2010 01-07Meridian Planning and Zoninct Meeting January 7, 2010
Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of January 7, 2010, was
called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Michael Rohm.
Members Present: Chairman Michael Rohm, Commissioner Joe Marshall,
Commissioner Tom O'Brien, Commissioner Wendy Newton-Huckabay.
Members absent: David Moe.
Others Present: Bill Nary, Machelle Hill, Pete Friedman, Bill Parsons, Scott Steckline
and Dean Willis.
Item 1: Roll-Call Attendance:
Roll-call
X Wendy Newton-Huckabay X Tom O'Brien
David Moe X Joe Marshall
X Michael Rohm -Chairman
Rohm: Good evening, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the regularly scheduled
meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission and to start things off I'd like to ask the
clerk to take roll.
Item 2: Adoption of the Agenda:
Rohm: Okay. There are no changes to the agenda tonight, so first thing I'd like is to
have someone make a motion to accept the agenda.
O'Brien: So moved.
Marshall: Second.
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to accept the agenda. All those in favor say aye.
Opposed? Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 3: Consent Agenda:
A. Approve Minutes of December 17, 2009 Planning and Zoning
Commission Meeting:
B. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP
09-010 Request for Conditional Use Permit for an indoor recreation
facility in an I-L district for Spartan Training by Paul Meikle, Sparta
Meridian Planning & Zoning
January 7, 2010
Page 2 of 14
Nation - 760 E. King Street:
C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP
09-011 Request for Conditional Use Permit for a light industry use
in a C-G district for Treasure Valley Marine, Inc. by
Bohnenkamp's Whitewater Customs, Inc. - 483 E. Franklin Road:
Rohm: Next item on the agenda is the Consent Agenda and there are three items,
approval of the minutes from the December 17th, 2009, Planning and Zoning
Commission meeting. Second item is Findings of Fact and Conclusion of Law for CUP
09-101 and, C, Findings of Fact and Conclusion of Law for CUP 09-011. Could I get a
motion to accept the Consent Agenda?
O'Brien: So moved.
Marshall: Second.
Rohm: All those in favor of that motion signify by saying aye. Opposed same sign?
Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Rohm: Okay. Before we open our first public hearing, just for those of you that are
here that don't attend on a regular basis, the process that we go through is we will open
an item and the first testimony will be from the staff. The staff will present the project as
it's been -- the application's been turned into them with their recommendations and,
basically, a presentation of the staff report. Once that's concluded, then, the applicant
has 15 minutes to respond to the testimony given by staff. Once those two have
completed, it will be opened up to those people that have signed up in the back to testify
and they will be given three minutes each for their testimony. Once that's completed,
then, we will ask if there is anybody else from the audience that would like to testify as
well. Once all that testimony has been received, then, the applicant will have one last
opportunity to respond to any testimony from the public. So, with that -- and, then, once
all that's completed we will deliberate and, hopefully, have some conclusions this
evening for the items on our agenda.
