Loading...
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 ,.