The URL can be used to link to this page

1998 10-13MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 The regular scheduled meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:08 P.M. by Malcolm MacCoy. MEMBERS PRESENT: Malcolm MacCoy, Byron Smith, Tammy De Weerd, Keith Borup. OTHERS PRESENT: Shari Stiles, Bruce Freckleton, Eric Rossman, Will Berg. MacCoy: The first items on the agenda this evening are our minutes of past time first a September 8th meeting. Commissioners, what is your desires? Commissioner Keith? Borup: I have no questions or comments. De Weerd: I have no comments. Smith: I’m sorry Mr. Chairman, we are commenting on the minutes, is that? MacCoy: Yes. Smith: No comments. Nelson: No comments. MacCoy: Thank you commissioner. Nelson: I would like to make a motion that we approve the minutes for the September 8th meeting. De Weerd: Mr. Chairman I move that we accept the minutes as presented to the meeting held on September 8th . MacCoy: We have two motions. Nelson: I’ll second that. MacCoy: All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Smith: I’m going to abstain Mr. Chairman. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 2 MacCoy: Thank you, moving on to the next one. This one was a special meeting that was held on September 24, 1998 for one item. I want to publicly thank Commissioner Borup for sitting in for me that night, acting as chair because I was out of town. It was interesting, I thought it might be a fairly easy evening thinking that we had done all the work on that with all the time we had put into it so far, both from the applicant as well as the public. I find that you went to midnight that night and you pretty well ate up 95 pages of testimony that evening, that’s on top of the four months that we had (Inaudible) this down. I hope that we have really discussed it in great detail, with that commissioners… Nelson: I’d like to move that… MacCoy: I’m going to ask first does anybody have any questions about… Borup: I have none. De Weerd: No. Smith: I just got this, I couldn’t possible be expected to read through it and I’m not going to be able to vote on it, since I haven’t even read it. MacCoy: Aren’t you a fast reader? Smith: Not that fast. MacCoy: Okay Mr. Nelson? Nelson: I’d like to move the… MacCoy: Before you finish, you got any remarks first? Nelson: No. MacCoy: Okay, I have one. It’s on page 11, last paragraph and I think it should be changed some of the things in here, but I think this ought to be changed. It says here in the thing, each at the north-south roads from Black Cat to—well all the way east to Boise will eventually be five land roads and it should be lane roads. So I want to put that in for a correction. Now Commissioner Nelson, you can say your thing. Nelson: I’d like to move that we approve the minutes for the special meeting held September 24th . De Weerd: Second. MacCoy: All in favor? MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 3 MOTION CARRIED: All ayes, one abstain. MacCoy: All right, we’ve come to the point now where we will be starting our normal agenda and I’d like to reiterate some things that we’ve been talking about this past summer that we’ve been adhering to, which hopefully will lead to a quicker meeting. Tonight we have nineteen items on the list which makes all of us up here a little nervous from the standpoint we don’t want to spend till 2:30 in the morning. What we’ve agreed to do is to go over the agenda till nine o’clock or a little about that time, take a break and I’ll pull the commissioners and see what we have left because what I would like to do is end our evening with a time of eleven o’clock and we’ll tell you at nine o’clock where we have the cut off point so you take your chance and go home. I’d like to think that we could make through nineteen, but past experience has shown us it’s almost next to impossible. We are also, just for information for the future, we are working out presently, actively a different system so we don’t have to go through this process. Hopefully we’ll have it to the point next month, we’ll have that in place. Moving on to item number one. Smith: Mr. Chairman? MacCoy: Yes sir. Smith: Before you move on to comment on what you were just talking about, we’ve got nineteen items on here, there is probably three or four that we didn’t get findings on until today and since I work, I wasn’t able to pick them up till tonight, I haven’t read them. Also, there are three items on the agenda 14, 15, 16, which is proposed Mid Valley Business Park Subdivision which includes I guess it’s item 16. 24,560 square foot office building equipment yard and garage with security fencing associated landscaping and parking. We didn’t get any building elevations or anything on that and I would think by now that staff would know that somebody up here and me especially if nobody else does is going to ask for that stuff before we can act on this thing. So I don’t even know why it’s on the agenda. I’m not going to be prepared to move it on forward. MacCoy: Okay, for a moment here, lets go to staff. Is it an oversight that we didn’t get elevations or, what happened? Stiles: Chairman, commissioners, they did submit their one required set of elevations, it is on file at the city clerks office. They are not required by our application or ordinance to supply more than one copy. That’s why it is in the city clerks office. I don’t know if it was too large for you to get a copy. The applicant submitted what they are required to submit. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 4 Smith: Well in the future maybe we can do something about this, so this doesn’t happen again. This happens all the time and it’s just a waste of everybody’s time. MacCoy: Okay, we’ll see if we can clean it up then here. Let me ask the city clerk, did you recognize that when it came in? Was it an 8.5” X 11” material or is it something like a full set of drawings? 16” 17” in that area? Smith: Maybe a suggestion even if it’s not in our application requirements it might be beneficial for this commission if staff would point out to applicants in the future that we are going to expect to have that stuff and suggest to them strongly that they submit extra copies in addition to what the minimum requirements say in the ordinance before we can get that thing amended. Just a suggestion because next time it happens I’ll be saying the same thing again. MacCoy: Okay, Commissioner Smith, the clerk is showing me that it was a large drawing and elevations on it and it’s not reproducible. Okay here’s the (Inaudible) and you’ve already got this. Can we go on now? Smith: I have nothing else. MacCoy: Where did I leave off here? The applicant we have covered on a standpoint of timing that we would like to hold the applicant to fifteen minutes max and if he feels or she feels that she has more to say when they get up here and if it’s going to take more than fifteen minutes and we’ve had this happen recently, then it’s thrown back to the commissioners and they allow us whatever the time is that the person thinks they have to have and we look at the project to see if it warrants that. As far as the public when we have public hearing, we’re going to limit the public to five minutes at the podium up here and I ask for your help here in this situation and that if you would be to the point and talk to the items and not to a lot of other things and if you’ve got something to say and somebody gets up before you do and says pretty much what you said, then I ask since it all goes on tape and is printed up in a record book, then your problems or concerns are recorded. That’s not to limit you, if you feel the person didn’t really say it the way that you wanted it to hear it said or you didn’t cover the final points, then you have the right to come up and make your statement. I’m just asking for your services to help us get this thing done so you don’t have to sit there, nor do we, the rest of the night to do this. I thank you for that. ITEM NO.1: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PROPOSED TERRA TOWNHOUSE SUBDIVISION BY JIM HICKS—EAST OF W. 7TH AND SOUTH OF IDAHO: (CONTINUED AFTER ITEM NO. 2) BOB UNGER, 870 N. LINDER ROAD, SUITE B, MERIDIAN ID. WAS SWORN IN BY THE ATTORNEY. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 5 Unger: As reviewed in your minutes of August 31st , we presented this application to the commission at that time, I know you have a lot of things on the agenda. Nothing has changed, we reviewed the conditions of approval that are recommended by staff. Just very briefly once again these are two existing four plexes that we are proposing to turn into townhouses, zero lot line townhouses. Once again, I’d like to say that they are existing, we have existing services. We will have to do some individual metering which we’ve agreed to do and it is part of the conditions of approval. We do have common area that is, we have some grassy area for use of the property owners and then the gray is the existing concrete parking sidewalks, patios and like I said, we have no problems at all with conditions of approval and request your recommendation for approval to the City Council. Borup: No questions. De Weerd: No questions. Smith: No questions. Nelson: I have no questions. Borup: We’ve already gone through all this once. I think the reason it’s here is because findings weren’t prepared at the last meeting. Is that correct? MacCoy: Yes. (Inaudible) Borup: Mr. Chairman, I think staff may have a comment. MacCoy: Okay, staff? Stiles: Chairman MacCoy, commissioners, the reason this item was tabled last time was because the findings weren’t prepared. The motion was you wanted to wait till you could act on the conditional use permit findings, prior to acting on the preliminary plat, so this is not a public hearing. You should be able to act on the findings and the plat without additional testimony. MacCoy: You can sit down now, we’ll take care of the rest of the business now. Moving on to item—holding on to item number one presently till we get to item two, which is the findings of fact and conclusions of law. ITEM NO. 2: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR 8 ZERO LOT LINE TOWNHOUSES IN TERRA TOWNHOUSE SUBDIVISION BY JIM HICKS – EAST OF W. 7TH AND SOUTH OF IDAHO: MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 6 Smith: Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a motion that Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. Borup: Second. MacCoy: I think this is going to be a roll call vote. Alright since we’re on item two—that’s what I’ve got right here, it’s right on my sheet. ROLL CALL: Borup - yea, Smith - aye, De Weerd – yea, Nelson – yea. MacCoy: All ayes, what’s the decision? Smith: Mr. Chairman, the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council of the City of Meridian that they approve the conditional use permit for the uses set forth within these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as requested by the applicant for the property described in the application with the conditions set forth within these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and any other conditions required by the Meridian City Council. Borup: Second. MacCoy: All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. ITEM NO. 1: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PROPOSED TERRA TOWNHOUSE SUBDIVISION BY JIM HICKS – EAST OF W. 7TH AND SOUTH OF IDAHO: MacCoy: Going back to item one, which is the preliminary plat. Having passed the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, what is your direction on that? Borup: Mr. Chairman I move that we recommend City Council approval of this preliminary plat. Nelson: Second. MacCoy: All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. MacCoy: Number one is approved also. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 7 ITEM NO. 3: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR GROUP DAYCARE BY TINA CARRICO –2052 N. LARK PLACE: MacCoy: Commissioners? Borup: I move that the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. Smith: Second. MacCoy: Okay, before I ask for a vote, staff has indicated—is it Shari? Shari you have something to say about this before we finish this one? Stiles: Chairman MacCoy, commissioners, the only thing I had to state was that improper notice was given on this application. We got the wrong addresses from the assessors office and so this would have to go back for another notice for a public hearing and notify those neighbors. In discussion with the applicant today, she indicated that she may withdraw this application, I just wanted to let you know, I didn’t know whether to go ahead with the findings or…Proper notice was not given and so that is in the findings, so I guess it is probably better to take no action. Borup: Mr. Chairman, I would like to withdraw my motion. MacCoy: Alright, Mr. Attorney. Rossman: I guess if Mrs. Carrico hasn’t made a determination whether or not she wants another hearing on this matter and that she may withdraw her application, perhaps the appropriate action at this point would be to table the matter until it can be determined whether or not she wants to pursue it. De Weerd: Is she here tonight? MacCoy: I don’t see her. Stiles: I don’t believe so. De Weerd: Shari, was the reason for her hesitancy because of the time delays? Stiles: She indicated that it wasn’t the delay she has started working and decided not to go through with the day care. She was contemplating following through with it so that somehow she could recoup her filing fees on her taxes, but since this is not going to, it wouldn’t even be in effect until after the first of the year, she was afraid that she might not be able to do that anyway and just didn’t MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 8 want to go through the process. Until we get that written withdrawal, I guess we just need to proceed with re-notification and re-publication. Smith: So we need to table this to a date certain? MacCoy: Yes. Rossman: Yeah, I guess you can table it to another month and hopefully within that period of time it can be determined whether or not she will pursue it. Smith: Okay, I would like to make a motion that we table this to our November 10th Planning and Zoning meeting. De Weerd: Second. MacCoy: All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. ITEM NO. 4: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR CONVERSION OF A GARAGE TO BEDROOM & BATHROOM BY MEL A. LACY – 1414 N. MERIDIAN ROAD: MacCoy: Commissioners? De Weerd: I have a couple of questions on it, that would be in regard to transferability of the CUP to future owners and how we can enforce that. Stiles: Chairman, commissioners, it would be very difficult to monitor that. Land transactions take place everyday. We are not receiving warranty deeds that are recorded from the recorders office, it would be very hard to enforce. De Weerd: Is there something that they can put into the conditions that they would have to notify the city upon sale of the property. In essence, aren’t we creating two dwellings on this one property? Stiles: Yes, two dwelling units. You could probably handle it through a deed restriction that would show up on a title report if they decided to transfer the property that upon the transfer of ownership they had to turn it back into a garage or to turn it into a commercial use that is in the zone that it’s in. Without some kind of deed restriction, it would be nearly impossible to enforce. De Weerd: Did you have any changes to your staff comments? They have been incorporated into the findings, so I guess now that they are listed like that in the findings, we probably should ask you each findings if there is any changes to your comments. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 9 Stiles: I guess if you are concerned about the transferability and our ability to enforce that, should add in the findings that a deed restriction will need to be placed on the property indicating the conditions of this conditional use permit. I know that’s not very good wording, but… Rossman: I’m not sure that’s a proper condition to make in granting a conditional use permit that a deed restriction be placed on there in Meridian City Code has a provision that requires notice in a public hearing before the City Council for any transfer of a conditional use, irregardless of any enforceability problems. The problem is still going to be there. I don’t know how you are going to by condition in your Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law require them to do anything more than the ordinance already provides. Unless somebody has a better idea. I don’t think a deed restriction is the appropriate way to go. Borup: I think looking at it from a practical manner, if the family relationship is not there anymore, it does sell, the neighbors are going to be aware of that and I think you will be notified by the neighbors and that’s probably the best enforcement we have. Would anybody agree with that? I think that’s normally been pretty good notification Shari? Stiles: As long as it’s the neighbor that had the objection in the first place. Borup: That’s probably—maybe other neighbors too. If something happens that is going to be the first line. I guess I feel in light of what counsel said, I feel comfortable that would be brought to light if there was such a change. MacCoy: Commissioner De Weerd, do you have anything else along that line? De Weerd: No, I don’t. MacCoy: Okay, what is the action? Nelson: Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a motion that the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopt and approve these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law to approve this request. MacCoy: Do I hear a second? Borup: Second. ROLL CALL: Borup – aye, Smith – abstain, De Weerd – nay, Nelson – yea. MacCoy: We have two ayes, one nay, and one abstention. It will pass, decision, recommendation? MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 10 Nelson: The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council of the City of Meridian that they approve the conditional use permit for the use set forth within these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as requested by the applicant for the property described in the application with the conditions set forth within these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and any other condition that is required by the Meridian City Council. MacCoy: All in favor? Borup: Second. MacCoy: All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: Two ayes, one nay, one abstain. ITEM NO. 5: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST TO AMEND CITY ORDINANCE, FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR TROUTNER BUSINESS PARK BY TROUTNER BUSINESS PARK DEVELOPMENT CORP. – S. WEST FIFTH AVENUE, SOUTH OF FRANKLIN AND WEST OF MERIDIAN ROAD: MacCoy: Commissioners? Borup: Mr. Chairman I move that the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. De Weerd: Second. MacCoy: This is a—alright then, you got one there? Okay, I’ll use yours. (Inaudible) Okay, are you ready to go for roll call? ROLL CALL: Borup – yea, Smith – abstain, De Weerd – yea, Nelson – yea. MacCoy: Three yeas, one abstention, the vote carries, decision? Borup: Mr. Chairman, I move that the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council of the City of Meridian that they adopt and approve the proposed amendment to the August 20th 1996 Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, the April 29th 1997 Troutner Business Park Development Agreement and the Meridian City Ordinance number 739 is set forth within these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as requested by the applicant for the property described in the application with the conditions set forth within these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and any other conditions required by the Meridian City Council. MacCoy: All in favor? MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 11 De Weerd: I second that. MacCoy: All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes, one abstain. ITEM NO. 6: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AN OFFICE UPSTAIRS APARTMENT AND POSSIBLY RETAIL USE BY JOSEPH A JOHNSON – 46 E. PINE: MacCoy: Commissioners? De Weerd: I do have a question of our city attorney. That would be we have a new report from ACHD and how can we incorporate that into the findings? Rossman: The ACHD report had not been provided at the time that the motion was made and approved, however, the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law have not been approved as of yet, and certainly an additional condition that the applicant comply with the requirements of the Ada County Highway District report can be made an additional condition by inner lineation on the Findings of Fact that you have before you. So basically what you do is just move to approve the Findings of Fact with the addition of an additional condition. Borup: Mr. Chairman, I believe the attorney did cover that item 9 paragraph A, I mean Item A under number 9 made reference that if the approval was obtained from Ada County Highway for the curb cut. Unless you are talking about other items in the ACHD report? De Weerd: No, that was the specific item. I’m pleased to see that they reconsidered that. Rossman: That item was covered within the Findings of Fact, if there are additional items in the ACHD report that you want may express the condition of the approval of the conditional use permit you can certainly do that. De Weerd: I have nothing further. MacCoy: Mr. Borup? Borup: I have nothing, glancing at the ACHD that was the only thing that I noticed that was in addition to their previous report. MacCoy: Commissioner Smith? Smith: Nothing. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 12 MacCoy: Commissioner Nelson? Nelson: I have no comments. MacCoy: Do you want to read the approval of findings? Borup: Mr. Chairman, I move the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. De Weerd: Second. ROLL CALL: Borup – yea, Smith – abstain, De Weerd – yea, Nelson – yea. MacCoy: Decision? Borup: Mr. Chairman, I move that the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council of the City of Meridian that they approve the conditions, the conditional use set forth for these uses, set forth within these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as requested by the applicant for the property described in the application with the conditions set forth within these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and any other conditions required by the Meridian City Council. De Weerd: Second. MacCoy: All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes, one abstain. MacCoy: Motion passes. ITEM NO. 7: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A REGIONAL SHOPPING CENTER BY DAKOTA COMPANY INC. – SE CORNER OF EAGLE AND FAIRVIEW: MacCoy: Commissioners? De Weerd: Mr. Chairman, I have a couple of things that I would like to amend. Item 12, letter A on page 11. MacCoy: Which page are you on now? De Weerd: Page 11. MacCoy: Item 12? MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 13 De Weerd: 12 A. If we could add in the last sentence that the final design shall not have more than 100 feet between landscaped areas per parking row. 150 feet. (Inaudible) De Weerd: I’m sorry, I still have that. I meant a 150 feet. I just wanted the addition to specify that is per parking row. MacCoy: Oh, I see what you are saying. De Weerd: And then on the next page, B, 12 B. That would be a 20 foot wide berm. I don’t want it a 20 foot berm, I’d like it 20 foot wide. Borup: You don’t want it 20 foot high? De Weerd: Or high, just wide. That would be the same on D. Then on D, the second sentence says, I guess I was confused by that sentence. That the residential community located to the east, it’s also located to the south. Rossman: Where are you at here, Commissioner De Weerd? De Weerd: 12 D, It would be the first sentence second row. MacCoy: Oh, I see what you are saying. De Weerd: Between the project and the residential community located to the east of the project. Located to the east and south. MacCoy: Okay, what else do you have? De Weerd: I guess I didn’t see any reference there as far as setting some kind of time line as far as the masonry wall and the landscape berm. MacCoy: So since I didn’t attend this one, what was the conclusion or had you— did you come by that time. De Weerd: We had that in discussion but we didn’t have it in the specific motion. Borup: What was your recollection of the discussion commissioner? Prior to occupancy? De Weerd: Yeah. I think—I believe that Mr. Durkin mentioned that prior to occupancy that they would have a landscape berm in. At the time we discussed MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 14 it, we didn’t know for sure if we had a masonry wall, so that particular time was not discussed. Borup: So you are proposing to add to D prior to any occupancy permit being issued? De Weerd: That would be my suggestion. Rossman: That is where again? De Weerd: It would be added to 12 D. Rossman: At the end of the paragraph? De Weerd: Yes. Rossman: That the buffer zone and the masonry wall will be constructed when? Prior to occupancy? De Weerd: Prior to the first occupancy permit. If anyone thinks otherwise, they can speak out. MacCoy: Well, you have the floor right now. De Weerd: Well, that’s my comments. I think the city attorney did a wonderful job with this, with everything he had to look through. Borup: Might notice he worked the holiday on this too. MacCoy: Mr. Borup, do you have any comments? Borup: No, did you finish Commissioner De Weerd? De Weerd: Yes I did. Borup: I would agree with those amendments or additions, or whatever… MacCoy: Commissioner Smith, do you have anything? Smith: Yes, I would like to reiterate that I feel that I’m at somewhat of a disadvantage. I’ve not seen these findings until tonight, so I’m missing something, where it is located in the findings. Please bear with me. Back on item 12 A on page 11, states that minimum 6 foot by 19 foot planning island would be placed within the parking lot of the subject development project at the location submitted within the plans. Submitted by the applicants and made part of the record herein, they weren’t shown on the map that we had. The ones that MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 15 we asked for to be added. Those were the ones that we had asked that Mr. Kolga design and place in accordance with the perimeters that Commissioner De Weerd just stated. Rossman: What we can do on that, Commissioner Smith, in that first sentence right at the development project and leave the placement of the particular islands to design review with staff. Smith: That would be fine. The only other thing that I can think of right now is, I had made a comment that it was regarding the 20 foot noise barrier along the side of the truck docks that if—there was some concern raised if the noise echoed out into the drive area and out past the property—something along the lines that if the desired sound attenuation deafening steps did not mitigate the sound to the design levels as agreed upon that we would use it further sound attenuation methods to deaden that and maybe that’s (Inaudible)… De Weerd: I believe that is on page 23, Item K. Smith: Okay, that’s all I had. MacCoy: Commissioner Nelson? Nelson: I would just like to comment that Mr. Durkin has been patient and conformed to all our additional requests and that this Findings of Fact is as complete as it needs to be but for the record, all said and done, to me it still looks like a strip mall, I’m underwhelmed by the design. I thought I would make that part of the record for the City Council De Weerd: Mr. Chairman, one more item to note is we did get a letter from Lorrell Rogers about the placement of the masonry wall. It has been referenced in our findings, but how do we incorporate those? Rossman: You can incorporate them at this point, because they were referenced with the original motion, they were referenced in the prior public hearing and if this letter—specifically if this letter relates to an agreement as to the placement of the concrete barrier between the project and the residential development. De Weerd: So that could be added to 12 D on page 12? Rossman: I guess you need to move to amend the record to include the letter that has just been provided today. De Weerd: That amendment would have to be in addition to the other changes to the findings. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 16 Rossman: No, you’re amending the record, not the findings. You are just adding that record to the record that we already have with regard to this application. De Weerd: That would go under a separate motion? Rossman: Yes, it needs to be added to the record as an exhibit. A motion to include a letter within the record with this particular application. De Weerd: That would have to be after any motion on this item. Rossman: No, it would be before. De Weerd: Before. That’s all I have. MacCoy: Do you want to make a motion on that? We are down to that point now. De Weerd: I would move that we amend the record to include the letter from Lorrell Rogers that was provided to us today regarding placement of the masonry wall. MacCoy: What is the date of the letter? De Weerd: Dated October 13, 1998. Smith: Second. MacCoy: All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. MacCoy: Is there any other discussion? Okay then somebody take the approval of findings statement. De Weerd: Mr. Chairman , the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts and approves these amended Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. Borup: Second. Rossman: Just for a point of clarification, with the oral amendments that were placed on the record today, I assume. De Weerd: That’s correct. ROLL CALL: Borup – aye, Smith – aye, De Weerd – aye, Nelson – nay. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 17 MacCoy: Okay, what’s the decision? (END OF TAPE) De Weerd: …Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council of the City of Meridian that they approve the conditional use permit for the uses set forth within these amended Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as requested by the applicant for the property described in the application with the conditions set forth within these amended Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and any other conditions required by the Meridian City Council. Smith: Second. MacCoy: All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. ITEM NO. 8: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT FOR PROPOSED FIRST MERIDIAN PLAZA BY WILD SHAMROCK PARTNERSHIP – SOUTH OF GEM AVENUE BETWEEN MERIDIAN ROAD AND E. 1ST : MacCoy: Before I call anybody forward does the staff have anything to add to this or say to this? Borup: Mr. Chairman, we have received a letter from the applicant. MacCoy: That’s what I want them to say. You are jumping ahead of the game. Berg: Mr. Chairman and members of the commission, we received a letter faxed today in the city clerks office as you have presented would like a postponement of this hearing which I would phrase continued until the next regularly scheduled meeting in November, November 10th . Smith: Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a motion that we continue this public hearing until our November 10th meeting. Nelson: Second. MacCoy: All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. ITEM NO. 9: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR OUTSIDE SEATING BY TODD MASON D/B/A MOXIE JAVA –106 E. WILLIAMS: MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 18 MacCoy: I will ask the staff for comment. Stiles: Mr. Chairman, commissioners, the property was not noticed by the applicant, so we will have to re-notice and public next month. MacCoy: Thank you, commissioners? De Weerd: So it wasn’t noticed so I imagine that no one is here to speak about it. Oh, okay. Stiles: The property was not posted. They need to put up a sign stating that the property is going to be under a public hearing so it can’t proceed. Borup: Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a motion that we continue this until our November 10th meeting. De Weerd: Second. MacCoy: All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Borup: Mr. Chairman, I’ve mentioned this in the past—again, maybe the workshop or something, this is the type of item that I think could be handled very fine on a staff bases, especially in old town. This is the third seating application that we’ve had in old town, I realize that it doesn’t take a lot of time, but I question whether it needs a public hearing either. MacCoy: Well, we will discuss that come Thursday. Borup: Right, I just wanted to state that again. MacCoy: Alright, for the record, very good. Moving on to the next item. ITEM NO. 10: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR GENERAL AUTO REPAIR & SERVICE BY JOHN BISS –WEST OF MERIDIAN ROAD: MacCoy: Staff do you have anything to add to that? I didn’t hear that is that for the record. Stiles: Would you like us to give a report on this application? You have copies of our comments, I won’t go through every item. Some of them are standard comments. The subject property is located south of the Hope Arms Apartment and also where Lee Centers has built some apartments. It is immediately east of the Troutner Business Park. As part of the Troutner Business Park, there was a MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 19 proposed roadway that would connect the subdivision to Meridian Road. They have a non-development agreement, Troutner Business Park has a non- development agreement on that portion of the property and has not been required to make any improvements for that portion of the property was annexed with the same property that came in as the Troutner Business Park and is subject to the requirements within that annexation ordinance and those findings. One of the comments, one of the requirements of the annexation was that as Meridian Road is designated as an entrance corridor that a minimum 35 foot wide landscape setback be provided. Initially when the applicant had come in, I was comparing the property across the street and the requirements which was a preliminary, final plat that was continued, the Rick Thomas Wild Shamrock Partnership Plat is a directly across the street from this and I believe that they had either a 15 or a 20 foot wide landscape setback as a condition of that plat, however when I went back and reviewed the annexation ordinance and the findings, it did specifically state that Meridian Road would have a 35 landscape setback. Another issue would be that the existing easement that does extend to Meridian Road, there is some question as to who would be responsible for construction of that road. Ada County Highway District has made their comments and they are giving them a temporary access to Meridian Road for the John Biss property, however once the public road is extended, that access will need to be removed and they will actually access from the new extension of I believe it is Penwood. Another comment that we had, we would like you to review the materials of construction proposed for this site. (Inaudible) concern in the area from the property owners adjacent to this site and in the area that perhaps this is not what they expect that area to look like. The property is in it’s general commercial zone and this type of service can be provided under the conditional use process in that zone. The last item that we had under 19 I don’t have in my file evidence that the parcel was eligible for a one time split. There was a portion of property formerly owned by Mr. Fuller and seems to have some splits in there, but they would just need to provide verification that it is eligible for split without subdividing. Those were the major items that our (Inaudible). MacCoy: Does Bruce have anything? Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, members of the commission, the only item that I wanted to touch on as Shari mentioned the future Penwood street will be directly adjacent to the north of this parcel. With the new construction of re-construction of Meridian Road, sewer and water mains are being installed. There were an eight inch sewer main stubbed into what will be Penwood, there was also an eight inch water main stubbed into what will be Penwood. Services for this proposed site will come from those main extensions. In looking at the plans, the question that comes to my mind is right of access across the set easement to those water mains, or water main, sewer main. That’s a question that I still have that I would like to get answered. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 20 MacCoy: Okay, is that it? Thank you. Since this is a public hearing is the applicant here this evening? Biss: Yes, I am. MacCoy: Step forward please and be sworn in. De Weerd: He needs to be sworn in. JOHN BISS, 1334 E. 1ST , MERIDIAN, ID. WAS SWORN IN BY ATTORNEY. Biss: Presently my shop is over by the post office here in town. I’ve completely outgrown the facility that I’m at now and purchased this property from Norm Fuller. My first step in trying to find a piece of property was actually going to Shari and asking where can I find a piece of property that is going to work in meridian without too many hassles trying to get it passed. This was one of the few that actually even showed up that was still available. I bought the property and I hope to put this shop on there and get back to working so. I’m open for any questions you guys got. Smith: Mr. Chairman this is a point of order here. On the cover page here it says location of the property or project, 1334 E. 1st Street, that’s where I went to look and so I haven’t (Inaudible) that’s where his shop is now, not where this is. So, that needs to be corrected on here. Building materials I can’t read on stuff we were given in the application what the building materials are. I can’t read… Biss: Most of it is going to be a split block face. The roof is going to be an architectural styled—architect eighties is shingles. Smith: Asphalt? Biss: Asphalt. I personally looked at metal roofs and that’s the only other choice that I’m going to have (Inaudible) opinion and I don’t like the way they look, so. The buildings down off of—Meridian Plumbing is one of the buildings that I’ve looked at, I like the way it looks. It’s got asphalt shingles on it. Smith: It looks like you have some banding going around, is that just different… Biss: Different colors of the stone I want to go with. Smith: So this will be painted or… Biss: No. Smith: It will be interval color block? MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 21 Biss: Yeah. Smith: It’s different colors not different split face and smooth. Biss: No, I kind of like the idea, I’ve seen some of it where they have done split face and then they had some 8 X 8 smooth kind of in sync where it looks good. I’d like the option to play it up. I want something that looks good as well as you do. Smith: I think that kind of mutilization (sic) of masonry is good design (Inaudible) I’m not to whooped up about the asphalt shingles but…(Inaudible) Biss: To me the metal roofs look cheesy…(Inaudible) Smith: I guess that is a subjective thing there. I kind of feel the same way about the asphalt shingles. Biss: (Inaudible) looks plain, but the architect eighties look pretty good, so. Smith: Just a clarification Shari, we need a 30 foot landscape buffer on Meridian? Stiles: A condition of the annexation was a 35 foot landscape setback. Smith: We need a 35 foot landscape buffer on Meridian Road, we got 20 showing here now, so. Biss: My concern there is, am I going to be the only one on Meridian Road that is going to be required for a 35 foot setback? MacCoy: Shari? (Inaudible) Stiles: If the ordinance is not changed, the only way you can put that requirement on a development would be if it were a new annexation or if it were a conditional use permit where you can impose standards greater than are contained in the ordinance, but without (Inaudible). People come in with a permitted use, we’ll be able to encourage them to provide the landscape setback, but we’ll have no authority to actually require that. Smith: We could require it couldn’t we? Borup: Not if they don’t come here. De Weerd: I think City Council could. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 22 Stiles: The ordinance would have to be changed to require that and designate the corridors where that would be required as part of the ordinance. De Weerd: So did that answer your question? Biss: I have no problem with it, as long as everything else is going to be made the same way. The only one sitting back that far, be kind of an unfair disadvantage. Smith: I agree. Comment on your signage, it seems like you’ve got a sign out, a freestanding sign out in front, there is two on the front of the building which basically say the same thing and then there is one on the end. Seems like you have twice as much signage as you really need. Biss: To me, it dresses up the building putting something on it, but (Inaudible) it doesn’t, so. Smith: I hope they (Inaudible) your integration of your split face and center scored smooth block, I think that will make your building—that will help the aesthetics of it, believe me. (Inaudible) the signage to do that for you. Are these overhead doors, those have glass in them, or are you indicating different colors or… Biss: Glass and doors. The front doors will be glass most all the way up and down. The rear doors because the west side sun will probably be—I’ll have one row of glass in, but the front of the building where it matters will be all glass. Smith: I have no other questions at this time. MacCoy: Commissioner Nelson? Nelson: I have no comments. MacCoy: Commissioner Borup? Borup: Yes, Mr. Biss did you have any other questions or comments on staff comments? Other than the 35 foot thing, you mentioned that. Biss: They have in there something about a two foot easement question. The property I bought, I bought no part of the easement. The easement, the 50 foot easement is still there and is not on my property so. The other, at one time I thought we had addressed the fact that the property hadn’t been split since Norm Fuller bought it, so. I’m supposed to have—I’ll have that information for Shari tomorrow. It was Friday when they give me that letter asking for that information. (Inaudible) kind of messed up getting all of it in here prior, so. What else is on MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 23 there? Your (Inaudible) the sign ordinance as far as what goes on the street, nobody has actually told me what the sign ordinance is. Shari says you guys like to keep it to a 72 foot square feet, but the sign that I wanted to put up was identical to the sign that is on the new car wash on Fairview, but she says that sign is too big. Borup: That can be a problem sometimes when we are trying to make changes in ordinances and policies, it is hard to go backwards and correct those things that have already happened, so the only choice you have is to go forward from the starting point. I think that is part of the problem on the 35 foot buffer. All can be enforced on applications that come before us rather than—not much you can do about something that is in existence. I had some more questions for staff, but nothing else for Mr. Biss at this time. MacCoy: We will finish with Mr. Biss first. Commissioner De Weerd? De Weerd: I just had a question as far as how many service bays you have? Biss: Eight. De Weerd: Eight. Biss: Four from the front, four from the back. De Weerd: If you need to increase the frontage landscaping, you’ll loose two parking spots. Biss: I’ll have to move the building back, so. Smith: He will loose more than two. His stalls are only—no, that’s right. Biss: I would leave the pavement base the same and move the whole thing backward. Oh, 35 you are right (Inaudible). De Weerd: Well, that’s all I wanted to know. Smith: How would you circulate around the back of the building if you moved everything back? Biss: (Inaudible) Same way we are doing it now, the way it’s on the plan is to just go around the side of the building. Smith: Right, but just seems kind of at 40-6-6-6 is 52-6 and your stalls are 20 feet deep? Biss: The building itself is 80 X 64. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 24 Smith: Right, right. I’m just trying to figure out how much room you have (Inaudible). 52-6, that leaves you 32-6, so that’s, I guess that’s enough. Biss: (Inaudible) another 250 foot of unused property out the back. Borup: That you own? Biss: Yes. Borup: Okay, that’s what I was going to ask. It looks like your planter extends beyond your parking lot in the back. Smith: (Inaudible) at the trash enclosure. Biss: The property sells for 530 feet deep so. Smith: So this just address the improved site area, not the unimproved. Biss: Correct. Borup: If you need additional parking places, spaces you would be. Biss: I’m doing okay still. Borup: Not by my count. De Weerd: He can use the land in back. Borup: (Inaudible) He has room to expand if he needs it. What we were looking at is if you take a 35 foot buffer, on the present layout, you are going to loose four parking places unless you slide them down a bit. Biss: Just slide the whole project back that extra. Right now there is 20 feet figured, so an extra 15 feet and just move the whole project back 15 feet. Borup: Okay and you’ve got extra at that basis. Biss: The other thing is that the county bought about five feet off of it. At that point of time they made an agreement with me to provide access to my property in the middle of the front of my property. At the time the negotiator that they actually shipped out to talk to me said there was no way I could take access off the Penwood proposed street. So at that point of time I made plans to never be able to use that. That’s what I set forth all my plans and building design. It took me a year to get this far with figuring out what I wanted to do. So I’m a little upset that they actually come back to me and told me that I’m going to loose my MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 25 access when and if they ever develop a road. Because of that, I’ll probably have to push the building back another 30 feet so I actually will be able to use the driveway from the side. They actually put it in writing that they would provide access to the middle of my property. I only assumed that that meant I could use that driveway, so. The latest proposal they proposed to me was that they wouldn’t ask to move my driveway until I did more development on my property. Borup: Are you saying that you are going to have move your building back? Biss: I’m going to have to do something different with the building if—I mean it’s going to be real expensive to move the building later so. I’ve got to plan on a driveway coming from the side. Borup: That’s what I was looking at at the end of your parking stalls on the north side, there is not enough room for an entrance at that point? Biss: No. Borup: Even with another 15 feet like you are proposing? Biss: It’s still going to make it—you’ve got to be 50 foot off Meridian Road with your driveway coming in. My end bay there is the one I plan on using for the motor homes and stuff. I would really like to be able to pull a motor home in without having to move it around four or five times. MacCoy: Any other comments from the commissioners? Any other questions? Smith: Not at this time. De Weerd: Do we have anything from ACHD? Biss: I have the latest proposal that they just faxed to me. MacCoy: Shari do you have anything? Borup: Not in our packets. MacCoy: I don’t have anything in mine. Biss: They said nothing would actually be official until like the 20th of this month so. Borup: (Inaudible) draft copy. Biss: Yes, they gave me a draft of it. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 26 Borup: They don’t like to give us draft copies for some reason. MacCoy: No, we’ve had problems with it. Okay, if everybody is satisfied right now for the moment. Mr. Biss you can sit down, thank you. Before I open to the public here, staff did you have anything else to make a comment wise? Borup: I have some questions for staff, but I’m going to wait till after the public testimony. MacCoy: Okay, until we’ve finished with public hearing, okay. Stiles: I guess the only comment that I would have, due to the fact that the entire property is a proposed for a development that the applicant be made aware that they should come back in for a conditional use permit for the remainder of the property and that they would not be allowed to use that area for parking of vehicles or storage equipment or materials until improvements are made. MacCoy: Mr. Biss did you hear what she had to say there? Biss: I heard it. So do I need to put that as… MacCoy: Do you want to come back here, so we can get you on the tape. Biss: I guess we need to add the whole piece of property on to it? That was the original plan was to pave what was necessary and then gravel it and keep it nice, smooth and looking good and be able to occasionally park extra cars out there. MacCoy: It might be a smart decision one time through. Biss: Yeah, so, I mean if that’s what I need to do, I didn’t realize anybody would care what I did with the rest of it until I put a building on it. MacCoy: No, we do. Biss: I mean if I set it up so that I can park on gravel, it’s going to look better than a field of weeds, I would think. MacCoy: True. Okay, thank you. We open this to a public hearing, does anybody have any comment, pro or con at this time? MIKE BALLANTYNE, 2690 N. MILLDEER WAY, MERIDIAN, ID. WAS SWORN IN BY THE ATTORNEY. Ballantyne: I represent Troutner Business Park which is Mr. Biss’s neighbor to the west. Just have a couple of concerns that I’d like to discuss. Don’t necessarily have a problem with the design of the building itself and the use and MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 27 certainly don’t have a problem with Mr. Biss. In fact, I understand from my neighbors that he’s a darn good mechanic. We have some concerns related to some of the logistic. To clarify the easement. There is an easement through what was Norm Fullers property to the benefit of Troutner Business Park. That easement is the access that will be used for phase II of Troutner Business Park, which is a portion of the property that has been approved, but not developed under a non-development agreement with the city, which basically says we are not going to build it, and at such time that we do build it, we will have to meet certain criteria. Our concern is that ACHD on that easement requires that we build a certain portion of the street and that the neighbors to the north and south that will benefit from that street will also have to build a certain portion of that street. We will build, I think it’s a 53 foot street section total including sidewalks and curbs and gutters. We would build 41 feet and the balance would be built by the neighbors. Obviously we have concern that development occur prior to that street going in and at such time, Mr. Biss be saddled with developing, you know, putting that in. There is some concern on that part. Our bigger concern is along the same line, and it’s really not Mr. Biss’s fault, it’s more he is a victim of circumstance. Mr. Fuller who sold Mr. Biss the property had the easement described by his engineer. He then had the same engineer describe the parcel to the north and south that were split. They were one parcel and then split by the easement, which created a legal split. It’s a very old easement and I believe this is the reason that Mr. Fuller didn’t have to go through the subdivision process, design review and sign a development agreement and show CC & R’s that they rest of our had to do, because this was an old enough split. The concern is, that his engineer when he did the legal description for Mr. Biss overlapped the description into the easement a couple of feet. So our easement which is a legally recorded document and a legal encumbrance on the property runs through a portion of Mr. Biss’s property and therefore, his site plan would have to reflect that easement and reflect the agreements that have been made with the city and highway district to allow us through. I’m sure Mr. Biss didn’t plan on buying property and not being able to utilize two feet of it. So there is some challenge there. Obviously Mr. Biss is concerned about access into his property and using that access at the time that Penwood is extended. We also have a concern that if that access stays the distance between Penwood and his access into the project is not what ACHD would determine to be adequate and there could be a traffic situation there, quite a bit of problems there. Kind of a big overriding concern is really the entry way corridor issue. If you look at East 1st street as you come in off the freeway and you see the 35 foot landscaping buffer and the way that area has developed out. There were a couple of different developers, Mr. Hon and Mr. Nahas primarily on that east side, you get a sense what the potential for east 1st street is. To date we haven’t seen that potential realized and we were very hopeful based on our efforts with what we were doing off of Franklin Road that the city would require that that type of potential be met. You have the ability to make Meridian Road look like east 1st Street rather than Fairview. We would encourage 35 foot setback. We feel that is fair especially considering the amount of excess ground that Mr. Biss has. We would like to MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 28 see plans for the entire site to know what is going to happen. We are concerned that we have a 40 acre office park that backs to MR. Biss’s property and we are talking about storing cars in the back, which would back up to our property and which would certainly effect our property value. We wouldn’t oppose that if there was proper screening and that type of thing. Maybe with a fence that you couldn’t see through. Anyway, there are some issues outstanding here that we think need to be addressed prior to approval of Mr. Biss’s property if those are addressed to our satisfaction we would certainly support his application. I would be glad to answer any questions. MacCoy: Any questions? Borup: Mr. Ballantyne, well first let me ask, I’m still confused a little bit on the two foot overlap. It’s your understanding that—well I understand what you are saying about it, on where the problem originated. Was the easement that was granted back whenever, did you understand it as a 53 foot easement for Penwood. Ballantyne: I think it’s about 50 feet, the easement is. Borup: Okay, that was one of my questions, which is normal street easement right at 50 feet. You had mentioned something about 53 earlier. Ballantyne: I don’t remember the exact number, Shari might have it in the file. It was greater than the easement because of the fact that the road would also be a collector for the existing properties. So, the highway district would like to build the road to a larger standard than the existing easement. They would allow us to put the street through for our use. For the neighbors to use that street they would have to improve it to a higher standard. Borup: At this point, it was a 50 easement. It was surveyed at the time, the easement was originally created. Ballantyne: Right, by the same engineer that did the legal description. Borup: The second one. So which survey was the two foot mistake made on? Ballantyne: Well, that is a question for God I guess. My engineer thinks they are both slightly in error. The really amazing thing is that Meridian Road is on the principle in Meridian of the State of Idaho from the initial point which is south of Meridian it’s about as easy to survey off of as any point in the State of Idaho. So the fact that the engineer went off of two different points rather than going off the same point and therefore making his survey match and the fact he didn’t go back then and check and make sure all his legals matched was a concern. It’s really not Mr. Biss’s fault. We did call Mr. Fuller and did say, after he had sold the parcel to Mr. Biss and it became public record the legal description, we said hey, MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 29 there is a problem here and he said it was Mr. Biss’s problem. (Inaudible) problem unfortunately. It’s our problem, we have a concern obviously. Borup: You had mentioned that you would be in support if your concerns were met you went through quite a number of things. Can you condense those down to specific items? Ballantyne: Well, lets see. We’ve got the landscaping setback, we’ve got the use of the entire site, we have the easement issue, the street section issue and by street section, the ACHD requirement that they were going to place on the property owners that would abut the street. Important to note, kind of on the side, one of the things that Mr. Biss eluded to is potentially that street may never be built. We have told the highway district they really don’t want that street to go through. We don’t necessarily see reason for it to go through Norm Fuller obviously doesn’t want it to go through because it hurts, takes away some of the property that he can sell. The goal would be for Corporate Drive to extend through similar to the way it extends into Central Valley Corporate Park and that would become a main artery that all the development in that area would feed into. There is a number of different owners in that area and if that doesn’t come to fruition within the time period that we would have to develop the second phase of our project we would go ahead and punch this street through. Borup: I think we’ve had that proposal before, I’ve seen it somewhere. Ballantyne: We would love for that to go through. We think that would be the best possible solution for everyone, but there is a lot of things that have to happen. We have to protect our interest that this easement isn’t taken away from us, prior to that happening. Borup: But by the street section each neighbor paying for their share of the development. Ballantyne: Right, it’s fairly minor I think. Borup: So it’s, if you are doing 41 feet and then there is 50 total, there is another 9 feet divided by two? So 4 ½ feet? Ballantyne: Basically, approximately, but I don’t have the exact numbers. (Inaudible) Borup: Okay, that was (Inaudible). Ballantyne: And the other concern just relates to those, is the fact that the highway district hasn’t submitted their comments on his application and I think they are going to address a lot of those issues that they had concerns about. Thank you. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 30 MacCoy: Any other questions? Okay, thanks Mike. Is there anyone else here who has anything to say to pro or con on this one? Come on up. ARTHUR BERRY, 1305 S. HAWAII, BOISE, ID. WAS SWORN BY THE ATTORNEY. Berry: My company, Arthur Berry and company and (Inaudible) Associates own the property immediately to the south of the subject property, was formerly referred to as the Johnson Property, 10 acres that abuts Corporate and intersection. I support Mr. Ballantyne’s contentions concerning the property. We think there are major concerns over the access issue and the main entry point of Meridian. I’m not as conversant as Mr. Ballantyne concerning the technical issues. I’ve had discussions with Mr. Biss before about concern we have as the developing and neighboring property about cars and entry points and ACHD issues around Corporate Drive. We are the people who control whether Corporate Drive can extend back to the further area and we are trying to work with ACHD as much as possible and the neighbors to not have the clutter of the multiple access along the frontage and are having some difficulty with ACHD trying to get that accomplished. I don’t have any objection with the nature of Mr. Biss’s building or I’m not conversant enough with specifics of his plan, I simply don’t think with the character of the whole neighborhood in general and this being the main entryway into Meridian that the use and the type of building that he intends to put on the site is consistent with the general commercial development in the area. I stand in front of you a little embarrassed in as much as Mr. Johnson’s property is not the greatest property in the world if you look at it now. I know that Shari and some of us have had some issues over the years. We are in the process of trying to clean up the property and we’ve purchased other property from Mr. Johnson, it’s a slow process to move all that junk literally off the property. One of the concerns we have is wanting to expedite that to not carry on with the nature of the neighborhood the way it is. We think it is a very great piece of property that’s the gateway not only to Meridian but also to Mr. Ballantyne’s park and would encourage it to consider that in granting this conditional use permit. Borup: I have on for Mr. Berry. You say that your property, you are the one who would control Corporate Drive extending to the west and tying back into that property? Berry: Yes sir, we own the 10 acre rectangular piece. We have sold approximately ½ of acre of the frontage to ACHD both on the frontage street and on Corporate Lane proposed which they are presently using for a drainage area. We have yet to come to an agreement with the neighbors to the west as to the extent to which Corporate Drive will be extended and some other issues, but we are the owners of the property. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 31 Borup: Are you in agreement with ACHD’s apparently their policy or their desires to have Corporate Drive extend to the west is that your desire also? Berry: Yes sir. Borup: So the problem is not through your property, it’s through some of the adjoining neighbors. Berry: The only problem with our property is the front access that is being restricted on Corporate Drive and the fact that if Corporate Drive and Mr. Biss property have accesses along 1st Avenue, we think it’ll become, there will be some clutter issues. Borup: Okay, thank you. MacCoy: Any other questions from any commissioners? Okay, thank you very much. Is there anyone else here this evening that would like to make a comment? We had a letter that was mailed to us. The person is Bob Nahas, I don’t see him here this evening. Okay, I’ll read his letter regarding this project. “I would like to voice my opposition to the above reference proposed auto repair facility on Meridian Road, I think this is incongruous with other types of business’s that have now located in the area. At Central Valley Corporation Park we have declined even auto lube operations here.” I don’t think this has any bearing on this, I just read that for the record book. We have the actual document on our files. Is there anybody else that has anything else before I close the public hearing? Borup: I have some questions for staff, did I forget to mention that? MacCoy: Put staff on the line again. De Weerd: You had one other letter. MacCoy: I don’t have it in mine, would you read that one? De Weerd: This is from Foad Roghani “This letter is to inform you that I believe the subject business does not fit into the general business structure of the area and application for conditional use of the subject property for alignment business should not be approved.” He has signed it. Borup: The only question I have for that letter, I’m not sure what—his address is not anywhere near this property. He didn’t state that he was a business owner. I guess you don’t have to, but it would hold more credence if it was someone in the area. MacCoy: Are you going to talk to the staff now? MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 32 Borup: Question for Bruce and wasn’t sure on your statement on—you had some concern about sewer and water access through the easement, through the Penwood Road easement to the sewer and water lines, is that what you stated? Freckleton: Yes Commissioner Borup, the easement is still technically owned by Fuller still. Mr. Biss would have to have some sort of easement for his service lines to cross that easement to the (Inaudible) Borup: (Inaudible) easement to cross an easement. That’s where I was confused. I was assuming that if there was an easement—so at this point the easement is strictly for the road, not for utilities? Freckleton: I believe that is true, yes. The location of those service lines would be a bit awkward as well, those service—or those mainlines are just being stubbed barely off of Meridian Road to the right-of-way line. Those mains will be extended on in the future when the road is extended through. At this time, they terminate at the right-of-way line. So any services from that point snaking them through on up to the building would be a bit awkward, not impossible, but awkward. Borup: The other question that I had, I was still confused Shari on the lot split. Did you have concerns on whether the legality of it. Could you elaborate on that a little bit? Stiles: Commissioner Borup, commissioners, that—I didn’t know if we discussed it previously , the city does allow an one time split if it is in the same configuration as it was in 1984. I don’t have verification in my files that the original parcel was in that same configuration in 1984 and has not been split besides this one. Borup: Okay, you are talking about the entire Fuller property. Would be the configuration. Stiles: Yes. Borup: Yeah, I believe that’s how your comments (Inaudible) That’s all I had Mr. Chairman. MacCoy: Since there is no one else, I guess you had something else to add to this. Biss: I had a question as far as the sewer goes… (END OF TAPE) MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 33 Biss: property had water and sewer to it, I mean, I called and talked to somebody and they said water and sewer is an 8” main both of them break (Inaudible) my property and that’s where I did it from. I guess I’m a little miffed if there is a problem with that why we didn’t go ahead and stub it straight into my property instead of relying on pulling it off the big main. Freckleton: That was why I raised the question because I looked on the ACHD reconstruction plans to see if services were being brought in off of Meridian Road to your property or whether they were coming off Penwood. There were no indications on those plans that anything were coming off of Meridian. That’s why I raised that concern. Biss: I called and they verified that’s where I would get my water and sewer from. Nobody at any point in time, I said I couldn’t figure out why we had 8” going into there, but that point in time they didn’t tell me that it was main lines going in there. They assured me that’s where I would get mine. I’ve got to be able to call and get the right information. I don’t know what we can do… Freckleton: It is true they are 8” lines going in, but they are in the alignment with Penwood. Into that future roadway, not directly… Biss: Possible future roadway which may never ever be built. Freckleton: They are not directly into your property. Biss: Well actually, when I called they said that was where I would get mine from. Freckleton: Your service lines would go to those 8” mains. Biss: The other, Mr. Ballantyne raised the question about not being the same design as what else is going on. Still nothing else is going on, I’ve never seen nothing what he’s proposing back there. I have talked to him in the past and he’s expressed an interest in purchasing my property, he just never ever wanted to buy it, so. But you know as far as building design other buildings in town, this basic design is similar to construction to Meridian Plumbing, which is a Meridian Building, it’s a good looking building in my opinion. The actual design of itself is a Meineke Muffler off the—just built off of Broadway, which I know Boise is really proud of Broadway going into town and they wouldn’t let something ugly go into there and I think this building actually looks better than the one out there. Little bit more of the roof than what Bruce did with Meineke Muffler on Broadway, but as far as this easement thing goes, I got a piece of paper that says how big my piece of property is and says where that easement is supposed to be. It’s supposed to be 20 feet off of Norm Fullers house that is on that property and 50 feet over from that is where my property starts. That was the agreement that Norm Fuller made with a (Inaudible) move that easement that’s my knowledge. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 34 If I remember right, that easement was actually not in the middle of that property but all the way to the side once upon a time. Once upon a time at least this is what Norm Fuller told me is that Troutner actually owned this property only he give it back. I think the best way to protect your investment is not to give it back, but continue owning it. I guess my question would be to Ballantyne, what is his idea of a good looking building, as far as an auto repair shop, we’ve got Les Shwab here in town, built just a simple plain Jane flat roofed building. I don’t think it looks anywhere near as good as this one. Borup: I doubt that he gave it back, if that happened. Mr. Chairman, I have a few questions for Mr. Biss. MacCoy: Go ahead. Borup: Well, first of all, did you get a title policy when you bought the property? Biss: Yes I did. Borup: So if there is an easement problem, is that covered in your title policy as far as you understand? Biss: I don’t know that for a fact. Borup: You may want to look at that. Are you familiar with the configuration prior to 1984? Is it your understanding that this was the same configuration of property? Biss: Norm Fuller what he actually did to, he actually never sold any property off to the property. He did do some modifications to it. For financing different parts of it. It was never ever left, no part of that ever left his hands. It was all kept in one piece, so. Borup: So you don’t have a concern with verifying that aspect of the lots? Biss: No. Borup: Was it your understanding that you would be tying into the sewer mains that are in that easement? Was that your understanding where your sewer and water access was coming from? Biss: Yes, when I called I didn’t—I thought that was just the standard way they did it. They just bring in one line to service to pieces of property so. (Inaudible) Borup: Have you realized that you don’t really have a legal access to that, apparently? Is that what you are saying? MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 35 Biss: Norm Fuller says I’ve got full access to that easement. So—that’s as far as having a piece of paper that says that, I don’t know that I actually have that. I’m sure it can be obtained so. Borup: That’s what I was going to ask. I would think if he didn’t grant that, at least from my standpoint he may have a hard time getting anything else approved for that property. We have not received the ACHD comments, was there—and I guess we are going to need to see that. Was everything on the draft copy that you think is pertinent? Biss: Basically what they said was, at this point in time, they originally asked for a $7,500 dollar deposit, they have dropped that. They also stated that they would not pursue the relocation of it, unless I redevelop my property later, so. Borup: They didn’t make mention of developing of Penwood? Biss: Yes they did. What they basically said was if Penwood ever gets developed and if I after that do more development to my property, at that point in time they would ask me to move my driveway then, so. Borup: I thought I had one other question. That’s all Mr. Chairman. MacCoy: Is that it? Anybody anything for Mr. Biss? Borup: I’m sorry, this is back on the 35 foot easement. I think to be consistent, anything else that would develop north or south of you would have that same. Biss: I was just a little confused by the property just across the street to me is being developed now, or maybe going to be developed now. I’m not sure when it’s going to be developed, it just seems puzzling to me that they are not doing the same thing there, so. Borup: The Wild Shamrock Piece? Biss: Where the Godfathers Pizza and the other Rockets is at, that’s—it’s my understanding that it’s all owned by the same gentleman so. Borup: That hasn’t made it here yet. Biss: When I originally approached Shari and I asked her about that in there and that’s why the plans are drawn up the way it is, she was under the understanding that across the street they were going to do a 15-20 foot. I said well, 20 foot sounds normal to me. The other project that I know the NAPA here in town (Inaudible) store. I don’t think she’s got 15 foot on hers. As far as being consistent, we ought to be consistent. How are we going to make it all look right if it’s all done in parts? MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 36 MacCoy: Mr. Smith you have something that you want to say? Smith: Not, just some comments on the application. It seems like to me we’ve kind of got some issues here that we need to get resolved before we can take any kind of action on this and one of them would be the easement issue. Second would be, as Commissioner Borup brought up, we need to get a copy of the ACHD report. The third thing is and this is something that we needed to start doing here the last few months is to have accurate, correct plats to forward on to City Council and this with needing to add the 35 foot landscape buffer onto that, shifting your building back… Biss: I tried to get all of that the first time. Smith: I know, it takes awhile sometimes. To address the ACHD concern about possibility of loosing your access onto Meridian Road and having to access off of Penwood, you need to address that with your side of your building as well. Like you say, you build it once and it’s in the right place. In the future if your access changes, you can put that in 70 feet off of Meridian Road and it still works with getting in and out of your building. I do agree with some of the comments about clarifying how the rest of your site is going to be developed. I think that is an appropriate comment. You’ve already mentioned that there is a possibility that you may have to park additional vehicles back there depending on your work load and so forth. I don’t know that we want to see vehicles driving back and forth on a gravel lot. I’m not familiar with the ordinance on that, but I don’t agree with the comments. I don’t think I heard any comments negative toward the architecture of the building. What I heard was the concern was how it fit in with the adjacent commercial uses and there a block away there is a Les Schwab, which is just an austere, across the street from that is the Meridian Speedway, behind Les Schwab (Inaudible) across the intersection of Meridian Road and I don’t remember the name of the street, is one of the ugliest retail developments in the city. I have seen Mr. Johnson’s property for 30 years and it looks the same as it did 30 years ago. As far as the area, I don’t have any problem with it personally with this type of…I’m not familiar with the development to the west of this property, because I went to the wrong address. I’m not supposed to say that I went to the site, but I didn’t go to this site. I’m familiar with this site because I’ve lived here for a long time. MacCoy: Okay Commissioner Smith. Smith: So that’s all, I think we’ve got some things here that we need to get wrapped up and brought back. MacCoy: We’ve got to do this. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 37 Biss: One of the comments was screening of parked cars. To ask me to screen parked cars at my place, I’d say we need to screen the parked cars at any grocery store, any office building. My business solely the shop is to fix cars. The cars aren’t supposed to go out of the shop until they are fixed. That’s the way we try to do it. The present facility we have now, we used to do it that way. We just got so busy that we can’t do it that way no more. This shop right now is more than four times the size of the one we have now. I don’t need to do anymore business to keep it busy, I just need to be able to do it all in one place without having to shuffle cars around. Borup: Mr. Biss, you are saying then that if you did need to use that area for parking cars, it would be cars that you are working on, cars owned by someone else, they wouldn’t be excess. Biss: They would just be for parking, there is not going to be any cars torn apart outside, no. Abandoned or tore apart, not a wrecking yard or nothing like that. Borup: I think that’s where, at least in mind, that’s where the concern was. Cars being parked there for months at a time, not being used, that type of thing. Biss: I don’t—that’s not the type of business that I want to do. I mean, a trashy looking repair shop isn’t what I want. If that was what I wanted, I certainly wouldn’t want to put it on a main road in town. I wouldn’t have to pay all this extra money to make it look good, if that was what I wanted so. I guess what we ought to do is probably come up with some idea what we are going to do with the whole piece of property. I guess I need to be able to ask the questions, can I gravel this back there? Someone give me the right answers, like I did ask the question how far the setbacks should be. I understand the confusion three was the property across the street going only 20 or 15 foot, but like I said, when we ask these questions, they need to be answered right, so we can give you stuff that is drawn up right. If 35 foot was what it had to be, I would’ve presented you one with 35 foot setback on it and we wouldn’t… Borup: I think sometimes there are specific answers to questions that going by ordinance has to be in a certain way, to go different than that, you could certainly ask for a waiver. MacCoy: Mr. Biss, I want to suggest to you that you work with the staff on these items and come up with that finished product so we can look at it. Borup: If that’s not quite right, I guess that’s not quite right. If Ms. Stiles has something to say. Smith: Shari says it’s written in stone, it needs to be 35 feet. Borup: No, I’m not talking about that. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 38 Stiles: Commissioners the city attorney has advised me that we are doing far too much work on these site plans as far as actually having designed them ourselves before the application submitted and that’s not our charge. What Mr. Gigray has stated to me is to give them a copy—have them purchase a copy of the ordinance, have them research their conditions of their annexation and comply with those ordinances. That’s what Mr. Gigray has stated to me. So we do get to the point where we on a case by case basis we are actually doing site plan design. We don’t have the staff or time to do that. I guess for us to make sure that it totally complies with all conditions, there is no reason to go to you. There is no reason to have a public hearing, there is no reason to go through any of this process if you are requiring staff to get down to that level of detail just to accept an application. MacCoy: Well, I’ve got one comment with the city attorney, which we’ll pick up later on, but I think some of our material is not as explicit as it should be for what we are trying to do. I don’t believe that the applicant is knowledgeable many a time as to understand what we’ve written or have intended before and I think we ought to clean this up too. So there is a two way street in this situation I feel. Which will get done. Smith: I agree with that and I take issue with what the city attorney has told you as well. I think there might be a semantics problem here between the two of you as well, but I think a couple of things are easy, as Mr. Biss needs an answer on what the easement of the landscape buffer needs to be, he needs to know if he has to pave his back lot. The only other things besides what I’ve already stated, while you are going back through this process to kind of re-work your siding of your building and everything, take a look at your signage and I’d strongly suggest to eliminate some of it. I think it’s excessive and really—I think it’s overkill. It’s just going to save you money, you don’t have to spend by omitting a couple of them. Biss: Well most of the signs on the building is painted on. Smith: Right, I don’t know that you need all of it. To me it takes away from the aesthetics of the building, the architecture when you start plastering big billboards on the side of it and I think the function of a sign is to identify who you are and what you do. To allow people who don’t know where you are located to find you and I don’t think you need four signs to do that. It’s kind of you’re advertising at your business. I don’t think you need four signs to do that on a parcel this size. That’s all I had to say. MacCoy: I will add my comments. I am in the same business as Commissioner Smith is and I agree with him 100% on that, I think that you can do less and actually get more for your buck out of a nice designed sign then trying to plaster the place like it’s a service operation. So I think… MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 39 Biss: The two signs that I’d like to keep would be the one that is on the road and the one just above the door, the entry there. Smith: I think that would be plenty, I think that would tell folks who you are and what you do and get them there. MacCoy: Alright, at this point. Commissioners what is your preference here? We’ve got some work ahead of us. De Weerd: Did Mr. Biss understand the information that we need? Borup: I think it would be appropriate to reiterate. De Weerd: We are waiting for the ACHD report and perhaps an answer to the access and also the section off of Penwood, the nine foot section. Design reflecting the 35 foot landscape and your plans for the entire property parcel and an answer to the easement issue. That’s what I have. Biss: I didn’t get his letter till this last Friday. They wanted this additional information on here. Try to get everything in. De Weerd: If we could get that, you know, I personally think that we need to continue this till November 10th . Borup: I do have a question on the statement on plans for the entire property, are we asking them to have a concept for the entire…I had the impression that he didn’t know what he wanted to do with the entire property. That’s the status I would have if I owned this. If Penwood goes through, he may have an opportunity to sell off a lot on the west end of his property for another business. Nelson: It is my understanding that it would be appropriate that he show what he has planned because he plans not to leave it as weeds and also it is in writing that he also plans on some overflow parking. I went to his current address and based on the appearance of his shop and how well kept it was, I wouldn’t expect to see—the types of vehicles parked over there, we are trying to avoid another unlicensed contractor sharing is what we are worried about. By the… Borup: Or a used car lot. Nelson: Or a used car lot, yes. I don’t expect to see that. Although if he plans on graveling that, that would be appropriate to put on the plan. I don’t know whether that is allowed or not. Borup: You can take care of weeds without graveling a whole site. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 40 Smith: I think it would be appropriate to list that as either undeveloped or which part is graveled and then takes that question out when it goes to City Council. Well and then how that property if undeveloped would be maintained. De Weerd: If undeveloped would be maintained. Nelson: City Council is going to ask those questions anyway, might as well put it in print. Smith: I think the only thing that concerns me about the part of the project that was not included was just the overflow parking and like I said, I’m not familiar with the ordinance or whether it is supposed to be paved or graveled. That’s something to get clarified with staff. MacCoy: I think ACHD may also answer that question for us. At least (Inaudible) Biss: The highway department only asks that the driveway be paved 35 feet. MacCoy: I’m saying that between our city ordinance, ACHD, etc. that will eventually fold out. I would like to get this thing moving on here. De Weerd: Mr. Chairman, I would like to move to continue the request for conditional use permit for the general auto repair and service by John Biss to November 10th . Smith: Second. MacCoy: All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. MacCoy: This will be tabled for the moment. There will be a public hearing on November 10th , when we will reconvene on this subject. Good luck to you Mr. Biss. Borup: Mr. Biss was wondering if there was any way he could get those items in writing. Berg: Chairman, members of the commission, we can have the minutes done this week probably at least his section and he can have those draft copies of the minutes in writing. I can also type them out of what you have told me and put them in writing. If Shari has them written down so when he has a meeting with her, they will be in some kind of configuration of writing. Is that going to be sufficient? Okay, thanks. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 41 ITEM NO.11: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 2.84 ACRES FOR PROPOSED OLIASON PARK SUBDIVISION BY TONY HICKEY –EAST OF 603 PINE (TABLED TILL AFTER ITEM NO. 12): MacCoy: Staff do you have any comments on this one? I think looking at the time, they are looking at the bookwork here. Lets take a break at this moment and we will come back with staff, with their open comments before we have an open public hearing for the public. (BREAK) MacCoy: We reconvene now and so we can get on the way and get home tonight. I’ve canvassed the commissioners. They’ve all agreed to stay till we get this thing finished tonight so we won’t have another meeting for it, so we are going to move it out. The staff is going to be stuck with this. Smith: Just as a matter of record, I agreed to stay till midnight, whether we were done or not. MacCoy: Well lets move it then. Staff you are one, item 11. Stiles: Mr. Chairman, commissioners, the next project—do you have to open the public hearing before I start staff report? MacCoy: No, you don’t have to yet. I’m asking for your comments from the staff right now. Stiles: Would you like me to cover the next two items or only—I guess it’s kind of combined. MacCoy: Alright, (Inaudible) so you can go ahead and talk about the whole subject right now. De Weerd: Mr. Chairman, in order to include it in our findings, does it not need to be during a public hearing? MacCoy: Well, it’s—we as commissioners can ask the questions of the staff, I’m told by our attorney that he wanted to do it this way. He said starting right now he would then—this is what I’ve gone through, then I would turn around to the public. De Weerd: Okay, before the public hearing is open. MacCoy: Yes, this is for your information, the public listens to this, so it’s not behind closed doors. Okay, staff? MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 42 Stiles: Mr. Chairman, commissioners, this project is a request for annexation and zoning to R-8 for 11 single family dwellings. The applicant has submitted a request for variance due to the reduction of the minimum frontage. However, all lots would meet the minimum square footage requirement for the R-8 zone. I haven’t had a chance to review their response I guess the applicant may review that if they have any problems with our comments. This area is currently shown on the Meridian Comprehensive Plan as existing urban. (Inaudible) Most of the development in the area is constructed to an R-8 or an R-4 standard for the most part to the east is still unincorporated Ada County that had some farm uses. To the south is a 10-20 acre parcel that has not been developed. The proposal is to extend Idaho Street, the applicant would be responsible for constructing half of the roadway to and thru their property. They are also proposing an access off of Pine Street that apparently they haven’t met with Ada County Highway District and they have I guess verbally at least approved that location for a shared access for the Pine Street frontages. We have asked that the landscape setback be extended through the property on Pine Avenue, if this is an entrance corridor to the City of Meridian. We have asked for a minimum 20 foot setback to protect the residents and to provide for a more aesthetically pleasing corridor. Without going through item by item, I don’t have any specific comments unless you have some questions. MacCoy: Alright, we will come back to that. Bruce do you have anything? Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, members of the commission, the proposal before you—they propose a private sanitary sewer main that would come in off of Idaho. The residents would take service from that private main. It’s indicated on the plan in an easement which is proper. The only other real big issue that I wanted to just touch on was the—in my comments I had made reference in site specific item #14 about the ground level, ground water report. At the time I had made these comments, I made a couple of calls to Clinefelder to try and get some additional information and had not made contact with them. After doing these comments I did talk with the consultant and I am comfortable now with their report that they have submitted. The written response from JJ Howard Engineers indicates that we do concur and I just wanted to reiterate that. That’s about all I can touch on. MacCoy: Okay, thank you. We will open the public hearing now, is the applicant here to come forward? JULIE PARKER—JJ HOWARD ENGINEERING. WAS SWORN IN BY ATTORNEY. Parker: We’ve come in basically from 28 lot townhouse submittal to adding an additional 10 lots with an existing home on three acres. We are just asking for a standard subdivision application, annexation and rezone. Nothing out of the ordinary. These lots are a little bit deeper than usual, they run even with the 20 MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 43 foot setback about 143 feet deep, so there is plenty of backyard and area for the homes and we have worked with ACHD in giving up more right-of-way in order to develop half street section plus an additional 12 foot of pavement, plus an additional area off the pavement to the south so that half street section can be drained onto gravel. We realize that we have to come in from the east with our sanitary sewer main onto that existing 18” main and Mr. Hickey has—is working with the five individuals, he is in negotiation with the fifth to get an easement across his property. The other four property owners are in agreement to provide a sanitary sewer easement. We will be providing pressurized irrigation to each lot. We would prefer to do it to NMID standards and have them own and operate the system. MacCoy: Anything else? Parker: That’s it. MacCoy: Commissioners, do you have any questions of her? Borup: Have you had a chance to review staff comments? Ma’am? Parker: Yes, and I did respond to Bruce Freckleton’s comments in writing. Borup: All fourteen? Parker: Yes. We have no problems with any of them. Borup: Alright thank you. Did you see—were you planning on a new fire hydrant also? Did you notice that in the fire department’s comments? Parker: We do show a hydrant on Idaho Street next to the streetlight between lots 8 and 9. Borup: I have no other questions. MacCoy: Okay, Commissioner De Weerd. De Weerd: I have no questions at this time. MacCoy: Commissioner Smith? Smith: Yes, can you address this letter written August 13th , 1998 on this Sevante Realty? Parker: I would have to see it first. Smith: You haven’t seen it? MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 44 Parker: No. Smith: It’s been… Parker: Was that addressing a townhouse project? Smith: No, it was addressing this project. Ten lots single family subdivision. There is eleven lots shown. Parker: There is an existing home on lot 1. Smith: There is a line in here that says the homes for several blocks west appear to be placed on 50 foot or narrower lots. I guess I have a problem with using the word of appear. That indicates to me that nobody has actually gone out and measured or looked on a plat to see what those are. So this statement appear to be 50 foot could be true and it could be not true. You don’t need to answer anything to that. I don’t agree with the fact that this—statement in this letter that this property couldn’t be developed. If this variance to 58 foot street frontage is not allowed. You loose three lots, but that’s all I had right now. MacCoy: Mr. Nelson? Nelson: I have no comment. MacCoy: Since they haven’t any comments, you can sit down. This is an open public hearing, is there anybody else who would like to make a comment, pro or con? JODY DAHMER, 513 E. PINE, MERIDIAN, ID. WAS SWORN IN BY ATTORNEY. Dahmer: I’m back again, I just don’t understand and I know I probably won’t be able to stop progress all my life. I don’t understand why we have to have so many on such a little lot. When we were here before, I explained our homes on that street are old. We all have pretty big lots, I don’t because mine was subdivided before I ever bought it. Our traffic on Pine Street is absolutely ridiculous just in this last year, it’s crazy. I have two little grand kids now that have moved into the area. They want to walk to see grandma, our streets are crazy. This is going to make us, what, 22 more cars within three doors of me. It just, I don’t know why we have to have so many on such a little lot. MacCoy: I remember when you came up last time. Well, I thought you did a fine job last time and I think that is the reason you are here again because as long as the land is vacant, people come along by it and want to put something on it and I think that is what you do, you come up here as a homeowner in the MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 45 neighborhood and come up and express your views and that’s how we have our basis for our decisions. Dahmer: And I love where I live, you know. Like I said before, we have a little bit of country and yet we are close to the city, but subdivisions across Pine and back over, I mean—and I know it’s progress. Why can’t we have four nice homes on that land with a nice piece of property so that, you know, I mean, I’m not objecting to developing the property, I just don’t know why we have to cram so many in. We have a lot of country, we have a lot of space in Meridian, why do you have to center on my street. You know? That’s all. Nelson: Ma’am, were you aware that there were only four new houses proposed on Pine Street, four lots. Dahmer: No, you mean in this. Borup: In this current proposal. Dahmer: I thought there were ten. Borup: The others are on Idaho Street. Dahmer: Won’t it come through? Borup: No, there is no access between the two. Dahmer: There would only be four that would be on access to Pine? Borup: Yes. Dahmer: Well, we didn’t know that, so that answers our question. Borup: Then you made a comment on lot size, do you know what the lot sizes are along there? Dahmer: No, I don’t… Borup: You said yours was smaller but I don’t know what that means. Dahmer: Well, all of the lots where I live are very long. I asked my neighbor, she couldn’t remember how long hers…do you remember? About 90 feet long. Borup: Not sure on the width? Dahmer: No, I’m not sure. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 46 Borup: Okay, thank you. MacCoy: Anybody else who wants to come up and make a statement? People are pretty quiet out there. Will the applicant come back forward then? Do you have any pieces you want to add to this, or talk to the commissioners about at this point? Alright, she is shaking her head no, for the record. Commissioners do you have any comments for the staff? And vice versa. Borup: At this point we are talking about annexation and zoning, is that right Mr. Chairman? MacCoy: That’s right. Borup: I have no other questions. MacCoy: Mr. Nelson, start at this end. Nelson: I have no questions. MacCoy: Okay, Mr. Smith? Okay, Commissioner De Weerd. De Weerd: I have none. Borup: None. MacCoy: Thank you twice Mr. Borup. Okay staff do you have anything you want to add to what has been said so far? Okay the answer from the staff is no for the record. Commissioners, what is your desire here? Borup: Close the public hearing. (Inaudible) Rossman: Mr. Chairman, it would probably would be appropriate to close the public hearing before discussion phase. MacCoy: It will be done. Since there are no other questions and answers from the public here, I’m going to close the public hearing at this moment. The commissioners ought to make a decision as to what the next step is. Borup: Maybe just one response to Commissioner Smith’s comment on whether this project (Inaudible) and I think you said whether it would be possible to do. The way I read the letter it said whether it be viable. I would have to agree that the economic viability of it, you are certainly right, do the whole thing on one two lots. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 47 Smith: I figure you can get eight lots on here as opposed to 11. I don’t know what the numbers crunch out what they got to get out of it, but putting a 65 foot minimum frontage, which is what is required in an R-8 zone, would give them three lots off of Pine and five off of Idaho. Borup: That wouldn’t work at 40,000 an acre, I wouldn’t think—That was my only comment, Mr. Chairman. Anybody else have any other comments? If not, I would move that—I would prepare findings. De Weerd: Would you move to prepare findings to approve or to deny? (Inaudible) Borup: The annexation and zoning, I would move to approve. We still have a preliminary plat. Maybe are we being a little premature here? We still have preliminary plat to discuss. Also, I believe a conditional use on the—or a variance. Rossman: No conditional use. Borup: Variance? De Weerd: We don’t do variance. Okay then, right. So the plat is the only other item? MacCoy: Item #12, yeah. So what is your desires? Borup: I already made one motion. MacCoy: I didn’t hear a second. De Weerd: Perhaps it would be better to talk about the preliminary plat to address, seems like there is some concerns that we talk about the plat first and then revisit this. Borup: So then lets move on to Item #12. Rossman: Table Item #11 and go on to #12. Borup: I move that we table Item #11 and proceed with Item #12. Smith: Second. MacCoy: Okay, we have a second on that. De Weerd: We need to vote. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 48 MacCoy: You want to vote? De Weerd: Yeah, I do. MacCoy: All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. ITEM #12: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PROPOSED OLIASON PARK SUBDIVISION BY TONY HICKEY – EAST OF 603 E. PINE: MacCoy: It’s a public hearing for the same product and the staff has already given their statements for the two, #11 and #12. So I open the door to the public and the applicant, is there anything you want to say for Item #12? Maybe you ought to come forward and say what you just said. Your comments for Item #12 remain the same. Parker: My comments remain the same for Item #12. Nelson: I have a question for you while you are here. If you did take for instance on the Idaho Street side, you have six lots at 55.58 feet. If you were to make that five lots, they would be 66.7 feet, I think that is frontage for R-8. But then that’s pretty deep 163 feet. It’s about almost 11,000 square foot yard. Then would it be safe to say that’s—the discussion was the difference between whether it was viable or not to subdivide it in that fashion. Parker: (Inaudible) create 11,000 square foot lots. Nelson: Well, there was concern about the density, did it really need to be ten more, could we get away with eight more lots? That was a question that was brought up (Inaudible) Parker: I would have to refer to my developer basically. I can’t speak for his pocket book. Should I allow him to speak, or do I need to speak for him? Smith: He can speak for himself. TONY HICKEY, 2090 S. COLE ROAD, BOISE, ID. WAS SWORN IN BY THE ATTORNEY. Hickey: I sent a letter to the staff some time ago in response to an effort initially to meet part of the areas zoning and that there are a lot of apartments so on and so forth in that general area. I wanted to build townhouses for empty nesters, roughly 2.2 million dollars which have been a tax base for the City of Meridian and was told that wasn’t an appropriate situation there. We went back and re- MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 49 addressed the issue, reconfigured a street coming through so we would not have to build a street coming through and reduce the lots down to where we had single family dwellings, probably somewhere in the neighborhood of 1 to 1.1 million dollars of tax base for the city and reducing any development value or profits considerably. I’ve looked at it, studied it, went over the issues time and time again. There isn’t any way to make this a business transaction with less than ten new lots there considering the fact that I have to put in nearly 700 feet of sewer that may or may not ever get any money of that back. If it is a ten year process, I can get latecomer fees on it. I’m not satisfied that the rest of the property will develop in the next ten… (END OF TAPE) Hickey: I also have to build a considerable amount of street, 40 foot wide street to service six houses and the expenses are such that it doesn’t make any financial practical business sense to go less than 10 new lots. So with all due respect, if I can’t do ten lots, I would like to know that tonight and we will continue with—it’s in the county, we’ll just leave it in the county bit the bullet and walk away from any further discussion, if we can’t do ten lots, I don’t even want to approach it for less than that. I’ve already got probably $10,000 dollars spent to this point so far and I’m not satisfied that that’s anybody’s fault but my own, but that’s the way it works. If we can’t do ten, lets just pass. Nelson: Well, it’s just more in my head. Currently several of this lots are you know, over 9,000 square feet. Hickey: Correct. Nelson: Which exceeds even R-4. Hickey: Correct. Nelson: Reducing that would put them up over ten. I wouldn’t want to mow 10,000 square feet myself. Hickey: Neither would I sir. Nelson: Then the issue is—there is still a variance for that frontage which doesn’t go through us anyway, you are aware of that? Hickey: Correct. Nelson: Anyway, I just wanted to discuss that. Hickey: The lady that came up earlier said, why can’t we just do four. Well, because the cost of the development is more than the cost of the (Inaudible) land MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 50 with all the different fees and costs and things that are incurred. The raw land, if I go down to four lots, if the land was free, I could not afford to develop it. Free ground and be able to build a home that would fit in the neighborhood. No one on this panel or in this room will pay 180-200, 000 for a house on East Pine next to 100,000 dollar homes. So the whole theory of Oliason Park is to try and bring old town out another 300 or 400 feet and do something that is very similar to what is there now. De Weerd: She was referring to I believe to four homes just off of Pine, not for the whole project. Hickey: I’m sorry, yeah, I understand that. Given that we did go down to say four, five, seven, eight lots. The cost of the lots has to go up in order to make a balance so there is any reason for the landowner to develop it and there is any reason for the developer to take the risk in the thing. The total project, the total home, lot and all, the lots should not be more than 20-25% of the project. A $30,000 lot will dictate $120,000 plus or minus, probably plus home. That’s not going to handle $120,000 dollar home in that neighborhood. It’s just not going to handle, if I loose two more lots, we go up to $140,000 or $150,000 dollars in order to make it come out. Nobody is going to build that house. So like I say, if we can’t get at least ten building lots, I’d just as soon pass. It isn’t going to look a lot like old town anyway, because now we are going to have berms and we are going to have 1998 straight frontage which isn’t going to look like old town, we can live with that, but if we go any larger lots in order to get this 66 or 67 feet, then I would just as soon pass on the whole thing. Any questions? MacCoy: Mr. Smith, or Mr. Nelson? (Inaudible) Smith: When you say it’s not going to look like old town, it’s going to look like 1998, I’m assuming that we are going to see garages facing the street and that’s going to be the most prominent feature of it, all from the street frontage. Hickey: No, in fact, I would hope not, but we will have the berms and we will have like 40 feet of setback where the other houses are 15 or 18 feet off of the street, these will be 40 feet off and so on and so forth. Because of the 20 foot mandatory setback and then you’ve got the yards and so on and so forth, so it’s going to look considerably different and I would hope that I could arrange them so that the garages are not real prominent. Smith: That would be nice. That’s about, when you get down to a 60 foot frontage or 55, it’s pretty tough to pull that garage back. (Inaudible) able to access and get a buildable, workable plan on your house. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 51 Hickey: At $30,000 dollar building lots, it’s real difficult to build a house and not have a lot of garage out front. Thank you. MacCoy: Commissioner De Weerd? Alright, Borup. Borup: I have a question for Hickey. You made a statement in your letter about lot sizes. Did you research that to the extent that you know what the lots sizes were on Pine Street. Hickey: I didn’t do… Borup: Or Idaho. Hickey: commissioner Borup, I didn’t do a thorough research. I did look at maps and plats, they all appeared to be in the roughly 50 foot width to me, but I did not actually go out and physically measure any of them and I did not pull a plat to show me what the exact measurements of each of those were. Borup: Okay, that’s what I wanted—it appears to me that half of them are probably that size, but I can’t read any of these dimensions on this, so that’s what I was wondering. Thank you. MacCoy: Thank you. Does anybody else here want to make a comment? (Inaudible) do you have anything that you want to add to this? Okay, as far as the commissioners, do you have any questions among yourselves that you want to discuss before we close the public hearing, or table it or what else you want to do. Borup: It appears by looking at the plat that we have that this stretch right here (Inaudible) to the west is the only area right here that doesn’t have an alley, is that correct Mr. Hickey, no alley to the west of your property? MacCoy: This one here is an alley, because I’ve been down there. This isn’t one. Borup: But on the other side of 5th they all seem to. MacCoy: Yeah. It was the old town. Borup: That’s the old town look. That would solve garages on the major streets, but. De Weerd: There is no alley to tap into. Borup: Somebody blew it 80 years ago. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 52 De Weerd: They were being progressive. Nelson: To move on, would we have to table this public hearing and go back to the next one to approve first? MacCoy: Yeah, (inaudible). So, is that what you want, does the commission want to do that? Nelson: Do we need to(Inaudible). MacCoy: Okay, do you want me to close it? Borup: I do have one more question that’s on exact size, we’ve got in the documents one says approximately two acres, another says 2.5 and the other says 2. 84, do we know what size this property is? MacCoy: Do you want to come up and make it on the mike here please. Parker: 2.84. Borup: That is the correct size, okay, thank you. MacCoy: Do you want to close the public hearing, I’m prepare to do that. Okay, I’m going to close the public hearing for now and the commissioners will make their decision. Nelson: Commissioners, I would like to—I’d move that we table this item. MacCoy: Item #12. Nelson: Yes. Until November 10th . Smith: Second. MacCoy: All in favor of that? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. MacCoy: You going back to #11 now? De Weerd: Yeah, I would like to move that we put back on the table Item #11. Smith: Second. MacCoy: All in favor? MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 53 MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. (TABLED BEFORE ITEM #12)ITEM #11: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 2.84 ACRES FOR PROPOSED OLIASON PARK SUBDIVISION BY TONY HICKEY – EAST OF 603 PINE: MacCoy: I closed the public hearing. Alright commissioners, what is your decision for Item #11? Borup: Just one comment, 2.84 acres divided by 11 lots is almost 2.6 per acre. I don’t know if that helps, but that gives us a relationship to what the density is. What I—I may have said that wrong. The 2.84 acres divided by eleven lots is .258 lots per acre. Smith: .258 De Weerd: 2.58. Borup: Okay, the decimal point is in the wrong place. 