Item 4: Public Hearing: PP 09-002 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 2
buildable lots and 1 common lot on approximately 12.91 acres in an
existing R-8 zoning district for Five Twelve by the Church of Jesus Christ
of Latter-Day Saints -west side of Stoddard Road, approximately'/z mile
south of Overland Road:
Rohm: So, with that being said, I'd like to at this time open the public hearing on PP 09-
002 and hear the staff report.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
January 7, 2010
Page 3 of 14
Parsons: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. The project before
you tonight is the preliminary plat approval of two buildable lots and one common lot on
approximately 12.91 acres. The site is situated on the west side of Stoddard Street --
excuse me -- Stoddard Road, halfway in between Overland Road and Victory Road to
the south. In 2005 this property was annexed and preliminary platted as Bear Creek
West. If you look at the map that Ihave -- the vicinity map that I have prepared for you
this evening, you can see how that plat laid out on that property at that time. In 2008 we
did process a time extension for that plat and also with the approval of that plat the
previous developer or the owner of the property constructed the Black Cat sewer trunk
line through that -- that property and they entered into a reimbursement agreement with
the city. Again, once we processed the time extension they were informed that they
needed to pay that reimbursement agreement, they were unable to do so at that time
and so that plat has since expired and now the church -- the LDS church has come
forward tonight proposing to do the plat, construct the street, and construct a church on
the site. So, here is the preliminary plat that staff reviewed in the staff report. You can
see the applicant is proposing two phases. The first phase shows the church site, but
all we are acting on tonight is the preliminary plat. So, basically, what they are
proposing to do is construct a portion of Kodiak as -- it looks like half plus 12. One thing
that I did want to mention to Commission tonight is that we did not receive comments
from ACHD on this application. So, even though staff has reviewed the extension of
that roadway and those access points and are in favor of those, we have not gotten a
formal recommendation from ACHD. If you look at the preliminary plat here, you can
see that they are proposing one access point onto future Kodiak Drive and, then, also
an access point onto Stoddard. Typically, our code restricts access to collector streets
and you should take access from a local street if it's available. In this case there isn't a
local street available for them to take access. Staff felt that their proposal and their
access met the intention of the code and the other addition as far as requiring cross-
access -- it's more than likely that that remaining portion of phase two would probably
redevelop with single family homes. So, staff did not want to have the applicant provide
cross-access and have residential homes sharing a commercial drive aisle with a
nonresidential use. So, we thought, well, in this case they will come back in, replat that,
we can reevaluate that street layout and that plat at the time they come back in. Here is
the proposed landscape plan. Again, you see the church site on here. Staff only
evaluated the street buffer -- street landscape buffers with this plat, so, basically, the
UDC requires that you have a 20 foot landscape buffer along West Kodiak Drive and a
20 buffer along Stoddard Street, which are both collector streets and the applicant does
comply with that, so no recommendation from staff. One thing that I did note in the staff
report was the fact that none of their plantings were labeled on the landscape plan, so
although they are showing the required trees are there, I don't know which species are
what, so I informed the applicant that they need to correct that in their legend and label
their species as they are in those buffers. Staff did receive written testimony from the
applicant. They had some concerns regarding some conditions of approval. I called
them up, discussed those conditions with them and let them know the basis for those
conditions. They informed me that they are in agreement with those conditions now and
so there aren't outstanding issues for you. With that that concludes my presentation
and I will be happy to answer any questions.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
January 7, 2010
Page 4 of 14
Rohm: Any questions of staff?
O'Brien: Yeah. Mr. Chair? Bill, on the map for the first map you had up there, the
Comprehensive Plan map, is that the name change from Bear Wood to Bear Creek at
some point, because you have Bear Wood up there on the map. I just wanted to clarify.
Parsons: Yeah. The project itself, Commissioner O'Brien -- the project itself was Bear
Creek West is how we have it in our database. I'm not sure why it was transposed.
There is a couple different things going on in this map. One is the preliminary plat,
which is Bear Wood and, then, if you notice along Linder Road you see Bear Wood the
number one. Well, that portion was final platted, but never the signature -- that's the
portion that they were trying to extend with the time extension and it was denied and
because that final plat was denied it also caused the preliminary plat to go -- to be
expired as well. So, I'm not sure where that disconnect came from, but the project did
come in annexed and preliminary plat as Bear Creek West.
O'Brien: Thank you.
Parsons: Which doesn't exist any longer. Right. It's pretty much dead. The plat's died.
Rohm: Any other questions of staff?
Marshall: Not at this time.
Rohm: Okay. Would the applicant like to come forward, please, and state your name
and address for the record.
Larsen: Do these both work? Does it matter which one?
Rohm: Either one.
Larsen: Good evening, Planning and Zoning Commission, Mr. Chairman. My name is
Jo Larsen and I'm with Lowland Johanson Zimmerman Architecture. We are located on
400 South Main Street, Payette. 83661. I am here to represent the Church of Jesus
Christ of Latter-day Saints in this preliminary plat application. We concur with all of the
conditions imposed by staff and I am, of course, in favor of the project and I'm here to
answer any questions you may have.
Rohm: Boy, that makes it a lot easier. I have no questions of the applicant. Anybody
else?
