ~~~= ~ ~ o WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., CI CLERK -~:- ~~~ ~ - ~. I i ;~ ~ '~ ~ . -. ;7~ ~~~~~ r'~Ci~i~ G " ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ l ~ ~ ~ -:4 ~ a i, g ~gyy tA ~ ~ . ~ ~ _ . Y ~f1L* f{ d >:. ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ i ~: a ~: r~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r a I ~ ~ i ~, f ~ ~~ ~ ~. i. 4 E ~ ~ ~ t~ ;~ ~~~.~~ ~~ ~', i'~ . .. ,1 I~ 'y ~ I a' i .yvsy i {~ ~~:~~~~Y ""f 2 ~~. ~~ ~~~ CITY OF MERIDIAN x'~ MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING REGULAR MEETING `_ 'a AGENDA Thursday, November 15, 2001, at 7:00 P.M. City Council Chambers 1. Roll-call Attendance: ~'. ~~ X Sally Norton X Jerry Centers ~~~_ ~ e ` X Bill Nary X Keven Shreeve ~_~ X Chairman Keith Borup "~ '~~ ;~° 2. Adoption of the Agenda: ". 3. Consent Agenda: f __ A• Approve Minutes of September 27, 2001 Planning and Zoning °4~ Special Comprehensive Plan Meetin A rove 9~ pP ~ r' ~; . . ;;r ~ B. Approve Minutes of November 1, 2001 Planning and Zoning " `' 3 .~-~~ Regular Meeting: Approve ~ , 4. Public Hearing: AZ 01-016 Request for annexation and zoning of 7.32 acres from County zone to C-G zone for proposed Meridian Storage by ~" , Touchstone Construction, Inc.- -south of West Overland Road and west of ,~ ~3 ~~ South Meridian Road: Recommend Approval to City Council P 5. Public Hearing: CUP 01-032 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a ? '_ ~` Planned Unit Development and storage facility in a C-G zone for proposed ' ° -- Meridian Storage by Touchstone Construction, Inc. -south of West Overland Road a d z , n west of South Meridian Road: Recommend approval to City Council ~~ ,,~ `~ '' 6. Public Hearing: CUP 01-033 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a * Group Day Care with approximately six children in an R-8 zone for Virginia L. Beberness by Virginia L. Beberness -Lot 14 Block 3 f " , o Tremont Subdivision: Recommend a pproval to City Council 7. Public Hearing: AZ 01-017 Request for annexation and zoning of .193 -'_ acres from RUT to R-4 zones for Packard Acres No. 1 by Packard Estates Developers, LLC -east of North Wingate Lane and south of East ~~~ Ustick Road: Recommend approval to City Council `'`` ~ Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda -November 15, 2001 ~ Page 1 of 2 All materials Presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to d ocuments and/or hearings Please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-g433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeti n9 >. , f Sa ~ 31 III" i„ -l ^ .~ y,~.P R Yr "i° R 4 y ' ~. Y ~ j ~ ~ h i ~ t: ,i h~ } } ~ p p ,; Y 9 9 ' t i t; 7~ .. - ~~ ;.' #w , t ~` t ~~ ~~ g 4~ t~ = i ~~ '~ ~ i ` r ~ ~ ~. i J~ j Fi ~ _ !~ ^ y~ ~ ~ ~S#i ~ >> i . ~ I ( ~ ~ _ 9 ~ a ~ #' , ~ ~ ~. ~~ a - m a 9 q~~( S yy Nl~~1? ~¢ ~ `~ ~ ~ 8. Public Hearing: PP 01-019 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 115 '~I, building lots and 10 other lots on 29.93 acres in an R-4 zone for proposed ri~ri,;~ Woodbridge No. 2 by Woodbridge Community, LLC -east of South Locust Grove Road and south of East Franklin Road: Recommend approval to City Council °;.:, 9. Public Hearing: CUP 01-034 Request.for a Conditional Use Permit for ~:~ ~` an alternative school for Middle School and High School age students in 4r;,w `~ `t an R-4 zone for Joint School District No. 2 by Joint School District No. 2 ``'' ~r - 930 West Pine Street: Recommend Denial to City Council 10. Public Hearing: PFP 01-006 Request for Preliminary/Final Plat approval of 2 building lots on 10 acres in an L-O zone for Tramore Subdivision by ,,. x ' Thomas Development Co. -south of West Pine Avenue and east of North t Linder Road: Recommend approval to City Council z 11. Public Hearing: CUP 01-036 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a 72 unit wood frame, three story senior apartment complex in an L-O zone for proposed Tramore Senior Community by Thomas Development, Co. -south of West Pine Avenue and east of North Linder Road: Recommend approval to City Council Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda -November 15, 2001 Page 2 of 2 All materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. ~~ ill `"'~~ ~]YP. y_, _ y,~' RK+'„ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ t E~ ft~ ~ < ~§.~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ . f i ~. ~ ~ ,.. n _ .._~ ~ : ' i ` ' t r j 1,~ [1~ ~E,~ `tY ~l ~5 ` , ~~t. 1 t ~ , ~ > 4y ~f ¢. ... ~( y[~ 4 4i~~ L ` .~ ~. 3 1 z ~., r , ~ }, ~ ~ ~: t ~ '~ ~ .., t~ 4 ' ~ ~ ~ ~, _, ~~ ~ k ~ ~ ~ - ~.. "x ~t t` ~ ' y ~~ i • r ' ~ CITY OF 1VIERIDIAN MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING REGULAR MEETING .. AGENDA Thursday, November 15, 2001, at 7:00 P.M. ~~-°`' _ City Council Chambers ~ . ~~ 1. Roll-call Attendance: .~. X Sally Norton X Jerry Centers ~ ,.: ''/ X Bill Nary X Keven Shreeve X Chairman Keith Borup . „; 2. Adoption of the Agenda: 3. Consent Agenda: ~:4 A. Approve Minutes of September 27, 2001 Planning and Zoning >~,~ Special Comprehensive Plan Meeting: Approve '''` ' B. Approve Minutes of November 1, 2001 Planning and Zoning Regular Meeting: Approve ~~ 4. Public Hearing: AZ 01-016 Request for annexation and zoning of 7.32 <'~°, acres from County zone to C-G zone for proposed Meridian Storage by } '~~~' Touchstone Construction, Inc. -south of West Overland Road and west of ~' ~~~~ South Meridian Road: Recommend Approval to City Council 5. Public Hearing: CUP 01-032 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a -~ Planned Unit Development and storage facility in a C-G zone for proposed Meridian Storage by Touchstone Construction, Inc. -south of West Overland Road and west of South Meridian Road: Recommend a royal to Ci Council P P tY 6. Public Hearing: CUP 01-033 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a { r Group Day Care with approximately six children in an R-8 zone for ~,.-~~ Virginia L. Beberness by Virginia L. Beberness -Lot 14, Block 3 of Tremont Subdivision: Recommend approval to City Council ~, . 7. Public Hearing: AZ 01-017 Request for annexation and zoning of .193 ~~ , ,. acres from RUT to R-4 zones for Packard Acres No. 1 by Packard r ~~<5 Estates Developers, LLC -east of North Wingate Lane and south of East t,:, Ustick Road: Recommend approval to City Council A ~ Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda -November 15, 2001 '~"~ ~ PBge 1 of 2 ~' All materials presented at public meetings shall become pro~rty of the city of Meridian. ' " Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. ti- , x. k 8. Public Hearing: PP 01-019 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 115 -;~ ~~~' building lots and 10 other lots on 29.93 acres in an R-4 zone for proposed Woodbridge No. 2 by Woodbridge Community, LLC -east of South Locust Grove Road and south of East Franklin Road: Recommend approval to City Council 9. Public Hearing: CUP 01-034 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for ~~tiz ~ an alternative school for Middle School and High School age students in an R-4 zone for Joint School District No. 2 by Joint School District No. 2 ".F ;`r-' - 930 West Pine Street: Recommend Denial to City Council 10. Public Hearing: PFP 01-006 Request for Preliminary/Final Plat approval of 2 building lots on 10 acres in an L-0 zone for Tramore Subdivision by Thomas Development Co. -south of West Pine Avenue and east of North ,~. Linder Road: Recommend approval to City Council . ~?°,~ 11. Public Hearing: CUP 01-036 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for ~~~~ ~ `s the construction of a 72 unit wood frame, three story senior apartment complex in an L-O zone for proposed Tramore Senior Community by -_ Thomas Development, Co. -south of West Pine Avenue and east of North Linder Road: Recommend approval to City Council ~:a. r ~; .F... Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda - November 15, 2001 Page 2 of 2 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings ~` = please contact the City Clerk's OFfic~ at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. ,~~ .r ~~l n .~~-. V f f • ~ ~ ~ t cY- ~ t `~ ~ f~ a a `~ Yi ~ . ~ ~~~ P j. '1 C ? ~ 4 A ~ , ~ ~ e - ~y~~~~ ~ J~ ~-0:Q ~ H }7~~~~~~ ~. ~ f S 'Nr ! ~jt ~L ~~ ~~~~ J ~ S~ti . 1Y ' _ ~ ~ ~, i. ~€ .. ,. ~ y k s ,~ :~~~~ ~ t> CITY OF MERIDIAN MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Thursday, November 15, 2001, at 7:00 P.M. City Council Chambers 1. Roll-call Attendance: Sally Norton Jerry Centers Bill Nary _ Keven Shreeve Chairman Keith Borup 2. Adoption of the Agenda: 3. Consent Agenda: A. Approve Minutes of September 27, 2001 Planning and Zoning Special Comprehensive Plan IUleeting: B. Approve Minutes of November 1, 2001 Planning and Zoning Regular Meeting: r_`, ` N s 4. Public Hearing: AZ 01-016 Request for annexation and zoning of 7.32 acres from County zone to C-G zone for proposed Meridian Storage by Touchstone Construction, Inc. -south of West Overland Road and west of South Meridian Road: 5. Public Hearing: CUP 01-032 Request for a Conditbnal Use Permit for a Planned Unit Development and storage facility in a C-G zone for proposed Meridian Storage by Touchstone Construction, Inc. -south of West Overland Road and west of South Meridian Road: 6. Public Hearing: CUP 01-033 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Group Day Care with approximately six children in an R-8 zone for Virginia L. Beberne>ss by Virginia L. Bebemess -Lot 14, Block 3 of Tremont Subdivision: 7. Public Hearing: AZ 01-017 Request for annexation and zoning of .193 acres from RUT to R-4 zones for Packard Acres No. 1 by Packard Estates Developers, LLC -east of North Wingate Lane and south of East Usti~k Road: Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda -November 15, 20Q1 Page 9 of 2 All materiaNs presented at public meetings shall become property of the Cityr of Meridian. Anyone desiring acxommodatlon for disabtl~iss related to documents and/or hearings please contact the City Clerk's Office at 88r3-4433 at least 46 fwurs prior to the public meeting. 1H.?F C Yom' .k _ ,~ '~ ~~ ~ ~ , i, Y~ Y r ~~F~~ ~ ~~ ~ fkE ~# ~i~'^~ r' V' ~ ~ . i, 1 ~, f qq ~ ' ~'.J. d <~ . _ 3 t .. ~. 1 ~ .s r ~ . . g~ { 1~ e 1:1f.. ~$i~FS~~$ L ~ f f a J ~~ ~ J ~ r ~Y, n ~ 7 ~~ ~ ~ } ~% i yS,S. ~ 5.~~i 1 s 8. Public Hearing: PP 01-019 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 115 - building lots and 10 other lots on 29.93 acres in an R-4 zone for proposed Woodbridge No. 2 by Woodbridge Community, LLC -east of South `~ Locust Grove Road and south of East Franklin Road: ~- ~ k 9. Public Hearing: CUP 01-034 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for an alternative school for Middle School and High School age students in ` an R-4 zone for Joint School District No. 2 by Joint School District No. 2 ~~ ~~ - 930 Wes# Pine Street: ::fir ' f ~~` 10. Public Hearing: PFP 01-006 Request for Preliminary/Final Plat approval ' `: of 2 building lots on 10 acres in an L-0 zone for Tramore Subdivision by Thomas Development Co. -south of West Pine Avenue and east of North Linder Road: 1 b ~$% `'~` 11. Public Hearing: CUP 01-036 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for ,? ' - ~ the construction of a 72 unit wood frame, three story senior apartment T1 1 £ complex in an L-O zone for proposed Tramore Senior Community by ~~ x Thomas Development, Co. -south of West Pine Avenue and east of i : - North Linder Road: ~; , ~~- .~ ' ~' fi - ~~< „_ .~ {; if f ~ ,~ _ ,` ~; ;~;, ~~ , ` `. J1 G~ ~ ~~ ~r, ~:(' ./r ~. M.• t 5T ~[ 3 `~~"" Meridian Planning and zoning Commission Agenda -November 15, 2001 Page 2 of 2 All materials presented at publk; meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring axommodatlon for disabilities related to d~uments and/or hearings . ' °-s pisses contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the pub8c meeting. ~ ~ fi '~ -~ ~'~ r, 1'~i ,r ` ~ 5 ,~ I ~ ~ ~ mf ~ Y ri~ ab j y '~ ~ } a t ~ it : ' f ! t yi 1 ~ I I jl S ~ ~~ I ` {[ i~ ~'+ : S t~ f;q .; ~~.' t _ ` i ,.. I~~~. '~ ~ i ~. ` ~y. y ~.5 ,y::Ge ~r 1 F£r` f ,~ ~s ~~ h u- i a a3 I ~ ~ ~ «~ y ~ ~ ~ ~~ j ' raj-~ ~ !~ Y I: '~+` F ~rt ~ ~ ~~ ~. ' 4 F ,; _ ?t} ' sw 4~~,' i k.:, I~ 1 ~ .1 n ~ . ~.F• `4 ~, II I + ~ ~ _ l ,.at ~~"11 1! d',b~w < ~~ >`„ ~ e., . ` i5'~3 i ~ ~, ~ .~ n, ~ . ~ t ~ ~ I r'~ F~-.~ f ~ . r M ~r ~.. 5 ~s ~ ~' ~ ~' ~. ~ y ~C. (~ ~ w" >`" •`F. ;' -f ,rt,r, K„. h. µ: ~ TX TION REPORT ~ AS OF NOU 16 'i~1:17 PAGE.01 CITY OF MERIDIAN DATE TIME TO/FROM MODE MIN/SEC PGS CMDii STATUS 13 11/16 01:01 PUBLIC WORKS OF--S 00'30" 002 119 OK 14 11/16 01:02 2082882501 EC--S 00'40" 002 119 OK 15 11/16 01:04 8841159 EC--S 00'41" 002 119 OK 16 11/16 01:05 2088840744 EC-S 00'40" 002 119 OK 17 11/16 01:06 2088845077 EC--S 00'39" 002 119 OK 18 11/16 01:07 208 898 5501 EC--S 00'39" 002 119 OK 19 11/16 01:09 LIBRARY EC-S 00'50" 002 119 OK 20 11/16 01:10 92083776449 EC--S 00'40" 002 119 OK 21 11/16 01:11 8886854 EC-S 00'40" 002 119 OK 22 11/16 01:12 2083757154 EC--S 00'40" 002 119 OK 23 11/16 01:13 8950390 EC--S 00'40" 002 119 OK 24 11/16 01:15 Laurel EC--S 00'41" 002 119 OK 25 11/16 01:16 CHERRY LRNE EC--S 00'50" 002 119 OK CITY OF MERIDIAN ' ;' MERIDIAN PLANNING AND 20NING REGULAR MEETING _:: AGENDA '~` ; . Thursday, November 16, 2001, at 7:00 P.M. City Council Chambers ~`>:,~. ` ~<.., , . h; ''; r~' 1. Roll-call Attendance: ~ ,: SaAy Norton ~ Jerry Centers 4r ~Biq Nary Keven Shreeve ~_Chairtnan Keith Bonrp 'S a, - : 2. Adoption of #te Agenda: ~ - 3. Consent Agenda: ~ ,r. . €. A. Approve Minutes of September 27, 2001 Planning and Zoning $ ~ Special Comprehensive Plen Meeting: c~-bv~e, ~` >~ ' B. Approve Minutes of November 1, 2001 Planning and. Zoning ~~: ` Regular Meeting: ~PI'''~'^~ f i °~' - 4. Public Hearing: AZ 01-016 Request for annexation and zoning of 7.32 ~~L " acres from Courrty zone to C-G zone for proposed Meridian Storage by rs; ~ Touchstone Construction, Inc. -south of West Overland Road and west of `~ ' South Meridian Road: f"2Gvmh~ ~~ps-vlraQi ~ G(G ~` 3. Public Hearing: CUP 01-032 Request for a Condfional Use Permit for a ~~ Planned Unit Development and storage facility in a C-G zone for proposed Meridian Storage by Touchstone Construction, Inc. -south of West Overland Road and west of South Meridian Ro d ~ ~ a : 6. Public Hearing: CUP 01-033 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a - C3roup Day Care with approximately six children in an R-8 zone for {F, .~ r Virginia L. Bebemess by Yrginia L. Bebemess -Lot 14, Block 3 of ; Tr®mont Subdivision: `;;.. 7. Public Hearing: AZ 01-097 Request fvr annexation and zoning of .193 " ~ ` acres from RUT to R11 zones for Packard Acres No. 1 by Packard ' Estates Developers, LLC -east of North 1Mngate Lane acrd south of East .'> ' Ustidc Road: ~Govn`+~eH-st. ct~p~rova.~ fn G/G r ; ;_:. , ~~, ~ , Meriden Plamir~q artdZoning commiaeion Agenda -November 15. ~Q1 ?. -' t `~ AO materials PreserAed at Public meeU~ ~aU beoom8 or Mro_ _ P-~~Y ~y of Mermen. ~ d ~ C a ~ti Dfe980 wM~t t ne lty Cle~ic'6 Ofl4x 888.4433 et least 48 Ito tlta public rlrlg. R . ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~~~ ~;4 y "%' 3~~?.~ ~ ' { ..; t . _Y, 1 ~j I° r~ } aJ ~~ ~ ~ - fz: ` ~t` -3 - "r~ - . ,; ~ ~h ~- ~ r _ '; h 4 ~? k~' ~+p4.. ~~~ ' ~ }Z. Sj ,. ~, r r td T~, r 7 , ' a,, ~~4 ,. - ~ F r h .t r~ s, ~'?S ~ 1 ~~, - ._ `t S V ~ ~.3`. + - ~:` ` ~`s- .s K~;x; . , cl ~' -'`~ :*.: , ~; `;~ ~,._::., ;,. ,; ,~ I ;~ ~ rrr ** TX CONF TION REPORT ** DATE TIME TO/FROM 19 11/14 08:34 92083776449 20 11/14 08:37 8886854 21 11/14 08:38 8950390 22 11/14 08:43 Laurel AS OF NOU 1408:44 PAGE, 01 CITY OF MERIDIAN MODE M I WSEC PGS CMD#t STATUS EC--S 03'02" 002 090 0K EC--S 00'38" 002 090 OK EC--S 00'38" 002 090 OK EC--S 00'39" 002 090 OK 'FI~QS e Po~+ -~- ~~t1~1 ~ c 0vc~-+~~ c~ ~n~sn~ CITY OF iVYERIDIAN MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING REGULAR MEE77NG AGENDA Thursday, November 15, ZOOt, at 7:00 p,M. City Council Chambers 1. Roll-call Attendance: Salty Norton Jerry Centers -Bill Nary Keven Shreeve Chairman Keith Borup 2• Adoption of th®Agenda: 3. Consent Agenda: A. Approve Minutes of September 27, ZOOt Planning and Zoning Special Comprehensive Plan Meeting: B• Approve Minutes of November 1, 2001 Planning and Zoning Regular Meeting: 4. Public Hearing: AZ 01-016 Request for annexation and zoning of 7.32 acres from County zone to C-G zone for proposed Meridian Storage by Touchstone Construdion, tnc. -south of West Overland Road and west of South Meridian Road: 5. Public Hearing: CUP 01-032 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Unit Development and storage facility in a C-G zone for proposed Meridian Storag® by Touchstone Construction, Inc. - soutli of West Overland Road and west aF South Meridian Road: 6. Public H®aring; CUP 01-033 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Group Day Care with approximately six children in an R-8 zone for Virginia L. Beberness by Virginia L. Bebemess -Lot 14, Block 3 of Tremont Subdivision: 7. Public Hearing: AZ 01-01T Request for annexation and zoning of ,193 acres from RUT to R-4 zones for Packard Acres No. 1 by Packard Estafies Developers, LLC -east of North Wingate Lane and south of East Ustick Road: Aterldlah Piann&rg and Zoning Commission AgeMe -November 15.2001 AU materials preserded at public mee0r~s shalifbeoome propeAy of the City of tiAaridien. Myorre deairUlg accommodation for dsen~eee related to dacumenfs and/or hearings please contact the Cdy GeAt'e Oflbe at 8804.(33 at least 48 hours prbr to the public nteetlnp. `£ A I ~' Y~r ~ 1 }Y~ F i t r y { y 4 j ~ J .F° ~ ~ t~ t ~:t~ _ L~~ '=1~ ~"i Y' Y-L ~l * 1 ~~~ 1 S ~j ~~2h ~ f _ ' `, r ~ :.: ~F~z 7 t h ' { i ` ~ ~; '!. r t { ~. C.V ~, l'~ ~ p1yy '1~~`~ rte... h ** TX C TION REPORT ** ;' #}> '`- r~ ~_ `~ ~~° ;.; ~~.. 1~ <~ ,~ ~~,,:. t aY3i ~~ ~. ~, DATE TIME TO/FROM 12 11/14 08:26 PUBLIC WORKS 13 11/14 08:27 2082882501 14 11/14 08:28 8841159 15 11/14 08:29 2088840744 16 11/14 08:30 2088845077 17 11/14 08:31 208 898 5501 18 11/14 08:32 LIBRARY AS OF NOU 14 y08:33 PAGE, 01 CITY OF MERIDIAN MODE MIN/SEC PGS CMD# STATUS OF-S 00'28" 082 089 OK EC-S 00'39" 002 089 OK EC-S 00'39" 002 089 OK EC-S 00'39" 002 089 OK EC-S 00'39" 002 089 OK EC-S 00'37" 002 089 OK EC-S 00'48" 002 089 OK ~l~~s e Pos+ -Rr ~c.~l~l i c i~+~ Cc ~ A~ 4LS CITY OF ME17.IDlAN MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING REGULAR iiAEETING AGENDA Thursday, November 15, 2001, at 7:00 P.M. City Council Chambers U .,- 1. Roll-call Attendance: ~. , ~ Sally Norton Jerry Centers Bill Nary Keven Shre®ve _ Chairman Keith Borup "' Z Adoption of the Agenda: 1 ~~''< , 3. Consent Agenda: A. Approve Minutes of September 27, 2001 Planning and Zoning F';:;» ; Special Comprehensive Plan Meeting: B. Approve Minutes of November 1, 2001 Planning and Zoning Regular M®eting: ~ 4. Public Hearing: AZ 01-016 Request for annexation and zoning of 7.32 ~ : ` acres from County zone to C-G zone for proposed Meridian Storage by Touchstone Construction Inc -south of West Overland R d ~'`'F~ , . aa and west of South Meridian Raad: '' r E 6. Public Hearing: CUP 01-032 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Unit Development and storage facility in a C-G zone for proposed McNdian Storage by Touchstone Con t ti I s ruc on, nc. -south of W®st ©verland Road and west of South Meridian Road: ~` ._ 8. Public Hearing; CUP 01.033 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a ~~r Group Day Care with approximately six children in an R-8 zone for VirgiNa L. Bebemess by Yr inia L B b '=° ~. g . e erness -Lot 14, Blodc 3 of Tremont Subdivision: 7. Public Hearing: AZ 01-017 Request for annexation and zoning of .193 _ acres from RUT to R-~4 zones for Packard Acres No. 1 by Packard Estates Developers, LLC -east of North Win ate Lan d g e an south of East Ustlck Road: Meridian Planning and Zoning Commtssbn /~qe1~ - November 15.2001 ~ matariab~reseMetl et pubJlc ~8a t ail AnlAOrm desiring aecommotlatron gpiea related toPrmeMs arw or ~ ngs Please conbl~ the City Clark 9 OfBoe at 888~4~33 at least A8 houre prbr to file Pu69c nresgng. i r •. ~ :::. s. - ~ ~~ .t ~ t ;~ t k i-, - "S y . a ~~ _ iF1 ~~ ~ Z k+ C 1_y :~, ..•~.: . _ 6~'~ 4~ ,s~ a `n`~"- ~ 0 s s x _- ~, , s ~ r, d ~.y. £! t ~ ~ ~. ; 2~~ f ~ ;~F '~i L:; y li'- L S~. { *~ f .. • o CITY OF MERIDIAN ~~' MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ~C?NING REGULAR MEETING AGENDA ~~ j " ~4- " Thursday, November 15, 2001, at 7:00 P.M. ~``~~ City Council Chambers r: ,: ~~ ` 1. Roll-call Attendance: Sally Norton -~,~ Jerry Centers ~.~.~ Bill Nary Keven Shreeve ,. ,'.~.. Chairman Keith Borup ~ ` ~ 2. Adoption of the Agenda: =" 3. Consent Agenda: ~': ~.:. ~ ~ A. Approve Minutes of Sep#ember 27, 2001 Planning and Zoning .~ Soecial Comprehensive Plan Meeting: ~v~e, ` ~~ ~. B. Approve Minutes of November 1, 2001 Planning and Zoning "„-.;; Regular Meeting: ~j~t~e., -r 4. Public Hearing: AZ 01-016 Request for annexation and zoning of 7.32 acres from County zone to C-G zone for proposed Meridian Storage by r 3i Touchstone Construction, Inc. -south of West Overland Road and west of r~~~ South Meridian Road: w ~'~ ~ 5. Public Hearing: CUP 01-032 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a ~` Planned Unit Development and storage facility in a C-G zone for proposed Meridian Storage by Touchstone Construction, Inc. -~ south of UN®st ~ Overland Road and west of South Meridian Road: I'~G~m H~-e~ ~j~pa~l~~ ~ ~~ f ~::°~ 6. Public Hearing: CUP 01-033 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a f ~''f Group Day Care with approximately six children in an R-8 zone for Virginia L. Beberrtless by Virginia L. Bebemess -Lot 14, Block 3 of ~- E ~ ` Tremont Subdivision: ' = 7. Public Hearing: AZ 01-017 Request for annexation and zoning of .193 %~ ::. acres from RUT to R-4 zones for Packard Acres No. 1 by Packard "' Estates Developers, LLC -east of North Wingate Lane and south of East ~Y~ ~ Ustick Road: ~c®Gn~e~.~- ~~~a~v~~' ~ clG ~ hLl ~ :~ is-`>'" Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda -November 15, 2001 ` -_ Page 1 of 2 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring acxommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings ,, please contact the City Clark's office at 886-4433 at least 48 hours prbr to the public meeting. ~r;~- ~ . ,- g a.~,~.: r ja ` " .~ •. s .,~: ~ ~ ' i r . ':1. ~. _ :. ~, ~ ~ - ~~~~ ~ , ~<~ , . .. .. i`.fl~.y....r~~ ,~,^~,Ty'~.~ . [ ! ~v{f±'4.Av c l..r: " ' "' • ~ ~ ' • , ry ~ 'W Y++^ l Y.blsr'.Y'. a, j . ~ ~~ ~r " p ~~':: .. A^F is ,tr ~'£ ieiy J ,~#~~7„°4`C m;,' b'-..aY +.~'`i; , ~^~ ~ 1.' is g Ii r R ~;. ~~5~'.~~~'t~ ^S ~ ~~~ ,; ~,•;» '7' ~ :.?J,S .. XY~.~,`rJ• - '`,~1~~ I ~ ^'~x^iy"J~,~, ::~ajti`~ .~~•r;,~ ... . C J. wf ' ~ ~ 3. } ~ ~ ..1 .., 1JS S sy... ~ ~:F '*... k d '} ;d ' y ~ ~ Y ~ try -• ~, •J k^ < •p":iT,.'tie;Y. ' ~ } C .` I• ~" ' .r A . ~.~% " , .a.. . a'~ 1F° ti L Y .~. .` .. .... .M., ntpeRvM:. ;u~.: :.?,'~a~~~li'~N~riain~d`.~1'.:~%.~:Jy~: ~di.. 1" :iL'..~ C k x*• ''"',Y lr: L Nom.. _ ' ' s' ' j`7 .y; ¢' h .,.Va ~ :.•m ti~-. J r - n: r," ..ti. r ~ . .:,yyXv's .do- •- S ::e%;i . , .r , ire •~ . .~%: . „ ;~ ., ~,.., t' :< ,fir ~ ~ . : a=. , 2,~ .t . ' ~ , '~ .: x 5 r4: f.. c N~ ,~ tL • ' ~' ~ t 1~ 7i'Fy~,1~$ Viah ~-e ~Mi t <r .,{ , >. _ ~^~~ ~eJ ~~.,, . '~~'<. w~~ 1 Y 0. (.~ f ~ t &' ~ .. . ~ '/ :'~, ; , "Y 9 ri ' . 7 :•+ix`.. : 't ~ °~. - ~;'a' ~ „ ;Y3. t M '~ ~` .t .? F ±;w 7*.. 9• ~. "" . f'> ..ti '%.~ F d "a Y; . 4 ~'.` 1 - .... .'~ `.~ :. °Y',•_ . . 3~ Fy{n,~'~:~~\.:4 yy~~ ,~^.-i,`~ . x .T.: } f .Y YJ.,C* a~~t •... . .'.. te§',~t+-~..rt~~kP'~L4'.d~~' 'W htE. ,. is y.., ~ ~ ~ `"~ - . ~ ~ < ~~ .!~ ..~.. .g.. __ ..... ~:; :r~Y ,~. .~.. N..-.... 8. Public Hearing: PP 01-01>~ Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 115 ?~~~ building lots and 10 other lots on 29.93 acres in an R-4 zone for proposed ~~ Woodbridge No. 2 by Woodbridge Community, LLC -east of South kt{r ,:. `~"" ~ Locust Grove Road and south of East Franklin Road: ® ~~V poi//K~ ~®/'i C~(~ 8. Public Hearing: CUP 01-0 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for " an alternative school for Middle School and High School age students in an R-4 zone for Joint School District No, 2 by Joint School District No. 2 ~~ ; ~ - 930 W~e,~s/t~ Pine, S,,tr~e~ept: ~, {/ j ~`` ~ ' 10. Public Hearing: PFP 01-006 Request for Preliminary/Final Plat approval ~; .. ~~ ~' y. of 2 building lots on 10 acres in an L-0 zone for Tramore Subdivision by 1~'` Thomas Development Co. -south of West Pine Avenue and east of North Linder Road: ~e~s~~vl e~~cC ~~~/•c,P ~ c%L 11. Public H®aring: CUP 01-036 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for ~. y the construction of a 72 unit wood frame, three story senior apartment complex in an L-O zone for proposed Tramore Senior Community by ~f ~ n - Thomas Development, Co. -south of West Pine Avenue and eas# of , ;; North Linder Road: ~,. .fi '~ r-" l_;j#~' :f '• `, '' Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda -November 15, 2001 ~ ~c4 ~ Page 2 of 2 ~•~,. All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation far disabilities related to documents and/or hearings ~~~ ~ please contact the City Clerk's OfPioe at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to, the public rt~eeting. ';~: ; _, n ... .}~. .. ,. ~ Y~I S~ Vii. ~' wr~s ~.ri t ~ 1' ~~~ •~ S ~C ~~,' ~ f ~ ~ ~.t a ~8., r~. 4:+.~ i'f Y ~r~ :~ ( ~ ~AR J'9^. /.' ~ 1 '. .~ k• ' 1X ~ • 4 p l '-ITr' ~d:~r u'Y- r''l.. .W.. '.~ ~u 3y~<~ ... G` * %G~x,',y T `x5' :M z~, ~L'Y~•~`.~ ~ s~:M1~~'. ~(.~ o.~w'..TYf•Yl~l. ` ` ~ . .'F~: ^V Ti. . ~t ~:f~'~ ~ ` ~Y_y ' .e ^.r `Y.'.e° I .er~-pb ; i ' . ~ ~ ` S J.+~ :r~; ,1` ,y, :r~'s.,"~',".: `.~'.ac~ .{i* ~ ~' q,k , t .t R . •M. . L kb 5 " d' ~ ~5;: c:° : ~°x e:W, >Z ~J „^ ~~ zZdM k,Tr g S;~r.: L " ' r ~ r~ : x T. + ~ J b ` '~ ' Y , : ~tfr y~.y,.7.• S` _J 6 ~ ~ ~t ^` ~~~ L O~ p~2FS,i, ',~'AI ' / ISY '~ ~S„{z, ~ Y ~~I ~~ y .' . ~ 1 . s, } 4 ;. t 1" '.:LN'i 't~b1~^ xF.i7 . . d Y `' Yi +~+ a ~ i ~r~ 1( 11~'~ w • ~' ~ " ( _ ~" ~ t , x .t , ~ % i . " 1 ~ :+; . X '''^t~ •> .,1 . ..,~s:"3 } ~ : ~' y '.Y' w: 6 ~ u.5r' ~( ~; Yerr! r'~ `.,, t i '' ~ i `' ~ s Rr . ~rv •i -'~~. I~ ri Y' ip t: i X1 ^.Y. n. . ~ i.. • i ~t/e ;~ 'aq s ~ Yx . } 1 r' x%., . 1'kt ~ y.,E •.~~. .1F-. E ~ . '~'ti'ra i M.. .3" , • , i .. n ~ _ I .~ zY'; . ,. ' r ~ - .;\ e Y•' ~` sw ~.! R_.r ~i g i ~^' ~ u I `7 y>'ti,. .y ,,': .;+1~d+h,`.$1~i9n,si~?4: .I. , .. 5~ n : _ i =vic2..`~ti ,.q'e` x" ~:, u , • .~ 5. . -. '~.'S • . -" ' 'Y• ~~ :t { a x~:i ~ € v i ~ 5 .~ Y ; y..~.,~€_•. t 5. , { s. x qq .. . Sr' ' Y ." e &•s' ' ~g > .. Y . a,• ' ` ~ ;;'V ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '~ bw. ?k' I ~ 1 :1' ±ta•e • 1 , T ,~ d ~ 5 . : y i iq ~s- ~ t ~ ~: . w . ...^. f. 't~ S :~~ ':.r r4: ~ i.~t .I r ,:,,t}iz .: (, ,s rF . .(~.; , ~ T' RbA ~ ;s: ~ ~ I ,. ..,, :rl~,_ ~ ,':: _ ,„~::, ~:';;"C~ a 2 r k ~ ~ ., , . . ,, ~ ~ ~' dY }~ 'y Y >~F = 4 V R'j ' ;ii ,~`r}9 ;} a•1'~. L~h':~ ; ~~~.~. ~ _ y,p~ ' 'S ~ w 1 i R 4 :rf W.i~i>~V~ Y:~.k::Yey. ' „ -.• ., ~ . ... .. k . ~ ~ >.. ^ s ~ . ': ~ ne'W{ ~S- ~; e ~ P n X ,+t Y' li vx, I • p~zM~, em Packet Pickup ''''SIB` Project ~• Picked up by Date Time Employee Initials ~~`~ ~ ~- ~ ~ ~ ~`~~r e t11Z"-.~-- cam. Y ~ ` ~-!~~'t ~i~' -~~ ~= ~~r~ ~ , f. . ~' ` r ~~~ p ~ ~ ~J ,~/~ oz~ LL},. F'~,"?~~~'~ `".,Y %~: ~~- -.~ ,I :~; ,.z, ;i :-~::k_ 1, r~; _Y :~ ~ , ;1 :~~ -, _` -~ '' Y,:,: _ 1 ~:.;,. ~:: ;: ~; rs;, r _. ~ ~ CITY OF MERIDIAN MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Thursday, November 15, 2001, at 7:00 P.M. City Council Chambers 1. Roll-call Attendance: X Sally Norton X Jerry Centers X Bill Nary X Keven Shreeve X Chairman Keith Borup 2. Adoption of the Agenda: 3. Consent Agenda: A. Approve Minutes of September 27, 2001 Planning and Zoning ~~. Special Comprehensive Plan Meeting: Approve j B. Approve Minutes of November 1, 2001 Planning and Zoning Regular Meeting: Approve 4. Public Hearing: AZ 01-016 Request for annexation and zoning of 7.32 acres from County zone to C-G zone for proposed Meridian Storage by Touchstone Construction, Inc. -south of West Overland Road and west of South Meridian Road: Recommend Approval to City Council 5. Public Hearing: CUP 01-032 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Unit Development and storage facility in a C-G zone for proposed Meridian Storage by Touchstone Construction, Inc. -south of West Overland Road and west of South Meridian Road: Recommend approval to City Council 6. Public Hearing: CUP 01-033 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Group Day Care with approximately six children in an R-8 zone for Virginia L. Beberness by Virginia L. Beberness -Lot 14, Block 3 of Tremont Subdivision: Recommend approval to City Council 7. Public Hearing: AZ 01-017 Request for annexation and zoning of .193 acres from RUT to R-4 zones for Packard Acres No. 1 by Packard Estates Developers, LLC -east of North Wingate Lane and south of East Ustick Road: Recommend approval to City Council Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda -November 15, 2001 Page 1 of 2 All materials presented at public mentings shall became property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accorrvnodation for disabilfies rela#ed to documents and/or hearings please contact the City CI~1c's Office at 8884433 at least 48 hours prior to the public rr~ting. ~n z'~ .: 1. ~ ' ~ ~w - . F'' ~ ;, ~ ,~ .~ { ~ ~' ~' `> ~, ~_ ' ~.. »{ `y: t ~ S Q t ~_ i ~ ,~ d, v - ~,. .~, . r "; Sri ~ • • t> ~: 8. Public Hearing: PP 01-019 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 115 `` ~ building lots and 10 other lots on 29.93 acres in an R-4 zone for proposed ~~~=°~~~ Woodbridge No. 2 by Woodbridge Community, LLC -east of South ~,;. Locust Grove Road and south of East Franklin Road: Recommend approval to City Council ~~. 9. Public Hearing: CUP 01-034 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for ~': ~; ~ an alternative school for Middle School and High School age students in ~';'~` an R-4 zone for Joint School District No. 2 by Joint School District No. 2 ' - 930 West Pine Street: Recommend Denial to City Council ~-~: -- _~;-, :,:.. ~I ;~: T, ",'" ~ . _:~: _:< 3:, s rig-,~ ~~ 10. Public Hearing: PFP 01-006 Request for Preliminary/Final Plat approval of 2 building lots on 10 acres in an L-O zone for Tramore Subdivision by Thomas Development Co. -south of West Pine Avenue and east of North Linder Road: Recommend approval to City Councii 11. Public Hearing: CUP 01-036 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a 72 unit wood frame, three story senior apartment complex in an L-O zone for proposed Tramore Senior Community by Thomas Development, Co. -south of West Pine Avenue and east of North Linder Road: Recommend approval to City Council Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda -November 15, 2001 Page 2 of 2 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the city of Meridian. Anyone desiring acxommodation for disabiG6es related to documents and/or hearings please c~ntad the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meding. ~, ~.. ti .-L.;a 4 ~r_ZY t; ' _1 i'~~~ ~y- ' r • ± ~ .i S 4' iii.. .., S ~` s ~: / -: i i-K y~~; 7 r ~i c~ ~ „ L. ,;!. r k 1 it ~ L •~-,:i. i ~F_ ' F: ~ s k vi ` @1~ ~ . . F'~; .. }3 a- Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting November 15, 2001 The regularly scheduled meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:15 P.M. on Thursday, November 15, 2001, by Chairman Keith Borup. ~~.~ "'' Members Present: Keith Boru Sall Norton, Bill Na Jer Centers, Keven ;: ~~., P, Y rY, rY Shreeve. a. ~, . Others Present: Bruce Freckleton, David Swartley, Brad Hawkins-Clark, Will Berg, and Dean Willis. >;:5:' =.;, Item 1. Roll-call Attendance: X Sally Norton X Jerry Centers ~~~`~~~ X Bill Nary X Keven Shreeve X Chairman Keith Borup ,~; Borup: Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We'd like to convene our regularly scheduled meeting for the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission. Apologize for '' " ~ being a little bit late. Our previous meeting went over just a little bit. This is Thursday, November 15th, 2001. Like to begin with attendance roll call. Item 3. Consent Agenda: ;: A. Approve Minutes of September 27, 2001 Planning and Zoning Special Comprehensive Plan Meeting: B. Approve Minutes of November 1, 2001 Planning and Zoning Regular Meeting: Borup: The first item on the agenda is approval of minutes from September 27th and ~~ _ , November 1st. Norton: Mr. Chairman. Borup: Commissioner Norton. ~' =_~~' Norton: I'd like to approve minutes from the meetings of September 27th and November the 1st. r- i "':'~~-F Nary: Second. Borup: Motion and second. Any discussion? All in favor? :~. ~~:-~:%~ MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. r _; =:; ~, -, _~ ~- Eb: L ~ ~ s~~ 4 ~ W_~ t d `r K: I z j.:n; r° .{`,. , ~: ~; ; ~;x _ . - t~, ;f ~- 5. a r ~ .,~ '.a., ~. ~ ~ ~- 5 ~ Y h. M '. s S ~ >• '[.~ .,~~i~• ~. .'tai ~; ~ r fi 5 k r S- i:; •~ 'i f. ;,, ~i~ ~ : `: _ Meridian Planning and Zoning Con ~mission Meeting November 15, 2001 : Page 3 ~- .- :~--: Borup:We have had some -- Commissioners, some discussion perhaps ~ ~_ adjusting the agenda a little bit this evening. We have a motion to -- discuss a motion to that effect or should I go ahead and -- ~~:~.~ Norton: Why don't you go ahead. x ~ : Borup: Okay. Maybe we ought to clarify. We are assuming the majority of the people here are on the school district; is that correct? Okay. We thought it might be ~' ' a ro riate to move that u on the a enda s ou don't have to wait all ni ht. Is that Pp p P 9 ~ oY 9 ' ' ~. okay? So what we d like to handle is the next item, it would be Item No. 4 with -- we d r'. ; like to do the conditional use for the Group Day Care first. Is Virginia Beberness here? Okay. So we'll handle that next and then after that go to Item No. 9, then we'll move up ~. ~° ~ to Item No. 5. ~'-` Centers: 6 is first, is it not? _ ~ Borup: Yes. Item No. 6 would be first and then we'll go to Item 5. And then the rest of it ~:`~~ ~~ will proceed as, in the order that it is. So we'd like to begin with opening -- At r ~ ° Nary: Need a motion to amend the agenda. Borup: Okay. v ,_ _ ~~; : Nary: I would so move to amend the agenda to reflect that Item 6 be moved as the first ~.~F. ~. ~.>.~. item to be heard. Item 9 will be made the second item to be heard. And then the a enda 9 ~' " ' to follow after that in the published sequence, Items 4, 5 and 7 and so on. ' ~f. "' " Y.': Centers: Second. s, Nary: All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. ~ ~ _~ _ Item 6. Public Hearing: CUP 01-033 Request for a Conditional Use Y° Permit for a Group Day Care with approximately six children in ~::, an R-8 zone for Virginia L. Beberness by Virginia L. Beberness - Lot 14, Block 3 of Tremont Subdivision. r~; ~ _~ : Borup: Okay. We'd like to open the Public Hearing on CUP 01-033, request for ~r Conditional Use Permit for a Group Day Care with approximately 6 children in an R-8 ~ 4; zone for Virainia L_ Beberness_ Did I nrnnnunre that riaht? Beain with the staff renort_ ~:~ L` Hawkins-Clark: Thank you, Chairman Borup. You should have received the staff "~'` comments dated October 5, 2001, from Bruce Freckleton and David McKinnon. We just ask that the conditions site specific in there be included in your motion. The screen Y~ ; ' shows the subject property. The staff report does not discuss the surrounding uses, our ' apologies for that, but, as you can see, it is located in the Tremont Place Subdivision off ~:'rr;, .TM ~ ~. 4 ii r §~' 4 : . :~:n.:' r i , ,n ] 1 .. ~ I ~ ,~ ~. .r :' i :.l• I ~ '; :..:. . 1, I ~' KX l.+ t. Err a=:W~4• ~I . T'.. . .Y. ` ': .. v } , .. ~ ? n, pr ~T '1. t . ~• .y~~ y(- •4v ,Y ~ :'~ : .. . ~ ., ~ , "f. ' , '~` x. `Y , ti .. _ .., - . , T I I ~, y.~a., r +t r .wl'~i.4 .. YYJ •4 . ~ ~ ~ ,. 6.. ,.t~ '..wc_ ~~• - C§''3;•,F`i•R'..4e _ ;fir, r ~ 3 %~.Ci. a 4< 9 1J •:k. I '. '~ ~ ,~ . sY. : , ' :" • - ' dP;`-~i' i~~all+R'z ~ 'r e, u.~ ~i tYIF , . M, Y '~~^• '~ `L:. a ,`;. 'I I _'~' ;:~.~ i '; ti '~ u d ' 6 viva: ll t~ A1v ~ y' . y ,i r.l• 3t .d : %:~.. .. , , ;+ ~ ~ ~ . i i ~~-M 'JiM'+ Y~'19XFY R ~ •:e .-. w f .. a .. - ~1.., °~ "~~=' x r ~ r7 fr:" ( ~' ~ • r ~a r A 9 :-r~' 1k ,. . Y;r ~"F . ~£ '~s,~.J ov'~ .5 ft •, Y^.r ,t'X~. YS ~ _ ,.~.. _ ~ IY ~•is~~ {G :"'r L, •~'~J` ,4. I vi?Yv... .4 , ,.f f , .yip': ;.5. 1. ~` s " '" r` L S^: z H" ~i'~gii °~ '-`: .+it.{'h mr.~:?~'`,(6 *R.~" (i. S. 'R~:P . : ' qy `Lr. . 3r R x: r ~ • , 1, i~>', r I Y'> . t'r'' • •~. 5 ~' .. .t. a• ' , 4 y Y xyh~F. r.. ,S ra •~s ~7N" + ' ' ' .r.iJSY~, .ugai2' ~'•! ." r ~ ;, I ~ yi. ~..q~.'i;.Y S `•,~ Fa {. Tfl ~ 3 Y s •:~:::.. e3~119 _ 1 . 1. , I Meridian Planning and Zoning Cor'Fi-mission Meeting ''~, November 15, 2001 Page 4 ~; of West Broadway Avenue there on the north side, West Broadway, that this area here ~{, , is the Nine Mile Creek easement, 100 feet wide, that her property backs up to. This is `' an elevation of the house as it currently is, which your packet should have the 5 ~ floor plan. The only thing I would point in addition to our comments, the building official ~' did reference that the second floor uses in these zones in terms of the Uniform Building ~.~ Code would require several changes and maybe Mrs. Beberness could address that. I ;~{ don't think that she's proposing second floor uses for the day care, but she can confirm that. The application that she submitted just showed first floor uses for the day care. I t; think the rest of our conditions are there. The applicant will need to meet all of the $~_~ licensing requirements of the state of Idaho prior to beginning operation and submit a :ail copy of that state license to the clerk's office. That's item number 6 of our conditions. I i:. ;~ think that's all I have on that one. ~'-~~~{I Borup: Any questions from the Commissioners? Would the applicant like to come ,a forward? Anything else you'd like to add? Okay. We may have some questions, too. I ' "` guess first see if you have had a chance to read the staff report and if you had any questions or disagreements with anything they said there. " . Beberness: No. ~r--- Borup: You need to start with your name and address, please. ~.~1 i" °, Beberness: My name is Virginia Beberness. 918 W. Broadway, Meridian, Idaho. 83642. In the Tremont Subdivision. Borup: Okay. _,,, ~'~" ` Beberness: The only course and concern I have is from the application I actually e~j;` submitted to what you guys have printed here in front. It says 6 children in an R-8 zone. I had put in my application 6 children, not including my own, which I guess my children ~;R;; in this state would be included, so that would be 9 children and they did not put that in here. I did go in yesterday and talk to somebody about that, but they just said to bring it up. z~~: Borup: Okay. The -- then our -- the front page in ours says 6 to 12. `7;T:~ Beberness: Correct. k~ -`' Borup: Brad, was that in there? So that would cover that for her own children? Hawkins-Clark: Correct. 6 to 12 would be inclusive of her own. Right. - Borup: Right. Beberness: Okay. That's -- Borup: Okay. Then you were not planning on anything on the upper floor? r - Y f'l', a ~., t_ n Meridian Planning and Zoning Co7RPfiission Meeting '~ ~ l November 15, 2001 Page 5 Beberness: No. No. Absolutely not. ~,; Borup: Okay. Any other questions from the Commissioners? Centers: I have one question. When did you make application? Beberness: For the Planning and Zoning? Centers: Yes. For this. ~~'~~ ;,, Beberness: Oh. ~; ~~'~ Centers: Because it savs home t~ he hunt ~, "~ Beberness: Oh. Yes. I think I started this when I was still living in Califomia and this was ~, F ~, ~~~°" ~ back in April that I started to work on it. ~; , kS' - ~'``' `~ Centers: And your application with the city was when? Beberness: It must have been about May. ?;._;,~ }~ ~' Centers: Okay. ~; "" Beberness: But it kept coming back and forth because of -- the building kept changing from spots. N - Centers: Okay. Borup: Commissioner Norton. ~~': `"'~-' Norton: Yes. I just have a few questions. That did answer my one question. I wanted to ~, know how many children you owned yourself. So you have 3 children? ;; Beberness: Yes. I have 3 boys. °.- Norton: How many children do you own.Then your hours of operation are what? ~ ` Beberness: They are still open. I don't know what the laws are here in Idaho with child ~e`~ care. I have always been 24 hours as needed, not exceeding more than 12 hours per child at a time. But I have been used to working with military children, so I was thinking more along the lines of about 5:30 in the morning until like 7:00 at night. Norton: That's very generous. There is some people that would like have that. You state you were licensed in California and have run a day care for 3 years and there is a structured environment? i ~~ " '~ '_ ~:: a~~._ ~.^ r ~ ~ T z' ~. m ~- ~`.,: ~.~~ c r + ' V~, d' .'. ~tr~a } - 5 ::~f 'Ss -;~ T s' k .' ~~ c~' R ,P ~. r .. u ~ , :..~ ~ V; - `' P - i.: f E }~ ' Meridian Planning and Zoning Coission Meeting r ' ' November 15, 2001 .. :, r Page 6 Beberness: Yes, I do. ~ - Norton: Okay. Sounds good to me. Thanks. ~ r.' ~`' Borup: Any other questions? Thank you, ma'am. Do we have anyone here to testify on this application? Seeing none, thank you. Commissioners? Norton: Mr. Chairman. r; ~~-:: ; Borup: Commissioner Norton. . ~`- Norton: Move to close the Public Hearing. ~.: ` Centers: I would second that. I ~r' ,;k Borup: Motion and second to close Public Hearing. All in favor? ., ;;~<II MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. ~~ = 3~~1 Norton: Mr. Chairman? . Borup: Commissioner Norton. Norton: I would like to move to approve CUP 01 -- _Tj :~ Centers: Could I comment first, Commissioner Norton? ~~ . '' ~", '" Norton: Sure. ~rY 1 _ Centers: I m going to be right there with a second. What I was looking for was the property owners and notification of and there was -- certainly all the notifications were given. I didn't see any opposition. No one was here to oppose the day care, so I don't ~ - ~ see why we wouldn't go forward. ''f` `" Norton: There is a huge sign on her front door saying about the public notice. So M1' ~~~ everybody is aware. She has a full six foot cedar fence in the backyard. She's ready to ~~ >> , go on day care. She's done all the rules, she's done all the -- ~- Centers: Excuse me. Go right ahead. ~ Norton: I'd like to recommend approval of CUP 01-033, request for a Conditional Use b: Permit for a Group Day Care with, a Group Day Care facility for 6 to 12 children in an R- .~~:; 8 zone for Virginia Beberness, Lot 14, Block 3 of Tremont Subdivision. s:;~ Centers: I would second that. Borup: Motion and second. Any other discussion? All in favor? ,. .. i.'{=i~)•"' •;iF'.;, :~ :! yy a, M1 ~ I `pie. ~~a~;.•„t.~' ~' I y _~ p Y +. ~~~'. Y i . ,t* 1 Y"$~ ~)', .§ ; E ,; : ` `~ ' 'n fH.. ~ ~ 1 I ' { ' Sa Saris +f ' : G 6 i ~ .. .,` { AVM,,.. YP ., ~~*`~i d -rd ; ' ' y' ~ ~ / f' ` w~' I . , ba ,.~ : Y'~ '.n ~ , ,~tir1`~ ~ . , 'rv •-^'F xl !'7"/,.1 ° f wp"~ ^I ' .p, "S'~ '`i Y '4w !~' „4'3 ~ ~ <. . • c . '(Fwd.. , i . ' , c i ~ ,~~t ...y.,, t . F L~j . r~~ ~ .. , :. +.,;~ .: ~: `:(~ R :~"y fi° YEy~+~91'i ~ .. w if, 4 _ f ~ L j ~.~.:C „i'~~ a.~'y,}}•sE ,• ~' _ Y ~ . , ,, ~k '~• • e~'~"~''~~~YjN~3:~> n fiFi +•r ` ^ +~ 1 ~~ ~ ; ' . n~ ~ A ~+µ .°ejpY ~ v ~ ! _ iy': a:d ` •_~ "4 f". < .e .~; :n : '.~~ f' ' :%; ~ ~ i~ i . , ~ :,h "yL~e ~~.1 t ' ,-~T. ', a; °'+'"ib'.Y,'i ~ •'~ . M. t ~ v . ?• r " ,,.~t ~Gh.~~,: [+~^, ~„'M>,i T I 2 '~. .. r,:;y t" .'h k ~° I' .~,-x8«3 ,~`;. I ~ ' } ~} ~ I t :. d'•rrf '~ l;4¢."'d..;~ ~Vr`.: '•,i`:•=,•"R:3;..,.v`. U. .~•e' 8 ~~I fi: v,i t.~j'.;S ~iFl.~ x~~•`Y. x.:'~ tS >n. .~.v .~• mil ~d.+ ,.i( . '!. .R.. ry . f• < .rin ~~ `l ~i}i. 1 , . ~ 1 ^r^ :-r`r .,+it~,~h• . 1 ~ tea k< I . •x J, . , .?e ,x. •~ ,t. Esc., .b;.: u ~ .. I _~tiG%,~~,ga•y~'~. ~'+w~;,i~F:'}',.~.?$ ..` " ' ~y ' V w` ~ s ' %a E ; ' r f : i Y ~ M ~ ~~ 'eN lx'1.S'. , ~ I , e r " ! ;S y I ,:i .. .