Minutes 7/15Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
July 15, 2010
Page 8 of 33
O'Brien: That's not my question, but -- you're right.
Newton-Huckabay: No. But Ithink -- and having seen recently cell phone towers
disguised as palm trees on vacation, I do have to point out that it is quite garish and it
does stick out, whereas we are used to seeing things, such as power poles and that
type of thing in various shades of gray in our environment and usually you drive right on
by them, but the minute you put plastic palm frawns on the top of one and painted palm
leaves or bark, it gets quite obvious. So, I think -- I agree with Commissioner Freeman,
it's a great location, I think it's a great win-win for the school district and Clear Wire and
the city, so --
O'Brien: I'm not against it. That wasn't my concern. It was just the distance of
notification of people. That's all. And I just wanted to know how it applied here, so --
that's all.
Marshall: Well, Commissioners, I can mention I am privy to the fact that staff has had a
number of discussions about the stealth pole and disguising it like even a flag was
discussed, could a flag go up it, which would interfere with problems, but the antennas
themselves are hidden within the pole and one of the things that I appreciate also is that
one of the requirements is that there are space for other providers within the pole
should they come lease some of that from Clear Wire. They have options of providing
services to other providers within that same. pole. So, additional poles don't have to be
made in that same location. So, that being said do we have a motion?
Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Chair. After considering all staff, applicant, and public
testimony, I move to approve file number CUP 10-003 as presented in the staff report
for the hearing date of July 15th, 2010, with no modifications. I further move to direct
staff to prepare an appropriate findings document to be considered at the next Planning
and Zoning Commission hearing to August 5th, 2010.
Freeman: I second.
Marshall: We have moved and second to approve CUP 10-003. All those in favor say
aye. Those opposed? The ayes have it.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 5: Public Hearing: CUP 10-004 Request for Conditional Use Permit
approval for an Assisted Living Facility on approximately 2.3 acres in an
existing L-O zoning district for Spring Creek Ustick Assisted Living
Facility by Doug Clegg - SWC of N. Meridian Road and W. Ustick Road:
Marshall: At this time I'd like to open the public hearing for CUP 10-004 for the sole
purpose of continuing it to the August 5th hearing date.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
July 15, 2010
Page 9 of 33
Newton-Huckabay: So moved. Or -- I make that motion. It's been so long.
Marshall: We have a motion to continue it to the August 5th. Do we have a second?
Freeman: Second.
Marshall: It has been moved and seconded to continue CUP 10-004 to August 5th.
Those in favor say aye. Those opposed? The ayes have it.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 6: Public Hearing: CUP 10-005 Request for Conditional Use Permit
approval to construct a duplex in an R-4 zoning district for Walker Duplex
by Cortland Walker - 1251 W. Crestwood Drive (Lot 2, Block 1 of
Woodward Estates Subdivision):
Marshall: I would like to open now the public hearing for CUP 10-005 for the Walker
Duplex and ask for the staff report.
Parsons: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. The application
before you tonight is for a conditional use and design review approval for a duplex. The
subject property is located -- physical address is 1251 West Crestwood Drive. In the
aerial before you it's located on the southwest corner of Crestwood Drive and
Southwest 12th Avenue. The property is approximately 0.0 -- or, excuse me, 0.20 acres
and is currently zoned R-4. Adjacent land uses to this property are single family
residences and a mix of single family attached, which you can see in the aerial on the
right across the street from the proposed property. Here is the site plat that staff had
analyzed for the application. A little history on this. I don't know if some of you
Commissioners have had an opportunity to drive by the site, but you can see that the
structure is currently under construction. Originally it came through to the building
department as a single family residence within an unfinished basement. Construction
commenced, the applicant decided to revise the plans and include a basement unit or a
finished basement. That triggered the building official to have the applicant notify staff
as to what the intention of their property was. After meeting with staff in pre-app'ing, we
realized that -- they realized that the site, in fact, did change from a single family
residence to what the code defines as a duplex. There are provisions in the ordinance
that allow for secondary dwelling units. However, based on the square footage that
they were proposing and the number of bedrooms at the time, it did not comply with
those standards. So, in fact, the UDC did describe this as a duplex unit, which is,
basically, two units on one property. And so it doesn't clearly say it has to be side by
side, it could be one on top of the other. So, per that they were informed of the
additional parking requirements of the UDC and so the plan kind of morphed from what
was permitted for a single family residence into the Conditional Use Permit that you see
this evening. The main floor unit itself will be three bedrooms and two baths and the
basement unit will be at this time proposed for one bedroom, including a living room and
separate kitchen and a den space that's located up in the right-hand corner on the right