O'Brien: I don't have any.
Rohm: Okay. Thank you. Okay. There was nobody that has signed up to testify for
this application, but at this time if there is anybody that would like to come forward and
Meridian Planning & Zoning
January 7, 2010
Page 5 of 14
offer testimony now is that time. Okay. It doesn't look like we have anybody that wants
to speak, so could I get a motion?
Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Chair, I do have one question for the Commission. Without
ACHD comments are we going to want to continue this or recommend approval pending
ACHD comments? It's not a real complicated package, but --
Rohm: I don't know. My opinion is we could recommend approval based upon
favorable comments from ACHD and that would keep it moving and let the City Council
-- if, in fact, there is negative comments from ACHD, they I guess deal with it at that
time, but that would just be my opinion.
Marshall: Mr. Chair? Addressing that issue I do like being able to address all those
issues here before we send it on, but, to be honest, I don't see a reason to hold it up.
can't foresee anything from ACHD coming back. It appears to be -- actually, I would ask
staff. Was there any ACRD comments on the original Bear Creek or Bear Wood -- Bear
Creek Subdivision? Were there ACHD comments on that that would have addressed
this at all?
Newton-Huckabay: Oh, yeah.
Parsons: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Marshall, absolutely. They have acted on that
preliminary plat back in '06. Basically, what they would do is send us over those exact
same conditions that they had back in that day when they reviewed that plat. So, I just
had a previous project, the one that's -- the hearing item that's coming up next was the
same situation. They just, basically, attached the same conditions that they had with
that plat. So, I would imagine this -- at least as far as the Kodiak portion of it, I don't
think that would change from ACHD's previous review. Now, as far as the review of that
access to Stoddard, that might be something different, because at the time that other
plat came in there wasn't access proposed there to Stoddard, only through West Kodiak
Drive. So, I don't know how ACRD would see -- would view that, but at least the initial
pre-application meetings that we had with the applicant they said that ACHD would
allow that access point to Stoddard. But maybe the applicant could elaborate more on
that.
Marshall: Okay. And, then, to expound on that, then, I would suggest we have done a
similar situation with another church that we have passed through, because the
churches seem to allow all the traffic flow all at one time and you cannot have a church
of that size having one entrance and exit, you have got to have two, and if there is going
to be a church at this location, you're going to have to have two entrances and exists
and the fact that I believe in that last discussion we talked that the vast majority of that
happens on Sundays, in the evenings, and off hours, that it's not at typical peak flow
times, that it really wouldn't be a significant hindrance. Thereafter, based on that
would suggest that this is a candidate to move forward.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
January 7, 2010
Page 6 of 14
Friedman: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, just one more point on that. I think
Commissioner Marshall did pretty much hit it squarely, is that, you know, we -- this is
not a commercial development; it has a lower traffic generation probably than the
number of residential units that could also be developed onto that property. The other
point is just so you understand what we will probably get back from ACHD is on that
West Kodiak Drive, probably that the applicants will be constructing a half street section
plus 12, because the property to the north of that is owned by the school district and is a
future school site, so that when they annex into the city and go forward with whatever
development they have there, we will get the rest of that road completed. But I believe
we will have more than adequate -- I mean it really hasn't changed much from what the
original approval was.
O'Brien: Mr. Chair, on another -- another note. Bill, on the applicant's response to item
number four regarding Exhibit B, 2.3, there was a double entry in there. Would you,
please, expound on that and just for the record, so we understood, which one of these
is going to be kept, 2.3 versus 2.4. It said that -- there is two entries regarding the
easements for utilities. You said you addressed it with the applicant and all things were
settled, but I think we need that clarification.
Newton-Huckabay: Those are two different conditions of approval, Commissioner
O'Brien.
O'Brien: But it says 2.3 twice. That was the question. In the staff report.
Newton-Huckabay: Okay. I'm sorry, I missed that.
Parsons: One moment, please. Commissioner Rohm, Members of the Commission,
you're correct, there are two 2.3's in that -- in the staff report. We will correct that. It's
just a typo error.