< ~ ~ _F~f'i~i 9~.., ..W,~ , . •. I ~!~~'~ Meridian Planning and Zoning Co~i"ii nission Meeting N b 15 2001 ovem er , ~~ Page 7 ~w' Y,J:,' ~4' >:.~. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 9. Public Hearing: CUP 01-034 Request for a Conditional Use ;~.~ Permit for an alternative school for Middle School and High F~,~~; School age students in an R-4 zone for Joint School District No. ~` 2 by Joint School District No. 2 - 930 West Pine Street: r~ ~ x `~~ Borup: Thank you. Okay. Our next item is Public Hearing CUP 01-034, Request for ~~-`~- Conditional Use Permit for an alternative school for middle school and high school age students in an R-4 zone for Joint School District No. 2 at 930 West Pine Street. Like to open this Public Hearing and start with the staff report. ';~ Centers: Mr. Chairman. hfr ~~ Ar:~ Borup: Commissioner Centers. ~' ~ Centers: Before we begin, I just would like say that I need to excuse myself and will sit . out for personal reasons. ' , ; , _ '`~3~ ~,~. Borup: Okay. ~~ ~~~~~ Centers: Thank you. (Commissioner Centers excused.) Borup: Mr. Hawkins-Clark. .~ Hawkins-Clark: Thank you, Chairman Borup. Again, the application before you -- you ,,, ~ have received a staff report dated October 26, 2001, from Bruce Freckleton and David ~' ;, ~~` ~~~ McKinnon. It does outline the project and we ask that our recommended requirements be included in any motion you make tonight. In summary, the screen shows the location J of the proposed school. On the center of the screen here is East Pine Avenue, which I ' ~ believe is wrong. I think that should be West Pine Avenue. I don't take credit for the :~ maps. Northwest Ninth Avenue here on the north side. The Meridian Friends Church is ~~ T-~ a here on the south side and then the existing residential subdivision surrounding. A '~~.` couple of site photos for you of the proposed location. On the left the main entry to the ~ „ ~.~r~' ' house from Ninth. That is the main entry, to point out. It's -- just to go back, it's not off ` ~ ` ~ `~ of -- not off of Pine. The primary entrance is located here, which is on that photo. On i _ the screen is the proposed site plan. Just to orient you, Pine Street is here on the left, _ : Ninth -- Northwest Ninth Avenue is here on the bottom of the screen. There is an existing fence here around the property. A driveway -- the driveway entrance is here, which is concrete. The main entrance to the facility is here. There is existing ~'~ landscaping and yard here along Pine. There is a walkway here coming off of Pine to the main entrance. There is a gravel -- gravel area here, which is just between the ~~ ~t~r~ fence and the facility. Again, as noted in our staff report, the students -- this is for 3 ~ students that have been expelled from the district's regular educational facilities will go ,; ~~ r~ w~", ,, `zk.. rf .. , - y ~, r .~ Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 8 } ~: to school at this location. Staffs understanding is the students will not be permitted to ~i~- drive to the school they will be bused from existin middle schools and hi h h l , g g sc oo s. :~n~ They are talking about 8 middle school students in the morning and up to 8 high school ~ .k '"~~ in the afternoon and they are discussing converting the garage for the -- for this, so it _ will not be available for parking. The garage would be converted for use as part of the -F ~ facility interior. On page 2 of the staff report we basically summarize the reasons that this is a Conditional Use Permit. As you know, the city's ordinance does not typically ~' require a Conditional Use Permit for public schools. In this case staff felt there were 3 reasons to require a Conditional Use Permit. One, the subdivision was approved as a " r~ ~; single family subdivision and no other uses were shown on the plat at that time. Number ,, ~,_~~~,~ 2, the alternative school is not a traditional public school and we felt the schedule of use control did not address alternative schools, so we felt it should come before you. Then the third reason was the potential impact of the project on the surrounding neighborhoods. We did make one finding. We felt that the proposed development would change the essential character of the general vicinity. The main other findings we felt ` ' - were found to the positive. I guess I won't hit every single proposed specific ~Mz `~ requirement, since you have that in your packets, unless you'd like me to go through those. 3 of the ones I will hit on page 4, number 3 is that the applicant needs to state ~~ `Y~ the hours of operation at the hearing. They did simply say that the morning would be for middle school and the afternoon would be for high school, but there weren't specific ` - ~ hours that we received. So we recommend limiting the hours of operation to 7:00 A.M. to 5:00 p.m. Number 4, we have a recommendation that no students shall be allowed to walk, drive, or be picked off or picked up by family or friends at the location and that's "~ mainly for the traffic issue since it's there and that was certainly up to you. In terms of ~, landscaping, other things are there. They would need to add one tree along Pine Street ~~ ~ to comply with the landscape ordinance. So we -- our recommendation was, obviously, ~ h~ ~ just to rely on public testimony and to determine if the proposed use is appropriate. We do have concerns about the placement of a high school -- of a school in an established neighborhood and -- but I think in terms of our conditions that's all I'll hit at this point. ~.., ,: i ~ Borup: Thank you. Any questions for the Commissioners at this point? Is the applicant r' ,~y here and would like to come forward. ~,F,, ho- ,~ `> Anderson: My name is Stillman Anderson. Address is 1735 Federal Way, Boise. I am the architect for the school district on this project. Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, Joint School District No. 2 asks the direction of Planning and Zoning staff, ' ` ` ' have applied for a Conditional Use to permit them to implement on their property at 930 West Pine a federally mandated IEP school for no more than 8 students in the morning session and no more than 8 students in the afternoon session. The length of time the -- i i i{ or the daily operational time, 7:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M., is agreeable with the district on "" that. To give you a little background on how this location was selected, the school ~ ~,~v~`'~` district has had this program in existence for 3 years and in that time it has been at Lowell Scott Middle School and then it was moved to Meridian High School. During that ~_:{; time, through observation and research, the district determined that to have this program on a campus defeated the purpose of the ramifications of the student's actions that had culminated in their expulsion from the district. The federal government requires .~.. that a student on the IEP, which is Individual Educational Program, even though they ;;~5; ~:~~ ,,. ~~ ''w k~:: ~`~ F::-,: n"~;-> Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 9 are expelled from the school district, they, the district still has to provide them with educational opportunity, as opposed to a student who is expelled who is not on the IEP. They are expelled, they are out. So with this in mind, the district put together some parameters. First of all, it needed to be centrally located as much as possible, because of the fact that this district is large. Secondly, they needed to have access that would be easily used by a bus. Third, they looked for a facility that would have space for 8 students in the morning, 8 students in the afternoon, provide office space for the instructor and also office space for a visiting counselor. They then looked at a requirement of where ever it was located that it needed to impact the area as little as possible. With these parameters in mind they started looking. They looked at a commercial establishment and it had everything that they needed and, in fact, it was, even had more, it had computer tie-in and everything. Mr. Bigham went to visit with Shari Stiles to get some direction from her, went through it. He was directed that she felt that they would have a better chance of getting an approval if it were located in a zone where a school was permitted. In a commercial zone it would have to go through conditional use. The zoning ordinance does indicate that in an R-4 school public is permitted. So with that in mind they started looking. This house at 930 West Pine became available, they looked at it, and determined that it provided what they needed with very little interior remodel being necessary. So with that it was taken to the school board for approval. They approved it. They purchased the properly. We submitted for a certificate of zoning compliance and on the 27th of July this year we were informed that staff had determined we needed to go for a conditional use. So that is what the district has done. With that I would like to go through some of these items that the staff has outlined as site specific requirements. Borup:You don't need to go through those that you agree with. Anderson: Right. There are only a couple that they have concern with. Item number 4, yes, the students will not be allowed to drive on that. Their concern is if for some reason the parents cannot get a doctor's appointment or whatever for the student, other -- at other times than when they are at school, the district doesn't feel that they can tell the parents that they can't bring their student -- can't pick their student up or can't bring their student back to the facility. So they would like to have that requirement deleted. Borup: You're talking about pickup or drop off? Anderson: Right. And if they pickup and drop off they will pick them up and drop them off from Pine Street. The existing main entrance, as pointed out, is off of Northwest Ninth. The school district will have the main entrance -- the front door off of Pine Street, because the buses will come, drop the students off at Pine Street and they will walk into the front door into their classroom. They will be supervised at all times on that. Number 5, it requires 5 parking spaces, one of which will be handicapped, not 5 parking spaces and a handicapped space. Borup: So what -- could you -- are you saying that you need a total of 5 and that's based on -- tip;::, ~ ~~ Meridian Planning and Zoning Cordmission Meeting ~ - November 15, 2001 Page 10 Anderson: Classroom requires 2 and office space for the size, you have one space for every 400 square feet and that facility is 1,200 -- almost 1,200 square feet. ~, ~`~ Borup: So -- Anderson: So together that would be 5 spaces. z' :' ' Borup: Counting the handicapped? 1r~., ~~`'~ Anderson: Counting the handicapped. r ~ Borup: Okay. I'd like to maybe try to hit some of these as we go, so we don't have so many at the end. Brad, do those calculations -- Hawkins-Clark: 1,200 square feet? ~~ ;: ~.r' Borup: So one per 400 would be -- Hawkins-Clark: That's 4. Then there is just one classroom? ~`~ - Anderson: Yes. ¢' ~~ Hawkins-Clark: 5. So then I guess the only other the concern would be in terms of ordinance requirements -- '~' Borup: That's what iwas -- Y' - s ('. ~x ;~~! Hawkins-Clark: That's correct. I guess staff would be the other -- `4 ~'~, Borup: You say you have 2 teachers, plus adrop-in? ,~j Anderson: Plus adrop-in -- '; ,~I Borup: Counselor. «~_ Anderson: -- counselor. Right. ,, ;j Borup: So there should never be more than 3 cars there? t I ~., '~ Anderson: There is a possibility, because of the fact that the garage is going to be ~ ~°~~ converted into storage for the district -- ~~ ~=I Borup: Oh. Well, that's -- "~ Anderson: Could be a maintenance vehicle coming in. That storage is basically for -- the ' district is donating cans, so that they can put it there. The other half will be storage for F ". `~'~~ Meridian Planning and Zoning CorrTmission Meeting November 15, 2001 s:;':r Page 11 ~~,; - µ; :.. ~'``'' ` the facility. So we won't regularly have maintenance people driving in, but, you know, 2¢: ; you would have maybe a maximum of 4 vehicles there. - Borup: Okay. Thank you. Go on. . ,~~``~°'`+`~ Anderson: Then the other item is item number 9. Planning and Zoning staff have '' x indicated that we need a 20 foot buffer between land uses, between school and existing ~;`. ~ residence and they suggest that we discuss alternatives. ~ .. Borup: Was the concern on the western boundary? Is that -- ~~ ~.,, ~: Hawkins-Clark: Chairman Borup, that would be correct. '~,. _~~. `~ - :: ~ Borup: Just the west only or the west and -- .: ~:;~ ~'~. ~'<~:' Hawkins-Clark: Well, the ordinance requires any property lines that are adjacent. Borup: Right. `~ ~., ,,, ~' Hawkins-Clark: Correct. ;~; .~' ~~ ~ ~ Borup: But both of those you do not have the 20 feet? ~~„~ ~. H'`~'~ ' Hawkinc_(;lark• C'.nrrart Anderson: We have got -- on the west we have got 5 feet. ~?/ ~' " Hawkins-Clark: Only 5 here on the north. ~~{-~~_ ~r,~ , Anderson: You may have 15 to -- ~' F~~ i '` ` Unidentified Speaker: 5. ` Borup: We are going to need -- Mr. Anderson is the one that's speaking and we need to ~~ ` ask the rest of you to not say anything while we are here. ~~~~ti . s _~ Anderson: At the street on the north, yes, the distance is smaller. Up by the garage it is ~~~~; . wider. II Borup: Right. That's what it looks like, about 15 feet on the plat -- on the site plan there. Anderson: Right. Part of that, right where the arrow is right now, is going to be paved '`=~~~ for a parking space on that. Borup: So the -- right now the only screening is -- ~.~- `~~ ,= ~ -~ ~.~a r ~~, , ,~ _ ~. , r~ j J~ y. r )~-~~ NQ ~ ~ ,' 1, t. F 1~ ~~ ' 3 ~~t QT~1 - Y~ e'??'1~6^~ t k q ~.~~ ~~` ~~ .~y _ .. .: C44 ~:. ` :, . 'ts~ ;a y~ •! .. r. ~i s'~ ~ s. ~ '~.? ~~ v ice: }L~ :'.S: .'~ ti .~: =; :~~v`; titer ;`5' :- ~, ~:` ~._a " ~;.:; vY-. ,,:_ ~:=~~ ,. ,~~~ ~~~-~ ;u;; : ; ,, , ~~. r~.. Meridian Planning and Zoning Co711T~ission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 12 Anderson: There is a fence all the way along the north and there is a fence along the west. It is a 6 foot fence. At the Northwest Ninth the fence does decrease for sight line requirements. In addition to these site specific requirements, the school district would like to have added 3 more. Number 13 being no more than eight students per session. Number 14, the property, as long as the district owns it, shall not be used for any other purpose than an educational facility of no larger than the current square footage with the related storage building. Number 15 is the exterior characteristic of the existing house and garage shall be maintained as they currently appear, other than any requirements by this Commission. At this point I would like to have Bonnie Gallant, supervisor of special services, come up and give you a little background on exactly what the IPE requires, if that's agreeable with you. Borup: Well, we may want to -- Anderson: And after she's through I will come back up -- and, in fact, we can both be up here at that point and answer any of your questions. Borup: Okay. Gallant: My name is Bonnie Gallant. I'm the director of special services for the Meridian School District. The Meridian School District office is located at 911 Meridian Street. Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, the purpose of this program is to fulfill our responsibility in accordance with a federal education law which is Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, or IDEA. Under that law it requires the school district to fulfill all educational obligations for students who are found to be eligible under one of the 14 categories listed within that federal law. What this means is is that not every student who is expelled from the school is allowed to attend such a program. This is specific to the federal and state requirements for what is called a continuation of education services. Therefore, whom we would bring onto this campus would be students who are either evaluated for the program or who have active educational needs prescribed. According to the data that I have selected at this point in time over the -- since 1999 we have had 52 students out of a population of almost 25,000. I have, as published by the state department, 2,500 students who are active in terms of individual education plans. As you can see by the numbers that there is a significant minor ratio of students who would be created to be entitled for such a program. With that in mind, I think it's also important for you to understand that students come in at staggered times. We may go 2 to 3 months and have only one student. We have gone as many as 3 months and only had one student. So the numbers are varying, but certainly we have never reached a fulfilled time of 8 students in the morning, 8 in the afternoon. The times of which would be 8:30 to 11:30 in the morning for middle school students, 12:30 to 3:30 in the afternoon. Do you have any questions for me? Borup: Commissioners? Commissioner Nary. Nary: Ms. Gallant, I'm going to guess that most of the people in this room aren't here because they think we shouldn't provide an educational opportunity for these kids. I t ~ _ y ~ ~ r V Y 3 l ~ C '+3.'. , ~ ~ 1. ~ 'hp 3` r'r3 ;t.~~+a ~ ~( + ..~:~ -F, s _: 1~` a y gg~~1. d. a ~k, t'-F ~ h $ _ . r~ ?~r {i » g ~ .:i Y n ; r~k + ,SSdE K x:'L~ Y ~ ,c 's ,: ~~ ~A_ ~- ~w kr~3 '+t,roi '~&Yiii4l~ti t;aiTth~'~ ~i;!'i~ ~ ~~ -~' ~? ~~F~' t w~:.~ee ~~~jj ,.: ai'~k.'Ri~ r (3y~~ si~, i r~~ ~ri ~ ~~, c ~ _4 .. # f ~~. ~.I C ~'S a f ti~ k r ;r ~ ~ x... - ..i '' r n,1h xA •h Irv ! ~T 1$ 'Y{ n1 4 6 4 ,J) r; F T Y~1 ~~ ~}. ~'.~ ~ r '~~'rs "{ s is 'y~y~i~-1~~,.~~ ~h `~~=y S~J ,~ ~kcl~.J~ ~'~ bt~ ..?hr .~, 1•~~i r1 v. 7~ :~ ~ e.tla S~{ .i~.~r#ic-~.~ v $ ~~; i ~~ffF.~yyf[~~ ~~,,-$$$Ljjjj331~ 4Y~ '3A^Ft Y rJ' ':'~ ~^~!t 7 i ,~~ -r '~~.~~1~4~~.,~ ,u„` inT y, ^'~y~r - j ' ,~'t '~~ ~~ RF.~',~~Sx"T.aipy'`~~ z4. " - 'v + ~ Y' ~' ~ ' ~ `'atee~t^t rr' "" r a ~ ~ ~i ~P 't'• "~f,a"~let2'.t ~ ~.a#`1`~.L s s-,~-h ;k T r y . r•, ; i ~. ~. .L _ _ 'Y] ~ :jI'..x ~t 8 1~ (~~~4.~4} S~ t ~~ {~~~ '.~~,tr Yt -mac .t .. .. ~. .a .:~, ~ -..,-fit t ~ r -~t[ ~~„ ~ 5 ~ ~ d, 1 v~ ~ k `~~; }:`w~n!i FT~.2~'~..+:?i x i `7 ~g'~`~'~ ~"~~',' ~ } -~~ E F~~ ~ 6 '~ I~.~'~~ ~ +F~F~~~.4,~ c•"+ ~~, i~ ~ '~ ~^i ;- . p <- ~~ S ,~ r '~ ~ l ~y~,i #~44+ r~ c a d~ r'~d i fas ~}. ,i., ,,rxt ,~ ~. ~r J; ^ ,ifs ~ ~i t~+^r.~ ~ '~S~i~r*~'f2 }a F`~'~~ !Q~ kn.,. ti h'yv-~r'~ t i. z ~ ; r ~ a 's~^t F ~~ ~ ~°~ Ate, ~ x V.y ~ d~t~ ~~ i w. 5~ _ °'wi_t ~ ~ --:~~r~~ ~~lA"5 Y'."v r ' ~t m§I'~ ~~15~ .~+t .. ,~ z .., ~; ~' ' `. a • rr ~, Meridian Planning and Zoning Co fission Meeting November 15, 2001 ~~°-"~` ~ Page 13 ~A ,,<; `'` ` ` think the whole issue is the location of this facility. I think I heard Mr. Anderson say the ~~ {~ ~ current location is at the high school. ..,, z ,.,Y, Gallant: The current location is not at the high school, Mr. Chairman. The current ~ location is that I have the teacher and the assistant going from home to home. We do `= not have a location. ~.~: ~~ , . ~'='`~ Nary: But the last fixed site was at the high school? ;u, ,, ~~ y~= Gallant: Correct. ~~ ;`I ~~`~s`~ Nary: Now when it was at the high school were the kids alwa s bused to that facili as Y tY _ well? Gallant: That is correct. ~~ n.. '_y, ;~ ~~ Nary: What happens when they want to drive? How do you prevent them from driving? ~~ ~.,._: ,.~1 Gallant: Mr. Chairman -- y ; :: Nary: I'm not the chairman, he is. Gallant: I'm sorry. Sorry about that. Commissioner Nary. Let me explain to you what that looks like. When you have a student that is coming in within special needs, you meet with the family. Part of the process of this program is that you're in continual knowledge and information sharing with the family. They have to agree to the °i- stipulations of what is required to get into this program. Part of this program requires us "f``°" to provide the transportation. It's not an option for a parent. They could not make that " choice. r ~~: ~- Nary: Okay. But that doesn't really answer my question. If on the occasions, as Mr. Anderson stated, that kids have to go to a doctor, they have to go to the dentist or whatever, on those occasions -- I have high school kids myself. '''~ Gallant: Correct. `~;_~ Nary: On occasions they drive for those particular circumstances. How do you prevent that from -- in this school setting? ;: ~ Gallant: The terms and conditions of going into the program require that the parent is only allowed to do the transporting if the child has a medical issue. The child cannot transport to and from this program period. The child cannot bring a car to this program. ~~, Nary: So -- okay. But my question, ma'am, is how do you prevent it, then? Do you r ~ expel them from the program if they drive once? Meridian Planning and Zoning Co'R'Rfiission Meeting ~'-= ' November 15, 2001 ~~;_:_;; Page 14 Gallant: We meet again and say it's determined that this is an inappropriate situation for ~.~ `" you. We need to think of what we are going to do otherwise. Nary: The very first time a kid drives himself back from the doctor because mom has to go back to work, you would sit down with those parents say not acceptable, don't do it y"~"- again. The next time your kid's out? `'`~` Gallant: Mr. Nary, I have been in this situation for 26 years and when a parent ~' understands that this child has been expelled -- you have to understand how far they 'r f`` have gone into this system. When aparent -- Nary: I just want an answer, ma'am. Gallant: I have never had it happen. Nary: Okay. But what are you going to do if you do? rt: ~ Gallant: You meet with the family, you call a team meeting, and you determine whether ~~ ,. that's an appropriate placement, at which time I'm sure we would determine that we are k = ` oin to be doin somethin otherwise. ~~ :; 9 9 9 9 x Nary: Okay. The other question I have is I heard you use the term special needs kids. ;~: ,. - Gallant: Yes. ~'~ ~' ~~ t. Nary: Now as a lay person that has a different connotation to me than what I think the school is, because most kids don't get expelled because they have special needs or ~~'~ they have a physical handicap. ,.. , . s~ t r Gallant: Right. ~,?. F= "~ Nary: That's what I think of as special needs. ,~` ~~ Gallant: Right. ~,. ;3 ~ ~ , 5~::- Nary: That's not what you're talking about; correct? ~, Gallant: That is correct. That's one of the -- ': ~'< "~ . ~~ "" Nary: Okay. What type of reason, for example, are these kids -- what kind of reasons ~~ _: have they kids been expelled from the regular traditional school system? =a_;> : Gallant: Well, we have had students that have been expelled because they brought a knife to school, that they were incorrigible, that they could not follow the rules and ,; ~,: regulations, even with specific accommodations made for them. So we have a variety E of reasons as to why they have been removed from school. „~ i=:~. u ~ _ ~ ~'` a 1, ~. Y t' ~-t__ n!Cvnl F~i~ti - ~ -ry ~ ~ J ~~~ M ~ ~' ~''~~ ~" .~: ii ^O.. ~!~' ~~ ~)~'i ,n; ,. ~" +~ j~ i k t k ~r L'; t _v. ~. ~ ~ 4 f n r ~ ~ ~:~ ., t ~ ~ w )~;F~ i," 5 , ~=~ B. ~_ .. s Meridian Planning and Zoning Co~}1~fiission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 15 Nary: Now I'm going to -- I don't know. Is your curriculum -- are the kids in the facility K the entire 3 hours? ~ rr Gallant: That is correct. Nary: So they never go outside? s=~:~ ' Gallant: We have never had them go outside, except to get on the bus. ~ Nary: So they won't ever go in the yard, they won't ever walk out on the sidewalk -- ~'~~ mean it sounds like jail to me, it doesn't sound like school. But they never will go ,{; outside ever? ,, Gallant: Mr. Nary, I only have a certain amount of time in order to get a significant ', education into their day. Y.:~b-~-_ fE- ~ Nary: That's a yes or no question, ma'am. That's a no, that they will never ever be ~~- - outside? So if we added that as a condition that would be okay? They can never be {~;Y out in the yard, they can never be anywhere on the sidewalk or anywhere else around this neighborhood? If we were to allow this, the school district would be comfortable ~`~: .. with that? Gallant: We would be comfortable with that. Nary: That's all I have. Borup: Okay. ~' Shreeve: Just one other thing, same train of thought. When they go from the house to the bus that is a direct access? I mean or - Gallant: Well, Iwould -- yes. ~. z.,:, ~~;~ Shreeve: They get on the bus and they are gone. They don't dilly-dally, they don't roam around the bus and isn't -- Borup: I guess what you're asking, they don't leave the building until the bus arrives; is that correct? `; Gallant: Correct. `w.=,~"~ Shreeve: Okay. ,, x,=~ '`~° ~, Borup: A couple of questions. I'm not sure which one would be best to answer this, but '4~ the school district owns, I believe, several houses on Pine Street now near the school '~ property; is that correct? Who is -- {. ~;: ~,~-~ kt F' iC',.;.. `4<+ ~ :' 3,. I ,jr. d f ~ ~t ., :~.~ i~~ . i i K ~ ~ f i .~4, } 4 {; ~~~ G~- ' ~[J ~ v ht ~ , 1' ~~ n' ~ ;p ., ~ ~ 1Y t 3 ~y5 ~ k ~ ~~~r. ~, ~ ^ S ~ r ~ Y . w. ~ 1.. - k~'-- ,: ~~ ~, ~~ yrypl r ~ ,~. ~ r..i+ ~t'~ T - ~F ~ .4 4Y R fr.v i~ ~ }^ . ~ f. ±~. Meridian Planning and Zoning Co714riission Meetlng a November 15, 2001 Page 16 Gallant: That's correct. ~'' Borup: Do you know how many -- do you know how many buildings are there now? You know, converted houses. ~:., Gallant: We own 3. Borup: 3? That's what I was thinking. What are those being presently used for? `'~ ~ ` Gallant: One of those homes is for our counseling center and that houses our ~~'` coordinators for counseling. We have one -- 31 ~~ `~ '~ Borup: So do the students come there or iust the counselors -- :, ~.~ Gallant: They do not. ~~r -?' Boru Oka ~... ~~.~ p: y. s. _. h, Gallant: You have one for testing and assessment and we do not have students that r~ ~ come there. Borup: Okay. _..~ Gallant: We also have one for curriculum coordinators. ~X~'# Borup: Okay. Borup: Had there been any thought to using one of those buildings for this alternative school? . ~ Gallant: I can't answer that. It has not been broached with me. It would have to take Mr. Bingham to answer that. Borup: Okay. I mean I guess you can see where I'm going to. I got the feeling that ~~~ , maybe most of these neighbors would rather have one of those uses there, rather than the school. Would it be that much of a hardship just to make a switch? Mr. Bingham. Bingham: Mr. Chairman. Commissioners. " - Borup: Name and -- s ~-; ; ,.:::_ Bingham: Wendel Bingham. 911 Meridian St. 83642. To specifically answer your <;N question did we think about it and the answer is yes. The overriding concern that we had is not so much of could we swap the houses. 2 comments on that and the first was of our own volition that if your child is expelled from school, it is sometimes hard for the _ ~ child to recognize the consequence that they are expelled from school when the bus stops in front of Meridian High School and you walk into a house that's on the Meridian ,,, Meridian Planning and Zoning Col!'!•P~ission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 17 High School campus. In many instances we know that the behaviors are best changed in the children by pulling them out of the environment and putting them physically removed. So we will pull that program off the campus for educational reasons. The second reason would be simply one that came from a comment from the neighborhood and I hope not to misspeak on this. In the discussion with the neighborhood meeting we originally considered also utilizing this house in conjunction with this program for an auditory screening program for the district for children's hearing screening and we determined that wasn't a good mix, simply because the parking wouldn't work. We would have cars on the street. We would be bringing the public there. But in the neighborhood meeting I asked the group collectively and said what if we were to put an auditory testing facility in there -- not that we could go back and do that today, we have changed that plan -- and pretty much the message I got was, no, that wouldn't be acceptable to us either. So that's just information on the side. But the biggest point is the children need to be physically removed from this campus and that speaks to the logic of why we really shouldn't put this program on any other campus. Borup: I understand what you're saying there, but the buildings I have seen there essentially are removed, they are within visual sight of the campus, but they are not really a direct access, the access is off of Pine, isn't that correct, on those other buildings? Bingham: That is correct. Borup: If they are inside the building all day, you know, the jail setting that Commissioner Nary referred to, they are physically removed. I mean I understand what you're saying, but I don't see that that's as much of a conflict as you're saying. Bingham: I need to tell you that I'm not totally comfortable speaking to the issue. Perhaps Bonnie can. But generally children who act out with these types of behaviors aren't always able to connect consequences with their action. So while it's perfectly obvious to you and I that when we get off in front of the school and wave to our friends that we are not in that high school. It's not apparently obvious to these children and -- Borup: But you're not getting off in front of the school, you're getting off on Pine Street. Bingham: Correct. You're getting off on Pine Street, but when you look up you are on the school campus. Again, I defer simply to the educational specialist within the school district to make that determination as appropriate. Probably the side light would be if we were to change the use of the house and it's zoned in a residential area, would we not be back here again? Borup: Yes, you would. But I'm not sure if all these people would be here. Bingham: Commissioners, I believe it would be a different group of people with the same valid concerns. Borup: All I was doing was seeing if maybe I could save some time this evening. iii; t . C~a; Meridian Planning and Zoning Cor~iFiiission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 18 Nary: Mr. Chairman. Mr. Bigham, correct me, one of those houses you're talking about used to have a preschool. 2 of my children went there, so I'm pretty sure that's what you're talking about, that if -- Bingham: Yes. I'm relatively new. Yes. Apparently. Nary: And I don't recall a lot of problems with the neighbors when you had a preschool there about having a school setting, a school environment, buses coming and going. Did the school district experience a lot of public concerns about a preschool when it was on the high school campus mixing small children on a high school campus? Gallant: Mr. Nary, we did not have any conflicts with that whatsoever and I think a lot of it was the difference in the population. We are talking about 3 to 5 year olds that were special needs students. Nary: Well, they weren't all special needs students. Borup: Well, I may have misunderstood -- Nary: I understand. What I guess I'm asking is is that what I think I heard Mr. Bingham say is that this is simply a policy choice based on data from other areas that said it's not a good idea to have an alternative school such as this program on a campus of the school, based on material that Idon't -- didn't hear him say was local data, it was an educational specialist that may or may not have local data. Obviously, a school can work in that setting, because there was a school there before. It was a preschool. I understand that. But certainly people would have -- there are always people that would have a concern about mixing small children in a high school setting, cars, traffic, kids out smoking in the parking lot, lots of things like that. Again, but those things could work. So I guess I'm a little bit with Chairman Borup saying I didn't hear anything compelling from what you have said or what Mr. Bingham has said that it can't work, it's just a choice that you have made based on data that may or may not be any real reference to our community. Everything you said as to why these kids need to be in this school is the same reason why I think these people don't want them in their backyard and I don't necessary know that's what everyone is going to say, I'm hoping maybe some of these kids' parents are here to give us their perspective. But I haven't heard you say that you can't do it, it's just that you choose not to do it. Is that right? Bingham: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Nary, we chose not to for a number of reasons. There is an economic consideration which may or may not have validity in a compelling fashion to move one group for one place to the other. The second compelling reason might be that the houses on Pine Street are larger than the house we are proposing at 930 West Pine, so we simply would not be able to move all of the staff and the 6, 8, 10 cars and public and district traffic to that location. So we are not really comparing one size of house office environment, however you would like to consider it, to the other. Physically the move didn't work. In the grander scheme of things, should the district ever be fortunate enough of build a new administration building, the houses on Pine ~..:: ~~, , H:J _ ,,::. ; ~ ~~ ~''~~ Meridian Planning and Zoning CoR!Tfiission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 19 ~ Street would then be vacated, the 2 -- the 3 of them in front of Meridian High School ~" ~.~_ would actually be vacated to provide a better educational setting. So we did look at it and determine that it really didn't work and in the end we would still be putting ~ a_? something in a neighborhood that would probably have essentially the same turn out ' ~' and same concerns, because it would be an office environment and, again, I go back to ;:, . the meeting when I questioned some of the speakers as to whether or not that would be acceptable to them and they confirmed my initial suspicion that that, too, would not have been acceptable, but our reason for moving the audiology was, again, part -- we would t ,., have had a lot of cars stopping there. rt ;`,~, ~ Nary: One last question, Mr. Bingham. I think I heard Mr. Anderson say that part of the ~~ ~~' ~" reason that the school district chose this route was based upon the plannin director's g recommendation that an R-4 zone would not require a Conditional Use Permit. Now that we are in this situation, we are looking at a Conditional Use Permit, would the school district consider again a commercial site that -- it sounds like it was discussed previously, but the Conditional Use Permit was sort of the road block at that point. ,;,~,-. ,4 ; { Bingham: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, the specific conversation I had with Shari rT. `' ~~" Stiles centered around the office space that's adjacent to our marketing education located on Water Tower just as you go passed the water tower it's the gray structure on the right. That was our first choice -- best choice. It was not a neighborhood setting, ` ~ but it had the ability, the buses could come and go without impacting traffic in any ' ' adverse way and we had some continuity with district wide supervision and district wide infrastructure, computer network servers, routers, etc. In the discussion with Shari she ~' ~= indicated -- and rightfully so -- that under her interpretation of the code we would be seeking conditional use and a change and that we would probably have the similar ~, ° -~ concerns of the business community that the neighborhood has concerns of, i.e., the nature of the students that are attending the facility. So with that obstacle in front of us, we looked for where the use was permitted and the distinction between when we look E, . ~ ;`~ and possibly staffs interpretation and yours is -- as close as I can tell and I'm no expert at this -- it says public schools. Doesn't say public schools, except something else. r ~~ :hy, .~ Nowhere else in the code or the zoning are public schools mentioned as alternative ;~ti schools traditional. Given the strictest interpretation that we are operating under today `~ , year around elementary school is a nontraditional school environment. Would a year ~ ~ ~ ~ around elementary school require a conditional use in any of the R permitted zones? It begs the question and that's kind of really the -- it's not our last hope, it's simply if we can't depend on putting it where the zoning indicates us to go with the greatest chance of success that would be consistent with the city's plans or vision, if you will, why would _ we choose to have a zoning change and be in a conditional use? The conditional use, >~ believe, is appropriate even though we are going in a permitted area, simply because of ,;~ ~ the use and the reason we are here tonight. But in the absence of I'll just say approval ~ ~~ .~a~ at this location, the question that we don't want to be left with from Planning and Zoning or the city is where do we put it? Where do we go with it? We are looking to the city under the zoning to give us guidance if not here, where, because we think we have met the letter of the law and, quite frankly, the spirit of it. That's kind of our dilemma. r`,A i~C ~S ~_~~. .. ;:,~, ,,.~, +, ~~~. Meridian Planning and Zoning ColTlFnission Meeting O November 15, 2001 Page 20 Nary: Well, I guess, Mr. Bingham, what my question is -- and I know you can't necessarily speak on behalf of the district tonight, but we are here now. We are here now on a conditional use. No different than if you had requested this in a commercial zone. It may be the room would be different, the people might be different. If that's something that's still on the table whether we resolve this here or whether it goes to City Council and -- I mean is that still something on the table that is an option or is it this or nothing and then we will go back to the drawing board and decided whether we go to district court or whether we reapply? Bingham: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, without sounding adversarial, I think we want it to go through the process. This is the stand that the school board took to the patrons who testified on Monday night in opposition to this, that we would like to see it go through this process and if we are turned down for whatever reason, we will be forced to regroup. We must comply with the feds. We have no choice in that matter. If we are forced to regroup will we come back in a different R-4, R-8, TE zone? Possibly. We will come back in a commercial zone? Possibly. But we would come back with the fear that we came forth originally in a permitted zone, we went through the conditional use process, and we were turned down. I would be putting my money on if we came forward through this process in a commercial zone we would probably again be turned down for the same logic that would cause you to arrive at that decision tonight. Borup: We have already approved one school in the subdivision -- the area you're talking about. There is a school -- probably -- no one here probably realizes it. But that has been -- and it did come before us as a Conditional Use Permit. I think it's just on the next street over, Water Tower. I can't remember the exact location, but there is a precedent for that having been approved. Bingham: Okay. Having said all of that, I would like to see it run its course. I want to have faith in the ability of staff and our appropriate architects to accurately interpret the zoning and code requirements and we may consider this a test, but I would like to see this process to the end, because it will simply answer the question, if not here, where would you like to -- Borup: Well, I think staff said in their report that it complied with all the requirements, except for they felt the -- changing the neighborhood was really the only item. Bingham: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners -- Borup: I didn't word that correctly, but -- ~t~ ~~~.~.. , H'4' Bingham: I think that's really the crux of the matter here. We are advocating our position is that we do not believe it will substantially alter the nature of the neighborhood if we maintain the house in a like and similar character to other residences in the area. Our hours of operation are shorter than the normal business hours. The program occurs on the traditional school year, approximately 9 months. The summer the house is vacant, other than maybe staff that might be running in there to fix something in the office. So we believe the impact to the neighborhood should be minimal. It has less trip ti >'~ ; ' Meridian Planning and Zoning ColTRfiission Meeting `'t; November 15, 2001 Page 21 generation, probably, or equal trip generation to a residence. The buses stop on Pine ~ Street and by pulling to the shoulder, turning on flashing yellow lights, and they do not „.. ~ stop the traffic and there are 2 trips in the A.M. and 2 trips in the P.M. _ ~ . Borup: Are those normally buses or a van? ,~ti _ } ;~_, 4 ~ Shreeve: They are buses. Short buses or long buses, depending upon the route that " ~` "' they come off of, but they are buses. - Norton: Mr. Chairman. Borup: Commissioner Norton. ~`?~;: Norton: Mr. Bingham, could you, please, educate us, you know, the Commission and h.~ ~r ~~~~ maybe the members in -- the people in this room, what is the difference between a student being expelled permanently and a student who is expelled that gets this special treatment of -- what was it? IEP program? Gallant: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Norton, the difference is that a student who is >~ } expelled -- when you're talking about expulsion, you're talking about -- for the most part } ~ ~~ ~~~, for a semester. A student that would be in this program has found or is in the process o ~ of being found eligible for special education services. That is an education law that ~ ~.F'~ requires for you to provide a continuation of services. That's the difference. R r ., ~ Norton: So 2 students could carry knives, one student is a special child, the other is not. The one who is not a special child is expelled forever, the one who is a special child gets special treatment; is that right? „~, ~k ~ `~ Gallant: That's correct. The difference, however, is that with -- you're using at the end ~ of your sentence the word forever. r i ~~~- :~ Norton: A semester? ;~ . ,' , ~ } ~' / Gallant: A semester. Yes. ~_ ,~ ,;; Norton: Okay. ,, kk ~~~ Gallant: That's the difference. Norton: Thank you. Nary: Mr. Chairman. _y` ~ ~.` ~~ Borup: Commissioner Nary. ~;y ~~ ~;,~~ Nary: Ms. Gallant, what is the difference between this program and the alternative middle school and the alternative high school that already exist? ' s.,`` ~~ ~~ ; ; .. ~~= ~,: ,. ,:~ ~:~:. _. - _ , ~^ „fir ,v - ~ ~3 ~ ~t r 3 ~r `= $a `-.~•,, k . ` r , . _ xr ", ,m ~ '' ~~- ~ `.~ ~~ r ~y +a ~ :~$ `, Y -~ : ~ F } ~ ~~~ ~~' ,.;. s~ ~~~~~ ~ ,< ~ ~,; ~~~ r, ~ + tx f ~: ~~'` .a~, c- }yr.. ~ ~T^ Ti~'1d1 xx~ T,4 i ~1~ 3 i~ r ~~ ~~ ~~, ~~ , ~r ~~~ ~` r t ;~ ~~, ~ ~s , ~_~ ~• ~w ~~ ~, t ;~;~~ i~ "t t ~~~Y ~~~ ~i { 4 Ft , .~ .• ti JT ~i X f Yl :~~ i ~ 1 ; k '~! r ~~ ~a{a~ ~ *~ ~; ~~ ~~; ~;~~' ~. , :~,. , ~~zh hew ~ R ~ ~~~ ~, - ;~ ~ ~ ~~, ~~~ - {. ..,'~ ~r~ ,r;~ r, -:5 T , ~~ ;` ~, ~>r yy .j Y~' i. <~ ~ ,,~_ 3,_ i+ ' 4s r b ~ E fir ~~. ~: T::. h.1 e. r ~::i4~ atN y- . 4 1: 1 1. ~ `~ } r {t / {~ ~~ s [~~ ~ _ ~..~Y.-.~ .. +, h r~ ~~ ~ j ~r ~ ~ t a y'. ~~~~` r~~ r ~ ~ 3 oc s ~y x t v t . i...