O'Brien: Okay.
Parsons: We can correct that before it goes to Council.
O'Brien: Okay. Just thank you for clarifying that.
Rohm: Any additional discussion?
Marshall: Mr. Chair, I recommend that we close the public hearing on PP 09-022.
O'Brien: Second.
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearing on 09 -- PP 09-002.
All those in favor say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
January 7, 2010
Page 7 of 14
Newton-Huckabay: I have one comment before --
Rohm: Okay.
Newton-Huckabay: -- a motion is made. I have some concerns moving it forward
without ACRD comments, merely for the fact of the Stoddard portion of this. I certainly
have no problem with the development, I would just -- I don't necessarily think that
Kodiak and Stoddard are the only two ways that you could access into that property and
I'm curious why it would be inappropriate to access the neighborhood church through
the neighborhood.
Rohm: So, you think we should continue it to wait for the comments from Ada County?
Newton-Huckabay: Well, I think it would -- in my opinion I'd like to see the comments
from Ada County on this and see if they agree with -- with the city or if they are
suggesting something else all together. But that doesn't --
Marshall: Mr. Chair, Commissioner Newton-Huckabay, it's very similar to something we
just approved on Ten Mile I believe it was.
O'Brien: Right-in, right-out.
Marshall: No. It was full access I'm pretty sure. It was a church just like this. We
already did this out on Ten Mile, I believe.
Newton-Huckabay: An access onto Chinden.
Friedman: Mr. Chairman -- Mr. Chairman, Commissioners --
Newton-Huckabay: I don't remember that.
Friedman: -- that church on Ten Mile Road was ultimately approved. If you will recall
there was some discussion at the Commission meeting, because the provisions of the
UDC -- in that case Ten Mile Road, which is an arterial, direct access is specifically
prohibited in the code unless waived by City Council. So, when that application -- when
you considered that application and moved it forward to the City Council, at that point
the applicant asked or requested of Council that they waive that prohibition and allow
the direct access to that arterial, which is what they did. You had provided some
comment, because it was not an official recommendation, that you did not see any --
you didn't have a concern with that access, but as we discussed at the time, the
appropriate body to waive that prohibition was the City Council. In this instance there is
not another neighborhood to bring access through. Right now Stoddard Road really is
the most -- the most direct access. The rest of the property is undeveloped. So, this
really is kind of the first piece of what will be a future development. The western lot, the
large lot, phase two, will likely develop as residential lots, but right now they are creating
Meridian Planning & Zoning
January 7, 2010
Page 8 of 14
this two lot plat, so that we can get a final plat on phase one, which is the five acre
parcel, so that the church can be constructed on that. Not wanting to take away from
your concerns, you know, I think we share the concern. Typically we wouldn't want to
go forward without ACHD's comments, but, you know, based on what discussions we
have had with ACHD, based on discussions that the applicant has had with ACHD,
there is also going to be another bite at the apple, if you will, because you're going to be
seeing a Conditional Use Permit on the church itself, too. So, if we can get a fire lit
underneath the highway district, we will do our very best to get comments on that
application.
Newton-Huckabay: Fair enough.
Rohm: Thank you. Appreciate the input.
Marshall: Mr. Chair, after considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move
to recommend approval to the City Council of file number PP 09-002 as presented in
the staff report for the hearing date of January 7th, 2010, with no modifications.
O'Brien: Second.
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to move onto City Council recommending
approval of PP 09-002 with no modifications. All those in favor say aye. Opposed?
Motion carried. Thank you very much.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 5: Public Hearing: CUP 09-012 Request for Conditional Use Permit for a
Self-Service Storage Facility consisting of 10 buildings on approximately
3.49 acres in an existing C-G zoning district for Linder Self-Service
Storage Facility by Chip Gallagher -east side of Linder Road,
approximately'/ mile north of McMillan Road:
Rohm: At this time I'd like to open the public hearing on CUP 09-012 for the Linder Self
Storage -- Self Service Storage facility and begin with the staff report.
Parsons: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. Before you this
evening is a Conditional Use Permit for a self service storage facility on approximately
3.49 acres of land. The property is located within the Paramount Commercial
Southwest Subdivision, which Council and you acted on in 2007. A time extension has
been processed to keep this preliminary plat alive. Staff also facilitated a property
boundary adjustment to create the configuration of this parcel as you see it before you
tonight. One thing I did want to mention to you before we move -- as we go forward with
this application is that a final plat is needed to be recorded prior to occupancy of this
project, just for the mere fact that currently this site has no access to it and it needs to
be created by a public street and the only way to create that public street is through the
platting process currently in the UDC. So, at some point that will happen. But for
Meridian Planning & Zoning
January 7, 2010
Page 9 of 14
tonight's discussion we will talk about the storage facility. Let me go back here. So, this
site is situated on the northeast corner of McMillan and Linder Road. If you recall there
is a Walgreens that's located in the hard corner there, in the northeast corner, and that
was phase one that platted with Paramount Commercial Southwest. Here is the site
plan that staff did review. Staff has recommended a few changes to the site plan as we
evaluated this. Of course, the biggest issue, as I mentioned, is the fact that we need to
get a public street, so that this facility can have access and so the applicant is working
with the developer to make sure that that happens. Number two, because of the use
and because this property is currently zoned C-G, it does require CUP approval for that
use and there are specific use standards that go along with that use and one of those
standards restricts the hours of operation for this facility from 6:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. for
the mere fact that it abuts a residential district to the east and a small portion in the
northeast corner. So, the applicant will have to comply with that requirement. The other
issue staff called out in the staff report was this northeast corner here. I did want to go
on record to say that I wrote the condition wrong in the staff report, I noted it as the
northwest corner, but it is the northeast corner. And so, basically, one of those specific
standards states that there should be 25 feet of separation between -- between all the
buildings on the site and this little portion here scales out at ten feet. So, staff tried to
give the applicant some options, either, one, remove a couple units and comply with the
25 foot requirement, or just attach the buildings and move forward. So, hopefully, he
will shed some light on that for you this evening. The other issue (brought -- want to
bring to your attention is the fact that the drive aisles will be split along property lines
and so the applicant will have to get permission from the property owner for this
southeast corner -- or southwest corner, so that they can construct that drive aisle. The
property boundary adjustment was really just to facilitate the sale of the lot and so now
the applicant -- when we met with the applicant we discussed the possibility of
conditioning the CUP based on the approval and recordation of a final plat and so they
are in agreement with that as well. Here is the landscape plan that staff reviewed as
well. So, as you can see here, Linder Road -- they are required to have a 25 foot
landscape buffer. Because the applicant is proposing to use the building as a sound
attenuation wall, the UDC allows them to reduce that buffer width along the northern,
eastern boundary to ten feet and, of course, you see a future roadway local street
punched through the site, that will require a ten foot buffer there. That buffer actually
exceeds the ten foot minimum and so the applicant, basically, beefed up that perimeter
to really give more of a street presence to the self service facility and I think that adds --
that compliments the type of use. Typically when you get -- when you're reviewing this
type of facility for the design review it gets kind of tough to try to get architectural
features to make. this facility have a nice street presence and so staff believes the
applicant has done a nice job on that and we do appreciate them going through that
effort. Here are the elevations that they are proposing for you this evening. The -- in
the north -- in the top corner you can see that is what the view would look like from
Linder Road and so there is a mix of material. You see the modulation in the roof lines.