-. - Meridian Planning and Zoning CoP'Rf~ission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 22 Gallant: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Nary, the difference is is that this is specific only for those students that are eligible for this service. When you have students that go to the academy or to Crossroads Middle School, you are looking at any student that wants to apply, wants to be referred for them for no special needs reason whatsoever. That's just an alternate program. Nary: Then maybe I just didn't hear you. What makes these students special that they wouldn't just simply go to the alternative high school or the alternative middle school? I heard you say people can apply, but why can't these kids be put into that program? Gallant: Because -- because they are eligible under the specific -- Nary: What makes them eligible? Gallant: But the criteria -- you have 14 different eligibilities under the disability act. There are 14 different ways that you can be found to be eligible. Chronically ill. Were you disabled? Orthopedically handicapped? I mean there is different -- and you don't have time to -- Nary: Why don't you run through all of them, then, so that we know what they are, because I don't understand -- I don't understand why these kids can't be in the alternative school system that already exists. So could you tell us what those 14 things are? Gallant: You want all 14 eligibilities? Nary: Yes, please. Borup: These are defined by federal law; is that what you're saying? Gallant: Right. These are students who have been referred for one reason or another -- Borup: I mean the 14 criteria, those are things that the federal -- Gallant: No. There are 14 different eligibilities. There are 14 different eligibilities. Borup: That's in the federal statute? Gallant: That's in federal statute. That's also part of the state guidelines for special education services. Nary: So these are physical handicapped? These are learning disabilities? Is that -- mean Ijust want to know what they are. I think these people want to know are these people here going to break into their cars. So are these kids that have learning disabilities and such? Tell us what they are. y~' '~ ~ ~ ~.; ~ ,:~: ~,.a:; t ,~ , t« ~ ~~ } 1 e~~ Vita r F^ „~ ~ `":r ~~:~- S ~: _ ;~ - ;ir?y~r ~~ ~r1~'`~. ~~~ ~y.~, `a}r~'.~k~,+'~rti t~'.C'~{'~..~t ~'k t a+' :r ° '- ... .,].•r' ~ k ~, c , ".R6 .~ ~r ~3 the ~at ~~ ~ '`~d r ~"r '~~~? $`~,'~t _~t ~7C ;c_f,~r. x~l T'xti ~r fit' ,.~ !~` 2"i~ ~ ° i `'~Y~Sys' ~ `~~ ; ~ ~~„ ~~ ;, 1 ~ - ;- y ;;a -. t ~ ,~. I ~ ~ ~ ~ fix, ~ ~ a ~ i ~ P. ~ ~~`~ 4 a i z r ~ ~ ~ „7.'~ ] '~d '" ~`4` ti~ r `r~~.~r,~s ~'~ °-r~,{r 1,~_~i~'~S "'a M. t,{,'?~~ t yYrx .t - ~ r yt 7L ~Y 1 /. F i PJ~ ~ ~ „a ;'~~ o 'is4F ~ ~ a s~ ~~~ .1,~ ;,~~. wy`},1 x ~ L .~~~u~,~" t ~'` ~~i~ ,r•?5y .:~', '~f"f4 ~~ `; ~5 ' ~ ~l i}s~ ~ ~ •'r ' ~+ r ", a , ~h i .. ~ r w 4 < ~~~ _ ~ , ~~' ~'~~~_'~ .,,~s drew ~` .. .~:,~,~,~. ,ice.. r ~ S- ~ 4 y ..,~ ~^"+ _. Z1n~1 J r - .r.. i s ;.'~ r ~! ': ~ ~9 -A ••~ 'r., '~ ~5 Abl 4~P'~. ~J ~ v i "s r Y'. s-{ [t x 'W a t k t i. ~+MkY '~-. 1 r It l t .t y k~- ~ - 3 r 'n M c - 4r. 4 ,t, , .~ }~...' ~:?~ i ~'",y. F 3 ~ ~7,E~SL' l.. rl '~S 3 e .' .y r... ..y ,~ . ys"1 a ~-t ~~1 tt 1 v ~#~' v. r s:.*Y.i,i/, ~ ~~}~. ti, J. 1~d1 ~ - .z.l - 'ram ~°~.. 4tt~ ~~~ F r ~ a~F~ ~ i y,, , ;3 ~; s a ; ~ 4 ,,{ ~' r y r rL ~, ~?% ~'P?r~ r ~ 1 .C '~E?~~ ~~~-.?~~~~s: w~ :I't}o i p _. .fir ra - gyrx ,r 9.?~w ~,'o`~y~4x/, yy~f µ~:Y,~YkGu c >S ~.t. 3 _ icr. ~/ fY ~ I r l~,t +1f 7 ~! 'C (ye7 4 i S,. .4 yf 1~.5LJ,~ 1 -:. ~ i w.. y , ~ ,.r9y~ - y •s'~ ~'~1+~ cL ~a i~~r a ~~ f"'`,.~3, d i'a'f ,,>~ Y Meridian Planning and Zoning Co7iTFiiission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 23 Gallant: Well, I don't have my code book in front of me, so I'll go as far as I can. You have chronically ill, other health impaired, learning disabled, emotional disturbance, orthopedically handicapped, cognitively impaired, language impaired, speech impaired, traumatic brain injury, developmentally delayed. I think I have done pretty well thus far. Those are the main ones. Shreeve: Mr. Chairman. Borup: Commissioner Shreeve. Shreeve: You know, we have talked about knives. I didn't hear knives as one of those lists. Gallant: No. What you're talking about is that this is a student that has been identified as having one of these special categorical needs. Let's say you have a child that has a learning disability. This child comes to school, his special needs are being met, and he brings a knife to school. What the school has to determine is is that how are we going to continue to provide services for a child that brought a knife to school, which is an expellable offense, and meet the standard of the law which says that you have to continue educational services for that student. So that's where -- I was bringing the knife up, but I think someone was asking what would an incident be that would be the generating focus of the student being removed. Borup: I think what you're saying is that the student's disability -- and I think this was already mentioned - 2 students can be expelled for the same thing, one be for the semester and the student with disability you're required to keep providing education. Gallant: That is correct. You're removing that student from school, but -- Borup: A little bit of reverse discrimination? Are we getting too far here? Never mind Shreeve: So let me just restate that, because that's exactly where I was headed, is -- and Idon't know what the politically correct term is, but a normal kid brings a knife and you get a kid that has a speech impediment who brings a knife. The, quote, normal kid, I guess, the -- excuse me if that's not a politically correct term, but he would tend -- he would then be expelled, because there is other reason, he brought a knife, he had full knowledge of the whole thing, where this other student has a special need, he classifies or falls into these categories and so they would -- yes, I tend to agree, that's almost a reverse -- but that is correct, is that right, that they would tend to be expelled, where this other student would go to the alternative -- Norton: But just -- I can understand the school district's dilemma is that this is federally mandated. They have to do something. They have chosen this house, which the neighbors aren't appreciative of. Nary: So, Ms. Gallant, the kids who meet that special needs requirement, these kids could not go to the alternative school, they have to be in a separate program all by ,,~_ Meridian Planning and Zoning Co~RFhission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 24 themselves with other kids that have special needs, as well as incorrigible problems that caused them to be expelled. They cannot be in any other system, except this special program that might have 3 kids at one time? Borup: Well, I think, Commissioner Nary, what they are saying is the alternative school is essentially mainstream. I mean if you're expelled from the regular school you would be expelled one of the others, too. Gallant: Correct. Nary: Okay. But all I'm saying is that there is no other alternative. This is it. You have to provide aprogram -- just so these folks understand -- you have to provide a program that you're currently providing in homes, which I'm sure is very time consuming and not cost effective, and there is no other alternative within the school system that we currently have to meet this need. Gallant: That's correct. Nary: Is that right? Borup: Any other questions from any of the Commissioners? Maybe one for staff. For this building to be rezoned as office use -- I don't even -- it would take a rezone, conditional use would not -- would not suffice; is that correct? Hawkins-Clark: Chairman Borup, that's correct. Borup: That's what it looked like, on the use, it would require a rezone. Hawkins-Clark: A separate application for a rezone. Right. Nary: Thank you. Borup: Any other -- thank you. Commissioners, I'm wondering if we would like any discussion before we start with public testimony that -- I guess I'm thinking it may speed things along if -- well, I don't know. Too early to reach any conclusions. Would we like to continue getting some more information from -- I mean we have read the letters, we have read the -- ~. i~~:;:; t ~s.~_ : ~. ?,. ti, n ~ ~ ,~ a ~r ~ F~ x~ * ~ ~ ^" ~ ~ ~.~~ ? .~ ~!_;y ;F-~ ;~ ~n~ ~: ;: u ~~ ~,. s ~e :. E~< 'th 1 E ' n• ~h ~~. x ~. ~ .~~ ' ~~.~ :~ y'y~7s, ~ ,s ~~~,~~,'''fff a f~~ ~ .iy rs '. j "-~~ ''.t W z -- `,~~ , ~.; .~ R ,.-- , sv ~, ~-1 ~:~~ , ~F , - ~ ,~ ~. ~ y#, ~ ` ;;t., ~ . ~N .~ ~~ ,;fir ;- ~ ~~~ ~~ , . rY< ~ ~ff F f}~~~ `4, F ~~ , w ~~ r~ ~~ ; ,~ ,r~. k, x , ~~. ~_ ~7 ~ ~tY ~ r~ ,~_ ~ ~d ~~~r• k~ i~jS~ F' ~ 'SS ~' ~ ,7 ~ , ~. " 7 ~r ~,~ ;^ 3 ~ 1' } ~- ~~~, ,~; ~r~.,. ._~~ - . i d _ ~ 4. x' ''W r~z ;~~ ~ ~: ~ t ~ : ~;, f ~" ~. ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~ _~.~ ~; ti.4 r, . ~yc ~, ~ ~.Y,~ 1 r~ ~ 3 ~~ '~ k t F 3 ~a s ~ .1~ t i' ~ ~ ~.;~, ~ f '~ . .Z~ ~, _~ ~~ 5 ~ t ' e ~ ~' a4 .~.~ ~. 4 M Meridian Planning and Zoning Co7ti'IThission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 25 Nary: Well, the only thing I was going to say, Mr. Chairman, is that we, obviously, need to hear from all these folks that took the time to come down here tonight. Borup: Right. Nary: I think that the thing that we need to -- that all of these folks -- the people, as well as all of us, need to look at and address it, is that we aren't really -- although I said it as well and I think that's the mood of some of the folks at least, it isn't the character of the kids that really goes to what the ordinance is talking about, because if this was a -- if this was a preschool or an honors program, we may not have this many people in this room. So I want them to understand if you read through our ordinance, it doesn't talk about the character of the people in the building, it talks about the nature of the use of the building. So if they are going to spend a lot of time telling us I'm really concerned about the nature of these children, understand our ordinance doesn't really address that. Now maybe I'm wrong, Brad, and please correct me, but, as I said, if this was an honors program, I don't know that everybody would be here. If this was a preschool I don't know if it would be either. So understand that if that's your number one concern, we may not have the ability in our ordinance just on that alone to deny this use. There are other things in our ordinance that does speak to how this use is going to be. So I just want everyone to understand that if you feel frustrated because you don't think we are hearing you, understand we are, but there are things that we are bound by, as well as the City Council in evaluating use of property. That's what we are talking about. Not who is in the building, how they are going to use it. So I guess, you know, that's the only thing I wanted to say before we get started. Norton: Mr. Chairman. Borup: Commissioner Norton. Norton: Now that Commissioner Nary has mentioned that, I -- the statement that the school district has made regarding -- regarding that they didn't think it was appropriate for these students to be in a property close to the high school, because they don't get it, they don't realize that they really have been bad and need to be put in a different location. If that is the case, maybe we should put them close to the police department -- you know, aren't they building a new police department? Nary: Right on Water Tower where they wanted to go in the first place. Norton: You know, and then maybe the kids would get that they have been bad, so -- you know, I don't know if that --that statement sort of bothered me a little bit. Borup: Any comments, Commissioners? Well, I definitely agree with what Commissioner Nary has said. I mean a strict interpretation -- there is not a lot for us to go on, but what the -- one staff comment that was made several times is -- maybe it's because they didn't want to stick their neck out, but that -- staff recommends that we rely on public testimony for a lot of these concerns. I guess the problem I have, I think if 3 1 : ~ .- 1 - }~i 1I $ ~ ~. ~ r ~.: ~~ ~.T~. a ,~~ ~ r`o ~'F -.. ~ ,r ~', ~~~~ r ' r- ,~ c, '~ ~r a ~., ~ ~ ~ . S'. ~lr_i ~~ ~: ~ y,btis A ~5 -~{~ ~ .. ~~ .t ~~ 1 _ 3 r(j.;f~ I ~ ~. ; t • 1.... 7'f ~ X .. .. 1Ta~+ ~., ~ ~ ~'lY~. ...yy vRK, ~,,~ ~ , lfy +r K ~;} C' _~ Yi ~y ~ ': - 't k' ~YF; Sb. r i~~~~ 4tt,'r~ ..4 }~' ~~ v . ~ ~,. -.y-. ~.~ ~ ~Y~:'~ w~:.2 ..~( ~ ~ Y ~~'~.; ~i . ~. :1 ~ ~ } i ~#u~ ~~ t~ S 9 .1 ~~ .' -.:. ~ ~~+~"a. ,airy ~~~~~ IIF Meridian Planning and Zoning Co~hiiiission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 26 it's -- if the regulation and rules are enforced strictly, you're never going to see the kids anyway, but -- Norton: Well, why -- Borup: But I guess the overriding thing to me -- I mean whether it -- when we have this many people that are opposed, you can't ignore that. Norton: According to our ordinance it looks like a public school is a permitted use in an R-8. Borup: And an R-4? Norton: And an R-4. So why are we seeing a conditional use? Borup: The only reason, as staff stated, they felt that -- Norton: Because of the use of this; right? So we are back to that. Borup: About the type of school. Right. Nary: My last comment before we do public testimony, I don't fault the staff. I understand the contentiousness of this issue. I think it is one that probably it is in our ballpark. If you want to talk about sticking your neck out, the school board didn't do anything. They just left it to us. These patrons are the patrons of the school board, too, and they vote for those people just as well. So maybe they need to remember that the next school board election that if you want to be on the school board, make a decision, don't just pass the buck. Leave it to the free people. Borup: Okay. Nary: That's my editorial comment. ~ Borup: That being said, I don't know if most of you had a chance to read -- to read the - - the information sheet back there on public testimony. When we have a group like this we have to stay real close on time limits. The other thing I might mention, we do have a provision of -- if we have a single person speaking for the neighborhood, we allow extra time. I don't know if this has been organized well enough that you have a spokesman for the group. We do have one. We have 2. Okay. Well, let's see where we are going here. We have at least one person that wants to speak for one part of the neighbor and Mitchell: 31 homeowners. Borup: Okay. You want to stand -- stand up, sir, just maybe right there. How many people by show of hands that this individual will be speaking for your behalf? Okay. ~~ ~ ~ ~~ _ _ r ~. ry rw t~ll`~~ f. ~~f"~ 7 ~~ ~ . 8_ - i .o ~~ x ~ .,. r:-' -.vxt ,e .~ s r ~,~~-"r ~~'-~'"r i _ y'~'3 i~w(~CNf'~s '~r#'[r ~7t;S 1 t ~ t 2L'`t 4r~~... ~~. ~i .`ir k ~ r~ ~ < ~.r ,.~~ l~r~. ~y.,F ~''~rra ~ ~kl }+~,.{x{~iti }.~ ~. ~ - a }.WS i,.,. ~r K~ . ~:,y ~ v^y~Si~ r.*--. K.~ ~r ~..ii ~?r fx ~ "l',d ~l :'~" .A ,trrrr- - - t ;iY, k a ..,~r, -t S ` ~~Y~; f ; y `H ~~ N' ~~ J'P:~ ~. y~ ;'..~t~iY ••~~'F '?ATf` ,Y ~~`j '' W~ Y~.~ ~'M1~h~ 1~ i~ ~. ., 4 n .: ,tp,~2t 'k. - .. ~ v 1~r ~ -,i S. ~ ~ ~ % ~~~-'~i f - i ~~ T"~ 't syw dr~y'~P_ti~ e ~~~,rx „rig.. ~ e ,,, r~x ,. i;~y~ :~. {~ a!{'~~si ~,~t ~jV ~ ;S ~°~ 3 tt ~ ; ~{ r', ra ~~ ^~ .,,+'~ r~~. ' n k-~ - "r r= '.a a - ~}5 f~ ~t x~~, a'ts ~j`i v I,VJ --`~ K~:.jti Ye - T '1T' - ~SSa4 ~ ~. L x 1 ~r~ Q W_ ~ 4 5' { 5 9 i ~~1, ~~~Y~` ~.. _-~~ aM~ ~. ~,. a ~* K~~~ L~ r° ', i ~ ?, ;~ .~,'~ ~JtrH t r r-~(~ ik, ~H ~ 4- s W ; ~ r k ,, y-?. ` i *~ ~ ? ~ , , ~~t; ` -,~>~' „~ J 2w i d,.t ~^ "t 4~h ` >~~~ ~,+ ~'~r s ~}_y(n ~'"? -.L t 4. s .: ~~ M `k.~S t fs~ rah ~~ t ~ ~u, r„t :... ti t ~ u,.~ ~ti^«: ~ f~"Th r , 't'"C ~. f`tc~ t-f t~, ,Sk~^ti~r i ,~ w ~ w ~~ ' ~4:%, ~s ,a _ ~~ y!' r r .a„~'~ .. pit. fi~! - FaS ., r~ .K~~ t` ~ r :~~°~ f. ~4x„RZ,q ",,, i., .~ a'. °= ~n ~, r , t, ~' , fh~'T r%'- -~~ ;.~ .%y3 i a ~ s~ n.~T~'`~tx"~ I~ ~-R ") r~i ~x k.~'tiir~" isn ~ 3' t w @i' +~ ' a ~ gSf4~ r ,~~. ~ , fi a c ~ ~ ti .~~ i ~ ra i ~ ~ ~ ~ r h - y'~~ ~- rs :ti `F 'L y ~ ~,~Y t1. y~+ t~ w R?'S'tY.t l~~ ~~ ~``.t''~y~ r,+.~~~~' ~ t~ v. s'"k~, ~.YS}.r -':'8 .vt y~ .%-~ 1 1~1 r+ fi.~f27 ~ ~~ ~'~7~< }S ~ n.F.x,D~ r .r nr,~,. - , i ~ <. ~. ,~ ,. . ;. .cn> ...:... .. .. ~. ri~ .>a ,. ,. h:, it .., _~: _..~4...~,,:; .. i. :.;f~r...a i~.x -<40, 23~~ .._a~.. .>..~.,~x..,, ..., _ ..., ,.._. _.... ... :~, <t;~; 2 •~:K 3 t ~ "`~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Meridian Planning and Zoning Co ission Meeting ;; ~~ % November 15, 2001 Page 27 Thank you. You, sir. You said you had a group that are -- raise your -- okay. All right. y~1 . ~.. And you, ma'am? ~, ~, Cantella: I'm speaking for myself. ~. x Borup: Okay. Okay. Those are the only 2 -- it looks like those are the only 2 that are s speaking for -- how many others do we have besides that would like to speak? Okay. 4 So we'd like to go ahead and start that. The other thing that is often the case when we ~' have a group like this, people start repeating themselves. If we've heard it -- especially ,. { ~ if we've heard it twice, we really don't need to hear it a fifth time. It doesn't help the n ~~ case to repeat and especially to get off on a tangent that really doesn't apply to what we W a~ are talking about. So that being said, I'm trying to decide whether we want to start with ~~ ~~'~~~ ~ the group or with the individuals. Why don't you go ahead, sir. It looks like you're ready. State your name and -- Mitchell: My name is Robert Mitchell. I'm the president of the Clarindafaire Homeowners Association. I live at 1085 West State Street. I would like to know where Ms. Bonnie '~ _ :.,. Gallant lives. She didn't state that when she got up here. x f~ ._, ' ' ~' ~~~~ Borup: She stated her ofFce address. 4t r~+'/"~! Mitchell: Okay. That plot map that you've got there on the wall is -- leaves something to " - °'k be desired. Where that driveway is going into the garage there is an island that comes in off of Pine and -- ~~~, ~r Borup: Right. We have a site map that shows that. ~r x.~ Mitchell: The people would have to come in. You don't show it on any of these pictures .. here either. Right there. "``` Borup: But we have a little more detail also. '~ ~ Mitchell: Okay. The things that we'd like to bring up is this is a single family residence ' }~ area, it has been, and we continue to want to maintain that. The school -- Mr. Bingham :`~ ~ indicated that that house is going to be vacant. A vacant home in that area would ,~. ~ ~~`~ definitely invite vandalism and people hanging out and children hanging out around that house when it's vacant. They also indicated that the maintenance of the building would -'~ be done very very, you know, concisely and keep it in the neighborhood up -- in a neighborhood condition as the other homes. The maintenance of that building has really deteriorated since it was bought. It hasn't been watered, it hasn't been mowed, .~ ~ the hedges haven't been trimmed, it has definitely gone downhill. You know, I realize ka%~~~ can't talk about the character of the children that are going to be in that home. The ° Idaho Statesman had an article in it just recently from Aaron Exline, the school district ~~ ` indicating that these students are expelled for truancy, weapons sales spokesperson , possession, incorrigibility. We all feel that having this in our subdivision will decrease property values. We feel that if it didn't work at Lowell Scott and it didn't work at ` Meridian, why would they want to put it in a single family residence area and try to make ~~„~ ~~ ~~ E;~:. - ,- kit;-, ~~;- . r , -~~ Meridian Planning and Zoning Co~ission Meeting ~~.rc November 15, 2001 .; ,~,, Page 28 "'. 3` it work there. I have to agree with Commissioner Norton that possibly it does belong - down the street from the police station. If not, put them in the creamery building. It ~ ~' probably would be a lot cheaper to give them a tutor than to buy a single family ~ , residence. You have got additional parking spaces, you have got teachers, counselors, more traffic, and now you're going to turn the garage into a storage building and have ~S` maintenance trucks going in and out. You don't have the buffer zones that you're ~`ar: ~ supposed to have for that kind of a conditional -- for that kind of a facility. I don't know ,. ";`'" why this has even gone this far. That's all I have got to say. Our subdivision is against it. ~.. e;;; Borup: Any questions -- any questions of Mr. Mitchell? Would you propose that the ,'~ ~~'`~'' school district -- is there any use that the school district could use on that site that you ,rd ' " feel would be appropriate? ~~ Mitchell: Without having a homeowners association meeting and discussing it and knowing what the conditional use they would propose, I couldn't answer your question, Mr. Commissioner. Not at all. They have 3 other homes near the high school. Why f~_:.:~ don't they use one of those? Borup: That's what I was getting at. Well, then, they have got to move those people to ~fr:¢ ~~'~ somewhere else. ~: Mitchell: There would definitely be less I think offense than what we have now. Borup: To move those office staff orthe -- t :.>. Mitchell: Correct. a ,5•t ~~ `^~ Borup: Even if that entailed rezoning that to an L-O zone? `'; ~~ ='~~` Mitchell: I would have to say we would have to have a homeowners meeting before ``,~.' could speak on that for the homeowners. ~, - Borup: Because an office space -- a conditional use would not satisfy the need -- '' mean the requirements for an office space, it would need to be -- is why I asked that. ?~`' Mitchell: I don't think the adjacent homeowners would appreciate it. You have got a r~ . family with 2 children living right next door and a family that's on the other side, that's '' within 5 feet of that home. So I don't know how an office use of that facility would work. Borup: Thank you. Nary: Mr. Chairman. ~; .: i;:C'i Borup: Commissioner Nary. .; 1 fs.. .•~ ~.tiir..~x. `4 :. ~.~ k• ~ 1 '~S ti x" # .~Y ..3E i~ s.:#~ ~i:: ~a~~,~' ^y f - ~ 3 y. ! ~''' rd '~,r v:4}:~i', ~{~4:i%'~r~: • , a . i ?: I tit ~ ~.., t+; ;r,,.x, .~t.~-~AY;' ~ ~ ~ ••~ - . n .1- ~ . ~ ... ,., r^ , - 11-Y,.. ~ ',5'Y. .~ 4 ,ar ~ Y~ ' . a 'a;h,:. `.:Z-: , h~ $ • y a °K ; ~' "°' F ~ w~[ ~' ` r lr r~ ..I ~ u4<Y $ .. ::. tl .•.. .- _ ~ -; N kt,dy ~-r •4vJk C .! ; i ~ .' rs .~ •.. • •W :' "• .,a ,. T . . •~ .• ~~ •. ~tf3k.•k°Nl..,. ~~~~.....t~ s ` . " ~ s y ~ ";!.''~; :;' f~ ~ Y r' m 1 ~+L x~x7 a ~'~Sbi'~~5; ~, .+ t @ J is r'f f x1'' . r ' 4 ~ k . +~',,,a k.. ~~-~Y, ',x A A ., Y y ~j y. t'~v.ti :~~:: ` ' ' Pht:~atY.~ ai# : ~}~?`,i ~..~ k'Y ~ ~ ~/~7 , 'c! 3 'YS ~ ' . ~ -. C. Y I.. 4•~. 1 • ' V i' .x ,;~ ' >• . }~ S • 1 ' ••" '' -` ' jy a ; a ~i'r .:~ ~ ;3e!,r,P~ ~ ~ R'.. ~ f ' . ~. . . N~~J, 4 ,f, ?? ~(( .:f i~ ~ , . ~' . r' ~ ~ x . -.:d 1y,^ .:n r..r::~;/ ~a:;. ~~i.. " ' ~o- I . ~ i'y,,_;,,~~,~ :t%rws: . ~ ~ .~ ~i(: ANY=N' e.y4 .:. . , ~ = ~ _ ~ i :.i.~: f; ;-4.+t':.T. il.'Y ~: .~ •. i . ~ -'~ .~hz, '. 1 ( .. _ ~ x • y j-e.b ~ ~ ~i - } ; ~._ l~ icq't,1J~ 1 ~ r "4 :(u ' ~ ~ ~ i ~ : . ~: y:. ±,;, ~ j . ~~.,~. ; ,i ,. a.. ,may i ..L=' n.,S' ~ • ~~ '~ 3 . .~ . ~ ,. ..~ ~. ^ - , . ' 1 • u~y =,, ," • , - ' • , ^~ u:' f . , .. %~3 . .. . . .i . ~: .~ ~ ~ ~ u ~ ~ - ... r ~ Meridian Planning and Zoning CoP!!~nission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 29 Nary: Mr. Mitchell, I'm going to guess before this whole thing started R-4 zones and R-8 zones and L-O zones and all that probably didn't mean a whole lot to you. Mitchell: L-O means limited operations on the -- Nary: But you did hear tonight that an R-4 zone, which is what this area is, a school is a permitted use and if this was a different kind of school, it may have not even -- you may not even know anything about it until they were moving in. Mitchell: Quite possibly. Nary: So what do you think about that? I mean I just want your feelings. I mean, like I said, I -- and maybe I'm wrong, but my perception is if this was an honor school with 4 students in it, you may not have as big a problem with that, but I don't know that. Mitchell: I can't say that we wouldn't have as big a problem, because you've still got the problem with the setbacks, you have got the problem with the additional parking spaces, you have got the potential additional traffic, you have got an island there that you have to navigate if you come in off of Pine to try to get into that driveway with counselors -- so they have got to come in from either Eleventh Street or -- to get into there without coming into that turn around and coming back to get into that driveway. So all of those homes are going to experience the traffic of that going in and out. That alone would -- there is little children all along that whole area that -- they are not in the street, but the potential exists that someone could run out for a ball and get hurt. And having a vacant home for 3 months out of the year sitting on the corner and the way they have maintained it so far, I got to tell you, there is no way you're going to convince me they are going to maintain it all summer long, because they haven't done anything there. Nary: You do, I'm sure, Mr. Mitchell, understand me, the traffic, at least from what the projection you're talking about here, probably isn't much more than most homes are going to have, other than the bus. I mean a school doesn't pull up to a house every day, twice a day, but -- or 4 times a day, but the traffic of the people going there isn't really any different than a house that people live in. But I do understand the vacancy concern that you have. I walk through that neighbor, too, so I see what you're saying. But it wouldn't have a whole lot more traffic impact for small children in the neighborhood or anything and any other cars driving down the street. Mitchell: You could be right. Borup: Ada county's numbers I think are ten trips per day for a single family home is the number they use. The previous resident, apparently they did the same thing, they would come in on Eleventh or would they flip a U'ey or -- don't know? Mitchell: They -- I never saw them that much. They came in and flipped around in the cul-de-sac and -- ~ Meridian Planning and Zoning Co ission Meetin 9 "' ~' € November 15, 2001 P 30 , .. ~~; age `-y- -. . `~~ Borup: Then came back. You had mentioned about the maintenance. Is this a recent ~ - picture, an old picture, or -- ,'~" Mitchell: It's old. I mean very old. ~. 4' Borup: Well, it had to be after the application. Do you know the date on that, Brad, at ,,r~: ~..: . } ~;a all? 4 F,~... ~s'.f ~ Hawkins-Clark: Chairman Borup, I believe it was taken about a month ago. ~~~ Borup: Okay. J. ~ , T..: -, Mitchell: So you got leaves off of some of the trees and some of them are turning color, r ~;~~ - so -- ,~~4 Borup: So it's fairly recent if they are turning colors. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Mitchell. ~~ ~ - Mitchell: Thank you. ' ~-- - Borup: Yes, sir. `~ E. Centers: My name is Eric Centers, I live at 925 Northwest Ninth in Canna Lily +=~ Subdivision. Mr. Chairman and Commissioners, you have made my speaking a little - shorter by far. You have touched on a lot of my things I was going to say. I think the ~ ~ main thing that is kind of gotten to us is the fact that the school district went ahead and . purchased the property without getting the opinion of the area residents prior to buying r - the property. If they were like a developer or a commercial investor they would seek to get a Conditional Use Permit and an option to buy ahead of time, so they are not out 80 _ ~~ ~: <: .,..~~, to $100,00 if they don't get the right zoning or if it's not -- ~~~ Boru Ri ht. But I think that's wh the are here, the thou ht the bou ht somethin P= 9 Y Y Y 9 Y 9 9 ~ ~,~; - that was a permitted use in the zone they bought for. They weren't anticipating on being here. ~~-;:~ ,_ E. Centers: Right. But what I'm trying to say is -- ~' ~ Borup: So there was no need to act -- to do that condition like you say on -- a developer .~'~`~ normally does have that as part of their option, because they know they are going to ~.. =~ - have to go through that process. r~ ~.:~ E. Centers: I guess what I'm saying is I find it hard for them to believe that they wouldn't t-~ `; :: feel they would impact the neighborhood with this kind of a setting and maybe thought that if they purchased the property ahead of time and would sneak it through or something. But since then they have purchased this property up until just a week ago ~~ i, ' they had been pursuing work inside the building, you know, moving desks in, moving ~ ~, different articles in, plumbing and HVAC rigs in there. So, you know, the subdivision ,k;; residents feel that -- you know, that they are trying to go ahead with this no matter, you E ~~~ ; ~ ~~,,:; _ _. , . ~ 3t .; Meridian Planning and Zoning CorTiFiiission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 31 ~~ know, really what our opinion is. Another thing I guess I would like to point out, '~~~" currently if you notice that on the map, Ninth has a cul-de-sac at the end and turns to f:~~;. r ~ ~ State. It's not labeled there, but that is State right there and that road runs directly into , n " the high school. If you drove all the way down through that road you would be at the high school So currently we have a lot of traffic from high school students that use that route in the morning to cut through, get to high school, and when they leave the high school, lunch breaks, they cut through. So that being said, if a bus was to stop at Ninth ' ~ and Pine, those students or other people would know if they want to get to the high il'`?'~ ~ school they could possibly take Ninth to State and down. Thus making more traffic on `~ Ninth. Borup: I'm not sure what that's got to do with this, but go ahead. E. Centers: With what? The traffic congestion problem is what I'm saying. If there is a bus stopping -- if the bus is going to be stopping -- they told us Monday night that the . ~ bus would be stopping going westbound on Pine. ~ Borup: Right. ~ ~;;,~ E. Centers: Which would back the cars right on that -- on Ninth Street. 3:;.. <, Borup: So there is no parking on Pine? 4.~x~~ :, ._ E. Centers: No. No parking on Pine. , ;;~. _~' LF ~ -..~~ Borup: Okay. Just the bike lane, that's all? E. Centers: Yes. So, you know, that, you know, I thought felt needed clarified, if the buses stop, you know, right before Ninth, giving the people advantage to take Ninth if that bus is stopped on the shoulder. Also there were a lot of kids that, you know, as the other representative said, that walk to Meridian Middle School and Meridian Elementary z~j_~: right in front of there, with the bus stopping there would be a congestion problem with people pulling into Ninth, people, you know, trying to go by the bus So I think the traffic ~ ~. ~, issue is pretty good. And I would back up. His assessment of the upkeep on the property up until about 3 weeks ago, which may have been when the picture was taken, there was nothing done. In fact, the property running between Pine and Ninth or lateral with that is actually maintained by our subdivision, Cannalily, and we currently have insurance on for our subdivision and we were trying to water their yard through our :°~ ~.~~ ~ system, because it was drying up, as well as the neighbor to the west of the property = t~ ,~ ~ was doing on her side. Up until 3 weeks ago after we had our first school board ~ ~ meeting and they heard our concerns about how the upkeep was, they then came out ~~ ~~~'~ and had somebody mow the yard and that's pretty much it. But the bushes have -- you know, it's an upkeep problem. It definitely is. So -- and then, you know, I know you said keep your comments minimum on the students that would be in it, but we definitely that, ~~fi' you know, there being a safety issue to the children around. Like they said the closest , is -- two of them, as you can see, and the one to the north has children, the other one ,~1; ` had grandchildren, so -- ;.;, IY Y A:c ~.~.; - --. - - +i` i"; H~'' ', ~~~ ~ Meridian Planning and Zoning CoTirnission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 32 Borup: Is it your concern there them leave the building, whether or not it's permitted? E. Centers: Yes. 4~'~ . ~ Borup: Are you afraid they will sneak out and the teacher not notice or -- ;< E. Centers: They do it at the high school and there is a lot more teachers watching over .`= kids over there than there will be at this one. I would feel that the students would feel a fi< " ~ lot more at ease at this one than trying to get out of a big high school or a big middle ~~` school where there is - '~ . Borup: You think so? Come on. E. Centers: Yes. Borup: I mean just looking at the teacher ratio I don't think that's logical. ~"=~~ E. Centers: Yes. Well - '`~ ` Borup: Well, you got 30 kids in the class, the teacher is not going to maybe notice one ~. missing, but when you have got 4 -- ~,: ~`~`~` ` E. Centers: Well, I'm saying, you know, if things got bad. I mean there is a lot more to ~ ~; cover that problem at a high school than there is with just 2 teachers -- a counselor and ~ a teacher. So the other main, you know, issue would be property values. I can't even ' ` fathom the property value situation if it does. It is a definite impact. Just to kind of clarify or put my 2 cents in on what they can do with this property if they were to use the property on Meridian High School or one of the 3 that you were talking about earlier, I guess I don't understand why they couldn't sell it, get the money from it, and use it for the hard times that they are facing right now with all the problems that they are having with money and issues that have been in the news lately. So I guess I don't know, you ~~~~ know, if they -- they could use that money to purchase -- you know, or to do something ~~~~f: with the property on Water Tower. I guess that would be my, you know, ` ` ~ recommendation, would be to -- if you tell them that -- you know, if you deny them this, "t ° that they could, you know, put this facility up for sale or this house up for sale and a family could buy the place like was there before. ~~-~ : Borup: Okay. Any questions for Mr. Centers? f¢;,; •' ~~.~ Nary: Mr. Chairman. :; . Borup: Commissioner Nary. Nary: Maybe just a comment as well, Mr. Centers. You know, the -- the district court doesn't look very much at property values and neither does the Supreme Court and the ~ ~ reason is because it's very speculative. If this was the crummiest neighbor you had in ~,, . ~' ~. Y ~ ~ .. 4' x p m ~.-.. ... a Ea ~k r ~ hY.. y' 4 t ~ ./ .t i~ ~.~~ V }~ Y ,} { ~;~.~~ , t r/ . x'}_k Y ~ r k 4 ~.~ ~ ~~ j'~ r~~ hi~~. '~ _(.' '^ .S_ ~ +r~ _ ~ .,y~ . Z i. J,~ H l t ~ ~ ~ _ ~.Y da .. i Meridian Planning and Zoning Cor~f'Fiiission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 33 the world that lived at that house and they had -- and since they are not part of your subdivision or homeowners association, they don't maintain their yard and they have lousy trees and their fence is falling down and they don't paint their house, that affects your property values, too, and there is not a lot you can do about it. So just so you understand and maybe these other folks as well, that's not a factor. It's not a factor to a court and that's where this may be from this. So that, itself, is probably not the most significant factor. I think there are some other things. But just so you understand, because there is a lot of folks that do bring that item up on all types of these developments that they affect their property value and I just want you to understand that that alone is generally not something the court is going to find to be persuasive at all, because there is no way to really know right now in comparison to this versus anything else that can be there, just so you understand that. Borup: Just adding on that, at least the experience I have seen here in this town is in -- here is nothing to back any of that up. I can think of a couple situations where that was one of the big arguments and just the opposite happened, their values went up. It wasn't a school, it was a different situation, but that was their -- one of their big concerns. Unless you have got some statistics to show that, I think Commissioner Nary is right, it's probably not pertinent. E. Centers: No statistics. Borup: Okay. Thank you. E. Centers: Thank you. Borup: Okay. I think those were the 2 that we had those representing, so anyone that would like to come on up, please do. Cantella: Hi. My name is Pam Cantella. Unfortunately, I own the property that's 5 feet away from the fence line. I live at 988 West Pine. First of all, I would like to state that my husband and I purchased the property almost 4 years ago. We retired out of Alaska. It took us that long to decide where we wanted to retire, live, and die, basically. We purchased our home there on West Pine 4 years ago, as I stated. Retired out of Alaska a year ago. Unfortunately, I'm really saddened, because I thought that I bought into a neighborhood, quote, family. All our children are grown up, but we have grandchildren, nieces, nephews, that come to visit. We have done a lot of extras to the house that when you sell it nobody cares, just I care. You know, something that we have planned on living in, dying in, and be done with it. So we did lots of extras while we could afford it, you know, before we retired. My problem is I understand that the school district -- when Ileft knew that -- when Jane and them had the house up for sale they were going to -- back to Minnesota. When I returned from a trip the grass was all burned up, the flowers that she had in the bed -- and I knew she and her husband personally, I had been in the house several times, and things were burned up and the flower beds were pretty bad, the weeds had taken over in the flower beds, plus the lawn. The lawn was absolutely burnt to crisp. I mean there was no green at all in the yard. I didn't know if it was in between realtors, I didn't realize it had sold. I thought, well, maybe it's in ~:;- :N~ ` ~ I Meridian Planning and Zoning Co ission Meeting ~ ~ - u ~~ November 15, 2001 Page 34 between realtors, you know, whatever. I tried to figure out how to get ahold of Jane in ~:~~,'; Minnesota to see if, in deed, that was the fact. I spoke to Eric's wife and she told me that it -- the property had been sold. Meanwhile, Ihad -- I, myself, had been flood ~?~; ` ~~ irrigating after I came home, because it was such a mess. This was the first part of > , w August -- into July, first of August when I came home. Everything was dead. There ~~~.~; was a few shrubs that were still alive, but as far as flowers and that, no, they were dead. The only thing green in the flower beds were weeds that were up, you know this r :; , high. Like I stated, I personally went over and flood irrigating, not knowing if the ;, property was bought or what, other than kids walked by there, we had the kids from the high school and, you know, just a lot of trafFc and cars drive by, I thought atl it would z '; take is a cigarette flipped out into the yard and it would have burned up. I mean it was «y =' a` bad. So I flood irrigated. I also -- there was a hose sprinkler there I got the hose and ~` ~ , sprinkler around areas that I couldn't get to flood irrigate and every time I would go over . t ~~;~ to move the hose it was shut off, so I thought maybe kids were doing it -- I couldn't figure out what was going on, other than I couldn't get ahold of anyone to take care of F~.- ~~_ the property. I went over -- I spoke to the gentleman from the maintenance department ' ;~" Borup: You need to wrap it up. J `,~ , ~,i~ t~ ~. 'S' Cantella: Okay. From the maintenance department on the 8th -- 7th of this month they were over there doing some work. I spoke to them and I said you guys -- you know, ~~' ~~ who does -- are you the ones that does the yardwork and keep the place up and he _ goes yeah and I said, well, you know, no one has been watering or done anything -- ~ Borup: Ma'am, is the essence you're saying they didn't maintain the yard? ;, ~`~_~ ° Cantella: Yes. ., ~ ~r~~ Borup: Okay. Cantella: Let me give you these pictures real quick then. -_.~ ' ,. ~:~~~ Borup: Okay. ".~ Cantella: These are the pictures that I took less than 3 weeks ago of the property. ~~ ~~~~`~ Thank you. This is the property between the house and my house. They dug it up -- this is how it sat. Dirt was on the fence for a good couple of weeks, because they had to change out some sewer lines. Okay. We -- here is the grass. Cannalily Estates ;~ :~ maintains this property. This is their line. One is burnt, one is green. x. Borup: I think we are understanding this. ,,, ~ .~:~ ~E ~` ~~ Cantella: Okay. This is my property. They stated that the fence is 2 foot tall. That is ~ in correct. The fence that borders my house -- the back fence that butts up the other house is 6 foot. As it comes down the side, which is the back of the house that we are ~;~.~ speaking of, it is 5 foot, then it goes down to like 3 and a half or 4 foot. So this is if s ,z ~: ', s~, ~~,. s;~;. r ~_,. ~: .,- ~ .. ~~:~ ;; , ,~. ~;,~ .. ; .- ~~: Meridian Plannin and Zonin Cor~RFiission Meetin 9 9 9 November 15, 2001 Page 35 ;; ~` ~ n you're standing in their yard looking over into my yard. So I get to look at this mess or - who knows what else is going to happen. They have tore out the hedge. They stated they were going to maintain the property in the same state it was. No. The hedge was "'`' tore out. They didn't do anything about it until just the other day. :~k :: Borup: Ma'am. i..~ t: r,.{. ~'~~ Cantella: They added the -- Her h =f` Shreeve: So your biggest concern is then just landscaping, in summary, is that really -- = Cantella: Boise school -- I mean Meridian School District told us that they would maintain the property. They have not. They also told us that they would keep the E,; garage in storage, now they are stating that maybe later they'll maybe make it into °' ~' another classroom. The gentleman that purchased the property told us at the meeting `5Y with him, quote, I can buy dirt anywhere I want. So, consequently, we are upset. We Y ~'~~ don't want a school, we want a family in that house. It's a subdivision, our children, grandchildren, whatever, we live there and what they have told us that they would do in the letter that they stated to you guys they have not done. You guys are welcome to i ~ have these. I have copies. If you want to look them over. We are just upset, because " what they have told us is incorrect. They haven't told us the truth. So, therefore, we ~~~~~ don't know -- therefore, we don't know what's going to happen if the school is allowed to -~~~ go in there. Thank you. ._~ '~ ~~'f ~ Teixeira: My name is Wally Teixeira, and that's T-e-i-x-e-i-r-a. I live at 930 Northwest Ninth Avenue. And basically what everyone has been saying here tonight I agree with, except one thing. I'd like to see you folks put zoning rules aside, the laws, you know, everything that can give the okay for that school to be there and think about being :~ neighborhood friendly. I look at that house as being bought by a young couple buying ~'~ ~` their first home and raising their first child, not to have a school there. Your statement `~" earlier about how would I feel or how we feel about having honor students there, quite ~~ ~r :~~~ frankly, I don't think it should be a school at all. Honor students, juvenile delinquents, that is a home in our neighborhood and I'd like to restate the fact that when we had a meeting with the school folks that Mr. Wydell Bigham basically told us that he bought that piece of dirt. Well, to me and the rest of our neighbors, that's more than a piece of dirt. Thank you. - ,~~~ ~, ~~Y~~ ~- -' ~Si Borup: Anyone else? r, ~ :` Hickey: My name is Jan Hickey and I live 1120 West Clarinda in Meridian. I just wanted " to take just a few minutes -- I will be brief -- and just have you just visualize the situation ;;b~ with the bus because even in the documents the school district has stated they will be using Pine. Well, this classroom -- the first one starts at 8:30, so I would envision that what the district is doing is they are using -- students are eligible from all the junior highs k~~ ~ s and high schools in the district, so in the morning let's look at the 8:00 o'clock issue. _: ~ -~ ~ There would be more than one high school involved and when that bus and the end of the bus would be at the corner of Ninth Street and the problem that you're going to -- ~ ~ ,`~~ =a~:v ._ ~~°:- ,, ,;, `\ r` t - Meridian Planning and Zoning Co~iission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 36 s ~-?