You see the glass. You see the landscaping. And, then, as you head towards east
looking from the future Deer Crest Street you can see how they are going to modulate
the building and add a trellis there. I think that's something that Paramount probably
has in their community out there now, so I think they wanted some of that added to that
Meridian Planning & Zoning
January 7, 2010
Page 10 of 14
as well. And, then, over here going -- the right photograph shows how this would
extend the remaining portion along West Deer Crest. So, here is -- again, here is Linder
Road here and you saw where the trellis feature was and the building modulated there
and, then, you have that Linder Road portion again and you can see how the building
modulates. Again, they modulate along the street as well, with additional landscaping to
help mitigate some of that. Staff is -- was supportive of the elevations. Along the north
and the east didn't see too much modulation, but the building materials themselves will
be compatible with the future and existing homes in the area, so it will be lap siding, it
won't be a stone or block wall. I think that blends well with that neighborhood and will
add to that. One recommendation staff had for the elevations was that at least the
perimeter building -- so these buildings along this -- this area were to incorporate an
eave -- a 12 inch eave, basically, to be compatible with the homes. So, that way we felt
-- here you're going to have a parapet, if you can see my arrow here. You're going to
have a parapet here and, then, these perimeter buildings, the majority of them will be
sloped roofs and so staff felt rather than just having that roof line match the building
wall, let's build some articulation in there and put an eave on that to kind of compliment
future and existing homes. My understanding is the applicant is okay with that. Staff
did receive comments from the applicant this afternoon and also from the developer.
The applicant did work with Sanitary Services and I believe in the staff report I called out
that they need to coordinate with Sanitary Services before the hearing. They have done
that. Sanitary Services has approved their trash location, so we were happy to get that
cleared up. The applicant wasn't able to provide you with elevations for their interior
buildings as we had recommended in the staff report. I think staff is okay with that. We
realize it will be screened and most of the architectural details and the features will be
along the perimeter, which we feel is adequate and meets the intent of the design
manual. And also if you recall in my earlier discussion I was talking about the
requirement of the final plat and so we did condition that staff report that they submit
and they extend West Deer Crest through the site all the way to the eastern property
boundary. The applicant wanted to modify that condition. Staff worked with them this
morning, this afternoon, came up with an appropriate condition. I'll go ahead and read it
into the record and if you're in agreement with that, if you would note that change staff
would be happy to correct that for the findings. So, that condition that we have -- that I
spoke to you about is condition 1.3 and so staff is proposing that it read prior to release
of occupancy for any structure on the site a final plat shall be recorded and the
extension of East Deer Crest Street shall be constructed to the eastern edge of this
shared driveway to provide access to the self service storage facility. The construction
of vertical curb, gutter, and sidewalk shall be extended along the southern boundary of
the storage facility, terminating at the eastern boundary. At the terminus of the
dedicated public street an approved 20 foot wide emergency access road and
turnaround shall be constructed in accordance with the Meridian fire department
standards to provide secondary access to the storage facility. The applicant is in the
audience tonight and, hopefully, they will agree with that condition. With that, no other
outstanding issues and I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have.
Rohm: Thanks, Bill. Any questions of staff?
Meridian Planning & Zoning
January 7, 2010
Page 11 of 14
Newton-Huckabay: I have none.
Rohm: Okay. Would the applicant like to come forward, please, and state your name
and address for the record.
Gallagher: Chairman, Members of the Committee, good evening. My name is Chip
Gallagher. I live at 3020 North Wingate Lane in Meridian and we have reviewed all the
conditions of approval and we are in agreement. If you have any questions 1 would be
happy to answer them at this time.
Rohm: Boy, this is good. Thank you. Any questions of the applicant?
O'Brien: I just think things are very well laid out and planned.
Gallagher: Well, thank you.
Marshall: You're in agreement with staffs update to condition 1.3?
Gallagher: That's the road?
Marshall: Yes.
Gallagher: Yes.
Marshall: Okay.
Rohm: Thank you. Again, we do not have anybody that has signed up to testify to this
application, but at this time we open it up and welcome testimony. Please state your
name and address for the record, sir.
Marcheschi: Good evening. My name is Michael Marcheschi and -- at 12601 West
Explorer Drive in Boise. I represent the developer Brighton Corporation. And I just
wanted to clarify in the condition that has been substituted I believe Bill said the
southern edge sidewalk and curb and gutter would be extended all the way and it
should read the northern edge of the street.
Parsons: Right. I have it as the storage facility -- the southern edge of the storage
facility, so --
Marcheschi: I just wanted to make sure we understood that. Other than that we are in
good agreement.
Rohm: Okay. Thank you very much.