` `' °~ that I foresee, there is -- one of the neighbors did acount -- there is at least 50 children R, that walk to the elementary school passed there, so if you will visualize that the bus is ~~ ~` 1$` on the corner of Ninth and a high school student is turning right and those kids come flying passed where that bus is stopped, because there is zero visibility there, there is some risk there to children that are on their scooters and on foot that are headed to Meridian Elementary School. The other thing is that Mr. Bingham mentioned, you know, ~~ that they -- physically there was an advantage not having the children at the high ~f;~; school. But out of the 52 students that have been there in the last year I wondered how "` " many are Meridian High School students. I assume that the percentage would be that ;~ ~, ~ as it would be district wide, which is a much smaller percent of those students that, you know, are not going to punished by being at another facility that's close. I also would - - look at the law and, you know, they did mention that it is a -- I believe R-4 zoning and look at the fact that there is in the documents some footage requirement that is not _ ~ being met and I think solely on that point is reason to take a look at -- if we are going to ~ ~ look at the letter of the law it is allowed. The other thing that I would consider in this -- Ty ~ µ~4 ' Borup: Are you talking about the buffering footages? ~~ ~4 ' _ ~': { ~ Hickey: Right. That it does not meet the 20 feet on either side. So that, in itself, is u~ .: enough to decline. But one more thing and that is -- and I don't have this information , but I would assume when you're looking at the language on that, which is public schools allowed in R-4, that the school district itself defines alternative school differently. They ,~~ have a different category and a different definition. Now if that was intended that that y was under the umbrella of a public school, it would be interesting to look at, you know, ~ ` ; ~ how the school district does describe or use the terminology for alternative school, ~ r -.u because it does not -- s '; ,. Borup: Our use only mentions, just public schools, period. Hickey: Right. But what -- I guess my point is that if even the school district itself s ~ ~~- defines altemative school differently than they do regular public school. They have a different category. So perhaps in that that might be something to consider. k~ ~~µ~ ~ Shreeve: Excuse me. I have got a question. With the school bus, I guess it sounds ,' like that the schools are close enough that there is no bussing now within that ;r; neighborhood; is that correct? Or is there -- a~' Hickey: Okay. I'm -- are you talking about -- .,. .: ,~ ~` . Shreeve: Any kind of bussing. ,~ , s ~ DNS ~ :~. Hickey: There is several buses -- .The propose location is -- t °-:',., Shreeve: Well, I'm talking about -- I'm just talking about for the neighborhood kids for = their schooling. Is there currently -- d .~ ~~r~ };; ~- ~~ ~. ~ ~~F~^ ::j 1` ~1~:'." ' ~ ~~ r~< , '~~ x' M ."~ ,~r, ~„ , ,-w . a F^ y .K ~~' ~' ~~~ ~~_ _,~,~~:_ ~.~.~t !~ ,~ '" ~ ~ } ,s~ ~ .f ;4~~ ~ .. ~~s: ~ ~s ~ : ;~, `~ ~ ~_,~~> G~-~ ~~ .~ -a~ >~=; 'c`t ;. ^r -try =.c ,~ :- r .r ~_ i Li ::~ ~r !~ ~r a ~~ ~~ 'S: ~~ + ~~~_ i . `~ -, a ~ ~~?' ~ ' ~'~ t ~:~ ~rt .~ rte: ti h''~; E,~: 1~m~ ~, ~~~=~ _~ ~~:. ;~ >. kk~~s ~~ 4~ <~ k~ ~~5~~ . ~ s,. ,~ t a<. ~ f ~;L k - }~ 4'~ t k;~ ~ .r 3 .. r ~~ ~ ~'^ ~:s ~,, ~~ , ~' z~ , ~~ ~~. ~i ~~ L J `~ ~~ "y . 4 i ~ :i }~. Ji a~u f~'yr t z~ ,~;f:YF ~F~ m . .r`r,,i. ,. p.: ~y r w', >f :. *t ,s .~ ~t- ~». ~, ' ~ . x ~ :~ r . x i ' ~~~ ~ ? ~ ,s . aC_ +~ ten; ~, - t c ~K k ~~~ ~~°- n-~ ~~.,F, ~ 'G j.~l T ~-~ ~ ~ ~ .- ~~ \µ ~~ ,1 ~~ a YfG ~x ~R ~i ~ _ a 'Ay! ~ CT-~ "*~ ~" i >~' ii 5E ~ ~ '~ ~M 4~ a ~~ Meridian Planning and Zoning CoPPffiission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 37 Hickey: Oh, yes. In terms of just our neighborhood, yes and no. Some of the residents here are from further down toward Linder and there is bussing, I believe, that goes to the middle school Shreeve: But even in your neighborhood -- I mean there has been concern that there has been -- that the bussing would cause traffic problems. Well, if there is bussing already in that -- Hickey: Okay. I'm addressing Pine Street from a Planning and Zoning standpoint. There is a lot of traffic on Pine Street coming out of the subdivision and what happened when the bus at the proposed stop stops on Pine, then you're stopping traffic on both ways and those are -- Shreeve: So there is no bussing currently with your kids -- with your kids that stop on Pine Street with current bussing today? Hickey: I can't answer that. Shreeve: It sounds like no, Hickey: Well, I know that they walk -- Shreeve: Just maybe somebody could clarify I that for the record, but there is -- you know, if we are talking about bussing, that there is concern and if they are bussing now, - I guess I don't see that that's much -- however, if there is no bussing -- currently there is no buses and yet this may be unique -- Hickey: Well, the concern that I'm pointing out is that the buses will stop on Pine during rush hour and you have -- so what you have -- it impacts all the other subdivisions, because if a parent is taking a child from the Linder area to the middle school down Pine, they are going to be using the Eighth Street route some of the subdivision routes and it's the same issue that Mr. Centers brought out where if they are coming off the direction towards the high school, then you have a safety issue, because they are turning right on Ninth and that bus right there, there is no visibility, so the students are -- Shreeve: Well, I'm not worried about what will be, I'm just asking what is now. Hickey: Right. It will impact traffic. Borup: Okay. Thank you for those 2 minutes. Thank you, ma'am. Do we have anyone _ else? Are we done? Hanson: My name is Frank Hanson.l live at 1140 West Clarinda. Commissioner Shreeve, I believe there are a couple of bus stops. They would either be for Chapparel Elementary or kindergarten routes or special ed routes. I believe Superintendent Donelle said there is -- there is one very close to there right now, but I don't think there are many. Might be one or 2. I'm just going to defer and just -- I'm going to ask one .\ ~.} v ~~} v a1 ~ Y -J ~z~` f ~ ~ ~~ ~ + ~ ~ ,~ , i. =f . bpx9~•. .:l ~. iL kf' ~-L~'~~ i j~ ~`~ ~~~~~Ss' 6 q¢#'. w f ~'~~1 ,~ ~ ~ 1~ t ~ ,,,; 1 ~ r J = .~[~ dy :.Y 1 ~ ~, ~ ~ r ~ ~ % ~ rn if L. 7~\4 -.et . ~ , w,,t ~._, . _ ~_4:ye d ,i~, i ~ c ~ ~ =~ A y~ ti? i J ~~ .r ~.' G~~ ~~M$ w ~~, ,~ ;. y. N J,~ y k.. ~ r .ItKF _. _ e y ~ ~~~L 1jn~ ~.ca D 4 IF~.~ 1. . _ ~~fi~'",~~5 ~ ~' ?s rc r[ - ~ ~ , tai n4~•~, ,~.,` ~ ° ~s ,. .i.K f 5' t'Nf y ~ ~~, "'"~ ~ w"~ r a3 ~ 1 i aH ~ ~ ~ ~:~ ~~ ~-hY' ~ ~` ~k~l~'~ ~ '. ~~.~ i~ „~~ Nor E° d-Y%7~' ~ ^cktF~ +~ ~ i c~" 1,tor ~ ~~~~~., .~ 4-r 3"r»N ~ `i~'~vrrf -Y iFr ~' ~.°.y' L -, i ~ tM t ~A t ~ r i ~.~r`°.'ky.c .~;, ~t c f^~r~+!ii~^ i ~~ ~. ~ ' ~~i~h~ 'd'am . '°Y c ~ i`h:;' 4 t t '~r .' e y. ` fQ z ti,,y 1F ~~ ,:>.. l ~ ~s ° ~> ~ ~ , .yY~'ry': r5 M 1 ,~ r ~ ~ ~'~. a ~°"q ~~` a --t o- ~ ~ t. t ~ iii.. dq~f Y:%'7 .L'~,1r P^~ :2.F s~.{~k~Crl 4 1f~K <yrt n~`f ~ , _~ Y~"i~ ?q~ t,'.,C ~~e•'~ '~7~.~~ o y*k~'s: "h `"~'7a1"..' Z J.'r -.~; ~. :. ~ ~ ~~1 ~~~k .. ,><<i~+ t~ ~ ~ .. 5~11~T7. _T 5 ~ FL 4~ tr~~ 3 t "~`h xx . _. ~.~` ''~~rz'' ~:y u~~. L .~ . Meridian Planning and Zoning Coission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 38 ~,; ,,. ~~s .; ~; ,,y. Y j ~~$'~ k y'Y -';;r, ,; ;r, ;: y ~~ ~L~~ ~j ~.. ~.~. F::~~': i~ , quick question. Are you considering at all the changing character of the neighbor? Is that a -- is that a consideration at all? If it's not, then I can stop. Borup: That was one of the main things that the staff mentioned in their report. Hanson: I have worked with alternative at-risk and special ed students for about 15 years and I would say that definitely this school could change the neighbor, could definitely impact especially the adjacent property owners. You know, the Meridian school District is a great school district. I mean they are great public servants, but I don't believe they can guarantee the safety. Some of these students can be -- to pose safety risks. I can just think of 2 in the past that I have worked with who would qualify for this type of program who are STB or brain injury students who were both violent, who both possessed the capacity to run away at any given time and I don't believe there is going to be any on-site school security at this facility. I believe it's just going to be a teacher and an aide. They might possibly wind up with students like this. Both of the students I'm thinking of from the past had parents or group home advocates that really pushed for educational services. They would not allow their students to be suspended without fighting and that's a good thing, they required that students, you know, were given educational services. But some students might pose safety issues. Runaways -- students with a propensity to run away, combined with violent or previous sexual offender status and the 2 students I'm thinking from the past are -- fit the whole umbrella. I'll stop there. It's late. You may have questions. Borup: Any questions for Mr. Hanson? Thank you, sir. Did we have anyone else? Come on up, ma'am. Meyers: Thank you. I'll be brief. My name is Mary Ellen Meyers and I live at 958 Northwest Ninth Street. I'm the second house in on the right as you enter from Pine Street on Ninth. I wear 2 quick hats. I am the secretary of the neighborhood association for Cannalily Estates. We were talking to the impact that we have the neighborhood and can just give you the general demographics of our neighborhood. There are 12 homes in the Cannalily Estates and we are responsible, as was mentioned previous, for the common area, the cleanup and the maintenance. Of those 12 homes, 5 of those homes -- we have one widow in one of the homes and of the 5 we have a widow, we have a retired couple, and the remainder of those 5 are couples who have purchased or built their homes there whose children are grown and gone. We have 2 families who have high school students that within the next couple of years will have their children grown and gone. So we are talking 7 out of the 12. We have one family that has grade school and middle school children and we are talking about 2 children in that family. And we have 3 families that have infants and preschoolers and we are talking about a total at this point of 7 children in that category. Without a doubt, 100 percent of the neighbors in the Cannalily have their own concerns. Most of them have been mentioned this evening, but Iwanted -- I guess I needed to let you know that Cantelilly Estates is not a group of 12 big families, we are across-section of Meridian and very proud of the health of our neighborhood. I put my -- take my Cannalily homeowners -- or my -- that hat off and put on homeowners hat and I have heard a lot of talk tonight about the zoning. That was a very important message for us, too. We were aware that '~~,~~ ~ Meridian Planning and Zoning Co ission Meetin 9 November 15, 2001 ~'.~:; Page 39 ~ `~~ we were purchasing land in an R-4. We were not aware of the freedom that that " ~~ allowed that school district in that. When we purchased our property and built our home - R-4 let us have a little extra room for a shop in the back. It also allowed -- we knew the `; ~ ~~~ high school was there and we certainly knew the middle school was there and we knew - that there would be issues with kids going -- walking to school and associates with whatever happened as the come through. We off on that. We thought that R-4 zoning :~ - protected us. We knew the lots were full, we knew they all had homes on them, and we ?~ '-' felt comfortable with our home. To the letter of law, you know, the school district can ;~ t ~~,~~~ probably -- which was a surprise to us -- that they can buy dirt where ever they wanted to and they can use it for whatever purpose they have. We are retired, we are that one retired family, and I'm just here to tell you we would hope that you would reconsider just ,<<: the impact on the neighborhood. We thought the R-4 zone was a protection and we are surprised that it's not. Thank you. z,t` ~~, ,~ £,; Borup: Thank you. Do we have anyone else? Okay. Does the applicant have any final comments they'd like to make? ~~° a`.' t ° ~' Anderson: My name is Stillman Anderson. Address is 1735 Federal Way, Boise, Idaho, ~ = In response to some of the comments that were -- have been made by the public, first of ` ti'_ ; all, entering the driveway there is no need to go to the cul-de-sac and tum. There is plenty of room between the end of that island and the existing driveway to get in without f , ~~. ` having to go all the way down to the cul-de-sac. So there is no need to go into that ~' ~ ~ subdivision any further than the driveway. As far as the condition of the property, you } ~ w were told that those pictures were old. I'm the one that took the pictures. We submitted ; ~ ~~ for this conditional use on September 14~" of this year. Those pictures were taken 3 days before we submitted. As far as the water main or the sewer line as it was ~ --~ ;~ indicated, it was water main and it broke, and so the school district repaired it. It went in ~ - ~ a'' under the shrubbery and at the end of hedge. Yes, that was taken out. The rose bushes t have been placed there and a new fence. To replace that hedge you wouldn't have ta - N ~~ known a difference an yway. You can't replace that size of a hedge with the same size. I r ~ But the hedge -- it was indicated that the hedge was torn out. Not all the hedge, just `~{ ~ ~.$, approximately 4 to 5 feet in order to get that water main in. As far as bus stopping, yes, the bus will stop there. As Mr. Bingham said, the bus will pull over to the curb, turn on its yellow lights. Yellow lights do not require traffic to stop. Only when the red arm is "`~ put out does traffic stop. If the situation warrants it, because of conditions, the school district will opt to put the red arm out and stop traffic. But at this point that's not the way h its going to work. As far as parking on Pine Street, there is parking on both sides the 3 ` ``+ - full length of Pine Street, along with abus -- or a bike lane on both sides. As far as `''" students taking off without being noticed, as it was pointed out, when you have got a ~s'~; °. very few number, it's a little hard to disappear without being noticed. You were informed - that the lady came back from vacation, found out that the house had been sold, couldn't ~~ tell who owned it. We had a neighborhood association -- or a neighborhood meeting on September 25~' at Meridian Middle School. The lady was present. She informed us that on June 24~' of this year papers were signed on the house. She knew who owned the ~_ _' house. The school district never received any complaints. Yes, the fence does change ~ k hei hts and if ou a ' g y pprove this I m sure that the school district will go in and make sure that it has a 6 foot fence as far as possible, so that they are satisfied and that there will ~~;~~ ~:_ ~:.. ; ,; ~~:~ . .: _ . ,. ; ~- ;. , - _ , f,~. . _, ~:~.. AA J4~'.r;,~ ~~~= <<t_ ~.9; ..: ,rl~_ 4 ::~_ ~~~ . ll h~ ._ b~N H'~ ~~~.~ ~;, ~~;, } ~~ ;- ~f Meridian Planning and Zoning Cor~i151ission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 40 be no -- we will not put a fence in that will block sight lines for trafFc. That hedge was existing before. Mr. Bingham does have a couple of comments that he would like to make also. Thank you. Nary: Can I ask a question, Mr. Chairman? Mr. Anderson, maybe I missed it in all the testimony, but on condition number 9, the site specific, I heard you ask that we reconsider the 20 foot buffer, because that wasn't possible. Anderson: Correct. Nary: But I haven't heard an alternative and maybe I missed it. So what's your alternative to the requirement of the 20 foot buffer? Anderson: One of the requirements in the landscape zoning is a fence. A fence does exist. We will make -- the school district would make sure that it is a 6 foot, the height required. As far as landscaping goes, that is something that Mr. Bingham will have to speak to you about. Nary: So the answer to my question would be nothing. There is no alternative compliance for the 20 foot buffer requirement, other than the existing fence that's already there. Anderson: At this point, yes. Nary: Okay. Thank you. Bingham: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, I'll try to be brief. The issues regarding upkeep and the district custodial responsibility for landscape. Simple fact, we do not do as good a job in maintaining lawns as the city parks or residents. We have 3.4 employees to maintain 580 acres of lawns and trees. They work day and night. Our plan for this house was to put an underground system in. Staffs position is to put an underground sprinkler system in. We totally concur. The irrigation water is unreliable and it requires ongoing maintenance to make sure that it's turned off and on. Won't guarantee it, but my recommendation is that we hire a lawn service to maintain this, because our time is better spent maintaining schools. However, at the end of the day we would simply ask that the requirements for maintenance, should they be a consideration by Planning and Zoning, be no more stringent than those requirements to be placed on a residence at that location in terms of caretaker or ownership of the property. We are willing meet the bar that everybody else meets and we want to be a good neighbor, we think we can maintain this house and we are willing to spend the money to do it and I think, you know, we will pull that off if we can get on water. Why have we done nothing since we bought the house? We thought we were eligible for a certificate of zoning compliance. When that went south on us we saw no reason to proceed with the sprinkler system, because we couldn't guarantee where the sidewalks were going and the handicapped ramps, so we put the whole thing on hold. If we get notification that we can go forward with this, we are going to get in there as soon as we can this spring and get this facility operational. Our goal, if we did get your approval, is r~~ ~~ ~,~: ~~ ~,~:.. ~: _, {~ c ^:~ n 1~~:', »," ~+ ~;:; ; 4 ~. za ~ .y ,, ;_ y`,4t W ~;3 `:y- ~, ~ ~ , {:`. ~, ~ ~ ; ~ ~~; ~~ ~ ~ <~ f~ ~~; ,;, ;, ~, .,.~;-.t ~~ ~~ -;~: ti: ± Y y~. 1 ~ tiY '~ ~ ~ ., .-~ v :-;:z;r' ~' ~2i , ~, ;.ry ::~R=~ ' °,x ; ~~~ ~~> Meridian Planning and Zoning Cor3ffsiission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 41 to bring facility on line immediately. The education needs of the kids are not being met by servicing them at home. One comment -- and it's just -- I'll put it in the petty category -- . I did refer to the property as dirt after 3 hours of listening to similar testimony by myself. That question was simply in response to a really valid question, why didn't we ask the neighborhood before we bought the property. The answer is I'm really not aware of that precedent as a requirement. I am unwilling to set that precedent that school district must go begging to locate schools to meet the needs of the children of our community. It's not a requirement, not going to do it. And based upon that my comment was I can buy dirt in any area where we are a permitted use with the confidence that the City will back that decision for a public school. That's where the comment came from. The neighbor is not dirt, it's a very nice neighborhood. They should be proud of that. The Last thing on the students. We keep -- I see an undertone that the students are bad. They are -- Wednesday they are at the school down the street, they are okay, Wednesday they get kicked out of school, they show up at this school Thursday, because they are expelled from the school -- they didn't come from Mars. They came from the school down the street around the corner. They are in our community. Once these kids arrive at this facility they do instantly become bad. We have these same concerns that the neighbor has with the traveling public or the walking public and the safety of all of our children. We do not believe a bus stopping and quickly unloading up to a maximum of eight students at any one time is not a traffic congestion and we are very aware of the safety concerns of all of the children in our district, whether they are at an alternative school, a school for choice as alternatives, like the charter high school, or the alternative middle schools that offer choice, or our traditional schools. So I want you to know we care about these kids and our goal is maintain our responsibility to meet the educational needs of students. Any questions? Borup: Any questions for Mr. Bingham? Nary: Mr. Chairman. Borup: Commissioner Nary. Nary: Mr. Bingham, I'm assuming the Boise School District has to follow the same federal guidelines as the Meridian School District does; correct? Anderson: Mr. Chairman -- Commissioner Nary, yes, they do. Nary: So what do they do? How do they house this program in the Boise School District? Bingham: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners. Boise School District houses the program I believe -- my information is only as good as my last employment date with them, which was a little over year ago -- is that their Darrell A. Dennis Center on Victory Road, called the Cooperative Alternative Learning Center, and it is a facility that addresses the needs of this type of a student on a campus that has the vocational programs for the district and it also contains classrooms that meet the needs of children that may come to the ~~, Meridian Planning and Zoning Cor~Tnission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 42 Boise School District from such facilities like Intermountain Health Care and stuff. So they operate that facility on school district property. Nary: This type of program has -- are there further disciplinary problems with these students in the program itself? Bingham: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Nary. I'll try to speak for Bonnie and if I'm incorrect, Bonnie, please, correct me. As I understand it, there has been no revisitation by any student that has gone through one term in that -- a few weeks, a semester, or, you know, a semester and a half. But I believe the revisitation rate is zero. Borup: Any other questions? Thank you, Mr. Bigham. Bingham: Thank you. Borup: Commissioners? Where would we like to go? Cantella: I have a question. Borup: Can you do it quicker than your previous testimony? Cantella: I have a deed here that was signed on June 5~' from and Jane her husband Bill when the school district purchased the property. I did not realize this when I came back, tried to run down who owned the property, whatever. The first place I came was City Hall here. They said nothing was on the books for Planning and Zoning. I told them that I had heard a rumor that the property was purchased, probably a school would be going in, and I think I went to the clerk's office or something, I'm not familiar with the office, but I went down to the end of the hall and spoke to the lady. She called Planning and Zoning and said nothing was on the books. So we continued to try to run down paperwork. That is how we figured out the school district had purchased the property as of June 5th . Nothing was taken care of. I talked to the maintenance man that was over there the other day. He said that he had tried to irrigate, but he wasn't really sure how to do that. The water wasn't on then. Borup: I think we are repeating ourselves here. Cantella: Anyhow, he said the water wasn't always in. In that canal the water is always, always in that canal. Constant water flows. Unless he had waited and tried to irrigate after they had shut it off earlier, then there was no water. Borup: Thank you. Did staff have any final comments: No? Hawkins-Clark: Chairman Borup, I guess not. Borup: Okay. Thank you. Commissioners? Nary: Mr. Chairman, I move to close the Public Hearing. -. Meridian Planning and Zoning Com'i"nission Meeting e November 15, 2001 Page 43 Norton: I second. Borup: Motion and second to close the Public Hearing. All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE EXCUSED. Borup: Is somebody ready for a motion or would we like discussion first? Nary: All right. I'll do it. Mr. Chairman, I'm looking at our conditional use ordinances in Meridian City Code 11-17-3 and that's what appears to me governs this circumstance in this application and the first one I come to --and it's something that staff had pointed out in the staff report that is somewhat of a quandary and I think Mr. Bingham also mentioned it to some degree. The first one says that the application and the use at the propose location will, in fact, constitute a conditional use as determined by city policy. I note in the staff report we talked about a couple times there is a little bit of a quandary as to whether or not a conditional use is actually required for this and I think Mr. Bingham mentioned it as well. At least the way I read this code, it says that a public school is allowed or permitted in R-4 zone. So when I look up school, it says it's an institution of learning under our city ordinance definitions 11-2-2. An institution of learning, either public or private, is supported, which offers instruction in several branches of learning and study requiring to be taught in public schools by the state of Idaho. When you look up institution, institution says it's a building and land designed to aid individuals in the need of mental, therapeutic, rehabilitative counseling and other correctional services. This isn't a school, it's a program, and it's an admirable program, but it's a program. It's not a school. So, therefore, I think a conditional use is required, because I don't think it fits the zoning table without a conditional use. So that may sound like a lot of semantic mumbo jumbo to everybody, but it really does matter. Trust me. I think it applies -- I think a conditional use is warned. I think the staff maybe didn't hit on it in their report, but I think they are right, because I don't think this is a school, I think it's simply a program, and we have lots and lots of programs, but just because the school district runs it doesn't make it a school. It is harmonious to have a variety of uses in neighborhood and so it probably at least is arguable either way, that it could be 'harmonious, of course, with the comprehensive plan. So I don't know that that's a big problem. But I get to C that says under our ordinance will be designed, constructed, operated, and maintained to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not change the essential character of the same area. Normally people ask for this before they do it and I understand why the school district chose the path they took and I understand why they thought they could do what they did, but I don't know find it genuine when they say they want to be good neighborhoods. They should have been better neighborhoods. Shame on them for not maintaining this property when they should have, because that tells me I have a little concern that they are going to maintain the existing character of that neighborhood. So I have a concern, because their evidence isn't very good on their behalf to say we can do this. They got -- they don't -- they don't have the evidence before us to show that they can. Secondarily, when you drive down Pine, other than a preexisting use, a grandfathered in use of Tolsma Welding, most of those uses are :~~;;, ~~: Meridian Planning and Zoning Corri~iission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 44 ~- houses. There is some apartments and there is some houses. It's not businesses along there of any kind and there isn't offices along there either, except down where there is, again, some grandfathered in uses. This is a new use. There aren't new uses down that street that I'm aware that aren't already preexisting, so it would change the character of this area to have anon-residence being allowed to be there. That is a concern to me and that's not -- that's a reason to deny it under this code. The other thing, to back up, the school district, Mr. Bingham's testimony was he agreed that a conditional use was appropriate for this anyway, so I think under A they are still on the right track. Under D it says will not be hazardous to the service of the existing or future neighboring uses and that's a very tough standard to deal with, because we really don't know. Most of the time that language -- courts are evaluating that for manufacturing and those types of things when you talk about hazards. You're not talking -- I don't know about hazards, but disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses, I think that sort of dovetails with C as to changing the character of the neighborhood. This is a neighborhood full of houses and although schools can -- can ask to be put there, I -- you know, in this situation where they require a conditional use, that's what we have to evaluate. Will it change the character. I think it does. The other one, the staff has indicated it probably isn't a problem. It doesn't probably meet those, but any one of the ones that exist --and there is 2-- that we can't find evidence to support it, are enough to deny it. The other thing that concerns me a little bit, even if we were to grant it, the school district has asked for other considerations in addition. They don't want to have a condition that doesn't allow pick-ups and drop-offs and things like that, yet they want to bus these kids here. I .guess in my mind you can't have it both ways. The other one is the buffer. They offer nothing. It's a fence. That's fine, but this is not a house, this is a program run by the school district that they want to have run like an office. They need to have a buffer. There isn't a way to do it. So even if we were to grant it, I don't think they could do it, because I don't see any reason to grant a waiver of the 20 foot buffer requirement. And I don't think they can maintain it any other way anyway. That's my 2 cents. I mean I will wait to make a motion, but I just don't think that there is evidence -- I think there is evidence against two of the provisions of the requirement of the ordinance and I can't support this school because of that. Shreeve: Mr. Chairman. Borup: Commissioner Shreeve. Shreeve: Simply put, I absolutely agree and -- with the overwhelming petition and response here. I think our obligation is to listen to the public as well. So I concur with Commissioner Nary's comments. Norton: Mr. Chairman. Borup: Commissioner Norton. Norton: I would third that, that these fine people have taken right now about 2 and a half .hours out of their -- out their evening to talk with us and this is, obviously, not the first meeting they have attended. They have attended various neighborhood meetings and it ~. .. ~• ~mJ .>~' ~ ~ w~: ~; -ti: T:~~ ~ ~ , ~; ,. r:: ~ ~ ' ~ , { rri ~.~~ ~~ . ~~ ~° i, ,: ~~~ ;~~~ ,;, ,~~` Meridian Planning and Zoning Cossion Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 45 sounds like maybe a school board meeting or 2. In addition, we have had testimony from a gentleman who has had 15 years experience with these types of students and has agreed that perhaps this school district cannot guarantee safety. I believe 17 -- or 11-17-3, No. D, I would agree that this is not harmonious with the existing neighborhood. So you want to make your motion? Nary: Well -- and I will add one last comment before I do. I think the school district recognized this at the beginning as well. Their first choice was a commercial zone. That's where they thought this belonged. That was their best choice. The only reason they are here is because they didn't think they would have to be here. But they recognize that the compatibility with the neighborhood was suspect and they recognize that their best location for this type of program is in a commercial zone. So they recognized it themself. This wasn't what they intended, they merely wanted to be here because they had some belief that maybe this wouldn't be necessary and maybe we will be here again or maybe we will be in court over this, but I think they even recognize it themself, that this wasn't necessarily a compatible use in the neighborhood, because of the character that gets impacted by this type of program. That all being said, (would -- Mr. Chairman, I would move that we recommend denial of the CUP 01-034, request Conditional Use Permit for an alternative school for the middle school and high school age students in an R-4 zone for joint School District No. 2 by Joint School District No. 2 at 930 West Pine Street. Borup: Would you like to state a couple of the reasons? Nary: Yes. I guess the reasons, as I stated, is that this -- under this Meridian city ordinance that -- I guess to make it clear under the staff report that's dated October 26, 2001, that this program would require a Conditional Use Permit by our city code and that in evaluating the requirements under the City Code for Conditional Use Permit that there is evidence that this program and the use of this residence for this program would change the essential character of the neighborhood existing under 7-17-3, C, and also would be -- maybe not hazardous, but at least disturbing the existing -- or future neighboring uses, basically incompatible with the neighborhood as it is currently situated. So basically under C and D this has not met those requirements and that would be the reason for the recommended denial. Borup: How about the buffering? Nary: Well, that, too, as well. That there could not be adequate buffering to meet the requirements of the ordinance creating buffers between lands uses. There is no real reasonable way to create a 20 foot buffer between this residence and the surrounding residences as required by the code as well and no alternative compliance has been suggested by the school district to meet that need. Borup: Okay. Second? Shreeve: Second. .^. ~h~~ ;,.~ ~. =~; >: r:~,, ;. ':` ,~. ~~ >=. ~.1, n; ~~; is r :;, Meridian Planning and Zoning Cor~iission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 46 Borup: Motion and second. Any discussion? All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. ONE EXCUSED. Borup: Thank you. Commissioners, I think I'd be open for a motion for a short recess. Nary: I'd move for 5 minutes. Borup: Okay. Thank you. RECONVENED AT 9:22 P.M. (Commissioner Centers returned.) Item 7. Public Hearing: AZ 01-017 Request for annexation and zoning of .193 acres from RUT to R-4 zones for Packard Acres No. 1 by Packard Estates Developers, LLC - east of North Wingate Lane and south of East Ustick Road: Borup: Okay. Let's go ahead. Apologize for the confusion. We had a staff report on one of the applications that we didn't get, so what we'd like to do is go to -- we are going to go to Item No. 7. I'd like to open the Public Hearing on AZ 01-017, request for annexation and zoning of .193 acres from RUT to R-4 zone for Packards Acres No. 1 by Packard Estates Developers. We'd like to open the Public Hearing and start with a brief staff report. Hawkins-Clark: Thank you, Chairman Borup. On the screen is the sliver of subject property. This is the Packard Acres Subdivision and, again, in general, we have Fairview Avenue on the southern part of the screen. It's more or less in between Eagle Road and Locust Grove Road on the north side of Fairview. You should have received our staff report dated October 24th from Bruce and Dave outlining a little bit of the background. Essentially this is a clean-up application. This sliver of property, which is 13 and a half feet wide on the north side of Packard Acres, was accidentally left out of the legal description for the original annexation for Packard Acres Subdivision. So the reason for this application now is to annex it into the city limits, to clean up the plat, and to have these lots be the size that they are on the plat that is already recorded. I think our conditions, we just ask that they be incorporated. I think one note that staff understands that the applicant has appealed to the City Council the decision to hold building permits on these properties that are affected. At this point these parcels, because of the error, building permits are being withheld and they have submitted an application to our department that essentially is appealing that decision of the building official and the Planning and Zoning administrator. That is -- I don't know the date. Will, if you have that, it should be within the next 3 weeks, I believe. 2 to 3 weeks. Should be on the City Council agenda. At any rate, that's the background on it. s~- ~t :_ Meridian Planning and Zoning Cor~Rission Meeting <''~.`<..;' November 15, 2001 '; > :H. Page 47 - Borup: Okay. Thank you. Is the applicant here? Would you like to come forward. ' ~` j''`' guess I'd just say that -- have you had an opportunity -- oh, well, go ahead, sir. State your name. ~~ ~J } ~~;~,~~ Tealey: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, my name is Pat Tealey. I'm -~1' ~ representing the developer Packard Estates, LLC. Mr. Rose is here to answer any .F;% questions. ~.:~ Borup: Staff is -- have you had a chance to review staff comments any -- ~.' Tealey: Yes. Borup: Staff recommend approval? U~}I ~-° `` -l Tealey: Yes. ~~~ ~ ~.v Borup: Have you got any comments on the staff comments? ~, ~,, y~ Tealey: No, I don't. I'm sure you don't want to know the history of it, so maybe -- Borup: No. As mentioned, it was just basically a clean up. .._;, 1-~ Tealey: Yes. .f ~k~: .~~~ Borup: Questions from any of the Commissioners? Do we have anyone here in the audience who would like comment? Please come forward, ma'am. ti H. Sharp: I'm Helen Sharp. I live at 2445 Wingate Lane. I liked his expression clean up for this piece of property that's being discussed here. When this subdivision started, which is just west of our property, it was brought up at the meeting that there was a strip of land that needed to be addressed. Of course, it was not. To say it's an honest .~ `# mistake, there are prisoners are saying the same thing. They knew it. They knew it. ~~,{~ You and I when we buy a piece of property get a legal description of that. If engineers ,,~; and surveyors are hired to measure your property, then they should know that this is '~ ~ ~` ~' where it starts and this is where it ends and they started with the fencing. Everything went through, Planning and Zoning, city commissioners, staff, it went through, they =` started the fencing, and then Mr. and Mrs. Peterson who owned this land said, hey, that's mine. I have a property description that says that 13 feet is mine. Okay. So then deliberations started, because he had already sold these lots and he says that the ~~ building permits were held up. There are 4 lots that are involved in this 13 feet. They ''` k' bought land that the developers did not own at the time. A quitclaim deed was signed ~ a ~~ ~ ~~~~ ~ ~ ~ July of this year and all of this was done prior to that. That can be checked by the ~ ` ~ " records, as it could have been checked before as to where property lines were and this 13 feet was brought up, but it wasn't. I was told by staff that 2 building permits were ' ' " '~ granted with a waiver by the people that they would not be able to claim that 13 feet ~, ; ; until after this meeting for the rezoning and annexation and they agreed. 2 lots they are building and two they are not. I am really curious when they said the reason they -, }si '=sr_ ~....m.. 4"3` , ,. k~'#, , ~,~~~ .. - ~`~f,=,~ ?; ~. 4 •.. 4 F:2F'._. ~k`b-::: ~G, ~`-~- =;>, ~~,~ a ~::~ ~, ~;,. ~. ~m~ ;~' '~:..., 4"~ 1 4 11 r { t a Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 48 granted these two building permits was that there was a financial obligation. Why and what financial obligation was there at that time. In any event, 13 -- Borup: Ma'am, are you objecting to the annexation then? H. Sharp: I'm just wanting you to know what's happening and I think that this needs to be on public record. They granted an easement to Ada County Highway for the pond that's on this 13 feet when they didn't even own the land. I have a letter, after talking to Mr. Newhouse, who is the attorney for Ada County Highway, that says he was assured that they owned that land and that was prior to the quitclaim deed that was signed in July of this year. So they have an easement that was granted when didn't own the land and I talked to --. One of the engineers for Ada county said you cannot grant the easement if you don't own the land and anybody that goes up there can see that's where the pond is, that's where their driveway is, and they have to maintain it and I think that once they found out -- and I say they, I say the staff found out that the measurements were wrong, they should have been required to go back and make it right. But here we go again with 1,400 wrongs and we are finally going to make it right. Now Mr. and Mrs. Peterson don't have 5 acres. They were gracious enough to sign and sell this 13 feet, but they were given a waiver by Ada county to build a certain barn that they wanted and had to have 5 feet, 5 acres to do it. When someone down the lane wanted to put a 3 car garage in and couldn't because Ada county said because of the size and all and you don't own 5 acres, you can't build your garage. So we are again with all the rights and we are trying to make them wrong. And then -- Borup: Well, ma'am, yes, and your time is up. Is there something else you feel we should be doing, then, beside annexing this? H. Sharp: Oh, yes. Yes. One other thing. This isn't particularly pertaining to this, but -- Borup: But that's all this meeting is about, pertaining to this. H. Sharp: Well, I can't have a rebuttal? But the -- Borup: Ma'am. H. Sharp: The applicant got a rebuttal and -- Borup: Ma'am, why are you saying that? H. Sharp: When I went to -- when we went to -- and, of course, it wasn't Planning and Zoning, we went to the commissioner's meeting, we couldn't have a rebuttal, the applicant got a rebuttal. Borup: Yes. H. Sharp: If you will talk to Mr. Fred Burns you will find out he isn't complying with the request to -- ~- Sw ~ e .Y f 0S ''' F R 3 ~r 1 r .J-z , .. .~v: ' r. } P 1 ]1~ ~'' S fj ~ ~ yt ?"x~i~l..fy { ~~ 1~ ~~ ~9ti~ n ~f ~ ~. ~,~. -. 1 t s Jr~ '., to F~ ~k n~.~ Ott P"4tS~M k ~:4p 2" .Tsif 1 ,....~ y.. _ .. i.~... . 4~ rZ ~. -.>: > ~'R~ 't t ~jr~, "t san7~' { 4~`c~lR~ S s .,.~ _ .. ,t;... -v~ ~ .:J~t ~: T. Fur 1?'f-~i hrs. Y ~~' t ~.~5-A'1C ~~{~ r ~'., f ,~. An.~ ~ '; .4t ~ .~ ~.'x, ,~d:r ., c.-.. 5 r'ec;n. 1 ~ , t ~~ t~7'f i ~. yy~ ,~~~ ,r - f _i. .~.I 'I 4. ~5 ~ 1 VrF h~ S Y,n 1 _ .. ~ Y •.• ., ~ .. -' ~^~~ ~. 1'. ~ ~ ,, et ... cif. yfi,9~ ~: ~' " _ r ~ <=<, zt ~s : ~- a,;~4 i y tit: y ... > x ;"r n q r ~~p~ K .. '. T"' ~' 1 ~Mr ~ M.y ry _. t ;, ~lr,~er ,~;axa t ~"..~ t _ ~ , r• a „~~.,ti: ~„~~,~3tr .~ ~ gd 9 w ~ ;'~k~c~ -' , " ^'x ~, rh~~„ ~ ~~u ~ ~g' ~+~ ~r ~~',r~~E ~f""~ {i~,7r, ~ r3,ai't c • . ~v/, ~ct...i h+ ?y+'~~,' ~ ~'~ <~, ~- ¢ ~ J~tG`.~. G ,pt 3. +°Lr~r 2 i ~ f F _ > ; _ .~ _~' b s . rir'H i"5 1 C Y rod; ,~ .~~fi ,~~ rN~ 23''2`, ~ i.L~ ;5 ~ _ j Y ~ k ` ~ t'?