Marcheschi: Thank you.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
January 7, 2010
Page 12 of 14
Rohm: Is there anyone else that would like to testify to this application? Okay. Thank
you. Any discussion before we close the public hearing? Comments?
O'Brien: I have nothing to add.
Marshall: A couple quick comments. One, I appreciate the efforts gone forth to try to
match in with the surrounding area. I think it's something that's needed within the area.
I don't think we have seen any other -- that I know of any storage facilities anywhere
close to that in the local -- in the locale. It does seem appropriate to me.
Rohm: Okay. Thank you. Wendy, any comments?
Newton-Huckabay: I have none. Thank you.
Rohm: Okay. Thank you. Could I get a motion to close the public hearing?
O'Brien: Mr. Chair, I move to close public hearing on CUP 09-012.
Newton-Huckabay: Second.
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearing on CUP 09-012. All
those in favor say aye. Opposed? That motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Marshall: Mr. Chair, after considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move
to approve file numbers CUP 09-012, DEF 09-030 and ALT 09-017, as presented in the
staff report for the hearing date of January 7th, 2010, with the modifications to 1.3 as
stated in staff testimony.
O'Brien: Second.
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to approve CUP 09-012 to include the staff
report as modified. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carried. Thank you.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 6: Request for Approval to Create New Development Application
Forms/Checklists by City of Meridian Planning Department:
Rohm: Okay. The last item on our agenda here is a request for approval to create new
development application forms checklist by the City of Meridian Planning Department.
Pete.
Friedman: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Commission Members. As you know, the UDC
requires that any substantial changes that we make to the -- our application forms be
Meridian Planning & Zoning
January 7, 2010
Page 13 of 14
submitted to you for your approval. We have just adopted a major reworking or
reengineering of the sign code. It was a monumental effort by staff and stakeholders
and quite a few folks contributing to that. That was reviewed by you a couple months
ago, approved by the City Council. Part of that -- my staff is -- well, we need to make
this thing work, so we have to kind of reengineer a couple checklists. So, the checklist
that we have brought forth to you tonight is a new checklist that used to be temporary
signs, it's now limited duration signs, and once I get educated in the code next week
could actual explain to you what that's all about, but Kristy said just get them to approve
this checklist, so we can started reviewing and approving these signs.
Newton-Huckabay: That's the politically correct way not to insult a temporary sign?
Friedman: You know, Commissioner, I -- I haven't done sign codes before. I think
only had one sign code in this go around in life and I'm glad I wasn't involved in this one,
but it was a good effort, but one's enough. So, I can't tell you why they got it, but I know
that they tightened up quite a few things, so that it's going to give a lot more flexibility
and a lot more choice to some of our businesses and still achieve some of the
objectives that the city's after in maintaining the esthetics of our streetscape. That's a
politically correct answer.
Newton-Huckabay: Yes, it was.
Rohm: It was. Thank you, Pete. I appreciate your comments. Any discussion on this
item?
O'Brien: I have none.
Marshall: Seeing how most everything has been passed and this seems to be just
updating for that; I think it's very appropriate.
Rohm: Okay. Could I get a motion to that effect, Commissioner Marshall?
Marshall: Mr. Chair, I am recommending approval of UDC -- the modification to UDC
11-5A-3B.2 as presented.
Newton-Huckabay: Second.
Rohm: All those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed same sign? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Rohm: Just need one more motion.
Newton-Huckabay: I recommend we -- or I move we adjourn.
Marshall: Second.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
January 7, 2010
Page 14 of 14
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded that we adjourn. All those in favor say aye.
Opposed same sign?
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Rohm: Meeting adjourned.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:37 P.M.
(AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.)
APPROV
Y A~
MIC A L H - AIRMAN
n ~~
ATTEST: J ~ I I
~I~~ I~
DATE APP~iOVE(~,."~~,,,,,,,~~
.~~, y ,,
q ~'
r -~
F
n~ ~ o
JAYCEE L. HOLMAN, CITY CLE _ AL
i 9p9~'~sr ~s~ "'~,~.~ ~\`
q P ~~
.~
eo ~o .~
,,..
vNrr ,.