~{~~ .r;7"Jr'y~'t~~? `~T~` ~~-~iti-t1+Frr~; ~ ~'vFt , k '~ `~'~r~ ~ ~~ ;~ ~~ ~ '#a~t`;1 s x~: _ , ~4f ~ c ~,~ ~ ~° >t~ 3 ~ ~ ~ j~o i z ~`'~°FY~.su`k'r '~~`~#` E~ r~£f~t~ o- Y~ u _ w,,. ~~ .. ~ a ~ ' x' .~s ~'~. ~~ a ~ r' .t { r ~~ -'± sr ~' '~ ~` ~y d ~ , ~~, i? X z is ~r „~,. -~ r - ~, u °~` t~q j MS ~~ t ! ~` ~ ~~ s> ,~ ~ ~~ ~''~' I ~. f L~ ~ t r: d Y,1~ ~~ ~ . , .~ ~ > . {' -~, ~ ~ . ~._ - ~ z ; ~f. r' ~ sk x y F , r~~~._~' ._~t~r 4~ ~ , k,~rr~', EF r N . ~ ~, .. ~; ,. ~,, . :; " F:~= W. t S ~ ~ ~t n .~' d+z,~ t {- ~} ~ L r Y t, f y.: ,:'y' :~ ,: x~ ~.,. ~ ¢~, :a ~_ - ;. ~~.; ;, ,~ ~ { ~~ ,~ ~k Y ~_~ . .~ ;~ , a ~ ~-. ~ S ~ yafk ~;1~q b ~. ~~ -~~,-. .y~ . ~:~ . ',i ~ ~. a ~ ~1M ~~ ~N~ r Y p s ~ ~' - ~~Kf ,_ ;Y'. ~_ k; ti' Y~ ~ ~t~ !~j. ~ fah ,;,: - 'z :~yfi~ ti P" ~ F 4 ~ ~ _ ,y ~, .~- tti ~~ ,~ ,~: r Y~ - fi ~ p~a Ems,, ~€, F' ,44 i ~ ~: ,. ,+~ ; -~~; ~ ,~, ~~,.;t, ~, .:z,u ~' ^,,Y x rd 4u- =-t a ,ytti ..+,4i "~. .v; r x~ #r. ~ _ ~'. ~ ,:`; ~ ~ ~ J >'~ ~', ; d A~ 5s ,y a ~ ~ ~ - y~ ~~, r9r T~ }~ ;Z r - ~,~+~ f ~ ~ t 1 ~ ~! '~ ~ 4r h r T / V ~`'~ '~ y r r r•. 4i -. ;7 Meridian Planning and Zoning Co711rnission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 49 Borup: Is there something else that you would like us to do this evening besides annex this? H. Sharp: Yes. I'd like to see that the developer have to comply with the requirements for getting a subdivision. He was told these are certain guidelines and that's your job is to get on these guidelines and the City of Meridian, they have guidelines and they are not complying with them and Mr. Fred Burns, who is the ordinance officer for the Meridian Police Department, went out there to see the condition of the lake, which was supposed to have been fixed, but is not. We had a meeting with the developers in July of this year and October and they haven't complied with that and we have no way to go or anyplace to talk unless we have got these Public Hearings to let people know. I want it on record the developers do not have to comply with what they are required to do. Borup: Yes, ma'am. You could also do that in writing and that would be on the record H. Sharp: We tried. Like I say, it isn't that they don't hear us. Borup: Thank you. Commission Norton. Norton: Mr. Chairman, I have a question for Mrs. Sharp. Borup: Yes. Norton: I'm a little confused. Do you own the property where the red arrow is? H. Sharp: No. I'm -- no. I'm down at the end of Wingate Lane. But we are involved with the whole subdivision there. We are at the very end of Wingate Lane. Norton: Okay. I just have a question. So do these people own the 13 feet or they just put a fence up and say they own it? H. Sharp: They put the fence up before they owned it, yes. They included the 13 feet in their subdivision and when they started fencing it the owner said, hey, you got to stop. That 13 feet isn't yours, it's ours. Then they sold it to them with a quitclaim deed that was in July of this year long after everything was done. Norton: I see. So now they own it; is that right? H. Sharp: They do now, yes. Norton: Okay. H. Sharp: But they was trying to put in the cart before the horse. Norton: Okay. Now just basically what is your complaint? ~ , ~ pl~.., w ; t~ y J! 3 f M•. V - ~ ,ur .tr a~ ~". .,,i~. ~ ~~ -f ~"~~F1~tiS ° °~~ - ~. , ~. ~.. ~,; ~ a- ~ ~: "C'.~y ? r~ >.d, c w, ~ Y~~' fi s. 3 a K k'Y w S iT ~i~~.d r ....lf, . <~. .'~~"e, ~ ;~ .t ~',Y.~~~'"~~~~y~~.Yk i l~"~I S ~ • u~ y~~""~`r, ~° tax yam) -V ~,~, tf~ ~ ~ ,~ ~~<, ~t+' - ens sr~~ .rte-~. +C.-., ~ -;y. ry ~ - sod;' f ! w 'EE 4i t h:l r / r3 .: 2 .L, r a ity~z ~' e ~ ~ f ~ "ty~ „->a-adc q}w ~tM ~~ nR t~n4~{ rt~ '~J~~ Z` a: +"k a- ' ~i . i"r. -5J i .,irY .nf'.: s f r ~'~ .+k!5q Q u ax r ~`~ ~r.F ,: ~ 4 va~ d, ~ ~: ~7 ktYJ >< ~r'i~"~ yt<~fYp, ±~{ ~!"~'~~'t'~ a ~"*% `~~4 ~; +' ~ .:~'~i~~'su,~ ~ v e"~ r~N~~ y~ 1, ', t r rs ~ .u~l. ins s- ^ ~4 i ~f.,,~`~~~ia,~~~* i ~ ,r' ~ k ~f .R ; i ,d ~ r i~wx ~ ~ -^!I~ h rq ~4~ S~~F ~~M~ _d•di~4L~f ~R ~r' is~l'~ xY 4 _. -. s.') ~ fa ,.y P, 4 +.1~i 4 y.L ~{ ~' ~?~'`~ °r't~ sur ).~''^ r~'u~i ~~~L su t.-~ e >. ~.. ~ -. ~~~. ~~~.~,.~.1 r'F'~'s°r ~2t~t~ 3~t "='S"~.t-,i` ~ }k~f ~~+> ~~ ~ ~ h ~i ~ _ '~Ifiw ~ ;~'~~If~-~`Y• .,',[~j .+1si''~...~'4 .rJ1t.~ 3 ~ ; _. t a ,~, ' C ~ ^~af'~ I ~, I '. ~ '3d~('t.F~~iw{~j s~7 ~ .f :J r . - : rti'.. , tti,~= -r. ~,h `~ d Y i ~... ~.+ ~ 5 eF x ~? ~~CC ~ t .h q{ i.y ~~r}~~,d ~'"'3-",l5°z. e'~' h f 5. +` - 5~'' ~,'' i!`z!.~~ ~i,~5~fs"yi;~' r ~ y r .~' t~' ~!.'T 'j.~~l.,3C,~ ~- n a~,~K i.'~K:?rf+ ~rµ ~ ,. .u- ~;;~ ~ Meridian Planning and Zoning Cor ~ir'ission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 50 . _ .~ . H. Sharp: That the subdivider -- or that the contractors or the subdividers or whoever -- developers do not have to comply -- you know, he knew -- he had to have known that he didn't own this land. ,: ~~> Norton: So what are you asking our Planning and Zoning Commission to do? '.4 -~ ,.~ *: H. Sharp: I'm asking you people to make sure you know exactly what the property lines are when they submitted their application and their plats. Norton: The first time. H. Sharp: Anytime. Look how many sessions this went through before it was finalized. It had been brought up at the meetings about this 13 feet and nobody chose to act on it. Norton: Okay. H. Sharp: See, this is what I'm saying. I want it on record that they are not doing their job, they are not measuring from here to here and that's my land. There is -- a fence is there and there is nothing in the record that I know of that you have to put a fence on your property line. Centers: Ma'am, the bottom line is they are here tonight. They are doing their job. H. Sharp: Well, we are going to have all these wrongs before they are going to make it right. Centers: We are here now. H. Sharp: We still have somebody that doesn't have the five acres can still get away with it. Centers: They are here tonight and that's what counts. Nary: Mr. Chairman. Borup: Commissioner Nary. Nary: I just wanted Mrs. Sharp -- because she said that she had tried to get this -- I brought my note. You left me a message at my house, so I did bring my note that you had left of what your concerns were. So I did want you to know somebody did hear you. I brought it so I could put it on the record if you weren't here tonight. So I did do that. H. Sharp: Yes, because of -- Nary: So somebody does listen. I just wanted you to know that. H. Sharp: See, I wanted to make sure that my -- ~_ ~~.' t~. .:. t r~ c -L 4 y ' r~ ~ - s :~< ,;.r ~w,:; ,. ~~ ;• ` ~' ;;: FT ~t 5 y ',' <; y~ •„ n Meridian Planning and Zoning CoPtil~fiission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 51 Nary: Right. So I got it. I just wanted you to know I kept it and I brought it tonight, so if you weren't here I was going to make sure that your issue was presented. So just so you understand, people do listen. H. Sharp: But do they hear. Thank you. Nary: Well, we will find out in a second, so -- Borup: Do we have anyone else that would like to -- come forward, sir. D. Sharp: I'm Dale Sharp, 2445 Wingate Lane, and it's beyond my imagination why this ever -- this project ever progressed as far as it has when the developer knew that he didn't own this land. We have -- we have 4 entities, both private and public, we have the developers that are supposed to be professionals, we have land surveying that's supposed to be professionals, we have Ada County Highway District that are supposed to be professional, we have Meridian city staff, and you work with these people -- these people work with boundary lines and property lines every day and it's inexcusable that they didn't know that this 13 feet was not in this subdivision. They knew it. They were told this. They were told this before this ever proceeded. I told Craig Rose that I would not sign off on the fence until that situation was corrected. The fence went in and the Ada County Highway District got their pond in and it's right -- takes up some of that 13 feet and it's amazing that the Ada County Highway District said that they were sure that the property belonged to the developer and that's inexcusable for an official agency that works with property everyday, that they are assuming and everyone of these should have -- should have verified that that property was in that subdivision before it was ever granted. The developer should be forced to comply with what he's supposed to do, - Centers: Mr. Sharp, I think it's good that you go on record and maybe people will be a little more heads up in the future. Could you tell me where you live? D. Sharp: This is our property right here. Centers: Okay. Thank you. D. Sharp: This lane that goes down here -- and they are supposed to be bringing that lane up standard. They were supposed to do it when they did some work on it, but -- and we keep meeting with them and meeting with them and Fred Burns has talked to them and so far we haven't got anything. They are not being forced to do what they are Nary: Mr. Chairman. Borup: Commissioner Nary. ;~.'_ A., ;.,:, Nary: I don't know if any of it makes it any better for you, Mr. Sharp, but the fact that they can't get building permits and they couldn't get the houses build as quickly, that -~ w < F e Ysaj ' Y1. t ~ ,T i'F .f,. '~ ~~a ~ ~~d~ ~~_ .uS~, t ,i.$: ~' ~~ z ~.I'~~{ ,~~~,~+,~F .~F : ~t~?..'J4~ + #,~?, cw.. x ~.»~. t ~t.-„ u. 4 Y.. ~ - ~~yy~9~-- _ - r-~ w ':1.~ ~~'+t r t _.;r ~prtt n1;K s#',.~.~~~'~:-,~4~~"~~`.e~."w`r~.~~,k~i,~' rn +a ~_ -. - ~.;` r L :Tf•!'e .;~~~ z:- ~{,kz"nF r,~;r ~~'.i'(a'}`~S~ k.~Fr'~'~,1j ~-~j ~~ t~ - ..K*q~'~,.n.: ~ .~y~. ,~ ii8 '` t.+M 4w~c r.: ] N~ ~ c^ 3i ~~`r i D,. ~~.2Y~ ~'!~C tt ~' ~ ~. - .. -. t ~ i r. ':tom ~ r~Ti'~~ [' ~.~"^i t ,' s ~. i * . fir. ~' n ~1. ~ r ~ y ,;fi ~;'- 4 4 F ~ ::~~ ,~, yi .: s. ' ~ x 7 rrE i f x, vs c ~ 7t ~~ ~ ~ J„p~ ~'~b'~M~ ~~ r ~ E ~ ~Y~~ x -. :w~ r ~t •t sv H~rk r t, ~ 3s..~ ~ ~t r ~~ ~ •fk'e'~t: Z,+ '~t~ ~x ~ 1~r17e 5 _ ~ - t, • 1 c X14 ~ _.'~.t / '~ r'~ ~ ., - - T~~_ ~~F.~a. ~..: ~ ~~'~~ ~.;.' " .~ r~ x ,G:~ur _ti.• 4` .~~- ,}, ear y, ,. .~ ~ ~~ -Gti „, r'~ y~ :JY t ~. 4 ~ 5 4 ~ A ~ Ef ~~ _ - ~ - ~ { ,^54... y,. ~~ ... f 'S ,'$~ f- ., ~. ~ ;~ R ;.~t ~ .,i ,.C{a or .' c r x i,Y .. 17 ~ , ,.~,,~f s,. `a ~ g :: ' '. ~l~j~~ ~' r~ttR~.it'~f rr~y~~ ~~r"~'~a,++ . k~s -r .: - - r .~~3 ~ _~ ~ ~ ~ b j eY.~ _ ~,~,{ ~a ~,f.Ew~ v i4 14 ~~'~ y i t~t~s ~~ ~ ~ ~i Y 3 e,~t'!~ '3I 35' _ s ,Ytd ~~ 4 3t :~} k p ~. i ~? ro ¢ i .1f~ t-~L t ~ "tom' t ;~, j t f '- ~ a ,>ut`r n 3~~ ~ 1a m~{u~?~;~ +id~ 'rr c ~'t6~"' I~€ ~ a ~kdwr~ ~. !p -- ~ 'r3 '• v ~ yt J :es- ~s*ryx~~.. ~ ~at~'v_ 3 1 ~ u~ p e . . I_.y.t_ _. ' :,a k. ' < ;?~~,~,~ a ~ ~4~;;' err,? t+~.r. ~. ~ - Y _ ~.,c sr ~ ~, t ,-1 3~:p ,.TM s.., Tip, h ' ~~~~ 1,~ ~ _~t ,m `'Sly , ., a, *~~ £~`_~: ~ d~ ~`~ i' f _..,u'~4R :~ r ~k"~.t 7 c n,,!C'z r 3 ,-.~ m r"1';'~r t ~ ~ tt. y rat a~ x' ~i r i~'~~F ~ ~ ~y, ~ + ~- ~,r i~' -, t, ~. v37 p _ ~,~ I' .. "r :-f S ~'1- d i *~ ~ fi ~~ x~ F Y~3+d2 d ,~ ~,,. - ... ~.t. _aFaa.. - fir. ,-,....~.`.rG S ._-, i~.. +:3:s:.w,. <. ... .t~:,a.. l,~.a - :.~..~.n i:~*.w.,~ ~- ,. r ,. ».. ti { }~ ti, ¢. k ', f s+ ~ )` b ;2 ~ ~~'! ~~ w '±' s y,. ,~: ~rn ~~ _~ ~., " s,. st?t, ;~: ,fir +t:-w - nF ti, r ~ ;- ~ ~~ty4.1 ,~ ~wc'"Y +: ~~R}~~ ~• -: ~-~ ti~~ ti ~ `w if !{ ~'; :~ ~ .~ ~= ~_ -~` i 7= 4 ' sort ?`~ s ~~ k~ :~~~ ~'~ . tip:; i• ~'~~ 1 v7i • ~;~ . __ , ~~; ~~ ~~~ w • ,~ , ~~.'• Y ~~: ~ t::~ az- ~ "~~'~"< ' ~'., ~~~ ^r~~l#F L :n F ~~ ~ ~t -Y i ~ ry• ~ ~x ... ~ ._ ~~1t• ;~ _ nf~x~ ~ C:i ~~ ~~ ~~w •~ . ~P' bE ~j ;:~. ,:: ;;: {;; ~ w •~.. # ~,`~ ,. ~ ti >~- ~„, ~ w~. a.~~ w , r~^.TS~~ :, > ,;~ ;~` z ~~ . ~: .~ ~' ~. ',,,; ,,~~-rt; i. ; • -~ ,.... ,;. :~±.~. :S`"~`~j` - ~v } ~:~,' 3.ra ;ti yr;_ ~!' ';u~i +~ +',.%F . 3 ':. ~ - ,4 ~~'~ ~ F~ ;S E + ~i -4 ~ ' r a~' s ~ fia s y -~ t ~f i -~~ ~~~ s Y K ~5 ~ ` h F - t~ s r ~ ri •. "- i fk ~ Meridian Planning and Zoning Cor'4f'~iission Meetlng November 15, 2001 Page 52 does impact the developer. You know, they are having to fix it and make right now and it doesn't necessarily mean that it was okay to have messed around with it not and done it properly at first. Mr. Tealey doesn't come here free. Not getting houses sold timely costs them money. So there has been an impact to them. I don't disagree with what you're saying. People do need to do it right. Things happen. That's the way things happen sometimes. There was certainly a known condition. Whatever you believe, there isn't an intent on the developer to delay the process to prevent them from building houses. They really want to get them built. That's how they make money. So the fact • that it got delayed, they have been impacted adversely. Whether that means much to you or not, I don't know. But they have had to fix it and make it right. That's what we are doing right now is just fixing it so they can -- D. Sharp: They delayed for -- Nary: Well, we don't have a whole lot to do with that today, so all we have is just the zoning and the annexation. Borup: I might just mention the information that the Public Works Department reviews is what shows on the legal description and they can check and make sure that it closes and comes what it does, but the city does not go out and re-survey the property. Do we have anyone else that would like to come forward on this? Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, I could maybe address that, too. The application, when it came through originally, we did review those legal descriptions, we did close those legal descriptions, and everything met legal requirements. The plat as it came through it included that 13 feet. It was when the plat was signed and went I believe to the county engineer -- Pat could probably clarify that, but it was very late -- in the late stages after we had reviewed it that this was discovered this 13 feet was not -- not included. But the plat that we did review did show the 13 feet as part of the subdivision and that was consistent with the legal descriptions for the annexation and zoning, so it hit us as a big surprise, too, so I just -- in staffs defense I wanted to clarify that. Borup: Okay. Thank you. Any final comment from the applicant? Okay. Commissioners? Centers: I would move that we close the Public Hearing. Shreeve: Second. ~ Borup: Motion and second. All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Borup: Do we have a recommendation? This is for request for annexation and zoning. Centers: Mr. Chairman. Borup: Commissioner Centers? K ' ~ i ~ ~ y ~~ 1 ~ rte, .~}'~~' ~ '"; -'r ti ~ s ~ ~ ct~r ~ a v`e ~ r 6 x ~ 2~ r '~ ~ `$ , ~y r ;:, ~ v ~'~ S ~ r; ~~ sf" ~~~`'a~ 'j yrF~r~ ~ tifi r . `w ,~ r ! 3 e t3^1 +y'~1.~'"'2'~y~.''{j3-ly'~]t rl~ .HS ,0.~ ~ ~ ' "~'R -~' ~` N. rv:G•4 j!!.. • ~ 1 ;i. ~ T. F` Yf ~ p-Y~= `~' 7 c'F~LYIl a >~l~ ~ n z`~~ '~a' s~~ '~~~•~~l"'``fv~'.~'~ td~}a„~'~ '~ ~, ~ +• ,~ ~ w~ ~ ~. stir ~ t x~. ) ~G~ ;~ r r ' ~' :+ ~' r r ~ ,i: y ,q j~~ ~ ~ ~' '. '. - F * ° At ~.-.t. A'',. ?~ .,'~ i+ . ~' .ink ~; ~~. eta +s- ~ '- ~ - t k;`5,4r ; R spa ~ '~.'F`F~ ~ v .q7Y~ r a - 'e fi,. d ~ t F4 -} - ,Y,~d yy?,~ o~h~^5xryu~~r'F~7~ `k ~'rFlr~~~'~r`^3 ~i~/"l~4 t„rv.i'`'M! .U ay~~ ~# .,e ~ '~ 'k5,yi '~ ~'n~~'y~,rry+ 7p~ Ei~ti+~'~x ~~d..#-.>"~ ~ ~ ~ y,- q - s 1 s : ~+ J 'tip`' '~ p'~'S, 3 -p u ~~,~'~~,y + ,j < '° .~?1 F _~,-n" ~: flea ~~ .. ~. .,q~.W'e ^tY1-0. Y,;~~~~rr"i C~t{+~13`at~• '~Ln[~''1?i-~ ~~ i~ ~r~ 2"' ~'C ~i'~{ ''{ r-~{ ~ 1-. a. '. ,, ~. N - r q[~y~ - - _ - .. ~ .,:Fr r/ .r. 1, ,~ .~^,:~ rb. /,,," W-., ~ 4 "+`~ r .. ` - ~'u- ~ s i ~., ~ S;i Y J) `v? 9 i'~'~.,e4` t ~.y~,,~ 2ts ~ ~ ~y ~q~sj~a"'y ~~r~ *5~..~ 'kGt~.'7~`^{f ~ / w~_a _ - - ~ ~, ~ T .`~ tin r-f 81f-r v '~µ~w c iq ~ t. ~`+r i~''~~~ ~~~~Y1~~•FYg~s~~~9'~~ r ~~ ~ ~~~ xYr.h r7 - r+ %~ rdr .xt10~k1 t t ~ "v, iJ rya atd}ijc~xjf t }~ #•'S' rk~ ~ ~ ~ ~,~°'~"R{R?t~ v~ tf ~ a-!~. ~ ~7y '. ._ < _ e~ i ~' :; ~: vN~ d k~ , < .~ri~, ~'~. 4 '3 ,. ;Ss'~~, ~ 2 1 - ,> s r: s e• t ~s '4<C s+a .s~ti a. ~r r~'.tf~'' ~ i ~ v~'FW~~w~+ 7~~ ~ ~~rt ~h tt ".`~ :-FI ~ '~ Meridian Planning and Zoning Co ission Meeting - November 15, 2001 Page 53 s ~~ ~~~ =. ~ Centers: I would like to make a motion that we recommend to the City Council ' ' ~`~ approval of AZ 01-017, request for annexation and zoning of .193 acres from RUT to R- ~' ~ 4, for Patrick Acres No. 1, by Patrick Estates Developers, LLC, east of North Wingate Lane and south of East Ustick Road, including all staff comments. ~'~~ ~`~ Nary: Second. '~~~ ~ ~~ r. Borup: Motion and second. All in favor? Any opposed? ~ ~ ~~~~~ MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. ~'~ ` Item 4. Public Hearing: AZ 01-016 Request for annexation and zoning `' of 7.32 acres from County zone to C-G zone for proposed Meridian Storage by Touchstone Construction, Inc. - south of ~~.,k West Overland Road and west of South Meridian Road: ~~: f Item 5. Public Hearing: CUP 01-032 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a ~~ r ~~ ~+ ~~~ Planned Unit development and storage facility in a C-G zone for proposed Meridian Storage by Touchstone Construction, Inc. -south of West ,:: _ =~' Overland Road and west of South Meridian Road: `~ Borup: Thank you. Thank you. The next item is Public Hearing AZ 01-016 and CUP ;r~ 01-032, request for annexation and zoning of 7.32 acres from County zone to C-G zone tij. °' for proposed Meridian Storage by Touchstone Construction, south of West Overland ~ ' ` Road and west of South Meridian and a related hearing with this is a request for a '~ ~ ~~ Conditional Use permit for a Planned Unit Development and Storage in a C-G zone for proposed Meridian Storage. We'd like to open both Public Hearings at this time and start with the staff report. ! Hawkins-Clark: Thank you, Chairman Borup. The arrow on the screen points out the ~~`~ subject property. Overland Road on the north. Elk Run Subdivision here to the °'%' southeast. The Bear Creek Subdivision, which doesn't show up on this aerial, but has N~ -~~~t ~.# :,. been approved down here to the south. There is an existing C-G zone piece here to the -- here to the east. You have the business park here to the north that has the Roaring .Springs and Boondocks and other uses. This cross-hatched parcel is the subject parcel. Our staff report dated October 26, 2001, from Bruce and Dave is the -- includes z the conditions that we are recommending. Here are a couple of photos. It is existing vacant ag land. Here is a site plan. Just quickly here is Overland on the north side of ' ~ ~. ~- ~ ,~ the site Ian. The are p y proposing an RV storage area here temporarily. Our understanding is that that area could potentially be used in the future for another more 4 ~~: permanent use. At this point they are proposing that to be an open gravel area that would be RV storage. Entrance to the site is here on the center. As you come in they ,have their storage units. There is another RV storage area here on the southwest ,portion of the property. In our staff report I'm just going to point out -- point out two things. On page 5, in terms of the annexation, item number two, we are recommending ° ~ that if you annex, that all the future uses should be required to be approved through the k., . Fr.+' + x a, ~~~- .. ~,$ ,t ~ '~`. ~ Meridian Planning and Zoning Co ssion Meeting " ` November 15, 2001 Page 54 ~' conditional use and the reason for that is because of this area on Overland. Typically '~~,' when you receive annexation applications we don't require development agreements if ` they have got an accompanying conditional use, because that essentially guarantees ~~ `, ~ ~ " ~ what's going to be there. In this case we are recommending that a conditional use for this piece on Overland, because of the high visibility and the frontage that it has be - included. The only other item I would point out is on page eight of the staff report, staff is recommending delaying the approval until the applicant can provide a written Y comment from the Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District. It states that they will allow the ' -:~ ,~~. ~,~ improvements within their easement. There is quite a large Nampa-Meridian Irrigation :, r; easement on the south end of this property, I believe it's 55 feet in width, and there is ,~, ~ ~,~;~ some landscaping that is proposed within that. The applicant may be able to address that further tonight. At this point our department has not received anything in writing ~~- stating that they would be able to have those uses in that easement and if they are . ` '~' denied by the Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District that would affect the site plan. So - that's the reason for that. Item number 6 on page 9, we are asking that they specifically state the hours of operation for all uses within the facility at this Public Hearing. Then °`~ item number one on the general requirements, we have come across this often. City ~: Ordinance 11-13 does require all off-street parking to be paved. I believe that that is an ~, ~ ~ item that the applicant disagrees with. So I'd just point out that that's the one. I believe they agree with all of the other conditions. Dave McKinnon has had conversations with -- them. We have on instances allowed the gravel to be used for temporary parking. It ~ ~~, ~ essentially comes down for us to an issue of fugitive dust creation with the gravel and so that's the off-street parking, depending on the amount of activity of use, could be -- :~~, could generate that dust. So that's the reason for us requiring that. I think that's all I ~;,~ have. ~° ~w~-~'`~ Borup: Thank you. Any questions from any Commissioners? Is the applicant here, would like to make a presentation? -_ Gibson: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, my name is James Gibson and my address is 38 North First Street in Eagle. 83616. And I am the project architect representing the _ ~~; project -- the application this evening. The owners, my clients, are also present and will `'~~` be available if there are questions that they could best address. We will try to be quite r ~~~ brief, because we don't perceive a lot of controversy with any of the items suggested by .the staff. We think that the proposed annexation is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and the associated conditional use also. It fits directly with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. All of the items in the staff report we have reviewed and we don't have any particular disagreement, except we had a couple of issues, :,~ which we wouldn't say we have disagreement, but we need to discuss. First and "~- probably the major issue is the Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District easement which ' ~~ occupies -- if you -- if you can see on the illustration, there is a dotted area going H~, ~r.?x~' through the center. That's where the Kennedy Lateral is presently located. The proposal is to relocate and to the that along the west -- west side from north to south t ~ ., and then across the south end of the property. That is a 55 foot wide easement and we fi t;: worked at some length with the Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District to assure that our ' design complies with their desires. We have obtained as of today their written approval y i ~. i a'{~ k~;r,,:,,.. Meridian Planning and Zoning Cor~RFiission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 55 ~F y< b174r r ".~'+'+s t'': ski ~kS h+'y {'7'.G Y' t , . wtit r, ,,°t n ~~~ y ~,zy {~ ~aY ~ ~. ,~ ~ ~~ ~; z ~. <~~ . ri } ~ ~}F~~~ C4 ~ta3. ir~'~i.~ ~. ~~ ;- -~r ~r ' , . ~~ ~ - ,+~+~ .e t.3 4, ~t,.~.~ f ,~.- ,~~, r ~¢¢ ~ ~ _ ~-,: ,x~~;~;~ _ .~~ r~r ~:y~ v 'P Y t ~ << r s~ 3~ : ~_ ~: ,;:,~; r~ ~M1~q n r.~r f ry ~`-~ k ,~+, r~ ~..t <. „,~ F~~` E,~~t;T ~~ r ra: 7 ~.r~' ~ ; ..3r ~r ~~ Y ~ ;~ ' y ~~-' ~~. ~:~ y; . A., x ~,~~~` .~~.~ Qf , ~- :~. ,~ -~< '~ eta - trrr'~~:=~>_.. . x~,j. ',~ ~~ ~~ } `°=: .. _, • i A4] e- I fi ~ ~y_,1 r t it x -~ F -_ i :.r. ~~~ ~ „':~,t'' _- ~~:~. =~ ~ '"fir: .:a-.~, t ' ~~:~ ~ ;T X i ~~ J i1,= ~., _ rr ~7try t k u k ~ R.~, $~ ~,• / ~ q+6 z~i -~~~ ~t '~ C r. , of the design which we presented and we can give you a copy of this or do you want me to read it or to how should we do this? Borup: Yes. Let's have a copy. Is that an encroachment agreement? Is that what is required on that or -- Gibson: What it is -- what it is at this stage, they require a license agreement. That will only be issued after the final design is done, the site engineering, and so on. At this stage we have a letter from them saying that if we do what the site plan shows, what the preliminary site plan shows, that they have no objection to that. They will accept the fencing and landscaping proposed within that 50 foot easement -- 55 foot easement. Borup: So Staff does not have a copy of that either? Gibson: They do not, because it just came late this afternoon, so -- Borup: Would you like to enter that on the record? Gibson: Yes. Can I give that to staff or to you? Borup: Right here. Gibson: There are 3 copies. It was Mr. Anderson, John Anderson, of the irrigation district that we met with several times and had several very productive visits there. That we think is the -- is the major question. The site plan displayed does not really illustrate the proposed landscaping within that right of way, because originally in our original visits with the staff it wasn't thought that we needed to or could, but I believe and Ihope -- Borup: We do have a copy. Gibson: -- we have it before you a current copy that shows the landscaping there to meet the letter and the intent of the buffering ordinance. Let's see. We note there is a comment from the police department suggesting a security concern along the south side of the property. That's the bottom of the picture here. We haven't thought of that -- that that would be a particularly dangerous area. It is presently an open field to the south. However, it doesn't seem like it will remain an open field for long, because we are aware -- that is we believe that other developments by other developers is proposed in the area and that will become, then, simply adjacent accessible property. So we don't see that as a particularly significant issue. However, the -- one of the comments with possibly additional lighting there. We hesitate to -- shall we say agree with the proposed lighting, because we are anxious that all of the site lighting be contained within the site to avoid any glare or objection to the neighbors. So we don't think it would be particularly desirable to the neighborhood to put bright lights back in that location. We think that also that that video surveillance would be shall we say a tad of an overkill there. However, we'd certainly listen to the Commission's advice on that matter. Keep in mind that the property in question is really the easement of the irrigation district, rather than the development proposed for this project. The hours of operation, that . '~ salklt ~~ .F. - rY{-. ~ -~ rSa';~ ~~`~K~b~"~y ~,T y.``Y'4,.r rY < 4 .'~ '~ ~3~° ~t}~'~C ` ~~.... s .; .. ~ ~.4+~: f~~, ..', . r n 4 ~,_~~ ,,~ ~j Ly~Yt ~~ ~ z. - -~.. -~3. > ~ .4 .. ~r;,~s T a r ~ ~" >F~M"+r+1 ~ 4 .~"' ~ ~''~~"r ~ ~ i +a . S7~i- ....~~:i +~a S +~y r ~ r t.{-. ~ - ~ ,fs'r 4'. '•P4 ,...~ ~ ~ ~ _,~~.. ~ J. r ~C' ~$I 3`P e ~h'w f"°~, y r. t t r~. ,. ; 3 ~ S Tr -~ ,,~ ~ 3.. F nr _ ~' -' 9if ~~'~~~ ~ ~`~`~t~ ~i .k33i~"yy3''.~~ y''KF`s ~~ ai ~t w 5xr t~,,.c+ ~r ~ L~fs, ~ti 1 ~h ';h§~. X'SV4x tCf; z t r t ~ w ' t r. M S - yl Ll ra. ~uyY. C- ,i f 1 0 4 A~~ ~~ f l "h''$ f~ 3 i, ~ 1 r'~ 7~,J` i `~ I,.x C ~'1S 3 '' ' .. - ' ?~~d $ ~ { 3 c p ~ „'~ 3, ~'~"~~',} ~, " ~ ~' a ~~ y,~'~t ~~`a,4/3tr"'a t~( y~4'R; 'H ? - n'.. ~ !t r y i Q. 1b ~ ~'. {'ro ^R t~:,,,..~~ •C r.4~kbf v~'k ~-:~'a 4 ~ - ~•' -:ri~sjt. -s~.a rid ~~~: i „g,~i~ C~ :, rdr~ { x""F"~a~t ""i ... ... y G t ~ ~a. { ~ { ~~~~k , ` ~~~°~~ y+.15 ' yr ~: ~rf ~ ~,. f rt r r. r; .; x t ; , .~' N Tp ~ ~. ,~.N '~~ ~ ~~ any ~ ~ _ ti,'..Mr wr .'r~Ya ''s' M '. ~~~ :..tit n ~, r r t ~ ~~ , r tx~ ~S f'.~ ~~~ bra R. ~ .. r.ti ,:-'•~, .. n~'#i. _ ~1wn+J,R}.t,-. ~r~~~ 5~~~ , ~ rus4 t CuY~SS ..}e..* `k"„ .s: N9 i4~ri.. .,t ,~:~ t Meridian Planning and Zoning Cor~nission Meeting November 15, 2001 f'~~~~ Page 56 . x ~'~ was a bit of a question. There will be an office there, which would be open from 9:00 to ~,: "j' `r 6:00, normal operating hours. It's possible that some access could be provided during evening hours. Sometimes people like to get to their storage units after work. We don't j; think that those -- this is anything like people would be going in in the middle of the night .: and causing any ruckus in the neighborhood that would be noticeable by comparison `r with the traffic along Overland and so on. So the hours of operation we think would be ~'k`` normal -- normal business hours, plus some evening access hours. However, there is ~~ ' ~~. no great activity late in the night. One question is the pavement versus gravel ~''~~~'' question. We realize that there is a normal requirement for all drive-in parking areas to ~',_> be paved and if that be the Commission and Council's decision that's how it will be. The reason, though, for suggesting gravel with a dust inhibiting surface is to avoid simply ~ paving seven acres of -- creating seven acres of hard surface. We feel that the on-site drainage -- the absorption goals would be much easier to meet without solid -- solid ~r seven acres of paved - Y~` Vic,'., ;~ Borup: Why do you say seven acres? Aren't you just talking about the RV storage area? ~:~;~ ~ Gibson: Well, I said 7 acres, because that's the whole site. ~:' r , ~, Borup: Right. But most of that's already paved, so the area in question is just the RV `~°~ parking. ~~-` Gibson: Yes. I believe that that's the area in question. Also there was -- I believe that °~'-`' that's the only question that staff has raised is that -- ~:. `- Borup: Yes. -.: rz, Shreeve: -- that area. Again, the only reason for asking for -- shall we say a relief or '' ~'` change of that condition is to avoid paving more hard surface, providing more easy ~;; approach area. It isn't -- isn't a make it or break it factor for the development. So ~` `"' whatever the Commission and the Council requires is what we will do. I don't think that we have any other input. So if you have questions we would be pleased to address ..~ them. ~~:~~ ~ ~ Borup: Any questions from the Commissioners? Nary: Mr. Chairman. >>: :; Borup: Commissioner Nary. ~:. <{, `~ Nary: Mr. Gibson, the part that you're talking about paving, how much more surface is €, rte' that -- that you don't want to pave. How much is that? '~~ ,li Gibson: Oh, well, to illustrate, it the area -- ~~ f ~~ Nary: The bottom left corner? ~kL _~i ~ : L $Y ~ ~`~ fi:~:::".; ~.~ ~ Meridian Planning and Zoning Cor~lfiiission Meeting ~A~ November 15, 2001 Page 57 `~`~ '' Gibson: The bottom left corner and the top right corner between -- yes, between landscaping along Overland and the area there. That it seemed, frankly, as an interim use, as was suggested I think in the staff report. There will be a future conditional use `~"`` request for development of that property. ~; ~; Nary: So what would that be, if you want to point that out. Here is a copy. What's going `~~ to be there and the front on Overland Road. A restaurant or something. r:j._w~M ~:: 2, Centers: You're going to use it for RV storage or -- Gibson: Yes. *:~; Nary: Okay. So that's not temporary, the RV storage? '~~'~ Gibson: It's requested as the -- that's the request in this -- Nary: Right. That is temporary? Gibson: Yes. ,T. . ~- .r ~;~. Nary: It wouldn't be there in the future if it's not -- Gibson: Whatever the market dictates. However -- Borup: Some commercial? Nary: Some commercial? Gibson: There is commercial development along Overland Road. Nary: Some that's going to have to have pavement or cement underneath it anyway. Gibson: Yes, it would. Nary: Because there is, I don't know, almost 7 acres of buildings on there anyway that are going to have cars going to -- Gibson: Right. A majority of the site is hard surface. Yes. Borup: Any other questions? Commissioner Norton. Norton: I wasn't clear about the hours of operation. Could you just tell me that. Gibson: We propose that an office would be open there from say 9:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M. Those would be the normal business hours, if you will. However, people like to get to their units sometimes in the evening. That's when people are off work. i ~;` Meridian Planning and Zonin Co~ission Meetin 9 9 November 15, 2001 Page 58 ~~ ~ Norton: So there is going to be 24 hours, 7 days a week? Gibson: Not necessarily 24 hours, but it -- we could do evening hours say until 10:00 or 11:00. Norton: Until 10:00 p.m? ~r;~ ~:1Sa Gibson: For a reasonable time. Yes. Norton: 7 days a week? Gibson: I would presume so. Yes. ':~ Norton: Okay. Thank you. 7 ;`.' kK-~\;•, Centers: Mr. Chairman. ~:~~ Borup: Commissioner Centers. °~;° Centers: Well, the people going and out, they will have -- is it a card system with a gate, they have their security card and they can get in at 3:00 in the morning if they . _ want? ~~ ~' v:` ~~ k~ fli- Gibson: Well, the hours could be controlled so that the gate doesn't open after -- Center: Yes. That is my question. I know of one location like that where they do shut off access -- Gibson: That can be done. Centers: -- after whatever and then open access at maybe 6:00 in the morning. Gibson: Yes. Centers: If they could -- Gibson: That is a concern that -- Centers: So what are you proposing on that? Shut it off and -- Gibson: Well, because the question didn't come up until just now, let me ask the people who will be operating if they have an idea. Borup: Let me -- another question that might be somewhat related. It looks like the office -- is that is a full-time residence? -' `~]!; ^ ~: 4. a' k ~.: ie' t 1. S'.,~.: ;.' ;i i i ~y Meridian Planning and Zoning Cor'~it"iiission Meeting ~'' November 15, 2001 Page 59 ~r~~ Gibson: It's not intended to be a primary residents, but a place where people could -~..; have a -- ~:~ Borup: So you're not going to have an on-site person is what I was wondering Gibson: They could be on-site there, yes. `~~ Borup: I mean several of the others that we have looked have had an on-site full -- r_. .. mean an on-site person living in a shared office residence and so there is someone there -- '' Gibson: Right. They could be there 24 hours a day. Yes. ~ ~° ~ Borup: So it looks like the structure is built with that option is what you're saying? ', ~:.,,. Gibson: Yes. It will have that option. Yes. And now the hours of operation. We've set ~~`~ basically 9:00 to 6:00 for the office, but in addition to that access are we oin to do 24 9 9 k~ ~ ~ hours, 7 days a week? That's what we'd prefer. That's what we would prefer. ~~ . ,.r. Nary: Mr. Gibson, did you not have the staff comments somewhere near October 26~' ~. when this was prepared? You said you just -- >,: ~'~''' Gibson: No. Now - k.' - Nary: Now. Right now that you needed to know what hours there were, but -- -;;;~- Gibson: Okay. It's in this report, the question. Yes. ~ ..:~.a Nary: But if it's in this report you're supposed to tell us that tonight anyway. Didn't you .' ~ know this in this report 3 weeks ago? }r_1 Gibson: Yes. We did know about it. Yes. ~, , ,;' "``r ; Nary: Okay. ~_ Borup: Any other --from Commissioners? .~; Centers: Well -- and I think, sir, at this time that you shouldn't -- I mean you should be _ telling us that it's going to go forward from here. Is someone going to be living there ~:~`'° after it's built in the residence or not? It should be clear at this point. ~~ _.:, Gibson: Okay. Let me ask the applicant if they think someone is going to be living there or not. I, as the architect, I know it's designed so we could live -- Centers: That would affect the security on the other end of this properly that you're talking about that the police had an objection for needing more lights. . *N~.; x ~a x~~'w ~, ~ , ~' Meridian Planning and Zoning CoTT4fiission Meeting ;, ~ ` November 15, 2001 Page 60 ~~,; ~~ Gibson: Yes. o: , y Rr<,, Selee: My name is Brad Selee, 2271 Interlachen Way, Meridian, Idaho. Mr. Chairman ~. ~; 4 ~, ~.~ ; ~~,~~ and Commissioners, the intent is to have an on-site manager full time for security :~ ~ reasons. Also to address Commissioner Nary's question about the hours, we did know '~ ~' j ~ F that it was required, but we didn't know the office hours. The part we didn't know until ~~ { now is the uestions about access. T q ypically access extends to -- public storage access ~K ~ti ~ extends to beyond office hours and where I have been in the past it's been 24. So it ; ,~ . '; would be our preference to have 24 hour access. That's our intent on those issues. . ' ~. E -`' , Could I speak to one other item, please? On the graveled area and RV storage, one of .~_ , ,~,~ ~; the reasons we thought to leave it gravel for future development is, yes, commercial r. :~. ground would end up being asphalt, but with underground utilities and so forth, we `~ ~~ wouldn't know at this time what future needs there would be, it would make any future ` ~ ~ ~ use much easier if it was only gravel and we wouldn't have to dig up all the asphalt. ~ That was the idea of maintaining that gravel for some type of future development. ~I ~ ~ Borup: I've got a question related to that, then. By past experience do you know what _ ~~ the normal activity might be m an RV storage area? A lot of traffic in and out, et cetera, .~ Lx." =~ Selee: Mr. Chairman, I don't have any, you know, figures with me. In talking with the e~ Ada County Highway Department, they gave us some guidelines on usage. Typically ~~ + r ~ most of the usage is during office hours and those evening hours as Mr. Gibson ,; ~~T _ ' mentioned, the after -- what we call, quote, unquote, after hours. ~; ~, ,, Borup: I was speaking just of the -- you know, the amount of traffic would be on -- in the ,~ ~~~ gravel area. As far as traffic, a mmi storage is probably the least amount of traffic R ,; ~, ' generator than anything that there is. I realize that. x ~. -1 Selee: Mr. Chairman, speaking as to the dust issue in the storage area, typically in an w RV storage there is not a lot of in and out traffic. Once -- you know, if it's anything like ~" ~ my RV storage, it will sit there for 3 years, but once that -- an RV is put in there, it ~' ,::~ oftentimes stays for quite a period of time. So it's not like there is people pulling in off of ~P. ~ • to 5 the gravel many times a day. So we didn't really feel that the dust -- especially with an .~ >_ y 3 inhibiting device, the dust would be an issue. :'` ~ t +~. i Borup: Any other questions from the Commissioners? ,:, `.I ,t' Nary: Well, just, Mr. Chairman, that back piece isn't really designed for a change in use 5 ~- ;• ~ in the future. It's the front piece. Right. So you could pave the back. If we were to say ~~ ~ we believe that the south boundary area, you could pave that, because you're not going t,-~<' a to use it for something else. ~x~ ;kY ~~,: ,: ~~ ~ : `° Selee: Commissioner Nary, no, the use of that would stay RV storage. ;~ Nary: It's just the front. ~< ~4 ~, ,`~: ~; tl.~.;.~~:. i ., h y • < ~ ^• p~ 4 +'(~4Y ~p3a. l l ~ ) I b i :i . . ~Z 22.n~n. Y.i . 1, ~)~Yi% A 1• e P. . - ::. , : ' . :, +o- , . ~ , ' }~,•. ~`, .~;~ - ~~ ~ : ~i _. . . , ~„ < . , , _ Saar ,'~ r .~' ~°~': ~, s'. , ... - ~4' ~ S ~ ~a.. ~: .,~ .1"`'F t.x$Y` 1ST" ..f 4x ~~ Y .~ , '. y. ~. ' l.+ . .. ... ~ 7 ~.. ' \ soy ) .~Me.r ~, ~u J' ~ ~"' ~'S' ~ •. e is ~£' ~[- , . r y~• ty d ~:~Y~,;•~'~..:: t ,~ ,`f';.. ~ , ~' lei ~s~ ~ ' 1 a, ~ N4 "."r~=,"r~~a;'S'.~i r:'~'~..Mwt k..1,^n ,`,~ ~ ~. " j4 Ly'~: `~3~'f'>7s 4\~. n ` i f _'' .3 .~1 .p' '-``',4„F~f 1: y ~ V{ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ` ~ ~~} eT;~?. .,`1: ~;L Kf~.'~k:/A~S ,.pp" ~:.y S~ w ". f!'6 ;+~iY ~ .• j t" .l~r . . k~ ~. . ~ F.'y+Y~' ,~i ~i :::`. , ayk ~~ ' ~~ ,SSA 1 r~}~:s~a. .:4a # ` }j' ft '.~;p'.:^`t'~°tCJy =~~: : (' C t T ?8Y'il /, i~. . I `~ . _ x5 ;:~.~.,:5i~,. ~ ~~. 's `~3 . '.vim. .. , . -P 't':"~ ~t"!' ~ wi ! ~~~' '' = -..~A~'.i~`.` o$tYZ4u, yk\ ~ 1 .. ~ ' a ~ ~;' ~~a 1n %. ,~ e t ' ~ +~ I th ~ +t. ' '3''s "Mx o:d: _~ ' ~.R'y •;'~ i'~T ' ' m{ ~ ' : " ~ ,i , ~T 'd 'I ' !~ ~ q, v ~ ~ ^ ~~ r~ ~ . jy T A^ ,' `~s? ,'~:. ^ ~ I' ~ `1~, ww '~:-. , a. 1 I4r, .~ ~ A. u ' Y ~ v # }F~ ''Ps 5'f c~n5 ( , :. ,, . ; pr,,; ; ?~, ti i' o ~~" ' a ~: `s r ; # I y^e .i '~ , ,,.. .. ~ ` tom'- r,. ~ 4 k ~ , ,; ~ - . ~~z , ~ t .a ::. ~ ~ ~ ' \':'•i Imo.", ^`•'.: ~ f;L!` : .:. ^iy .. .- .n..;.t 'n < rYl- xa ', 1. ( Y s ~ A T~ ~ ;' ',i "., ~ ~ , 34 5 u~' F"'~' l ~Y:, , ~~ e kryay ky K#. ,r . .F. ". ., ~~~~ M a- :,; eridian Planning and Zoning Co fission Meeting November 15, 2001 ~j" Page 61 ~£..~ tt:' ;_~ - ~ Selee: It's just the frontage that we were concerned with. 4{ ~ -. ~. Nary: Potentially could change. ~{ }~ Selee: Potentially could change. t y, k ~ Nary: Okay. Centers: Mr. Chairman, this is about 120 feet right there and you have got abuffer -- ~;~,~' landscape buffer 35 feet. Concrete walk. Parkway. Even if you just paved part of this - ~ - I mean that would be beneficial. But I guess I concur with you. When you take your a{ RV in there, if you use it 2 or 3 times a year like me you're lucky. So not a lot of traffic. "4k x ` Borup: Okay. Thank you. Did you have any other comment -- any final comments Mr. ` , Gibson? Okay. Do we have anyone here to testify on this application from the audience? Seeing none -- oh. Mr. Groves. ~::~ c-9; '' i Groves: Yes. My name is Craig Groves, 3920 East Shady Glen Court, Boise. ~' Commissioners, I'm here on behalf of Bear Creek, LLC, the current owner of the ~n~~. property south of this site. We are in the process of developing the property into single ' family residential. It's an R-4 zone. We have not had a chance to visit with the '~~{ : applicant about some issue such as landscaping and buffering between our houses and storage unit facility. We believe that this could be a good neighbor for us, but we have some concerns in the area of landscaping, exterior lighting, and just how that would affect our residential development. Would ask that you allow us some time to meet with ~ ,!'~~ the applicant, have them show us their proposal for landscaping, their proposal for the architectural style of their buildings and their proposal for site lighting. The second ,~~ .~I comment I have is in regards to the property there along Overland Road, I don't know if ACRD has granted any additional curb cuts to the vacant -- vacant land there. From ~~ i, that drawing we can't see anything there. So my question is for future use where is the access and you might want to consider that in your final decision. Thank you. > '" ~ Borup: Any questions of Mr. Groves? I had one. Did you receive notification? ~~ Groves: Yes. r - Borup: Do you know what date you got that? { Groves: I do not know. We were not notified of any neighborhood meeting or anything .along those lines, but we did receive notification. We just actually purchased that site, you know, within the last -- well, since September. a,.. i~.` Centers: But about how long ago did you receive notification that this was going to go in? Groves: Within the last 30 days. `; w ~~ Meridian Planning and Zoning Colfl~fiission Meeting ;~~xk November 15, 2001 t ' ' Page 62 Centers: Okay. ~;, v Borup: And that's my question is did you attempt to call the applicant? >" 4` Groves: No, I did not. Borup: Did you -- 1~ Groves: I was under the impression the applicant is required to have a neighborhood meeting and so on and so forth. `~: Borup: No. You should know that in Meridian from other projects. Have you had a chance to see the -- you haven't looked at the landscaping proposal? -~; ~~ Groves: No, I have not. ;;~; Nary: The other question I had, Mr. Chairman, I know that Mr. Groves is here. There is < a 25 foot buffer that's required in the site specific requirement on the south boundary ~`'~ ~> there. It seems, I don't know, fairly significant to me, as well -- I was just looking on page - Borup: In this case it's -- they have got 55 feet because of the -- ' ``` Nary: Oh, because of the easement as well. Of course, all the lighting is required to be maintained on the property to eliminate glare and eliminate -- I mean I understand what you're saying on specific detail when you haven't had an opportunity to review, but it appears at least from general comments it's going to maintain a fairly significant gap '' between your property and this property. ~.. Groves: Yes. From that site, yes, it appears that there is significant setback. Borup: In my mind that would be the two concems that we usually look at is -- in the buffering is if the landscaping is dense and then the lighting. Groves: Correct. Yes. Those were my 2 concerns, so -- t~,, Borup: Our standard requirement is to not have off-site lighting. I think the police department is the only one that was advocating that, but certainly not -- it was not from ~" the staff. ~~,~ k, 4'` ~~ ~ ~' >:; Nary: Well -- and, Mr. Chairman, the only other one that may affect that south property is if we were to allow that RV storage on the south end to remain unpaved, because there would be dust and stuff, but I guess I'm not looking to leave it that way, but I don't about anyone else, but it appears between now and maybe if we were to decide on this tonight, by the time it got to Council, maybe those other details you're concerned about +a e Meridian Planning and Zoning Co~ission Meeting °~ ;~` November 15, 2001 `=~~:' Page 63 P" ~f ~ Y}. c ~~ ~ s: Groves: Sure. If the applicant is open to just a quick little meeting with us we would be ?~~ `''~ acceptable to that. ~; ~, Borup: Okay. Thank you. Centers: Mr. Chairman, I think of Woodbridge about 2 months ago. There was a lot of cooperation there with the mini storage that went in next to them. Woodbridge called a ~ lot of shots there. But in this situation the would corn lament each other and I think it ~t 7; Y P~ would be beneficial for this applicant, this developer, to be in touch with that developer, ~` ' because that developer could send customers this way. So I think if there was good cooperation there it would be beneficial for everyone. <- ~ ~-"~ Borup: Do we have anyone else on this? Okay. Any final comments from the ;" applicant? If not, I think we have got at least one item we'd like to -- ' ~ y Gibson: Mr. Chairman, just say that we are certainly open to meeting with the neighbors to discuss the concerns. We would be pleased and would appreciate their input. . _.. 4 :~ Borup: Okay. Well, I'd like to say we'd like to maybe see more than just being open, that perhaps ask that you would meet with Mr. Grove or a representative of Bear Creek t~., , to discuss -- it appears that, you know, the concern was mainly just the buffering and ,~. ,t: ~^`~~ perhaps the esthetics of the buildings facing their property. So -- at .~ Gibson: We will certainly do that. Borup: Within the next 2 weeks. Gibson: We are open to that. ~~ Borup: All right. ~; ~'~~~'`~ Nary: Mr. Chairman, I did have a question for staff as well and I don't know whether or not in this discussion with Bear Creek that that may be an issue. The 24-7 sort of operation is a little concern to me. I don't know, Brad, do we have a lot of that type of operation or almost -- or are the majority of our storage units in the city have some f,> r limitation on time, do you know? It seems like the ones we did recently, like Mr. ~~=. Osborne, who is sitting here, we did place some limitation on them on time and then we ;~_ didn't have 24-7 operation and there is a good reason for that and I didn't know whether ~~ or not we had a preference one way or the other. ~> Hawkins-Clark: Right. Commissioner Nary, the -- I believe of the 2 that come to mind, the Avest behind Fred Meyer. I believe the Avest is 24. Acorn -- Bruce believes Acorn is 24. I believe Ed Buse's Ten Mile Mini Storage adjacent to the wastewater treatment ~ ~,,~ plant is 24. But it certainly is not addressed specifically in city code. But it would be an .~~' issue that would come up in this -- as part of a Conditional Use Permit based on surrounding uses. L ~ _ Meridian Planning and Zoning Cot4Rfiission Meeting = x;: ,,,: ~~.? -, November 15, 2001 , ~ ~; Page 64 ;,~' ,' ~x Centers: Mr. Chairman, I didn't see it in the staff comments and I would highly ~ '`'~ recommend it, maybe even make it a requirement if we do approve the applicant, where F ~, they have a security camera at the gate that's filming the entrance. When people are 1 using their card or they are going to have a system of a key pad, possibly. That's probably what you're going to have. Each entrance will have a code and a security ~° ~ camera is very necessary. I speak from personal experience where a security camera ~ ~ got the thief, because they watched someone enter the code with binoculars and then ~, ~'~'~ ~ ~`~ they go back and enter it themselves. A security camera is very important. I don't know '~ if -- okay. "~}- Norton: Mr. Chairman. <_;.; ,, Borup: Commissioner Norton. ~~ ~ Norton: I have another question for staff. I notice that the sanitation department had ~` ,:` noticed there are no waste receptacles or enclosures on the property. Before they can ~`~~., get occupational use or whatever, don't -- are they required that they have to have waste receptacles? ;~.. ' ~`' ~~' Hawkins-Clark: Commissioner Norton, they are required to obtain a letter from Sanitary Service Corporation and submit that with their certificate of zoning compliance to us ' prior to their getting a building permit. But they could come back and say that they don't ~ = ~ have to have it. We rely on the Sanitary Service Corporation. °'`h'" Norton: Okay. t ;° Borup: Okay. Anything else from the Commissioners? ~~ Nary: One other note. I was just noticing as Commissioner Norton was commenting, - item 7 on page 10 addresses trash enclosures, but I was noticing also that it was ~'=' ''^ misnumbered, so whenever we make a motion on this there needs to be an 8 and a 9 as the next 2, rather than -- Borup: There is 2 7's. So are we ready for a motion? Centers: I think we need a motion to close the Public Hearing. ~ Borup: That's the motion I'm looking for. ~__:~:: `~'~~ Centers: Yes. I would move that we close the Public Hearing. `~=:`~~ Nary: Second. Borup: Motion and second. All in favor? . ~~~ MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. a I >: ~;~ ., } ~:::,~ ~ ; ' - ' ~~ ~~~ ~, s ~;: f ,. ~~ ~- ~. y~~'1-,~ak'.?,'Gly a~`'". yt ' ,f ~~ ,. Y t ~ tiur ~ ''.,,, ' ~ 3 ~5 .. . 7 k~ ~'. ~ - - - - J +i~ ~y,~~yyrr ;h ^t T 1 4 N %1 -' ~r+"^T14. w "~ ,~~. ~~ : ~,~~ . } ? 4 r~` y~~ - s^, i rtk~~• „ T .V'iT:._v 4 y i~ ~ Meridian Plannin and Zonin Co• sion Meetln • 9 9 9 November 15, 2001 Page 65 ~` '' Borup: That was for both hearings. We opened 2, 1-- ,,t..:~ '~ '~'` Centers: Yes. {~ Borup: -- annexation and the other on a conditional use. Do we have any discussion we need to look. at? It sounds to me like from what was -- the issue of the Nampa-Meridian ~~: looks like it's been answered. Did you have a chance to read that -- rather that -- it ~'~ looks like that satisfied the staff requirement --the stafFs recommendation. ~~. ~~ ~~ Hawkins-Clark: Yes, Chairman Borup, we are comfortable with that. Borup: Okay. Then the other issue is probably the gravel parking area. What did you ~;1 '. say, Commissioner? Norton: I was just thinking hours of operation. m-- Borup: Oh. Right. Well, that may be an item for discussion, too. >_~ `. r' Norton: A security camera, perhaps? ' ~ ~ Centers: Yes. I would definitely support that and the -- at the south end I think the i._°~ : applicant said he was going to pave it and I'm not -- ~' ~~ Borup: Well, he hasn't said it, but -- Centers: I'm not against not requiring the paving in any other area. The hours of _ operation -- I mean I'm kind of -- I don't know. I know operations that shut down at midnight and open up at 6:00. Most people don't want to enter their storage units after that or before that. I think we schedule accordingly. The same way for getting their boat out. They are not going to be there after midnight and maybe -- e~ . ;} Borup: After it's dark, it's -- ~.~ =~ °i Centers: Yes. ' ` Borup: Usually not too many people, I would think. y; ~' Centers: Because I can see cars going south and the headlights at -you know, at ;~~_: different times and when ou have residential y properties adjacent. I think of ~~ Woodbridge. I mean we were pretty strict on those folks. .:~ ~~`~ ~`~ Nary: I guess to add to that, Mr. Chairman, I mean I think they should certainly pave the RV storage on the south property line. It's not going to be used for something other ~ .: than that, so I think it should be paved. I think there does need to be some restrictions ~, ~ :~`~ on time. You know, if you look at the map, this is oriented and basically all the vehicles are going to be driving north and south on the property to get to the rear lot. Now there ~~~~ may be 55 foot buffer and there is going to be fencing and the like, but you still may get :~ ~;" Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting ~`'~ November 15, 2001 tom: Page 66 °'~~` °' some lights -- I mean probably not, but there is still the potential for some light from cars and things, so all night long does seem a little intrusive and probably isn't necessary beyond midnight and it probably isn't necessary before 6:00. If it becomes a problem, F,"' ' then they can certainly come and asked to amend it. I don't see a reason that we 3t_ °= ' shouldn't put at least some limitation. I think it's still adjacent to some residential h properties and the like and I don't have a real feeling on the security cameras ~~~~'` Commissioner Centers raised, other than it's just a detail that we don't normally include ~.; in these types of things. That's something that they need to decide what's appropriate ~r'...5 and cost and the like. You know, we are more concerned about lighting and how that is going to impact neighboring uses and I don't know whether or not requiring a security f ~' camera is something that's really in our ballpark, but I don't really -- ~ ~ Centers: I would agree with that, Commissioner Nary. I was just -- you know. ;`'R Nary: It makes sense. I do agree with you, but -- Centers: It's highly recommended. It would also enhance their rental. It's a suggestion, maybe. ~` Borup: So it sounds like from what's been said talking about paving the south area and a r;;~ perhaps leaving the other -- ;..~ Nary: Yes. I mean I don't think it has to be paved. I mean it does make sense that they ''r°: `z may want to convert that use, but if they use things to keep the dust down and those ~'~'`~ types of things, I think that's reasonable. "~ Borup: To me it is -- ~,,.: Nary: It doesn't make sense to rip up asphalt a year and a half or 2 from now to build ~f~~. something else and you have to put in electrical lines or something else. I mean I don't ~s x" think that's unreasonable. Where that's located there is enough buffering from the ' ~ street. ~fi;::~ t~orup: weu, mat's -- to me a big tactor is the density of the landscape. '_ Nary: Right. Borup: There is fairly dense landscaping along there. ..~ Nary: Yes. I think it will be fine. I don't think that -- I agree that as was stated that a lot of ': that -- it's not going to be generating a tremendous amount of dust and what they can -- ~` ' do to remedy that is probably good enough for the meantime anyway. So with all of ~'~ ~ that, Mr. Chairman, I would move that we recommend approval of AZ 01-016, request ~...>: ~- for annexation and zoning of 7.32 acres from the County zone to a C-G zone for ~~~~ ~` ` proposed Meridian Storage by Touchstone Construction, Inc., south of the West Overland Road and west of the South Meridian Road, to include all staff comments of ~~:; _.{ .;~ ~Sr~f, Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting '-~'f--~~ November 15, 2001 Page 67 October 26~" in regards to annexation and I don't think there was any modification of the ~''':"'" annexation requirements. ,__ "~~~ Centers: I don't think so either. ~~ ~~ Nary: I think all the modifications are regarding the conditional use requirements. That ~. " Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District, was that an annexation requirement? ~' Centers: It was page 5. But according to staff they met that. r' ~,:; . ~:::, .~ Nary: Right. I think that requires a development agreement and I think they have agreed ,~' to all of those conditions, but -- ~~~~`~~ Centers: I second that. < Borup: Motion and second. Any discussion? All in favor? 3-, ~ ~ MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES 34., Nary: The second one, Mr. Chairman, I would recommend that we -- or I would move I that we recommend approval to the City Council of CUP 01-032, request fora ' Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Unit Development of a storage facility in a C-G zone for proposed Meridian Storage by Touchstone Construction, south of West Overland Road, west of South Meridian Road, to include all staff comments of October I 26, 2001, with the following additions or amendments in regards to -- that the statement on page 8 of the staff report, that the applicant has complied with the staff requirement ~' V. to provide written comment from the Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District as attached to this report, that the -- on page 9, that the third item down, which is actually numbered ;~:~: number 6, should be numbered 7, and that the hours of operation for this facility shall be ~~ from 6:00 a.m. until midnight on each day. That item seven would now be then number 8. That the RV storage area on the site plan on the south boundary would be paved, ~,' but the RV storage on the north boundary could have gravel and dust remedial ~~ measures to eliminate fugitive dust from the site, but did not have to be paved at this time. Let's see. On page 10, item -- the fourth item down would be numbered 8 and the ~ ~ ~; fifth item down from the top of the page would be item 9. Then, again, the ti x recommendation of page 11, that the applicant has provided written comment from the z'# Y:` " Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District tonight in regard to landscaping and fencing within a~ .. ~'° ""'~ their buffer and then I guess just as a note for the City Council that we have also .~ recommended that the applicant meet with a representative from Bear Creek °~ Subdivision in the interim before the Meridian City Council sees this to discuss any ~ r other issues regarding this particular project. I think that's all the amendments. ~3 } : in~ .I ~;r;""° Centers: I second _' "," Borup: Motion and second. Any discussion? Seeing none, all in favor? Any opposed? ~; MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES ' _~ ;ti ?T { E ~~..,. :< .~ ~ t r~~ ~ ~.~ a ,, ~~ ~5~ ~~. `A tS ~ - , .: iE ~„f ~~ ..~ :i ~x : ~, , ' +_ ,~ ~° ~;, ~ . ,~ ~~ r. ? F ~~' ~ ' # `~ ... n .., ` ~~ fly F:-~ _ '. t t ,. ~-tY. "=~ ' ~~,; ~ r ~ ~~,, ~ . ,~ ~y _. ,~ f~ x 'N .~., _ ~ ri '. E ~ e ' i r ~.~? ~~ F ~ i~ r fr ~ t r + ~ 35 F z ~~ - -. ''t ~~ n ~ ~ ~ ~ r _ ~' s V ~ ~,r `` r ~ _ d ~rr ati.. .. . Meridian Planning and Zonin Cosslon Meetin 9 9 November 15, 2001 Page 68 Item 8. Public Hearing: PP 01-019 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 115 building lots and 10 other lots on 29.93 acres in an R-4 zone for proposed Woodbridge No. 2 by Woodbridge Community, LLC -east of south Locust Grove Road and south of East Franklin Road. Borup: Thank you. Item No. 8, Public Hearing PP 01-019, request for preliminary plat approval of 115 building lots and 10 other on 29.93 acres, R-4 zone, Woodbridge No. 2. Like to open this Public Hearing and start with the staff report. Hawkins-Clark: Thank you, Chairman Borup. This is on the screen the subject parcels. I believe most of you are familiar with the Woodbridge project, so I won't go into much detail. We are talking South Locust Grove Road here. Phase one has received final plat approval well under way. Again, this property is more or less bisected by the Five Mile Drain, which runs in a northwest to southeasterly direction. The bold here is the subject phase 2 of Woodbridge that is before you tonight. The Greenhill Estates Subdivision abuts the property to the north. As you will note in a couple of the conditions that the applicant will address later, this is the Weatherby Drive access point right here that goes into the Greenhill Estates Subdivision. Here is a detail of the preliminary plat as submitted. I apologize for the difficulty of reading with the top lines and what not. You should have -- or received this in full in your application. The bridge across the Five Mile Drain is constructed. They are complying with the -- with the conceptual plan that was approved by the city last year. They do have an approved Conditional Use Permit that approved a conceptual plan for the entire property and this preliminary plat had to meet the intent and the guidelines of that. They have not added any lots from that conceptual plan. The open space is more or less provided here in the center. At this point I will refer to a couple of items in the staff report dated October 23. On page 2 I believe this was also copied to you tonight. Does everybody have that? Should have received that earlier. We did receive comments from the police department discussing the need for a secondary access and the need for conductivity. Again, they were particularly pointing out this Weatherby Drive. They asked that that be a full vehicular access. Staff feel that given the condition that was approved as part of the Conditional Use Permit that said that would just be grass creek and bollards, that we cannot revert back on that existing condition and comply and I did not talk with Captain Musser, I don't know if the applicant has about that. I believe that they just were not aware that that was an existing condition that was already approved. I think that's why they submitted that. But we have addressed that there on page 2. In terms of the vehicular access to the east, as you can see they are proposing full vehicular access at this point here and I'll just go back to the overall plan here. Again, this is the Magic View Subdivision. This the new St. Luke's Drive road that comes through here, there is a signal, and then the Magic View here. It's more or less in this location. And the condition that was approved, which is in the staff report, the condition that was approved in the Conditional Use Permit last year required them to provide that prior to the 200th building permit being issued. So that does need to be provided. The applicant, I believe, has had discussion with Magic View, they can address that a little bit further. All of our other comments are detailed there and I will just stand for any questions. ~+ rr ,'yi ~ z' iL~~ i~ + r: r t ~ i f ~,, x} t w', .~~. 5i ttJK,'- ~~.~ '} ~ +!~a ~j-ta~f d~'~1.'Sit1'~ 3w ~~ti '~} " .~~-r,~ °-+'~~~~ ~W,a4 `x ~t ~' ~}''~ '. _ :~• ~a a °3 N Y„ ~ 3 _ r t~3~~d~~~;'rzl'7~ ac`^ti' ~:~'~ ~, ~ ,,, t ~ . ~ ~, t ~ ~ ~ S r~y ,~' ( K t _ ,S F'; ~y KrAk; ~Y q }. ~ ~" . ~ t~ ~'t~"Yo ~. 1~~~aN '~~~~AL~~~"~`~P~ryj^,1~rbt `~~ ~ +'. tr'; .~. _ _. .¢ .~i~ ~~E.. ~'' YR!-,Sa ~ ~k ~~ ,~ t_'~ ~ ~ ~~il~*Fq'S a?fir ~~'1 ,y a~- ~.,.r: 'c.`,~V"L'~t + fi'~ Fr,~ 3t ~'~ Jy, yr S.T ~ yj Gy ~'ap~.r ~•tn wr r~ ~-k'~-,r ~'~S ~~;s ' ..~F~~y r ..:{. r~a~ ~~CF h ."~b 'l''t i"'A&' r S+M`.tt'tf ry ;+,~~5 ~ n .~vV~'~Y~~+. tl~~ik~~y wlrs ~-' i hl,}~..~ L % :. r ~ ,~ s- ~ . , '~' ., n c t•>. 4 %. ~ `~ t ~ ~ rt r r ~ ~' s z ~'qw ~i ~ ww ~ L '~o- ~~ .' _r.~ s • - ) ! L. ...~.'NFf ~" i~ ~l L ~ ~"$ ~y1F T'T~b. T Tr tr.f- ~ - ~ ,*`-M'ti M 'Jh v "~+ -;L ~ 3 a'i ~,t. ~ ~ :;Ja s y: Xlp ~ 7k - '{' ~ ~~ .~~._~ r,C~~aly+ryy.~4 .xyt (513.-%hat ~3`ii~'ja•'S~~ < ~t tt F .f°,L~'l~T+,~rt~.'~'1~'~'a~FXr tsa~.W ^t tita ~_,o ;i,~ r '~t¢ ~... ~ ti.. R y ~,r * ~y ~ YA.~ :q ~ _ .~ •~ ra , _~.. r .~ + - . ~ ~ f a,F.--- ;;`d } f ~ .~^`aRd R Y'J' --'.ai 4+4 t.^~,; tq?4 ~ft`~:-~n tN'~'~ t: "~,,~j~~~y~Rj~Y, ~3N~n"'tJi'S~'ti- rJ a~~. ihmr F s~ r as ~k .- yc"`^d ,~ * ~ ~i~- ~ ~~ 4~` Vie'' dsz .r ~~ .L.: .. `i~ i~ x _ a .. .4, t 'i,:p ~% ~ 4; k ~J ;'J .,"F~e..I ~~tws .~`' r + •. !{+~~lt *~ 1 jW %~~'~,.'l d~ «i~ ~4~w~~+YyYT L S.. ,~ y~ 4'~ t~~~. '~'~af-~~f~: ~,,~1 {~t ~. L ~ .. a, 3 m~ +;x +~ ~' .~S- ~ r ,.~ ~~ .. ~.. ,,~i ~~ ,.~s~,e? _ ,~ +. Y ~ ~ t ~ ,a ~ 4r,,.,.. ;~~ '. 2 L ~~ ,~,,'*# ~ { '' ~ ~~x~~y 'V"L~+I-^'~'~ r r `sV".!{~s,~> Ys r a ,,: ..y~ Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 69 ~~:`, ~' ~,~ ,~ . ~~ ,~ ,'~ 4 ~,~t~e ~ Lt ,~y,~~S a + y;?1 Y fi ~~ ~~~ ~~ • ~ S 1t s; ~ / i.> ~:~~ . ~-s _~ ~. ~~. > ~. ~, .: ~-: { ~. ~ ~- ~~ ~.y _.~,."7 ~~1 .r d;Y `Y .mot . rc ., . ,, 4 k,~ ~;, x f~ -~~ ~~ ,~~. ~ , ~~ :: ~~ ~~~n~ ~~ ~. ~fi~ ~. t ~ ~..:1 r ~•~ c ~ z ~~ .: t ~~ ~ 4'. ~a ~ ~ t `a ~~,~ ,~ <. sr ;~~- s; ~s . ~ xk~~r~t .,. ~ ~,~ 9 :: ^;N,k v r< K M. ; ~.~} 4« 1 z~ _ ~~ ~~ ;+" ~-,: 4 :: .~x~a~.. ~. .~~K n .~~ ~~` ~: . ~°` ~, ~F:,~~ r~~ ~~„ ~~ ~_ ~. ~. ',' ~~ r ~ `' _~ y~,z , ~r~~ .~-.;4 ~ , 4 ~ ~ j i •a x ~' ~~:• - ~; ~ y I F. V 1 .5 ~.t. .~n.Jr. b * ~` 5& y i .. r ~f ` f iti J j t t ` ~ L , f,Yf• _ _ d ~~f, ~ t ;', +, r' Borup: Any questions from the Commissioners? Does the applicant have a presentation they'd like to make? O'Neill: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, my name is Derrick O'Neill, 158 North Ninth, Suite 300, Boise. I'm here tonight representing Woodbridge Community, LLC. I will try to keep my comments brief, but I think it's probably important that I go through some of the issues to help maybe bring you up to speed. Some of you weren't here when the original conditional use was approved. I will start with the phase 2 preliminary plat. I just want you to know -- and Brad mentioned that we have prepared the plat consistent with Conditional Use CUP 99-037, which was approved in December of 1999. That was a conditional use for the entire project. It focused on areas such as circulation, access, open space, common areas, landscape, fencing, pathways, total units, homes site sizes, and various specific details, along with the development agreement. So we have prepared this plat very consistent with that. I'm going to start with some comments on the staff report and maybe expand on some of Brad's comments. The first comment would be the emergency vehicle access on Weatherby Drive. Our plat was submitted with an error. It showed that that would be a full road and full access. We switched engineers for this phase of the project and he made a mistake and didn't do that. We clarified that as you see in your staff report. I apologize to all of the Greenhill Estates folks. That was an honest mistake. I believe staff has reviewed it and we are very comfortable with the original condition that was written. The Highway District did review it and approve that as emergency access. In terms of the comments from the police department, I'm just not sure that they were clear that there was another secondary access that would be a full access to the point. I think once they see that they would be comfortable. I haven't talked with the captain, but I'm sure he would be comfortable with that. We are certainly in support of emergency vehicle access and I know there will be some people that will testify about that tonight. We have reviewed our plan with the fire department. We are doing it very consistent, as consistent as we can with what was submitted as a conditional use. We are also trying to satisfy the fire department, so they can use it purely as an emergency access. Number 2, secondary access, we are on track to satisfy that condition and certainly realize we have to and we will do that. There may be a minor modification to the location and it may move just a tad bit to the north. It's not going to materially affect the plat at all. There would be no more lots added or taken away, it just may slightly move up to the north. We would like to build it with phase two and anticipate doing that and we anticipate building phase 2 this summer. So we hope that that would be in before September -- or it will be in before September if we build it. So our intention now is to improve that and build it before the 200th permit. We want to get that in as soon as we can and it makes a lot of sense to do that with phase 2 of the project. Those were some of the general comments on the staff report. As it relates to some site specific comments on the staff report, we submitted the letter to you I think 2 days ago or a day ago, written by Scott Beacham. Site Specific Condition No. 1, which addresses sewer latecomers fees, we spent some time with staff and we have agreed to a modified condition that was drafted by Bruce at his suggestion and we are comfortable with that. That's written in the letter to you under suggested modification to staff comments. That modification reads in that letter: Sanitary sewer and water service to this site shall be t '~ ~ ~ i• ~Af'. F'.Yj- ' ,-i $k~ ~ ~ }p r-. -'-i` `w • ~;'~ '' ~ ` x w' . t 4 sr- ~ ^, .~~ ,z ~ 4. ! ~,~~ t~ x ~- rd; ,: •; ;~. L ~ ~ r f ~, ` ~ . i k , Y ~ ~ ~ ;~ 4'~ a ,~ if p ~y~~ k 11 { ~' ~ j~ (' t f x} ~r k ~~ ~ 1 ~ ~ Y T ij ~ •' 7.T ~ 'c 1"~.: ' 'M.:yT ~r ~- ~`~ ~ ~ rF ~~ n ~ r ,h. ~3 , S . ~'VYt ~K~ ;ti »= r:. - t ~~~ t .~T~c .~ha^ ~. -~~ r ~t ~ ~ ~ ~ R A[%: ? t I'" > cr ~ J ~4U ;yam, ~ 7 ' , ~ . ~.:'. f ~w ~ .1{ S4tYi' ~ V.. W F F ~~i Y - ~ ' r Y ''S is ~V~ ~ Y Y 4+?~ 7~#~~~t k Y ...,. rµ Yf =;~' a Fria _. ~ }ter ,l ,avl~~' a~.." f L t ~~~ ` X1 ~ ich ~ '~ h t 5 r •' r a -r., are .~ ;,rys: : a . ; ; t ,. - r ,~ Y ~'~ k 1 ,F • 1 ~y .:k 4 _T }~ ~ f ~a r ~,~4` b ' ~II'~'<1Gr y kc~y '~+asY t ~,~ ~h~"~*if~~ S ~ IYT 7~:E { 6 ~ 42 1~t ~~y ~A A i h Y`. t~{ f -.!!'y +'~P `4't .c x ~y t ~ .~yT.g~.Ci ~ ;.fr.A F -4 _ -~~, ~ ,1 F _.1t i ~ 7 a ~Y.Yk ~a *~ 1 } . E :~ ~~~ l~ `~~ r~'y~~Yg7 - ,. Q RTa'e- { i i' f ~ ~' ~fFi'9+~ 1,' q'~f wr ? ~'~: Fw 1. r~u~ ~_. 44 _ `~F!~'1FI,~. ~7"tt Ya:,~"~ 1 f ~, c /~ r[q 2 ~Y"~E'°'t~ ~ .ref 1f~'~ ~' '~ k !1` ° f+'1~ . S `:. t ~_ ,T~ _ F~ y, ~• ~, ~ F, ry`s~i. ~~ .~~ .4 ~ 'L n •: ~t ~..~ i~ ~;~ i1 3 ~kSSr,~~~I.`~+~qq ~r~:,s°'iy~ ~~FY ~;lk'y,~,y~ ~,r ~ r : zrY ~3w 4~Hh ~ ~'a?~;~i R^~e? F'~ ~~ F ~'t FL1y ~F ~ ~~4M =,x v~~~ i ~~~{y ,e D+ `~r*'~ '~ .fix 7 ¢~7V~~ a1~,iS 3L11; ~ - .k.,. ,_ ~~ :,. . ,, . a ~; >f ;,: . n r ~:.. ,, 4 ., ;r , - r ,~, r~ '- ~, ~„ ~4 ~ ~~ - t;. t f i~ ~ ~, t ~~ .~'rT~Frr, ~ ~~ -' ~ Yk, ;~. . ~ t~ f' ~T ~'J f7 l t f r ,5 ~~ r ~ d t •r - ~; ~ i .~ - L ~ ~~ ` 1 fir li iw ~ '~ Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 70 via extensions from existing mainlines adjacent to the property. The applicant shall be required to either pay the Five Mile Trunk sewer latecomer's fee in full or, with City Council approval, make arrangements for payment prior to obtaining the city signatures on the final plat. We are near to where we think there is an agreement between the city and us. We are happy with the fee structure and they are happy with the fee structure, we just want to make sure that we have the ability to be in front of the Council for that goes into effect. No. 2, the water connection to the high pressure zone. As you may be aware -- and I'm not sure if there is a general map, Brad, but we are watered now on the - low pressure zone which comes in through the regular entry to Woodbridge, but St. Luke's went in there as a high pressure zone and now it's pulled further down to about the middle of the Magic View. Ultimately, the Public Works Department and ourselves feel that it is important to connect to the high pressure zone to the low pressure zone. We agree with staff that it should be connected. We think it's good for Woodbridge and it will be good for the homeowners in Woodbridge, but it also is good for the overall city and the circulation of the water system, so there is a benefit to more people than just Woodbridge. We are prepared to do that with phase two construction as well. We'd like to just get it all done at once. However, there are a couple of things we want to mention. The water model for this project shows that it will exceed the state and DEQ's requirements for water pressure in a project. It may not be where the Public Works Department wants to see it ultimately. It will be there eventually. But we believe that we can provide water to the site and we can provide it at pressures that the state and Department of Environmental Quality would be satisfied with. So, therefore, we are going to ask that the cost of the off-site improvement, which would be improvements not within Woodbridge, but the off-site improvements to get the high pressure zone to Woodbridge would be shared with the city and that's what that condition number 2 modification, if you look down to the very last thing, that's what we are asking. Those are the site specific comments, the only ones that we have. I would like to mention that - this is probably the best staff report that we have and compliment the staff for putting it together. We got it well in advance. We have had a chance to react to it and I think it's really good. Now we move into neighborhood comments and there is some neighborhood folks who will talk tonight. We had a neighborhood meeting with the Greenhill Estates Homeowners Association Board. We did not have a meeting with all of the Homeowners in Greenhill Estates, we figured that going to the board would be a way to get with as many of them as we can them and that they would represent that neighborhood. At that meeting we discussed emergency access, we discussed secondary access, and we discussed fencing and we feel that our answers to those issues were okay with the board at that time. We discussed fencing, that it would be consistent with the conditional use approval and the phase one fencing that we have in there. We also met with several individuals not as a group with the Magic View residents and we met with them individually. They were primarily concerned about the - secondary access. Individual neighbors and comments, I had the opportunity to meet with Mr. Osborne this evening prior to the meeting and he gave me some comments and concerns. Unfortunately, he wasn't made aware that there was a homeowners association meeting, apparently, so he didn't participate in that. We did not communicate prior to tonight, so some of these comments I'm reacting to. The first comment was he'd like to see a berm and fence between the property. I'd like to -- Mr. Osborne's property -- I think you're all aware what it is, down there in the corner, it's a :. [`~ S.t .. - ' ~ ; :, ~~ 41~i l fh I_~_~ 5 ~.~ ~ ~~y% :k,. 't $z~ S2 ~. ~«. ~ . n ,a a ~~ k ~ {f i ,.}.. i :jc, ~ Y ,~.y~ /~~,,y~ .::~, , t.~`r fit,. S l.ki 1 - '~ Nf ` L'.... S ~~ t 1 ~ ~ -~' a {, ~. S 1 :, s ~~ 3 r +~1--. i i , 5~1..Y, H ~'.. ~ :. ~ k ~ '4 ` ~ ', , - Y erg.- 4t in,fii ~~ M.'~T -. ~ h' ~ ~ sLF.: 4ci- ._. _ H E-a-~fl Sim-.- ~. bj y.~,bY F.cr S ~r~ ~ q i F wi~tu~~.^ f7' 4 ~ ~ t~ ~ Aji d 'V Y. .~ ti ~rj, Vie; ,~ y~, L~na'~,~ q~rv'a~,u~ 'fib` *5,+~ r K ~ `~ h" N ±, h i i t f. ~' !~ ,~~r _ FA.Y 31 F 1'hY. rs { ~:fr'~ RS 'fl ff,.Fr ik s n 1,d~ Y ~.:'rt F l'^-~ ~ e . r. 'tl~~"' t ~ ~'° ~ a '~ k~irr i f~k`~~ ~ } ,.r r ~ ,~ , t y~~~p.~, rein ~er,t dFr t Y ,. v ` k' Y :N. 1 ~ ~ }~ .y a ~° ~ ~ F t ;; xtc, ' 7 r~ti f ~ - ~ ~ ~. a 7 ~ ~ 5 i E~ ~ ~ i i j ~iY n','t'''.Cf,n. - j ~~ 11 t r~~ ,~ , ~ K 4 ' 4•~~' ~ ~ s~. ~ ~. 1 ~+~ 4 „Y. ~-~. ~k ;' :~• ,'~ ~„ _ ~,, ~ `~ ~ ; ~. r~F ~~ ry = i ~ ~: *~ z~~ "r ~:-~ ti ' ~ 1 Kr~fi ~F `` x ~fl c x i. }' / ~: .. ~, r z~ ~ S ' ~lv ~ 5 ~~ r ~~~~~` ~;~`~~~; ,r~~., a.~;: ~ ~Y ~,, qx } y ~S .' ~ ~ -mot ~ ~'^~ t ".: r~,~; k~. ~:.. -~ ~' H. y ~ ~~~~ .~.; ;~ ~w' ' t ~r, • s~f '` ~ ~:: .'. ~f-. ~." 4 .. ~r ' ~ rryy~f t~` " 4,- rr.'';, t-~~= r ~ r ~}: ,~ r a y~`µY_ ~~4Y.:.' ~L l: ! tea; } L~: ~~' f x~~~~ `~' ~~, u~ ~° .~> ~> - ~5 ~~ ,~ a-< i r,• r~ ~,F, .~; '' ; ~ ~' y 1 M~~,(( .. 1 a ,' k ~ v 'r . ' ~ ~' °~ lc ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~~ rt x ~t Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 71 pie-shaped property. Right here. I think he had some good comments and comments we definitely will work with him on and some that I'm not sure we agree with. His first comment was he would like to see a berm and a fence between the property along our boundary there. As some of you will recall who were on the commission when we went through this originally, there was a great debate about this and we are comfortable with the fencing consistent with the conditional use approval. We also had a fencing plan and diagram approved by the City Council and we are comfortable with that fence and we'd like to see it stay that way. I think there will be some problems if we but a berm in there. There is a drainage ditch on their property and some problems that would make it tough to put a berm and fence there. Borup: Would you elaborate on what the fencing -- what was the fencing agreement? O'Neill: It's 6 foot fencing, a good neighbor fence, and it would be consistent with what we have currently in Woodbridge. Borup: 6 foot fencing. O'Neill: Cedar. It would be cedar and a good neighbor fence. Borup: Thank you. O'Neill: It would be on our property, so it will be on our property and it will be maintained by the homeowners who have that individual section of their fence. The next question or comment he had is he wants to make sure that the Five Mile Creek pathway that we will have come through the property is consistent with the path that's along Five Mile near his storage facility and we are perfectly comfortable with that. I think the Parks .Department has a plan and we'd like to make it stay consistent so. It's a path that has a benefit to the entire community. So we are comfortable with making it consistent. The next comment is he wanted to see some open space at the corner of the property at that location and there was some open spaces you recall in his storage facility and he wants to see it compliment that and I think that's a good thought, however, I just want to point out that Woodbridge has over 20 percent of its project in open space, which is over 16 acres, and a large portion of that is down there right along the boundary. So I'm not sure we are in favor of that. But we are open to talking to him. The next comment he had was management of the dirt and the fact that he has a pool and that it was just pure havoc on his pool last year and I certainly apologize for that, but when you're constructing on an 80 acre project there is going to be dirt. We certainly will comply with the city requirements and do the best we can to minimize the effect of dust and dirt when we build this project. It's an ongoing battle and we'll do the best we can to do that and we will certainly meet the city requirements. The next comment he had was the banner on the back of a house in phase one that he could see from his house that says for sale. We don't own that house, we are not selling that house, the house happened to sell last week, so that banner will go down. We certainly will work with our builders and ask them not to put banners up on houses that are facing other houses. That's not a problem. But we can't control that, we don't own that house. So those are some of his general comments and hopefully some responses to those. We are certainly r '7 - M1 ~~~\ k +c ~,'?_ ~ r _ ~i. ~. t -. ,~~'.• .?'.c 0.a m-''-~ i 1'$"~4 "~ is ~ i .,~ t ~ , r ~ s •:rr ~ '~ ' ~ }~1 v ~~~ y F ~~ ~ ~ ~ 3 ~ ~I~ Y~4t s ~''i ~f o ~ 1 -~ f, 1 J .. .. ~ 6 t :+ r t~ ~ s ~ ~ .~~ y• to +~ 4 y t[ A-~14~ .r... , .~ f ; tc F y ~,.v k ~~' ~'~ ~ ~r ` b ~:. ~ f.3 °.iY ~YY~i 1 t, , f i +~}. . ~Pr+. 1 4 ~p ~r L ~i (f .rA ~ ~ y . ~;i V,~~~ ~.f~ t 4 tlr { rr S'l 3 ~ ~C'~K~T ~.t~Y~aM "+2 y. , ~ ~ ~ k 7 x~ L f .. nl 7 ' '~. ~ ~ ,u •~ ; ;ant ; r ~ r "ft}~ , x ~ .i: ~¢ t~3 :~yr 44y ~. -t7 ek..... .. ~...~n'w 7b1--~ ttN?.a,.,awa ~ '~~ + ~~=~ 1 , ~,r.s; + cl .. n. tNgk ~ M'~ ~.~ t _~ ~ ~ ~ if -, .. .y t. ~ t, r _ .l t ,,. F ", ,~* ~~~i'--~ {~+ tom.' ~•1 a ~ +w+ ~ i ~. ~~r`-W s~gi"•Y~w{'C~~~~t'~ ZSG4q.,~!t~'r$r.~C ~ ~~. n :.r t. a~ r t'~44i ;1~ '~t.~'•r.-~~1 „ems-" r-~ r.k r i .r ~~ vs ~ _ ~'~`~~ cam, i ssrr~5}i y_7tr ~r.ysa,~v-o- -~..,,;~< `~.t~„~°sa~~l,i ~lY,~i~.lt+!eIA~L~d'u3Sc ~jo-F; ~ wvt':' _ _ .. ....T ~' 'Y ~ `'. ~ ""., Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting _` -v November 15, 2001 { I,,, ~;y~~ Page 72 n'. prepared to stay consistent with the original conditional use approval and all the details ~'' ~~ in that approval. We would be happy to meet again with the homeowners association board if they want to review more in detail those conditions. I would like to try to keep it to meeting with the board or people as part of a board meeting, instead of trying to meet ~;~' 9 with probably over 80 homeowners in that area and so I would like to do that if possible. I mean we will do that and show them the details before we submit the final plat, which <J`~` is when we are required to submit the minute details. So, in conclusion, we ask that you recommend approval of the preliminary plat with the modifications as written in our letter to you by Scott Beacham, dated November 14, 2001. I'll stand for any questions. << Borup: Any questions from the Commissioners? I have got one probably for the staff ~ `~ and that's on the high pressure zone tie in and the shared off-site costs. Any comment ~ t~.?'` on that, Mr. Freckleton? ' o Y ' `' Freckleton: Absolutely. Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, I'd just like to point '` ~ ` out to you that the state of Idaho and the Department of Environmental Quality don't .. ~^ operate our system, therefore, they are not on the receiving end of the phone calls when they start rolling in for low pressure complaints. We strive for a higher level of service than 40 to 50 psi. We would like to see pressures in the range at a minimum in , the 60s. Provision was made in phase one for the installation of a -- we call it a clay ~r`~~ ,. valve it is a ressure re ulatin station with full intent of this develo ment bein brou ht P 9 9 P 9 9 ~~ `-~ into the high pressure zone. In the last couple of weeks I have had the water ~., -. -~,~= -~ department go out with our pressure recorders, they area 24 hour recorder, and I have r got 2 charts. Pressures were taken at the end of the cul-de-sac that you see that's in a ~ phase one, which would be on the west side of Five Mile Creek. Pressures during that I period of time indicate that it will be about 42 pounds of pressure and that's at ground level. You don't want to put a 2 story home on there or you can probably expect in the ~5~°~~. neighborhood of 34 pounds. According to our plumbing official, a standard toilet minimum operating pressure is 20 psi. You can see that that doesn't leave you much ~'"`~ ~~ room for cushion. I'd point out that at this point in time the development -- .There are only 23 houses that are occupied and we are seeing these kind of pressures at this point in time. It's just going to continue to get worse. The pressurized irrigation system in the development does have a single point connection that is to the city system. As i ~ you know this year irrigation water was shut off in September. During the month of October the Woodbridge development consumed two million 90 gallons of water. That's ~~ a pretty good demand on our system. We feel very strongly that this subdivision should +~ be brought into the high pressure zone. ,; Borup: Maybe just to interrupt a little bit. I think that's what Mr. O'Neill agreed with. They want to be brought in -- __ ~ '~_ O'Neill: I'm not debating that at all. We are prepared fully to go ahead and do that. '~'`-'"- Freckleton: We don't have any mechanism to cost share this. I have explained -- Borup: Where do they need to go to tie in? Right now it's not a loop system; is that correct? It dead ends in -- ~':=~ ~t s , ~: ~~ .. 5 K+ft~ ~S}i' t- 9~J Yt `, r, ~; Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting `+' '> November 15, 2001 "' Page 73 `r ~ -:` Freckleton: It dead ends in Woodbridge phase one. Correct. ~, °~_ Borup: Where do they need to go to -- -;f~ Freckleton: They will go right out the secondary access that they are going to provide to the east and they are going to tie in with an existing high pressure main that's in the Magic View Subdivision. ,, - Borup: That is clear down there? '~"~~ O'Neill: Right in here. Borup: Is that a main that goes under the freeway at this time? Freckleton: Correct. Borup: Comes from -- Freckleton: Correct. It ties in Overland Road and it ties into Eagle Road, the St. Luke's `-b~ area. We have talked to Mr. O'Neill about the latecomer's process and that is the mechanism that I would propose that they pursue. We don't have any means of cost sharing with them. I mean in our respective it's a development cost. Borup: Are there easements available for them to tie in then? Freckleton: It's a public road. They are going to have to provide the access into Magic View from that secondary access -- public access. So they will be in public right of way. ,E ;~.. - .. _. .~~ ' 41 ,,, ~:z:; ~~ ,~ Borup: Okay. So the cost is the piping, essentially? Freckleton: Correct. I would point out that they did -- in phase one they installed the vault and they posted surety with the city for the cost of the installation of the equipment in that vault, so that -- as soon as this tie-in can be made the city will install that equipment and the conversion to high pressure will be accomplished. Borup: Okay. Thank you. Any questions from any Commissioners? Nary: Yes, Mr. Chairman. Just so I understand, Bruce, there is 2 suggested modifications in this letter from Mr. O'Neill and what he indicated was that you had either authored or had agreed with the first one, the first modification, essentially. The only addition was that the latecomer fees would be paid or that they make arrangements with City Council to do that -- do that some other way, as long as it gets paid. Did you not agree with that? Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Nary, I did author that and I do fully agree with that first modification. f ~;~ ~.., t- ~'~ F~. ~r Meridian Planning and Zoning CorYimission Meeting `>~:r November 15, 2001 r Page 74 ~. ' ~ Nary: The other one -- ~i~, £; ~t .._ Freckleton: The second one I strongly am opposed to. ,~ Nary: Okay. Okay. ~'', O'Neill: I knew that before the meeting. ~ ~` ~ Nary: I assumed you probably did. ~'._~,' ,~~~` Centers: What's the rationale for wanting the city to pay half of the water -- ~"` ~, j O'Neill: I didn't necessarily say that they -- ,: ~~ -. Centers: I thought that's what you said earlier. ~.. , ~ Nary: Cost share. ~, }~~~: Centers: Cost share? ~~ `` O'Neill: Yes. Cost share. I think the rationale was 2 fold. One -- and I'm not goin to Y 9 °~~ ``~ debate Bruce's tests at all. We did some tests ourselves and they are a little bit different, but I trust his tests probably better than ours, so I'm not going to debate the tests. I think the rationale was -- is that by connecting the system and pulling it from off L_ site we are not just -- we are not just providing the benefit to Woodbridge, we are ~~ probably providing the benefit to the other projects that are on this water line and the ~" city by having a loop system. So I don't think it's just a pure benefit for Woodbridge. I ~$ : think it is a benefit for the overall city and it is also a benefit to others and I realize there "'" is a latecomer's fee program and we are prepared to do that if we have to, I just -- it's oin to be about a 60,000 dollar cost to us, we have alread g g y put about $10,000 of ~r costs in the pressure reducing deal and that's a large number. -~ Borup: Any other questions? Bruce, on the -- what's been the normal experience on ~:, sr~:;: the latecomer pay back? That's going to be -- in this case I assume it's going to be when commercial development comes in. Is that the assumption? Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, I -- you know, the way the Magic View Subdivision is changing -- Borup: I mean it would be development within Magic View would be the ones that would atw: be -- ~. aa:o ;:~ Freckleton: Correct. r Borup: -- on the -- ~i~ *~_ u~~~ $E :;; `'" Meridian Plannin and Zoning Commission Meeting 9 November 15, 2001 Page 75 Freckleton: Correct. So I guess I would foresee the chances of getting pay back are ,: r very good. __ Borup: But it's not going to be next year. Probably. `' ~= Freckleton: That's a crystal ball question. x:= ,.~. :,~ :,t =r,~K_ O'Neill: My only concern with that is I believe under the latecomer's agreement there is a 10 year clause on that and if, for some reason, that within 10 years that didn't develop, _ then we would not be able to recoup that money. So if there is some way we can work within that I might be open to that, but -- t~~ Centers: You knew that when you signed. ~`_~~'~ O'Neill: Well, we had to build it and then we submit it. ,.-~ Freckleton: Built right into that agreement is a clause that would allow a time extension beyond the 10 year term. It does have a caveat, because the city's ordinance does not ~~ provide for that right now. So the way this comment is worded -- or the agreement is ~~~~~ worded is that it says something to the effect that when and if the city ordinances allow ~~~ this by mutual agreement this can be extended out beyond the 10 year term. So the s- -r reason we did that was because we wanted to open the door. ~~ -~: 5..: :; Borup: But I agree in light of hopefully a new comprehensive plan, 10 years would .ti,£, probably be very conservative. Okay. Thank you. '` - O'Neill: You bet. ''`~ Borup: Do we have further testimony on this item? If so, please come forward. rt;~ ~ Forsberg: My name is John Forsberg. I live at 2320 Cadillac Drive. My property is one of ~" the only 2 properties that abuts this phase 2 from the Locust Heights Subdivision. I ,4- ~~ guess my main concern is the density of houses in that area. You know, I am right on '`~ the creek, I have quite a bit of wildlife in that area and I just hate to see it go away. '~ There are foxes that live down in there and there is a family of raccoons and quite a bit ~_~~ of birds and such things and I feel that if there were just, you know, maybe one or two ,~~ '..."~'" less houses in that area right there would be a little bit more beneficial for the wildlife `~~ ~~ that are already being scattered with the rest of the subdivision now. Originally when saw this -- the original proposal, there was not as many houses in there, the lots were bigger in this area, and I'm speaking about this -- this area right in here, right on the creek, and, again, my -- probably 90 percent of it is selfishness on my part, because, ~. ''°' you know, I bought the property because I like the wildlife and I've tried real hard to maintain that and if there was a little bit more buffer zone, a little less density in that area, then that would be protected a little bit better and Ijust -- "~ Borup: Sir, was your lot the one on -- the furthest to the east? z~; ;,:~ . t .: ~" ~ 7~ y Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 76 Forsberg: No. Mine is the second one in. Borup: Second one in? Forsberg: That's correct. That one there. So it's looking like to me they are putting in 4 - 4 lots up against my one lot and it just seems like a lot of people are going to be in that area and the original plans that I saw held for a pedestrian path down through there and not so many houses. So I guess that's all I really have to say. I'm just, again, concerned for the wildlife and, you know, you just don't see that many foxes in this area anymore and it's kind of a nice thing. Thank you. Borup: Thank you. Any questions, Commissioners? Thank you, sir. Centers: Just one. Does that creek run full year around? Forsberg: It's not running full this year. In the past it has -- it has trickled through the winter. This year it has not. Centers: Okay. Norton: Excuse me. I have one question. How long have you lived on that property? Forsberg: 3, almost 4 years. Norton: Okay. Thank you. Borup: Do we have anyone else? Fender: Fred Fender at 2134 Autumn Way, which is immediately to the north of the property in question and the property that's immediately to the west of the proposed emergency access. I'd just like to address the emergency access. 2 years ago when we were going through all of this -- some of you were here, some of you are new to the Commission, but we spent many hours with ACHD first and then came here in front of the Planning and Zoning and thought we had all this ironed out and hopefully we do and I just would like to speak to that and encourage you to keep that emergency access. It would make a lot more sense to come in off of Eagle Road with the way the traffic flows are going to have a primary access through our subdivision in line in and around makes little sense because of the construction of the road, the density of the housing, it's a rather closed, tight-knit community there, and we would really not like to see a main access through that. Borup: There has been no proposal to change that. Fender: Okay. Borup: It's still emergency access with the bollards and no vehicle access. ~~. ~. ~~~ .. 1 t ~:.....- S *4, Meridian Planning and Zoning Co~ission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 77 °~~~ Fender: Okay. Good. Congratulations. Thank you. ~z: Borup: Well, but that's what the applicant proposed. There was a mistake that was -''r; -4 mentioned. .~`,:,` Fender: That's what I thought. I just wanted to confirm and that -- I also just wanted to s~'~=~y affirm their project. I think it's a very nice project they have done, they have held to their ~ ~ word, and those of us that live next door I enjoy looking off to the project and the houses ~~~~ they are building. They are doing a nice project and I want to congratulate them for that, so -- Borup: Thank you, sir. Any questions? Thank you, sir. ,: '``" Coole M name is Keith Coole , I live at 2586 Autumn Wa m Greenhill Estates and ~;~~ Y~ Y Y Y I'm on the committee of the Greenhill Estates Homeowners. We did have just a board ~; meeting, we had a very hard time for some reason getting even that many together and ~" on a very short notice and we haven't talked to all the homeowners, but our main concern was the access and we appreciate that that's going to stay the same. I had one more item and that was that we would like to have a chance to have the ~ ~ homeowners, particularly those that live next to the Woodbridge, have a chance to get ~ '' together and discuss the fence and possibly work with the Woodbridge people to work ~~. out an agreeable fence situation there, so that would be all my comments. ': '~~~ ~~ Borup: Are you -- you've got a concern with the fence that's agreed upon now? Cooley: We've heard some comment about they would prefer some other type of fence, „wT~'~` but only from a couple of the people that live next there. Borup: Do you know whether those are the people that expressed the same concerns 2 years ago? '" ~ Cooley: I don't know, because I was not able to meet in some of the meetings at that = time. Borup: Thank you. Any questions? Norton: I do have a question. Mr. Chairman, considering you were the only one on the '~~"~ Commission at that time, we are all since December 1999, I came on in January 2000, ~ "~ what type of fence are we talking about? ,s: ~;~ Cooley: Well, the fence that was approved is a good neighbor fence and we don't -- ~~, "° Norton: What does that mean? tt. ~" ~,; .. ')' ~ax`$ra ..Cooley: That means it's the same on both sides, so you don't have one side that looks i.ff>r;sy like a back and one side that looks like a front. I'm not sure that that's going to be a real ~~>--; ~ concern, but we want to have a chance to have the homeowners meet and discuss that { , .,. .;r ~. ~.~ A tii: -i ~ J, `,~_. ~~ ..a 'r," ~ Meridian Planning and Zoning Co711rnission Meeting _ November 15, 2001 ;~° Page 78 and meet with the Woodbridge .people to discuss what the majority want. I'm not sure we'll get everybody that wants the same thing anyway, but -- ~;; . Borup: So you're saying that some might not want a fence at all? ~~' Cooley: I don't know, to tell you the truth. That may be -- ~,: w= ~~ Borup: Yes. Yes. They are putting it on their property so I mean I think there is probably ~'` '~ Y± o , going to be a fence. But I think you're certainly welcome to discuss that with -- a ~~ Cooley: Thank you. Borup: Thank you. Mecham: My name is Bryan Mecham, I live at 2159 Autumn Way, which is north of the ` r" project and I'm the home - ,~;, j S `, . ' Borup: Right next to the access road. : t Mecham: Exactly. Just a couple of points I'd like to make. I was involved in a lot of the ~'r.;,-~` ~,,. discussion 2 years ago. I think Woodbridge and the late hours has something in ~,< common. We were here until 3:00 in the morning discussing at one time Ithink -- ~~~: - Borup: It won't be that late tonight. «° ` Mecham: -- Commissioner Borup knows about that one. Anyway, what we'd like to -- I'd just like to say that I'm glad to hear that this emergency access is staying. One of ~ f-: our concerns is, just so the rest of the Commissioners know, is that in the decision that ~:x,. ~~~'' it was going to stay -- I mean the emergency access, there is still that concern about the ¢~ . secondary access and in our discussions last time it was said that if at the 200th home . they didn't have a secondary access that the project would be stopped and that they couldn't go and petition to have the emergency access turned into their secondary access and that was agreed upon. So I just wanted to bring that up again, that if it comes to the 200' home, we are not expecting to have the ACHD here. We have ACHD -- I almost said AC-DC -- the ACHD come in and put that road in. The one d'p; question -- or the one point I was going to make, I was involved in the meetings ,5,y:,: regarding the fence. We did have a discussion to the east of our property along our 4r subdivision, our half acre division, there is a berm with trees that separate their homes `,-'F, from the development that's going in and it's -- one of the things that's going to happen is that we have thought about having a berm with a fence type a little bit higher. We did -- we didn't push for that completely when we -- when we signed on. We would like to be able to discuss that, because we now see that it's -- the development's continuing down our subdivision from the east and there is a berm and I believe in our whole ~~<' ~~. subdivision we are going to have half a berm with trees and the other half is going to be ;;: this little fence with -- you know, cedar fence and the other thing that -- ,.~.j~.~~~~I Borup: You're talking about the berms in the commercial subdivision; right? ~J Meridian Planning and Zoning Co'~'iission Meeting a . November 15, 2001 Page 79 S, ,1 ;~r :~. ~' `~Y ~= ,f, 1` .•_ ~. ,: t, .... ~,,~ Mecham: Right. But if you notice, it's going to come halfway down into our half acres and into the full acre lots. Right to there would be bermed. Then the rest of the way down is going to be a picket fence in our subdivision. So the same for consistency we maybe would like to have the opportunity to discuss that. We did find out that one of our close neighbors, that O'Neill Enterprises made sure they put a berm up to protect their subdivision from looking into the storage facility. So they requested a berm, so we think that, you know, it's something that we should be able to look at. If that's what our neighborhood agreed upon, it's allowed to be able to look at that. The last couple of comments is the good neighbor fence. I heard Mr. O'Neill say that the neighbors -- I mean that the homeowners would maintain that good neighbor fence. The question is is that both sides or is it just one side? I mean are we going to be required to -- since it's on their property are we going to be required to maintain our side or is that -- I just want to get a clarification of what he meant by -- he did say that they would maintain the fence, so, you know, I assume both sides, but -- the other point was on the emergency access. I wasn't sure who -- on our property who's going to develop that. Is that the ACHD? Is it a requirement of O'Neill Enterprises or Woodbridge to -- so that that pathway between our subdivision and their subdivision is consistent or is there going to be two different organizations that we are going to be dealing with? Borup: Do you remember what was agreed to 2 years ago? Mecham: Well, my recollection was that O'Neill Enterprises and the homeowners would work together to put that together, but I didn't know if ACHD and -- if they are involved or who's involved with that. So I was just hoping for some clarification what's being required of -- so I know who I get to work with. Borup: I think, yes, we will get some clarification. But my thought is I'm not sure what they can do. It's not their property. Mecham: I didn't know if that was a requirement of theirs to tie it in or if it's ours -- I just didn't know, so -- Borup: Yes. That's ACHD property, is that not right? Mecham: Yes. It's the ACHD's property. Borup: All right. Mecham: So they would be responsible for that. Do we need to be meeting with them or - Borup: I would assume if anything's going to happen it probably would -- I mean if they are -- whether they would look at doing something different, I - 2 years ago, I don't remember the details. I guess in my mind I was expecting to see the grass creek and landscaping area done on the Woodbridge side and then what happened on the other side would be up to your subdivision. ~ls'_7~...n r; r. ~~ ji~`~~. { ~ ~. •4' . _~ ~.;~: ~ Meridian Planning and Zoning Co~f'ASiission Meeting November 15, 2001 'n~;: Page 80 f: r -~ Mecham: I guess I'm just a little concerned -- ~~~~~ Borup: But I don't remember what was -- Mecham: I remember we were going to work together and -- ,;;: Borup: I think we can get some clarification on that. Mecham: Then the last thing -- I think Mr. Cooley mentioned it -- you know, in these board meetings, if they have board meeting that are homeowners association, that the ?'',~~ Fenders and the Mechams could be invited, since we are the ones that are going to be affected by this project and I guess the question as homeowners what do we do, do we ~' contact ACRD for the access and discuss with them how they are going to do it or -- .F ~w ~..; -~ n ~~ ~~' ~`~ ''I ~, >:~k ~.`:;I, Borup: Yes. Mecham: Is that what we have to do? Borup: It sounds like maybe you need to talk to your board members for notification. Mecham: Okay. Borup: Any questions? Thank you. Anyone else? Last chance. Okay. Oh, Mr. Osborne. Osborne: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, Ron Osborne, 373 Thornwood Drive. Also owner of the recently approved Franklin Mini Storage. It's almost midnight and we are meeting too often. A couple comments. First of all, Commissioner Norton, the horses are doing fine. Okay? The colts are doing nicely. I appreciate Mr. O'Neill's comments about our discussion prior to the meeting and it wasn't quite as positive when we were having that discussion as he portrayed, but I appreciate that that's changed a little bit. 2 or 3 issues I'd like to address. Thought we were going to have to break out the boxing gloves out there, so -- the berm issue and the fencing. The -- along the south border of the property, as mentioned by Mr. Mecham, the east side is currently bermed, treed, and a fence. That will run down to the middle of the property. I was one of those 2 years ago that did request the berming, so -- at the meeting they had at that time and I was in a minority. I think also the Fenders were interested in the berming at that time and it may have been discussed. But we'd like to see something done a little different there than the good neighbor fence, because I'm afraid it will become the good ship lollypop, beings that everybody paints or stains it different colors on both sides. Perhaps berming may not work and Mr. O'Neill may be right there, but I'd tike to discuss that. But certainly trees, shrubbery, and particularly trees that would grow really tall. I don't want to see in their neighbor's bedrooms or anywhere else in their house and with the proximity of the houses along that side, including my own, that will take place. I would think some type of berming, fencing, and particularly trees that may grow rapidly would be appropriate there and then would be consistent along the entire property line. Secondly, on the corner just where it meets the south corner of my property we did talk ,~ ? ~: _` Meridian Planning and Zoning Co"RRfiission Meeting November 15, 2001 ,'~ ~ Page 81 to them about approximately a 120 foot setback there that could be treed and then it would blend with my adjacent mini storage property and I'm sure, you know, that makes ~};=~a sense to them, because we, you know, put in that little -- what we are going to call ~~ a affectionately the Snorting Bull Park at the back of my property and -- _ ; H ~..::, '~ ~'~~ Nary: I thought it was Osborne. Osborne: Well, Osbornes can maintain it, but it wasn't Osborne's idea and so -- okay. °~=" We think that would -- as I mentioned before, to be for the benefit of the community. `' Since that pathway will come right along Five Mile there, it would set back with some ~~<~ trees that would -- between the back of our roe We think that makes some sense. {''~'~~ A couple other things, too, we'd like to address~The lighting issue, I haven't heard ~ much about that, and that is a concern, depending upon what kind of fighting will be ~~~>_ allowed on the houses on the back, porch lighting, outside lighting. :.?.~ Borup: Mr. Osborne, your time is getting close, but I'm not sure if all your comments are really that serious. ' Osborne: Oh, they are. Very. ,_, <r Borup: The concern about residential lighting? , Osborne: Absolutely. - ,_ _ Borup: Okay. ~~ Osborne: Absolutely. If we could have berming, trees, and fencing there, I think it ~1. would resolve many of those lighting concerns. The next item, they have immediately to '~ ~' the south of my residence currently an extremely large mound of dirt that has been ~_ there for some time. It used to be 35 tons and now a large portion of that is in various places, such adjacent to the houses, and we expressed a concern about what the future ' dirt would be and we recognize with a project like that there is going to be dirt, but it has ~- been for a year plus and it was stacked immediately behind those houses in the ;f~~ southwest part of that. So that was a concern there. He addressed the banners. The ~~ banners were hung on the back of the houses that were right behind our property. That ~'~ ~ ' seems to be going away. And those are the issues we would. Be happy to stand for ~~~ ` questions, Mr. Chairman. ~;: '~`- Borup: Any questions from any Commissioners? Thank you. Maybe just one short f'.~ `s~:'. one. It sounds like you're proposing to make a change in the agreement that was "~~ ~ agreed on 2 years ago and not -- the developer not necessarily comply with all the ~~'~ things they agreed to at that time. << ~`' ' Osborne: What change in what agreement are you -- Borup: The fence and the berming, etc. r ~~ =. r ..~ ._ '; T~ ~' ~ Meridian Planning and Zoning Co~ission Meeting ~;. - November 15, 2001 ~_:;;;,s Page 82 `~~ Osborne: Yes, I am encouraging a change there. >,~ ~'`"'` Borup: Okay. Would you also feel okay if we let them change a few other things they agreed to also? 't, `~- _ Osborne: I would be open for those discussions. ~~''~Y Borup: Thank you. ~~: ~;;~ Osborne: I'm not sure which ones you're referring to, so I don't know. Borup: Lot sizes, maybe. Have a few more smaller lots against your subdivision or r } ~~ things like that that they agreed to at that -- Osborne: If they can get them any smaller, that's great. They addressed the issue at ~~-~~~ that time about the house pricing, the value of the house along there and agreed to put ~_~' :, $ the higher valued houses there, which was my concern at that time and that was ~~:_.. ''~' "~ satisfactory. Borup: Okay. Thank you. Do we have anyone else? Okay. Mr. O'Neill. Because of the ~;~ ~='r lateness, I think I would like to limit maybe your comments to questions that the :, Commissioners have, does that sound satisfactory? I have got -- actually, I have got -- I ~~~~` have only got two, and we will see what the other Commissioners have. That was on a ~''T"21 comment by Mr. Thornberry, I believe that was his name, that the original plat that was approved had -- that the amount of lots had increased and then a comment on the -;.~f pathway on File Mile Creek. O'Neill: I can answer both those questions. The original density -- we are actually 4 home sites fewer than the approved original density. So we have less home sites -- ~w. ,, . ~;,,w:- ~~'~ Borup: Overall. But how about along his property? { {~ O'Neill: Along his property line, as you may recall, we had an access -- a road which - would have brought vehicles in this area I was concerned about. That's where we showed the access. So there was a road there. So there was one fewer home site, ~{ 3 ~ because it was a road. I certainly think probably for his purposes and the concern he has, having that road further away from thatarea will probably benefit him. There also is ~. _ a 20 foot buffer where that sanitary sewer easement is that can't be built on, so there is =_ buffer there and, in addition to that, he had mentioned a pathway and there certainly still - is a pathway that will run all the way along Five Mile Creek up to the edge of the '~~~'<` property. So there will be a pathway. Borup: The pathway is still there? }, . O'Neill: You bet. That pathway is still there. ~' Borup: Is there any concerns, questions the other Commissioners have? ~', ~.~ i Meridian Planning and Zoning Co~ission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 83 N.: , . , } ~~~~~>r.' . Nary: I guess, Mr. Chairman, I'm a little unclear on -- and maybe I guess I should ask s Mr. Osborne, but on the residential lighting, I guess I'm not really that clear. O'Neill: I can give you some thoughts on that. I mean those neighbors have lights as ~,; ; well, so our people living in our houses are just as concerned about the lights that are over there. Typically we have lights on the back that are focused down and not focused ;_: . out. Some homeowners today like to have those motion sensors and they like to have ~- lights that come on and off. I certainly don't want to put a homeowner in a position here ~'~`-~~~~ they can't have security and do things for them So I guess we are open to lighting ~~'''` ''~ . ideas, but what's good for them, it's good for us. So with the lighting requirements we ;{ certainly would like to see them have those, too. ~ °' Shreeve: Mr. Chairman. ~:~, ... ~•,3~ ~r ~ '~ '$= Borup: Commissioner Shreeve. ,. s :~ Shreeve: Then back to the berm. What's your thoughts on that berm? ~ . ~ O'Neill: I'm not in support of the berm. There is a ditch or a lateral that goes along their °~ property line and I'd hate to put a berm in there and to be able to put a berm on both sides of that I think is going to be very difFcult and I think we can provide them privacy. ~~ ~ We have neighbors, too, that have backyards and they are concerned about those ~: ;" things as well. So I'm not in support of a berm. ~.~ `~ ~~='`^" Shreeve: Okay. Then just for clarification on the maintenance of the fence. ~~'` ~ O'Neill: Good question. The fence is on our property. It will be the responsibility of the ' ~ homeowners who have that property to maintain it. Just to you let you know, we will -- ~, r.- , ~`.~h ~'.,u;. ",""'' ShrPPVa~ .liict nn tha hark cirlr~7 x~, ' ~, ~' O'Neill: We will have to work out an agreement with those folks and that's always a problem in projects that are fence to fence, but we certainly have been able to do it in past projects and hope the neighbors can be good neighbors and can work through that. Just to let you know, we will stain the fence to begin with at our cost, so we will put an original stain on it, but it will last a little bit longer than some of the other fences you see. But if the homeowner doesn't want us to get on their property to maintain it, it's ~`' ° going to be hard to do that. Hopefully they will be in support of that. Borup: Any of other concerns from the Commissioners? Okay. Unless there is something you feel is really important, then go ahead and then make any final ~i _~ ~ : comments. ~.s._ ~~~ r ~~' ~ O'Neill: I probably should stop, but I'm -- it's hard for me not to respond to a couple of ur, things. One, Mr. Mecham's comments about the highway district or our responsibility to improve the highway district's right of way. I have the approval conditions and the ,{; ~~=~ ~~. ~~;, urn r, ~". N.7 S i .. ;. '. 1 h ,fir ~ ~`, S n saw 3 '~ ? x . II ..'~ - f ¢ M A ~Y: r~l~ ,f ') T. .. ~{ y °", ~yY 1' Y .d A' ~ttra.'l. {'g _ + ~~e^ u. { a ' ' ~ ` ~ ~ ~. '^ " .ri. T.S.^.~': •1 i..S~;Y,..Y.: -:F~. ~ L ~,+ ~ ~ S~ fk t 'A'~' 9b: Z ~'~ 'i A d . . . Fp i~ . i:t r. ; dY-. rs G { ,,,,n ,. ,.der:: fi'r' ;1.`iir~~: urv~ '~+;~.W~ n ~ `' ``~~4 ,,~: ~'~".Si 4 t 1 S:Y ~. 4 F ~ { ~ Y~ ~ ~ `~ ~ $ 1 N ,;{~ + ~'! i~•s'~ t 1 rt .M1, y ~ ~ J S. ' 'A { 1 t .)'.r ;~y":5r:.3r i7+:5 `v~' ~' ` + I ~ : i c' :1 ~ ~"• ,'~ g r ~ :rf, i~..,``,~`.5'., : ~ : : }~. '.'.h s Y i.~. ~+ • . P.` rku: ~:. Vr4 Ct rn $~.~'~ ~.. 1. jr~°, •fy2; ~ .: .. fem.' ~ xY.:. :1 ! i~ i :_~x 'MS~~~"F ~r { l t} ~ 1` r ' L ~ ~ ~, Y++K~ +~ i .. i . . 1 -`i ,y~ S ~~k#' : i :t' ' •~ ~` ~r ~: '~" ~ S 1 .. ~ ?~:s:,. ~ 44~A~~~ . ~ ~ , , f ~y YYd1` t. ;. ) $ . . ~ ~ ~. l~, ~r ,fie ::, ~.... ~ x ~ . ; {~4L~F+ j ~~~ t f_ A >n r'y ' +.•.$vt`:,lq -5 _ , f ~.fj 1~-F v. S ~ ~ l~ '+t4 ~q~~~~h £ ~i re Y {J i ' S aVr ". { I ~^ ~.• C.: jAti. .5 ..YU~ W f;k, `Y :'~.t .7 { • { I ''+. ~ ~A~ }'4,~ ~1 ' !, ~: ~, 'Y SM1Y.` YG u'~«~ A . ~ , f 'r ~, e, .. .. ~ :~3_ 4 ~ xs „~,' Meridian Planning and Zoning Co7Tfrnission Meeting ~~ ;X ~''«: ; :' November 15, 2001 Page 84 -; '.4 highway district's condition is to extend Weatherby Drive form Autumn Way into the site and emergency access and pedestrian pathway with a 50 foot right of way. So it's clear ~ ~~ ~ in the original condition that we were going to take it up to the property and we were ~° going to improve it and then we couldn't control what happened on the highway °~ district's property. We certainly will work with them, we will share with them our design ~~ and we will do everything we can so they hope that it's consistent, but we can't control ,. R what happens on their property. '~ ~~ ;~ Borup: Okay. Mr. Mecham wondered if they should contact the ACHD. So that would be your assessment, too? O'Neill: Absolutely. But we'd participate in the meeting with them if they wanted to. f Y- ; ~~r -~ Borup: Okay. ;s. - - : O'Neill: I don't have any other substantive comments. . . is= ~ x Borup: Okay. Thank you. z~~ i ~~ i k., O'Neill: Thank you for your time tonight. -.~,~s Borup: Any final comments from staff? None. Okay. Commissioners, any discussion? 2 °~~''' of the comments from the applicant was -- the one I think was handled on the -- but the -: .~;; other on the off-site high pressure water tie in is probably one of the issues. } ~ Nary: Iguess -- Mr. Chairman, Iguess -- first I'd move that we close the Public Hearing. ~r~4~= Norton: I second. Borup: Okay. Motion and second. All in favor? }' MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. `~ Nary: Iguess my only comment would be in looking at the staff report and looking at ~a~ ~~~ . how this project got to this point, I guess I'm not ready tonight to revisit a lot of these ~~ other issues regarding the berm and the trees and all those things. That was done. It ~,~:~ just doesn't seem like something that we should be revisiting tonight on this, I guess. I think the vehicular access I think makes some sense on what they wanted to do. The fencing I think makes some sense. I agree there probably may be some problems with it but I still think its rett reas p y onable how they are trying to do that. Iguess -- maybe ~ it's just our experience with Mr. O'Neill on a couple of other projects. It seems like he's ~,;. been pretty cooperative in trying to work through these things. I guess I don't see a ~~r~ reason to start over with the whole Conditional Use Permit. All we are looking at is basically the phase of the plat, looks like the second phase. It appears to me that }.,~_ ~'-~ basically there is 2 modifications that have been suggested by Woodbridge. One, the city staff has agreed -- agreeing to this modification and the second one it's not and the t ': latecomer fee agreement can probably deal with that and that's something they can -~ ,;, ~: ~,~~: '~ ~° ~,^ Meridian Planning and Zoning ColTrfiission Meeting =_ November 15, 2001 ' Page 85 ~ ~~ work out together. So I guess -- I don't think we probably need to do a whole lot. I don't see that this is something we should be revisiting some old issues and start over again. ~t - I think it just opens us up for more problems than just looking at this for what it is, a -~' different phase of a project that's essentially been approved to some degree and there r u is a little bit of change in there, so -- k- r ~. - Borup: Any other comments? =. Centers: That's my feeling. ~~a. ~- :. ~~~~~' „~ Borup: Okay. ~~- ,; ~~~r,~ Norton: Mr. Chairman, I didn't see the applicant objecting to staff comments. Borup: Just those 2. „~~ ~ -t.,~ Nary: Yes. ~~' Borup: The one was in agreement already. I guess comments one and 2 from the --and p~ -; r< ~ ay. owe ave any other questions or concerns? Nary: Mr. Chairman, I guess I'd move that we recommend approval of PP 01-019, ;f ry request for preliminary plat approval of 115 building lots and 10 other lots on 29.93 acres in an R-4 zone for proposed Woodbridge No. 2 by Woodbridge Community, LLC, ~ ~'~=z east of South Locust Grove and south of East Franklin Road, to include all of staff s: ~ ~ .. ~: comments of the staff report of October 23, 2001, with the only amendment is to site "~~;.~ specific comment number one, that it can be amended to include the sentence: Agreed ~{ ~ upon by the applicant, as well as the city in the letter from Woodbridge of Scott ' . Beacham, dated November 14, 2001, essentially adding one sentence to that condition that says the applicant shall be required to do A, the Five Mile Trunk sewer latecomer =.:> fees in full or, with City Council approval, make arrangements to obtain -- prior to obtaining city signatures on the final plat. To include all the remainder of the staff °° ~ comments as well and on this letter, as far as public record, to not include the l"~,:: ~_.~~, modification to site specific comment number 2. .=: Borup: Okay. We have a motion. Centers: Second. .- ~'`"` Borun: Second- Anv further discussicn? ;;'. r~', Norton: I just want to put on the record that it seemed to be very important to these residents that this emergency vehicle access remain only as an emergency vehicular ~''~'` access and not revert to a main access. I think it should be important and stated to City - Council that it should remain only an emergency access. ~:. r.,,,, ~. hN;~-_ ~?r-_ ~; ~ ~. . w; r ''~~~. " Meridian Planning and Zoning CoTrRfiission Meeting November 15, 2001 - -_ Page 86 ~'`~'~~ Borup: That -- you know, we do not have a revised plat, but I'm assuming that the plat will go to City Council and will show that with the detail and that's --. I'll reiterate that that's what was approved, strictly that. Any other --. All in favor? Any opposed. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES s~:~`"~ Borup: Thank you. Q 'w Item 10. Public Hearing: PFP 01-006 Request for Prelminary/Final Plat ` approval of 2 building lots on 10 acres in an L-O zone for ~:-° Tramore Subdivision by Thomas Development Co. - south of 1 West Pine Avenue and East of North Linder Road: Item 11. Public Hearing: CUP 01-036 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a 72 unit wood frame, three story senior apartment ':` ~ complex in an L-O zone for proposed Tramore Senior Community by t Thomas Development, Co. -south of West Pine Avenue and east of North Linder Road: ~ .~ Borup: Let's reconvene from our short break and the next item is 10 and 11, Public ~~ -~ Hearing on PFP 01-006, request for Preliminary/Final Plat approval of 2 building lots on `~; 10 acres in an L-O zone for Tramore Subdivision and related is a request for a Conditional Use Permit, construction of a 72 unit, 3 story, senior apartment complex in 4 ~~ =b,.~ an L-O zone for proposed Tramore Senior Community by Thomas Development. It's "`~• south of Pine Avenue, east of North Linder. I'd like to open both these Public Hearings and start with the staff report. ~` Hawkins-Clark: Thank you, Chairman Borup. Aerial photo on the screen of the proposed ' site. Pine Avenue on the north side. I think you're generally aware. We've already had s`~ a request tonight for a school at the -- just down there -- right here. We've also had a ;: request for aday-care just right over in this area. So I think you're well familiar with the ~~ area here, South Pine. Here is a more detailed site plan of the proposed lot. The existing Sunbridge Rehabilitation Senior Center is immediately adjacent here to the ~. , ~ west. This is a -- one of those Preliminary/Final Plat applications before you, so we do have detailed comments on both the preliminary and final. It is vacant piece of ground right now. There are I believe about 6 residences adjacent immediately to the north ;~r~~:-~ across Pine Street that would -- that would be impacted by the project. Here are a I k~,,.f couple of site photos of the Nine Mile Creek, which bisects the plat. This is the existing pathway, which I reference in the staff report here, that stubs in Tremont Subdivision ~;;~: ~- and it is referenced. Again, this would just continue directly west along the Nine Mile. This actually is not the plat itself. We didn't have an 8 and a half by 11, so I apologize for that. But this is -- this is more or less the layout that they are proposing. We do -- `~` ` ` they are proposing a 2 lot subdivision. The flag lot here that would access Pine and ~~'' ° come down across the Nine Mile. This Conditional Use Permit is for this northerly lot _~ A~~ ~. here for the 72 unit senior apartment complex, so there is just the 2 lots. Before I go on, t I will refer to a couple of particular points. You should have received a November 13~" `~~: ~- ~:.., letter from Mr. Tom Mannschreck that did address a couple of the issues. So I refer you ~-:~ { . >. ~:::_ ._ .. y ~.-:~, ~,,,* g ~"'"^ d ~ . "• ~ ~~, s. . ' t. 'dY ~ . a . ~ i . y ~ Y ~. c ~; „ i i1 ;+n 3 '+h :` '.~ ? 5n ~ •ifr I i ~.. .:} ~.~ ~=•;:Vt~~~;" ` % % . : , j £ . ; j . ` 3 ~ .~. . ~.v . . .~' , r f ' x'~,r . ~ 9~a ,: 1~ I.. r :b.:. k '%~. ~. i' , ~ ~ ' T7 ' ~ 1 . , •J}I ~ ~ ;Y . 1"• %~f '~ A • ,Fy ~ t : : ^,p ,1 . ~ .G'. w' ~, .~ :b .',fie ~•: a;1~i ~4"A^`F~'•~~t~7: }k •v ••~; V .k .~ . S y) {~~ "~ 8?.. ~ ~ "Y• ~ ~'~:,~. ' 'f ~ ; • ~+ , . .j Ss .r'Yi;•.krc T F ^t'x S t a •~,; yt , • r . ,! , ' , ~ . '• ~r -•i•' -fi• r :•,a 5' ,. :. ~I.,ri dp •;? . . , , y > : ;. ..:•. ~ .. 'I i . .,. ... ,.. 4. , . -. - •f •~ 4•s) w r I . .. . y w S ~ ' -F~LIrT` ^i,@•^.r ~ 11 }~~ 13 f~ E x ~ ~ f~ ~ f ~ 3 rr ~ "h i'SJ~av :n 7 h -a~ ~ t ~ r s ~fi5 f,, ~ ;..~. ~~~ a:.;~y£$,'", f~', Rs ,~ F . Y, ,r " t 1 ! v ~ ~ ...: I . :: ; .;: . _ ` ~r~ ••r .-.i ' ' , • s`p• • Y' `~ i`.~'~ ~ kit: ~;.~•;4 q ~ F ' • } ~ x. ii• • A' '~ : ~ : S , " k ~ i ~~ ^~ '° ey ' y • ~', s ^ ~ ~~": :~ fi't' ~, r .l ~. ~. ; , d-~1--, `~ ,.' ,.~ •': ; . , r _ i .. ~. ' y , ~ .' ~ ~.~r~ ~,s s ~ ~+ .. . •?>x i .e~ .~ °,,.' ,, Z " • . .. . 'SI °~:' S i ' ~~7 ~ 1.• ^si:..{ d ~, ~ ., ) r ~, ~y .~.„• :~ ~ ~h .. •, y .~r: y ! ~ ~ * ' ~e~•. ~a ~w ~~ ~~~'~ .d. ~~. .%F Y ~YF~ i ~ r . n it a ,F f _ x S~ ••S :' ~?' r ~ '~• h f+~ })7) a I.. ~ C ~ T 'E •i T I7 . •, d"~0.'~•.•k 3y, . , 'a1~.:'3`7.:Ti, ~ Is' ut i#~n.x ~r:f sd~G .. . ~ F • _ .H ~' f:-' F - x.'..Sw:..c- `~. ~~~; ~.~; '> :~` ~;~ ~,, k- ~: . ~~:; ~:;~{; ~; ~;, ~e ., :,` ~s~ ~:,. ~:., ~'. ,~ ;,- {t'iS t. ~- p_. ; . ~- ~.. 4Y':.;, ,.r::. ~~~r ~, ~., u: :; ~;~' ~~ ~~ Meridian Planning and Zoning Co~ission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 87 to that letter. The staff report on page 3, which deals with the Preliminary/Final Plat application, we do have in number one a -- several items regarding the landscape plan. We did not receive a copy, to my knowledge, of the revised landscape plan. I guess we at staff are comfortable with the confirmation on the record from Mr. Mannschreck that they will be getting that to us. Most of these issues are --unless the Commission wants to see them, we feel could be addressed as a revised landscape plan prior to the City Council. It's mainly some addition of some trees. We don't see anything that would significantly impact the layout of the CUP or the plat. The one that might -- item number 2 site specific, starting there on the bottom of page 3, there is this -- this issue about the common landscape lot along Pine. Our new Landscape Ordinance, as you know, requires in subdivisions for street buffer landscape lots to be separate. The issue on this here is -- and here is the CUP for the north -- you have got this corner of the building that's just 20 feet back -- 20 foot building front setback and I did talk with Mr. Mannschreck and they are in agreement to put the landscape in a common lot. What that will mean is still needing to adjust this building so that the setback can be made correctly in order to avoid a variance. I put in number 2 that either they are going to have to submit a variance application to either allow the front building setback to be calculated from the right of way line, because right now it would be taken from the property line, or to allow the landscape buffer to be placed within a landscape easement. They wouldn't need to submit a variance at all if they could shift the building, you know, approximately 15 to 20 feet south. Basically everything would just kind of move south. That would not -- that variance would not be necessary if they could do that. So I will just leave that to see what their comment is to that number 2. Borup: Are you saying the whole -- all the buildings would shift or just that one that's kind of angled? Hawkins-Clark: Well, it's just a single building. It sort of appears -- it's got 2 wings, more or less, to it, but -- Borup: With a breezeway between? Hawkins-Clark: I don't -- no, I don't believe -- there is not -- you know, it's a connected building. Borup: Okay. That's what I meant. But just the angle would shift down so that you get the clearance at the street? Hawkins-Clark: Well, I mean however -- in order to -- Borup: That would be up to them. Hawkins-Clark. Right. Borup: Okay. ~~ 7 ~ f= . T ,rj xr n~,.¢F ~ ~~ ~ ~ro ~. ~k ~ f, ix t <. ~ ~_ ~ '-,c r . }i< ... r t `~ ~° d~ 4~1~~~`''- .; _ ~ ~~ ~ pp r'1 ~ 1 , , I:t~' 'v, ~~ !:~~ IM .iJ ~e~~• t qI S IF ~ d : 7 ~ , Y ~ ~ kµ~" ~y yw. i~.>~.~ ~'.# -sY r ;, s ''~'~ ~~~ '.iYi"£ " n 30 ^ ~ } ~ 1. ~ _ 1 fi ~ G, ~' ~ ~ ~ Y. ~l ~.,4 k2~Gn. _ .:.u ~ -_ _ _ . +~_ ~~~ a, T~'a_ ; ~`~' _ ~ :~:~ Y G r ~°~ >I ~ ~ Meridian Planning and Zoning CoRRhission Meeting ` November 15, 2001 ,, _ Page 88 •~~t ` Hawkins-Clark: We don't -- just basically meeting the building setback. I think they have ~~~ '~ ~ ~ got room on the south to play with, but it just would basically involve some shifting to ~ avoid the variance application and if they want to go for the variance, you know, I mean that's just their decision, so -- the item number 7 on page 4 deals with the -- deals with tt '-~ ~ the crossing of the Nine Mile. Again right here. We have got this issue of crossing the Nine Mile Creek and I went into some detail there. Basically we are recommending that :~ the applicant make a written commitment as to when a private bridge will be constructed i :~'. and the general terms of how they are going to work that out. It was not public, so it s doesn't involve the highway district, so it's essentially left up to this body to insure that ~rv somehow that happens. So we do have a recommendation on that. Item number 8 on the top of page 5, you should have included in your staff -- in your packets a copy of this `~~~,:. supplement. Essentially we are just trying to think long range here in terms of r.., conductivity between these parcels. Our recommendation -- Ada County Highway District does have a condition that this West Idaho Avenue and West Broadway ;~?~;- Avenue extend to the east -- to the west in the future. Obviously, that's -- this is currently owned by Meridian Friends Church. The church occupies just this northern '` ~ third of the property right now. The alignment of these 2 extensions and whether and ~-' '~ when all that would happen is, of course, a complete unknown at this point, but we ~.~ ": certainly have been supporting conductivity. So our recommendation was not that r;; these extend as public streets into the Tramore project, but simply that the Tramore . _ project provide some private access to this public street in the future and, again, it ~ would not be public and there could be some chokers, there could be, you know -- or E,. f ~ signs that it's clear that people will not be able to continue into the Tramore project. The ~~ conversation I had with Mr. Mannschreck today was they had just strictly some ~{ <, ~ ~ breakaway bollards here on this northern lot. We did not talk about the southern lot. At ~.~ Y ,~ ~ this point there is just a single point of ingress-egress here at the north. So this would _~;-' also provide some emergency access into here and, you know, we are supportive of r :.~~ that, if that's the way -- I guess this southerly lot is probably the more important, since you do have the Nine Mile crossing to deal with to get there. 7 }l °~ Borup: Brad, I'm a little confused on the parcels -- the dotted roads that you're e k~~ ~~ „,~ indicating there are present, those not on the subject property; is that correct? Hawkins-Clark: That's correct. Borup: Okay. So the little -- the temporary turn-arounds -- ~~ ~ Hawkins-Clark: See, these are 2 separate -- separate lots right now that are not a part >a'-~ -~ of +tio onnlino+ir~n ,~.,. ~_: Borup: Okay. <~~ Hawkins-Clark: These 2 here. The church and then a vacant lot that's owned by a San Francisco company. Then the subject lot. So there are 2 parcels in between where the road's currently stubbed and where Tramore is. E>.= ~;;:.~: Borup: Okay. S``, c,!: ~ ~. _, a. ,, ,. y <. x~(~r '.7.. ,. 5 ... ~. .: .. y ... _, y 1 ...~~~t~rr:ux ~+ia~u`x~"'_'{, ~ ,"4 ~~ _.^t.;` ~.,. s:. . ~'~' 3. ~'i i _`~£ ,~xv ~..'+x ... 4y F. ' '~ . 1 'i ~, r e. - 4: +P 'Z':~YJ SN ~ t b : ~ t A ... ~A .. • ,'~. a -.{ .. K .'.lid M T y~ ~ ,+~'%EY, ' Meridian Planning and Zoning CoT1Trf~ission Meeting 'f~~~~=" ~'~ November 15, 2001 `~ " Page 89 `I,:,L ~~. Hawkins-Clark: Just 2 other items that I did talk with Mr. Mannschreck about today. The a ~- one Ihit, the landscape common lot, about the no variance should they be able to shift that building. The parking item, the parking ratio, which was also pointed out in the staff ~~ _ report, under the Conditional Use Permit section -- now that was item number two on ~ ~` ~.~ page 8. We wanted the applicant to address the parking needs. Mr. Mannschreck indicated that on a couple of their previous completed projects that they actually have ~~ H _ _~ h less parking ratio than they do here. It seems to be adequate. You know, they f essentially met the ordinance, but we leave these cases where there could be some a r .rr leeway really -- you know, if they have experience with projects and I guess staff is ` ~' comfortable with what they have proposed at this point. I think that's all I have. ~ '~ Borup: Any questions for staff? Did the applicant ask for any variance on the separate ~,i ~ lot landscaping along Pine? ~`~'`- Hawkins-Clark: No. ~' ° A Borup: At all? Okay. I guess my only comment was Ihad -- I certainly agree with what -- the intent of that, at least from what I understand. I think the intent is that probably ,~ got a lot of projects, you have multiple tenants or multiple owners and it makes sense to ~ ~ ?~; have it a single lot. Hawkins-Clark: Right. ~ F~.~; Borup: I'm not sure if it applies to the same situation where one lot, one owner, one use. Hawkins-Clark: I would agree, Chairman. It is the ordinance if it's a subdivision and this is a subdivision. So that's the reason that we had it in there. ;F " ~ "" Borup: Okay. The applicant would need to ask for a variance? t~' ~.7,~u Hawkins-Clark: Right. `~,t Borup: Or would handle that if they --okay. Thank you. The applicant's here ready for a presentation. ::. Mannschreck: Mr. Borup, Members of the Commission, Tom Mannschreck with ~, , Thomas Development, 413 W. Idaho in Boise. I'll try to be extremely brief given the hour ~~w:= and thank you for your patience. I'm simply going to, I think, address the conditions of approval that -- Borup: Please. ~ ' ~` : z ~ Mannschreck: -- to take another look at I'm going to pass around if I can a picture of a _ ~ _ . very similar senior affordable community that we finished about 9 months ago in , h~~ -~ Sk ~ ~ Caldwell. It is at the intersection of Tenth Avenue south of Ustick. I believe Mr. Clark 1 ~a, ~ : , , and some others perhaps from the city went over to look at it. Tramore will be our 7th ~ "~ ~' ,z, } '' f ti; ~ ~rt~ . :i,f t: , }~A 4 ti gip; ~ _k~ F . ~. ~ ~.tf ry~~..' e ~ ^ ..,~.± fi - ~ r"-~.,_ ,v;~ ~ U q ,,. ~: < i -+- s~ ~ b~.H c ~ ~ i ~:' I ~~a t ~ ~~ I ' ~t~ ~ ~ ~ .; i ~ ~~ ~~ f ~ ~ Y~ 'Y _ V ~ ~~ ` ~ ti ~,h ~ f ~~~ ~d 4, ~ lY V ~ ~ yn ~ a. yy ,z w ~~ ~ ' ~~x ~~~ S ~~~ J{k `ka~L r7 Y _ LL .. t. j^ \ y ~~ 4 ~i ~ -. ~. .d'F~ e~.. ~ ~ ~ d~K Y"11 ' - ~i q Y'~ _ t~ e# r ~~ p~ Fi ~~.. Y 4, ~ [ ~ ~~h`'[ .~ 1~ I' ~ i ~ ~'. 9 I' ' ~ ~ . ~ y.- I I~I'~ Kd f' r~ ~!. A ' _~ t F ;` Meridian Planning and Zoning CoP9Trr'iission Meeting ~'~ ~" November 15, 2001 Page 90 ~ :> ` senior affordable community. We are in Twin, Jerome, Nampa, Caldwell, Lewiston - 3 ,~ in Nampa, I guess, so some of what we have done is very much based on experience in i ~~°„* go ng in and talking to residents and those of you that know people who are 75 80 85 ~~ , , years old, they are generally fairly willing to both share their time and share their opinion. We do spend a number of hours with our residents, both people on my staff ',,r and the property management company, to ask what we have done right or what we could do better the next time out. One of the things that we have done in this multi-story building is create a lot more interior open space. The hallways are all on the inside of ~;', the building, rather than outside. We have handrails that are very wide. We can have ~r~` two wheelchairs pass very easily and when we built our first multi-story building we thought -- which, by the way they have elevators -- we thought this ma not be such a _- ; , y terrific idea. The site really dictated we did that. It turns out it's terrific. These people like r; _: to go up and down stairs for exercise and the elevator doesn't get used hardly at all. A couple of things on the site itself. The -- and that really does not do it any justice. Sorry. The common lot -- it seems to me that certainly, if I was -- for example, Mr. ~~ ' O'Neill here with a 60 or 100 or 200 unit single family subdivision, it doesn't make sense ~' ~ for this Commission to force a common lot and the homeowners maintain perimeters or r~ , F."~ a barrier. This is a 10 acre parcel that's been -- that was platted about 30 years ago f ~A, and it's all zoned office and we are basically chopping it in half and creating a flag lot. It ? -~ seems to me in a commercial application that there is a bit of a disconnect because .N. . _ , what we are really saying is the setback isn't 20 feet, it's 40 feet, because there is a 20 ±~, foot common lot on Pine Street and then set back another 20 feet we are saying in this ~;' development that the setback is 40 feet, so we would propose -- and if the ordinance ~ ~~, `~~ requires the common lot we would propose to either do the landscape easement or ` accept staffs offer to support a variance. The reason -- if we could go back to the site ~~.~ ~ " ~r-;~. :1... plan there for the -- the reason we wouldn't shave or move the building back -- and, believe me, we have tried this, is you can't simply move it back, you have to rotate it " and you rotate it counterclockwise and with all due respect to the police chief, we very much tried and the representations were made at the neighborhood meeting we had, k- - . ~ that three people attended, and the representations to the Sunnybrook people in the site - ~ ~ plan is we wanted to sort of adopt a new urbanism, and site planning philosophy, put ~= f~:,,: the buildin between - g -put the parking behind the building and we could easily put that ,. , '` around and make it look like a K-Mart and have all the asphalt out in front and the :w.~. $ building way in the back. If you start to rotate the building, you start to expose vast amounts of the parking, because you to have rotate it clockwise and ten or 15 feet ~~ ` doesn't sound like very much, but to pull that back and also honor the setback on the +>_ east property line, you really crack that thing around a lot and you have a huge new vista on the west side of the property that exposes that parking. So we would - €~:-. Borup: Do you need to rotate or can you just change the angle on the one building? ~;' Mannschreck: You have to rotate because of the -- because of the John Anderson ,. setback on the Nine Mile Drain and - Borup: I'm talking just take your upper building and just move it down and the southern building stay where it's at. Meridian Planning and Zoning C nission Meetlng November 15, 2001 Page 91 C: Mannschreck: Commissioner Borup, it's the same building. You can move them on a disconnected basis. That center piece of the wing is the community area where the kitchen and the library and the exercise room and the laundry and all that stuff is. You can't break it apart. c; ry ::. {.~,F 1 ~~~.: ~;.. ~~~ ~. ~~ =~' Borup: Well, not once the building is built, but you can design it so it's changed. Mannschreck: Well, it's more complicated than that. To break that angle -- I tried to make it a 90 degree angle and it's so - Borup: Well, I'm not talking about a 90, I'm talking, you know, another 20 degrees or whatever. Mannschreck: Well, I guess my point is that staff has offered, I think, to support a variance. I'm comfortable with the 20 foot setback. I'd like to keep the parking hid and I'd either like to do the 20 foot landscaping or an easement or a variance and not monkey with the site plan. Condition number six on the plat talks about curb, gutter, and sidewalk in a private versus public lot kind of a schism. We have proposed to the highway district to construct this as a private street. Again, it's a two lot subdivision. So -- and I will get to the location on this street in a bit, but sufficient it to say the highway district now has their tape measure working properly and we can leave the access road on the left side and we will address that in a bit. So we would like to not have to curb, gutter, and sidewalk both sides of that -- that private road and would maintain it as a private road and the bridge would be handled in that fashion as well. Item number 8 relative to the staff, if you do the street side planning on the property that we don't own. Next one back, please. Yes. The property that we own -- these right here. So the dots -- the dotted lines on the site plan are on property that we have neither any ownership interest in nor any present intent to develop. For a couple of reasons, in addition to the ,.lengthy discussion you just had on Woodbridge on emergency vehicle access and not encouraging multiple locations, we are not in favor of, number one, site planning on somebody else's property and, number two, putting cul-de-sacs at terminus points on our property for streets that we have no idea whether they will ever be there, if at all. Our proposal -- and, by the way, we didn't see any staff comments relative to concerns about a secondary versus emergency vehicle access. Our proposal would be if requested to grass creek from the back of our existing parking lot to our property line and bollard, if need be, for a connection as it might need it. My suspicion, having been in this business for 15 years, is that those next 2 pieces will not develop as single family subdivisions. I believe one is zoned L-O, is it not, Brad, and the pricing on L-O property will not support single family subdivisions, so we are drawing streets in presuming a land use that is very unlikely to occur. So I would be willing as a modified condition -- as amodification on number 8 to provide a fire department approved through the back of our existing parking lot as designed, emergency vehicle access, should that development -- the fire department, in conjunction with the development to the east of us there are no present plans, want that access. Conditional use parking requirement, I'll ask Pat Doby, our traffic engineer, to address that. We did submit a traffic study to the city with our plat and conditional use application. I will tell you from personal experience owning a number of these for a number of years, that parking on one to one ~a r' Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 92 ~?~ `£ i4 z ; :° r,,- .J ~~. ~~~. =;r;I ~~~- ~, .<;~ ,i rt`, s... is;r is plenty sufficient. We will have 72 units, we will probably have 90 people living there, maybe, and of those 90 people I would guess less than half will drive. So in development after development we have had one to one or maybe a little more than that and there is always -- even on Mother's Day there is plenty of parking. So we are really talking about trading asphalt for landscaping and I would rather buy landscaping any day of the week, rather than asphalt. Mr. Doby can address the highway district's confusion I think is the best way and most delicate way to put it on where the property lines were and they have agreed as of today to leave the street access on the west side of the property as we have designed it all along. The police department's concerns on visibility, I guess I would say that we are very big fans of indirect outside lighting. We feel that safety in our private communities is -- certainly in our senior communities is one of the reasons that people rent from us, just as Mr. Centers suggested in our previous application, a security camera might be a good idea. We feel that lighting and safety and security are very important to our seniors. The doors all have key locks on them and things like that. So we would certainly be happy to meet with the police chief and maybe address any specific lighting concerns, but flipping the side and putting the parking in front is something that we just -- we feel very strongly that we don't want to do. I think with those comments I would stand for questions and ask Mr. Doby to come up. Nary: Mr. Chairman. Borup: Commissioner Nary. Nary: I guess just one question. I understand what you were saying, Mr. Mannschreck, about the lack of driving by a lot of the residents in the community, but are your -- is your experience in other communities in places where there is more of a bus system and more of an ability to get around? I just don't know how these folks are going to -- they are not anywhere near a store. Most of the people aren't going to walk. Mannschreck: That's correct. Nary: So I'm not sure how they are going to get out and about to get things. I know a lot of people out there driving are 85 years old, so I -- Mannschreck: Commissioner Nary, Members of the Commission, our experience in other senior communities is family members come to pick people up. Those that can drive will take the person that lives across the street and, you know, the cities and counties in which we were located, Lewiston, Caldwell, Jerome, Twin Falls, they are not mass transit towns. The point is very well taken, but the -- when you develop senior communities, people move in fairly slowly. At least that is much slower than you have in family communities, but the move out is -- they stay. We have a community director and we do, you know, bingo and they do quilting and we will do a scrapbook during the course of construction and you can get a picture taken in front of your apartment as to what it looked like when it was being framed. They develop a very strong sense of community and the car pool. ~F~~ii_'-q<~ 5. . ~fi' 3,. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meetin 9 `; `• = November 15, 2001 ~ '~, Page 93 ~~"''` Nary: Okay. ~,_ .<~ a' x;r Centers: Was your concern the parking stalls? Nary: Well, I mean I would agree that probably there isn't a lot of driving, but I just want to make sure that we are not going to have a parking issue. But I figured without having any real mass transit for a lot of access, there may be more driving, but they -- tr f'~ r ~ Mannschreck: If we were proposing a family community I would be at 2 to one plus on '"' parking. Absolutely. Centers: I concur with what he said. My mother lived in a facility just about tike this and very few of them have cars and people come and pick them up and everything you said was just about what -- ~~~}~ Mannschreck: They really develop a sense of community. It's very nice. ~; ~~ "~'' ,.. Centers: Yes. z;, :: 1: Borup: Any other questions? Norton: I just have one question and this might be for a question. Isn't it within walking ~y~~; ~ , ~ distance to our senior center -- senior -- is it three or four blocks or longer than that? ~ I a. ~ , "" Oh, longer than 3 or 4 blocks? 9:"" ' ."`'~ Berg: It's a little bit longer than that, Commissioner Norton. The senior center also has ~ a new van that they just got from a grant from funds from the city and the Chamber of ,, ~;~ C ommerce and ITD, so that could be so methmg settled into lunch m the staff report. '~ ~ Mannschreck: As we move through the course of construction and start pre-leasing, VPj. ~_:~ . our marketing folks will go to the senior center and will bring people over and on the f same basis when the development is ready for tours to start to show them what we are { • ~: doing and we'll sponsor a lunch over there and things like that. >„ ti_-:. ': Berg: That's 11th Street. The senior center is on like 3rd -- 2nd or 3rd? ~ -~ ~ Nary: It's on West 2nd or West 3rd or something like that. So it's a pretty good walk. ,, ~;~: Ty.:. Yes. Broadway and 3rd. ;; 1 Norton: It's a long walk. `:.'' Borup: I thought it was also an interesting comment on the -- and I'm very much an advocate of interconnectivity in this type of project. I'm not seeing a lot of benefit tying into Idaho, but at this point you do not anything specifically planned for the southern lot; s;': is that correct? ~: ~~a- '~'~ v~ ," fir. ~.:,~ ~, I I ~` i'. 3 L Y .~: ~.. , , ~`~ "_ ~~:: ~: Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 94 v Centers: Chairman Borup, Members of the Commission, we don't own the southern lot. Our sole interest is in the northern lot on developing the senior apartments. Borup: Okay. I thought this was a -- so you -- Mannschreck: It was a joint application and the owner of the -- we are buying -- we bought the northerly lot and when they presented the application they reviewed the conditions of approval. s~,~: x~', Borup: Okay. Well, I think that answers that. I guess just maybe for future reference, think it would be rather beneficial to have Broadway tie in just, again, for emergency -- a ;r;; real emergency access and the traffic -- ~.... -: *~ Mannschreck: I guess the better case is to tie Broadway than it is Idaho, probably. '~ Borup: Right. But that's what I'm thinking. Okay. Thank you, sir. ~~, y Mannschreck: You bet. Thank you. y; ~~~ '~_ Borup: Did you say Mr. Doby had some -- do any of the Commissioners have a ~. concern on the issues of the -- other than we had the one staff comment that -- ~j Centers: Well, the ACHD, the staff recommended delaying it, so -- -~1 ~~ ~, Mannschreck: Well, Mr. Doby met with ACRD and after some challenges -- and I'm not ~' a mathematician, with either the wheel or the tape measure, we finally I think today got them to understand where our property lines were, which I think was a challenge, and ' ` the have a reed to leave the drivin ~ . ~ Y 9 g -- the ingress and egress on the west side. He can speak to that in 30 seconds, I think. ~r :, ~ Borup: Okay. ~- }r,: s'''" Doby: Mr. Chairman and Commissioners, Pat Doby, 7077 Hearthstone Drive. The ACHD staff was of the opinion that this site is about 130 feet west of where it's really ,,uf; located. If you read the staff report in Fact and Finding F, it mentions that it's only 20 feet away from the driveway going into Sunbridge. In fact, it's 150 away from that driveway. Once I explained to them exactly where the property was they realized that F~; > they didn't have a problem with this. There is no conflict with their acceptable criteria. Centers: Do you have anything in writing? ~~~. Doby: I'm sorry. Centers: Did you get anything in writing from them? Doby: No. But we will be going to the ACHD Commissioners and it will be resolved at ~`~' that time. ,. ~. {s:, r ~t~~ .~~ ~, ~. M, .. , ~; g'~~', K~X~.:o 1 Z;' .:. w - _ Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting -~ : ~ November 15, 2001 Page 95 Mannschreck: Mr. Centers, we would accept a condition of the initial improvement ~,~~ subject to ACHD approving the ingress and egress as shown on the plat. ~~, Doby: If you have any other questions I would be happy to answer them. These are very low traffic generators. I have worked on a number of these projects. There has been studies that have been done by the Institute of Transportation Engineers and the ;;. Urban Land Institute. They both identified a parking ratio of one space per unit as being m ore than adequate. We are proposing 1.5 spaces per unit, there is quite a bit of margin. Borup: 1.5 did you say? Doby: Approximately 1.5. That frees up about 10,000 square foot of additional landscape area. That's a real benefit, rather than an the area all asphalt. Borup: It was mentioned that you could put some basketball courts in there, maybe. $. Any other questions from -- ='= ~ ~~~:I Centers: Shuffle board. =~; `~ Borup: Any of the Commissioners? Thank you. Do we have anyone else to testify in .~I this application? Seeing none, Commissioners? ~r~ Centers: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to move that we close the Public Hearing. 5~> ~r _- ~ Norton: Second. ~~ Borup: Motion and second to close the Public Hearing. All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. ,Y Centers: Mr. Chairman, I'm highly in favor of a project like this, I guess, because I have ~?``~~ experienced it with my mother at one time and I think there is a big need in Meridian. r~x:; You know, the 3 story I thought at first -- and then, you know, you addressed that and ~~~ probably perfect. I would like the staff to tell us -- I think the Commission pretty much agrees with me. I'm confused here. I'd like the staff to tell us what they can live with after Mr. Mannschreck addressed some of the concerns. Mainly the highway district. Are we okay with that and we can push it on to Council? You can apply for the variance, instead of the dedicated lot? ~r`: Hawkins-Clark: Commissioner Centers, I guess the one thing I didn't catch was the ~;:_ bridge. The bridge issue. In terms of the timing of -- ~;., ,: a . ,~..F ~~~ Mannschreck: Mr. Clark, Members of the Commission, as I read condition number 9, I believe it is, there is an alternative method of proposing the bridge be constructed and it's tied to development on the southerly lot, as I read the condition in that final note. ~; x:. ~; , .-~~ ,~~ , {, ~, .r ~ - fi F ..;t+`ryr - . ~ S `-1" r.~ t 5~ ~, j¢~ '.N. A ~ Y x ~~~~ '~ r ~~ 4 ,;,..,Q xs ~ ~ ~.r??~ vy 7 F~,~ ~~ . 9 y' -~+ ~^ { r y~-,; ~ .iiS# ~~ y ~~. `S~ R -y:,,., }W S ~~ ~' a(~'f ~ - . % y~ * 4 '3~ ~~ ~' k ~~~'~ ,. {J :., , p ~~' , Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 96 Hawkins-Clark: That's fine. Nary: So the reference -- seven of the site specific requirement. Mannschreck: Condition 7 is fine for the applicant, yes. Norton: I guess I had some other particulars. Brad, what about going up one, number 6, since it's going to be a private road you would not require curb and gutters and sidewalks? Page 4. So we could strike number 6? Hawkins-Clark: Commissioner Norton, I -- you know, these private roads are a little bit :: unclear in our ordinance and we always struggle with these when they come up, but it's -- they are really not even proposing a private road, as I understand it. Essentially at this point, you know, it's a driveway. It's a sharedaccess driveway into there and the shared access is taken care of on the plat, you know, with the uncertainties of how that south lot is going to develop, I guess at least on one side, I guess, we just feel that some kind of, you know, decent sidewalk to get across there and get up to Pine is a ~.~ good idea. I mean some people are going to walk, regardless of what the southerly lot develops as, you know, they want to get across that. Borup: The last page I have does show a sidewalk along the east side. Is that correct? - It doesn't show on the site plan, but it does shows on the landscape plan. The site plan shows sidewalks, but not along the road, so I'm not sure which is -- they are both ~~~ different. Brad? Hawkins-Clark: Commissioner, yes, I guess on number 6 there. 1~; 1, _ . ~~ '~ ;~I ::~. `,~~~_ `~ Centers: Page 4? Hawkins-Clark: Page 4. Right. We have agreement that there could be a modification there to say -- on the third line that curb, gutter, could be eliminated. It would just say shall revise the plat to include the landscaping on the west side of the lot and curb, gutter, and sidewalk on the east side of the lot. Borup: Okay. So is that road not going to be developed out the full width? Hawkins-Clark: No. It would be. It's just essentially they would just, you know, run their drainage off the west side into the landscaped area. But it's going to be full width to their property line, which is, you know, the -- on the north side of the drain. Borup: So I'm not understanding why no curb and gutter. Hawkins-Clark: You know, it's one of those design issues. If you want to essentially leave it up to work with Public Works at the time of -- ...,~ F ~_ ~;.;r ~~~,~, Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meetin ~;,.; - g -,_~•>• November 15, 2001 Page 97 ~; ~,~ ;:,~. ' Borup: So when that lot to the west develops that's when the curb and gutter would go 4 in? ;~ Hawkins-Clark: The lot to the west is developed. ~.. ~, Borup: That's the Sunbridge? ;,> ~; ~~ Hawkins-Clark: Right. Borup: Okay. ~` ~ Norton: Just oin on to clari number ei ht on a e five, does there need to be an :'. ,- , 9 9 fY 9 p 9 Y change to that language? ~- ~: ; Nary: It seems like that I had heard the applicant say is that they would be willing to ~~-.:; include language that they would provide fire department emergency access as needed. ti; Borup: They were talking a grass creek emergency access? ~.~. ~; , Nary: Right. ~V Borup: Not a regular roadway. k t'! Nary: Right. I don't know whether we need to amend that or add that. This just gives an option in here how to do this and that's just the different options. That might seem like either way, whether we are revising it or just adding it -- adding that language into ~~;-~ that w~ulrl hP cufFiciPnt ~~ ~g Shreeve: Now are you also suggesting -- right. Just the secondary access, not necessarily make provisions for -- that would be difFcult. z:='sr.. -: r:,: - Nary: Well, I think what he had asked for was -- or what he had suggested was that emergency access as needed, as approved by the fire department. So that would be ~ ~` ' something they would build now -- ~~~~~ Hawkins-Clark: Correct. a , , Nary: -- west of that property -- or east of that property is just a vacant lot anyway. If it y`~ g, r, was needed in the future, then they could provide that. Norton: So add it or -- ~~ ~'~~ ~` ~ w. ~ . Nary: Is that right? ~~~~ t ' ~~ y~ f `~' Hawkins-Clark: I think it's essentially they are just preserving it, they are not going to ~` ors =~~ slap a big permanent storage shed that's 500 square feet right there. x :: _ T ~ ,~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ,~. :.~~ ~- . ~~~~ ,~ ~~ e' ~ ~ ~ ~l ~ ~ _ `_ F..__.~~ tt ~r~ k~9~ 5 ~~ ~ p, j. 1 ~ ~ 4 _~ Y [ ~: ; +! U' ~~f 4 ~ L ~~ ~1 ~ w '$ t ~ x h.~`.y ~ Y ~~~ , ~w[Y t 1Y~ y '11 ~iv^ _ 't .. ~' ~ _~ - 1~•i ~:~ ~ ~" ,`.. 1 a.:. ..k " ^~ s g £ ~ V I ' t ~ ~~"a~xe ~ ~ . ~~ 4 l ~~i l 9 ~t ~~ v ' s i ~ .r ~ - ~ ~ ~ ;Y S~ I I x ~ ~ I f # 4 + ~ RS~j.`~ ~~ Y, rv ~.: . ,t *~, ~c FSa E ~ d 0 ' . ~~ Ff~ ~ • 'I A w ; L 3 ~4 ` l . r T '-. Y ~ _ d T 'i ~ J~~ _ t 4$ ~1~` hi: ~ ~ Y ~~~ ~ r ~ ~ • - J 9 l a ~~~, 1+ ~3 i Lia. ~,. { , ~ 1~~~T-TJ ~(i _ ~_ n~ s "hy~~r"~1 7 , ~ • ~ r ~ly: :L x. fit' f"~~ i ~ ' ~: ~ ~ }. ~ l~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ k i~ - {a.. ~~ ~ ~'~. »~ f ,~ ~ ~ l ,~ ~ ,, ~~~ Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 98 Nary: We could just add it to this provision -- t ~. ~~: 'i >'1 {~ ~, -. ,_-~ ~, .~_. { ~- , ~LL . . ~:: ", ~~* ~? .., ~: s ~~r ~; .: E -. ~: ,:,: ,. ~a_ >' ~: ;~+ ~:=> r. P~ Gt,l' ,1.R ~.i. . ,. Hawkins-Clark: Could just add it. Nary: Just increases his options. Hawkins-Clark: Right. Nary: Yes. r~ Norton: Then I think the only other change that I can see would be on page 8, Conditional Use Permit No. 2, regarding the number of parking stalls. Hawkins-Clark: Actually, Commissioner Norton, I think as it reads it doesn't actually require them to add any. Centers: Right. The last line says -- Norton: So that number 2 is okay? Hawkins-Clark: Yes. Norton: The way it is? Hawkins-Clark: For staff it is. Norton: Okay. Thanks. Are there any other changes? Nary: The only other change or I guess -- in the motion would be simply that on page 9 CUP recommendation would be that the applicant would provide written approval from ACHD in regards to the driveway prior to going to City Council. Borup: Brad, a clarification. I'm still -- do we need anything else? I'm still going back to this curb gutter thing on entrance. You said there would be landscaping? Hawkins-Clark: Yes, Chairman Borup, that's correct. Borup: My landscaping plan does not show any. Hawkins-Clark: That's correct. We are asking for -- at this point --the way that their site plan is shown they are just --they would just run asphalt to their west property line more or less. Borup: Right. Where is the landscaping if they landscape their property line? 1-s a ~`' Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting ~ r November 15, 2001 Page 99 h' Hawkins-Clark: The landscape plan did not show any landscaping along that west ` boundary. We are asking for it. ~. - Borup: Okay. -~'~~ Hawkins-Clark: Just 5 feet. ,~{ ,. ~' ' ` Boru Ri ht. ~~. ,;` Hawkins-Clark: I mean just essentially enough. Right? ;~, : , ~' ~_'' Borup: Okay. I just wanted clarification on that. Hawkins-Clark: Right. So then -- I think there is agreement about the landscaping strip ~_:-, being added along that driveway on the west side. I guess the -- is that clarified for you '~r, or was the only other issue -- ~f ~, Borup: I guess if it wasn't for me. I may be slow. It is now. Okay. Okay. I feel fine x: ~~ about that. I was concerned about no curb and gutter, but it can look nicer without curb and gutter with some nice landscaping. ~`~~ Hawkins-Clark: It could. :`;~V~ Borup: That they have at this place quite a bit. ~~ Norton: Mr. Chairman. i Boru Co mmission p: er Norton. ~1 Norton: I'm going to make a stab at a motion. ,,,, , ~.. ;r`j :.~~.. ~`~=' Borup: Okay. r b,~ Norton: With the help of the fellow Commissioners, can you clear me up on things ~~ make a mistake on? I'd like to approve -- I'd like to move to approve -- to recommend approval to the City Council for PFP 01-006, request for Preliminary/Final Plat approval F_ ~, of two building lots on 10 acres in an L-O zone for Tramore Subdivision by Thomas ` a Development south of West Pine Avenue, east of North Linder, to include all staff E ~-;; ~~ comments with the following changes: On page 3 of the October 31St letter from staff, "~" number one, that the applicant will ive the staff a revised landsca a Ian. Nu "'r`~ 9 p p tuber 2-- what do we do about the common lot? Leave the common lot? Oh, I'm sorry. For ~ ~ ` number 2 he would -- the applicant would apply for a variance. Borup: Right. He would do that at City Council. _ ~h' ~ Nary: Number 6. ,~~. _, ,« . ~; ,w -; ~ ~,~_ rt ~,> ~~ i :.~ r - - ~~ ~, k~: { y} ;k ;,_ `~, ., ,, ~~ ~~ F ~_ h~~~j3 ~~i:'y~'L. - ^9Y.. ~;F_4 ~ y ,. ..t~~,~ ...4 !~ dM 1~~; ~; i7~r `, ~ ,~, t i¢ f P 4 3 ~'H~. dLN;, 1. -'.'4. ~~~ ~ ~ 3. ri..~~~ ~ a „, . _ ^,.~f.Y ,~ ~ ,,~~ xr ~ ~~ F.~z>r a ~. «,', k s +v i ,I~, ,~ Sfi, Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 100 Norton: Number 6-- third line, number 6, applicant shall revise the preliminary plat to include landscaping. Nary: Then maybe, Commissioner Norton, that we put 5 foot of landscaping on the west side of the lot. Norton: 5 feet of landscaping on the west side of the lot with curb and gutter on the east side. Freckleton: And sidewalk. s ;~: { Borup: And sidewalk. Norton: And sidewalk. Number 8 on page 5 to add the words of the extra sentence saying emergency access as needed -- to provide emergency access as needed. Nary: Maybe, Commissioner Norton, if we could also put that it be approved by the fire department for the emergency access, so it's clear that the fire department has to approve that, not just the applicant. Norton: As approved by the fire department. I think that's it on this one. Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to propose one more. Borup: Mr. Freckleton. Freckleton: Okay. It's on the next one. Sorry. Borup: Pardon? Freckleton: It's on the next one. Borup: Yes. We are just on the Preliminary/Final Plat approval. Centers: Number 7, page 4, when constructed -- I mean there was discussion, but is that -- Brad, are we okay there? Nary: Where? Centers: Number 7, page 4. Borup: That's on the conditional use. We are okay with that. Centers: We are okay. Just as written. Borup: You're getting into the next -- number 7. You said page 7? ~ ,r~ ~- ~:; . ;:.x ,...~ :,. y Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 101 Centers: No. Page 4. Norton: No. Page 4. Borup: Oh. I'm sorry. I reversed that. Norton: I think he's right. That the bridge would be installed with the development of the south lot. Centers: Yes. They are okay as written, so with staff comments. Norton: Okay. Nary: Maybe, Commissioner Norton, in looking at page seven on the Preliminary/Final Plat recommendation, probably the same comments that we would need to make on the conditional use, that that -- the applicant will provide a written approval from Ada County Highway District in regard to the location of the driveway on the west boundary. You said they have already got that, but it has that same comment and recommendation that they do so it's just clear that they have to provide that before the City Council. Norton: Did our attorney get that? Swartley: Yes. Centers: But that was on the next -- Norton: Any other additions to the motion? Nary: Second. Borup: Motion and second. All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Borup: Okay. Item No. 11. Norton: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make arecommendation -- motion to City Council to approve CUP 01-036, request for a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a 72 unit wood frame, 3 story, senior center complex in an L-O zone for proposed Tramore Senior Community by Thomas Development, south of West Pine Avenue and east of Linder, to include all staff comments, with the change on the bottom of page 9, to keep the first sentence, strike from however on the way down, and include the word: Applicant will prove approval from ACHD before going to City Council. Nary: Bruce had a -- ~~~ S' ti ,~ o ;; Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 102 ~° x -= Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, I'd like to propose a change to - site specific requirement number 2 on page 8. Would propose to strike the word may at '.;yT1.. „~ `r the second to the last sentence. J ~~~ ~~ Norton: Council Commission shall? Freckleton: Just put Council Commission allows -- Norton: Allows. Freckleton: -- 111 stalls as deemed sufficient. So strike may and -- ~, ;,, _{ '` Norton: A reduction in -- ~ w <.;~ >': ~ Freckleton: A reduction. Yes. ,!t Centers: It should say to 111 stalls, shouldn't it? Isn't that what they are going to have? ~~;~_ May allow a reduction to 111 stalls. ~._;: Borup: Well, the ordinance calls for 144 and he's saying they allowed a reduction from the 144 to 111 is the -- ~. Freckleton: Basically what we are wanting to say is 111 is sufficient. In the nutshell. II4 Norton: As long as our attorney gets that. Did you get it? - Swartley: I got it. r'r ~ ~~ Norton: Okay. That's it. Centers: He's home already. a~'~- Nary: Second. ~::~ Borup: Motion and second. All in favor? . ~. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES >' Centers: Mr. Chairman. ~:;:;; ~r= Borup: Commissioner Centers. i`~~:~ Centers: Before we close the Public Hearing -- as you know, I did not participate in the ~:~~~~~ Public Hearing No. 9 on the original agenda, but I have a comment that I'd like to make - for the record. Some of this was addressed, but, you know, the zone allows public schools permitted in an R-4 zone, but when the city designated permitted uses ~~ alternative schools were not even thought of, were not even in existence, and I'm sure -~r, ~:. ,~ ,;~ ,,~ ,,, ~~ ~~~~ } ~. ~,~ r; ` ~~~ ,~ , 7 "~ LS~ ~F l- n" S ,~ ~K U` ~~ ~ ~ K ~ ~~, ~~~ t r 1 ~i{~: t~" r~ +~ ~'~~, ~~a a~; Li~4j 4~ a:4~~;~' ¢ ~~ ~ c N~ ~~ 'a ~ rN i r ~4 Y 1 ~~.. J L * ~,.., ~, iL~ n,~ ~~, .; a?Yy i ~x~" l ~~Y ''r r ~ ~;-'... ~ - 3 ~ +ot -:fir Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting November 15, 2001 Page 103 that was many years ago. Traditional schools were thought of at the time, I'm sure. As the staff commented in their staff comments, certainly the school district knew they would have objections. They knew that. They should have talked to the neighborhood in advance. They did not. They didn't simply -- they simply bought the property, thinking they would push it through the neighborhood. Shame on the Meridian School District. This is America, ladies and gentlemen. A permitted use in a certain zone should not be cause to ignore the voices of the neighbors and citizens. I would think that the applicant would not want to locate at a location with this many unfriendly neighbors, believed they were continuing with the application just to simply not look bad after knowing they probably shouldn't have bought it and knowing they should have talked to the neighbors in advance and then either proceed or back away. Instead, they elected to spend I heard 80 to 110 thousand dollars of the taxpayer's money. As Commissioner Nary mentioned, remember this when you elect your school board members. Thanks for your time. ='~~ Borup: Thank you. I'd like to thank the Commissioners for staying late this evening. ~ We were able to get through the whole agenda. I appreciate the extra effort. Do we ~~ t~~ , have a motion to adjourn? ;: ~ ~ Nary: Move to adjourn. ~~ ; Centers: Second. ';';. ~~ ~ ~~. Borup: All in favor? "~ MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. r ~;. . `>° MEETING ADJOURNED AT 12:39 P.M. ~J =_ (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PRnCFFf)INC,RI hl ~~~ APPROVED: ,. ~~ c i~ .~ ~E.. ~'?~ ~Y ~? r:~~ H BORUP, CHA9`RMAN ~~ ~~, . ~: ~~ ~~~ ~~ A r ;{ ~v ~ ~/ Syr d 1, y w 4, .. ~~/ ~ / ®~ DATE APPROVED /~~ ED: ~~ P WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., ITY LERK Y ~ 1 -j. ~Y tl{F_ ??_ s yu' 144~~~ ~'~~ 'T ~ H ~ , ~: ~. ~ ~C ~ ~~ ~y ~t S;` r ,~ :' 3A y3 r~`~".~~ ~'~ ~ . ~, , ~~~. ~~, , . ,~~ ..~~ ~N 'k s c~ ' ~: ~ ~° ~ _ '~ r s ~" ~~ ~~ ~ 'k. S ~~~~~1 - ,Y V~ t (~ T~, V^ ri, M 4 ~` i { ~S J~ ~ :. °~_ rA*" ter, Hk ^ ti~ ,~ A v ~~ ~~~ ~ ~~~ ~, ..~:~z-y ,;. _ , 4C ~~~~ .. i F°, ~':' ~ 3 .~ c~ ~, ~!, ~s ic•;;; -: ~. November 13, 2001 ~.; ~~ MERIDIAN PLANNING 8~ ZONING MEETING November 15 2001 , APPLICANT ITEM NO. S-A ~ , % 4, '' REQUEST Approve minutes of September 27, 2001 Planning and Zoning Special Comprehensive ,:;. ~::... Plan Meeting ~;~:.:, Y;': ,~ ;. ~ AGENCY COMMENTS '~ ~- m, :_,~j CITY CLERK: ,.k~~ `~1 CITY ENGINEER: ~ °`~' CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: ~ yr ~ ~zR~) CITY ATTORNEY p~~.~ ' CITY POLICE DEPT: ~`~ ~`` CITY FIRE DEPT: :.~; CITY BUILDING DEPT: o ' ~'; CITY WATER DEPT: ~} ~ CITY SEWER DEPT: "V ~`" ~ SANITARYSERVICE: ~ a~ , / Uv ~~ ~ MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: :. MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ~: ; ;~.;; ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ~;~; CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: ~~'• NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: <;~ US WEST: F =' INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: ~~~~~ ~~'~~` f' ~° OTHER: z;.~ Contacted: Date: Phone: Mat®rlals presented at public meetings shall becom® properfy of fhe Cty of Merldlan t ~ q: ~R~>'S n`{,3r"y m::.•*`•. _q;`.~;~~`.n ti`•6. ~ i, a '`+~ ~•;3. :.: ~~j}~ S. a Y~\'.T 4 t•' • . 1 ',~ November 13, 2001 K ' ~ sr~~ MERIDIAN PLANNING 8~ ZONING MEETING NOVember 15, 201 ~~ y ; . APPLICANT ITEM NO. 3- B '" REQUEST Approve minutes of November 1,2001 Plannin and Zonin R g g egular Meeting 3-?_ ,,r~.., . E~ AGENCY COMMENTS '' *' I~~ ~,. ~~` ` " CITY CLERK: K~:-> CITY ENGINEER: ~r } ~~ ~, ~: `~ CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: ~,.~~~ CITY ATTORNEY ,,,,, '1 r„." CITY POLICE DEPT: ''' '' =~ -.~. CITY FIRE DEPT: ~> CITY BUILDING DEPT: . ;~: ~~ ~ . ~_ CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: k,~ SANITARY SERVICE: ~/ ~:` a°;-'.= MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: z : ' ~z, . MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ~. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ~,, NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: q";: ,~ ; IDAHO POWER: ~,.=~a US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: OTHER: `~~~~ Contacted: Date: ~ti. Phone: ~~: Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian. %~ ', „~, `y. DTs y. ~f .. ~ •~i~q.,~ ~7r*-~ ZM r, h_ ? 4~` yyr~~~5 ~' i ~ LL ~ ~ .~~' ~" i` ~ `*.^~'.. T~~~ ~ ~ ~ C~~ ~ ~ c ~Jr-~SIF, .~. t:. ""'3. a~ ,rt .-~ a~~ ~ ,nS~C" ,,'~' ~r''"t` ~~F~ ~4` 4~~ 2 .5~~ ~ ~ t~ ~' ~~ ':~- $f f+: "! ~~~' _ J~. 2y71~~yy' Le.,` ~ ~ t C ~ J ~~ ~~ s < ~~~ ~~ ~~ r ~;sue ~ ,r_a :F~. ~fi~.. ~~ ~~~~ • November 13, 2001 AZ O1-Ol 6 MERIDIAN PLANNING 8~ ZONING MEETING November 15, 2001 APPLICANT Touchstone Construction, Inc. ITEM NO. REQUEST Public Hearing -~ Request for annexation and zoning of 7.32 acres from County zone to C-G zone for proposed Meridian Storage -south of West Overland Road and west of South Meridian Road AGENCY COMMENTS ~s= t sF~~„_ CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: See attached legal description CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: See attached Comments CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: "NO Remarks" CITY SEWER DEPT: "NO Comment" SANITARY SERVICE: NO Comment MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: See attached Comments CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: See attached Comments NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: No Comment IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. November 13, 2001 MERIDIAN PLANNING 8~ ZONING MEETING November 15, 2001 CUP 01-033 APPLICANT Virginia L. Bebemess ITEM NO. 6 REQUEST Public Hearing -Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Group Day Care with approximately six children in an R-8 zone for Virginia L. Beberness -Lot 14, Block 2 of Tremont Subdivision AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: SANITARY SERVICE: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Materials presented of public meetings shall become property of the Cffy of Meridian. COMMENTS See coached Staff Comments No Comment See attached Comments See aoached Comments "No Remarks" "No Comment" See attached Comments See attached Comments See aoached Comments No Comment ;; i; r ~ November 13, 2001 AZ 01-017 MERIDIAN PLANNING 8~ ZONING MEETING November 15, 2001 APPLICANT Packard Estates Developers, LLC ITEM NO. 7 REQUEST Public Hearing -Request for annexation and zoning of .193 acres from RUT to R-4 zones for Packard Acres No. 1 -east of North Wingate Lane and south of East Ustick Road AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: SANITARY SERVICE: MERIDIAN SCHOQL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian. ~`_ COMMENTS See attached Staff Comments "No Comment" "No Remarks" "No Comment" "No Comment" See attaohed Comments "1Ne have No Objections to this Proposal" No Comment • o ~~;;; November 13, 2001 cuP o~-o~. MERIDIAN PLANNING 8~ ZONING MEETING November 1 S, 2001 APPLICANT Joint School District No. 2 ITEM NO. 9 REQUEST Public Hearing -Request for a Conditional Use Permit for an alternative school for Middle School and High School age students in an R-4 zone for Joint School District No. 2 -- 930 West Pine Street AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: See attached Staff Comments CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: See attached Comments CITY FIRE DEPT: See attached Comments CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: "No Remarks" CITY SEWER DEPT: "NO Comment" SANITARY SERVICE: See attached Comments MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: See attached Comments CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: '9Ale have No Objections to this Proposal" NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: See attached Comments IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: OTHER: See attached letters from Homeowners Contacted: Date: Phone: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. -`t. • o ~~ti _¢#~~ 4~" November 13, 2001 CUP O1-036 ~: z~7: ~r " MERIDIAN PLANNING 8~ ZONING MEETING November 15, 2001 t f'' APPLICANT Thomas Development, Co. ITEM NO. REQUEST Public Hearing -Request for a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a 72 wx , -;~~f unit wood frame, three story senior apartment complex in an L-0 zone for proposed Tramore ~' ~ .~; Senior Community -south of West Pine Avenue and east of North Linder Road Fa itr-°w .. AGENCY COMMENTS y' '' t ~ ~ ^J CITY CLERK: =~=~ ~~:+ CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: See attached Staff Comments ~~ ,.,: CITY ATTORNEY °' " CITY POLICE DEPT: See attached Comments CITY FIRE DEPT: :„ a: t~~', CITY BUILDING DEPT: ta,~ ~- ~~~~~ CITY WATER DEPT: "NO Remarks" ~~- , . CITY SEWER DEPT: "No Comment" ~ s r,,; SANITARY SERVICE: See attached Comments ' ' MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ~ " ,, ; ~`~~` Sr MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ,1,- ~, ~'~ ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: See attached Comments ~r a ~,'' NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: See attached Comments 1~, ~' ~''` ~ IDAHO POWER: ; '~~~ US WEST: '~ INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: ° ' OTHER: : ; . Contacted• Date: Phone: s ,.5~~ Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian. r;~, sN + w= ,.' f: ;,;::~: ?aK' M~~ ...: ... ~. '. p~~~; : ~~. r'~ `r - i