2.58, maybe it’s not in the wrong place, maybe I can’t see it. MacCoy: What do you want to do with Item #11? De Weerd: I would move that we ask the city attorney to draw up Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law to approve the annexation and zoning of 2.84 acres for the proposed Oliason Park Subdivision. Nelson: Second. MacCoy: All in favor? I hear three ayes, but are you going to abstain or are you going to say nay? Smith: Nay. MOTION CARRIED: Three ayes, one nay. MacCoy: It moves on to the attorney for preparing the facts. Item #12 has been tabled to the November 10th , meeting. ITEM NO. 13: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 12.21 ACRES BY MERIDIAN JOINT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO.2 – WEST SIDE OF EAGLE ROAD BETWEEN FAIRVIEW & USTICK ROAD: MacCoy: Staff do you have any comments before we start this thing? I’m still waiting for staff, found your place yet? MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 54 Stiles: Unfortunately, I didn’t have most of my comments, copies in my packet, so bear with me. Bruce and I reviewed this project, the property is located in an area shown as single family residential on the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. The parcel is immediately south of the Carol Subdivision and west of Eagle Road, approximately a half mile north of Fairview. The legal description was accurate. The site that they are proposing, currently has no legal frontage. There is no public road access. They would need to coordinate with Idaho Transportation Department for that access and to provide easements for access and for extension of utilities. It’s proposed that they get their sewer and water would be from easements through what is called the Packard Subdivision. It’s kitty corner from this site to the south and west of the property. That project is a little behind schedule, hopefully those easement considerations are taking place right now. There is for Packard Subdivision #1 there is a lift station that is being built near the south slough that is designed to serve this piece if the trunk line sewer is not extended prior to the construction of this school. There is a ditch that runs along the south boundary that would need to be tiled. I’m not aware of any ditches that are on the rest of the site. Particular attention would need to be paid to the site plan that they propose to make sure that consideration was given to that adjacent neighborhood, understand the gentleman that sold the property to the school district, John Barnes, lives in that subdivision and I would hope that he would be very cognizant of the need to coordinate any site plan with the needs of that neighborhood. MacCoy: Anything from you Bruce? Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, members of the commission. Maybe just to expand a little bit on the sewer and water serviceability of this site. As Shari stated, sewer service for this site would be coming through Packard Subdivision, provision was made in the early stages of that development and the preliminary plat, there were—a proposed route was established, there was a common lot that was set aside up in this corner for the routing of utilities. Design of the system, routing of the system, the appropriate easements all need to be coordinated. We haven’t seen any design layout for the site, so it’s kind of hard to know where we are going on that. That was about all. MacCoy: Thank you very much. Alright, to the public hearing now. Now open and is the representative here from the Meridian School District? KENT KROHN, 1735 FEDERAL WAY, BOISE, ID. WAS SWORN IN BY ATTORNEY. Krohn: Mr. Chairman, members of the commission, we appreciate being able to address you this evening. We have reviewed the comments and conditions proposed by staff and are in agreement with those. We are currently working with the property owner to the east and the Idaho Transportation Department for access to Eagle Road. Agreements are in place with the developer of the MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 55 Packard Subdivision on sewer and water access to the site. We have engineering design going on at present to tile the major irrigation ditch on the south property. The other things are we have no problem with, be happy to submit any questions that you might have. MacCoy: Commissioners, do you have any questions of the applicant? Borup: I have none. Krohn: Thank you. MacCoy: Just a minute, Commissioner De Weerd, do you have any? De Weerd: Not at this point. MacCoy: Commissioner Smith? Smith: Is this—does the school district typically tie in to pressurized irrigation systems? Krohn: It depends, if they are available then they have, yes. Smith: Do you anticipate that it would be on this particular project? Krohn: I don’t think we’ve progressed quite that far yet on the development of the property. If we have a pressurized irrigation system available we would probably want to do that. We would coordinate with the Nampa/Meridian Irrigation District on that. Smith: Okay, thanks. MacCoy: Mr. Nelson? Nelson: I have no questions. MacCoy: Alright, thank you. Is there any one here who would like to comment pro or con? If not, I’m going to close the public hearing on this one. De Weerd: No, wait. Borup: I do have a question for engineer Freckleton. MacCoy: Okay, go ahead. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 56 Borup: Pertaining to—I’d never heard anybody call you that before, I thought I would try it. Sewer service to this site, is there an active sewer service through Packard at this time? Or, well—I’ll start with that question. Freckleton: Commissioner Borup, members of the commission, Packard Subdivision has hit some snags. Easement negotiations going on with a property owner to the west of what was in Packard Subdivision #2 for access to the south slough sewer trunk line. Easement negotiations broke down, the developer had to fall back on an earlier plan to install a lift station and pump the sewage back up to what is Chamberlain Estates. They are in the process of building that lift station now. That was a pretty major setback to that project. Gravity sewer lines have been installed in phase one. what you see out there today, the paved street, those lines are all in, however, without the lift station in place, or the route to the trunk line, it’s not an approved system today, but as I said earlier, in phase #3 of what is going to be Packard Subdivision, the sewer lines would extend on up to that northeast corner. Borup: Of the school site? Freckleton: That would be gravity flow through Packard down to the south slough. Borup: I guess my question is, if the lift station goes in, that would access the school site presently? Until the gravity flow trunk line is eventually connected? Freckleton: Yes, yes. Borup: Then there would be access through the… Freckleton: Through Packard Subdivision, (Inaudible) Borup: Through the lift station assuming that it’s going—and I assume they are working very hard on that, I would think. Freckleton: They are, they are behind the ball big time. Borup: Since they’ve got houses built. Freckleton: Right on. I’m not sure if the school site was taken into consideration during the design of the station as far as the size of the pumps and that sort of thing. Mr. Krohn could answer, I’m not sure. Borup: I’m assuming that is something they will work out with… Freckleton: It may have to be upsized. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 57 Borup: The city engineering department and it’s not going to effect what we need to do on here. Thank you. MacCoy: Anything else? De Weerd: I had a question for Shari on the site plan it’s got landscape detail. Is that sufficient for you and do you have any concerns with the perimeter around the field all being the Pines. There is an awful lot of them. Stiles: Commissioner De Weerd, commissioners, I don’t have any sort of site plan with this application. They hadn’t applied for anything but annexation and zoning. De Weerd: Oh, yeah. Stiles: If they get zoned in the R-4 that is a permitted use in that zone, however, in talking to their representative, they stated they would have no problem coming not as a conditional use permit or anything like that but to have the site plan reviewed either by Planning and Zoning Commission or the City Council to get your input on those plans. De Weerd: So would that be a condition of zoning and annexation? Stiles: It could be. Smith: …complaining that there is too many trees. De Weerd: No, not too many trees, but too many of one. Smith: Just wanted to clarify that. De Weerd: I wouldn’t do that. MacCoy: I think evergreens are a nice tree myself. Borup: I assume they are looking at the year round. MacCoy: Yeah, I do too. De Weerd: Well, I just say that because when one gets diseased, you do have a problem with them all getting diseased and those do have some disease problems. That’s why I ask. MacCoy: It really depends on what kind of Pine too, I’ve been dealing with the nursery people this past week on a couple of things like that. Okay, are you ready—close the public hearing now. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 58 De Weerd: Yes. MacCoy: Okay, I’m going to close the public hearing officially. Commissioners what is your desire? Smith: Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a motion that we ask the city attorney to prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law to approve this item. Nelson: Second. MacCoy: All in favor? De Weerd: I haven’t voted. MacCoy: You didn’t vote? De Weerd: No, I didn’t. Smith: Did you want me to add your….Can I withdraw my motion? MacCoy: You withdraw your second. Smith: Yeah, I’ll withdraw his second. MacCoy: You will. Nelson: If he lets me. MacCoy: Lets go back again. Smith: Mr. Chairman I would like to make a motion that we direct the city attorney to prepare Findings of Fact on this item to approve it with the condition that the applicant come back before this commission for site plan review. De Weerd: Second. MacCoy: I hear a second. Okay, she said she had a second. All in favor now? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. ITEM NO. 14: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 5.4 ACRES FOR PROPOSED MIDVALLEY BUSINESS PARK SUBDIVISION BY HUBBLE ENGINEERING – NW OF EAGLE ROAD/ I-84 INTERCHANGE AND WEST OF EXISTING TEXACO: MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 59 MacCoy: Well Bruce do you have anything while we are waiting? Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, members of the commission, I will address public works type issues on this. MacCoy: Alright, proceed. Freckleton: The proposed subdivision is a re-subdivision of an existing lot in the county. Services, sewer service to this site will be off of an extension of a line that was extended to St. Lukes about three years ago. Water the same situation, they are going to have to extend the lines to and through for service to this subdivision. We did comments, prepared comments, we have written response from the applicant. Do not see anything in the response that they’ve taken exception to… So, that’s about all I have. MacCoy: Okay, Shari? Go ahead, do you have anything? Stiles: …comments. MacCoy: You are looking for your comments. Stiles: I did not get the majority of my comments… MacCoy: Okay, we’ll come back to you then. Alright, it’s a public hearing, is the applicant here to speak? Very good sir. SHAWN NICKEL, 9550 BETHEL COURT, BOISE, ID. WAS SWORN IN BY THE ATTORNEY. Nickel: Mr. Chairman, would you like me to address all three of the applications at this time, or do you want to go one at a time? MacCoy: We are going to have to take them one at a time, but if you want to make one broad statement, it will probably save some time. Nickel: Yes, I would like to be brief because of the time of night. I have read through staff’s comments. We are in favor of all the requested conditions of approval. We have no problem with any of those. As far as the annexation, we are requesting the annexation of 5.4 acres. It is lot 10 of Magic View Subdivision which is a currently platted subdivision in the county. We are requesting a zone change to CG which is general retail and service commercial from the current RT zone of the county. We believe that CG zone is compatible with the existing use to the east which is the Texaco service station mixed use development and we believe that the request complies with the Comprehensive Plan. In regards to the preliminary plat, we are proposing five lots at this time. Lot one is approximately 2 acres, a little more than the other ones, but less than an acre in MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 60 size. This is on the corner, southwest corner of Allen Street and Magic View Drive. ACHD has reviewed this and their commission did approve of the design last week. You do have their comments in your packets, I believe. We have agreed to dedicate right-of-way curb, gutter, sidewalk, improved pavement on our portions of the property. Sewer and water is available and we will extend those as per the public works department. As for the conditional use permit, Commissioner Smith, I apologize for not having the elevations, we were following the application requirements and I have made a note and in the future I will provide you with the elevations so you can all see them and I know how important they are to review and make your decisions so I will get those to you in the future. However, you did get to see the one copy that I did present, we are proposing on lot 1 which is approximately 98,000 square foot lot, we are proposing a 24,560 square foot office building that would house Hubble Engineering, our corporate office. We believe that the City of Meridian would provide excellent services and we would like to be part of the city with our development and our office. We have designed this site based on the standards and requirements from the Meridian zoning ordinance including landscaping, parking, space requirements and lighting. We do have two proposed signs at the entrance to our development, those will be low profile monument signs, rock signs. They will be illuminated, low light illuminated. As far as the design of the building itself, that will be a tilt up concrete type building single story with a flat roof. We did hold a neighborhood meeting on all three of these applications last week and we had five neighbors attend and everything seemed positive. We did review what we were proposing and I felt when they left that we accomplished a lot in holding that meeting, even though that was not required by the code. I would like to thank Shari for her help in going through the process. We do appreciate that. I will open for any question you might have. MacCoy: Number one, I’ll thank you for doing what your business is, it helps all of us. Commissioners any questions to Mr. Nickel. Borup: Just one Mr. Chairman, well I don’t know, maybe more than one. You said ACHD approved this last week? Nickels: Last Wednesday at noon, I believe. Borup: With—I do not have a copy of the ACHD report. I don’t believe anybody up here does, so. Nickels: I have their draft, they have not given me their final. Borup: (Inaudible) for some reason they don’t trust us with a draft copy. Nickels: Well, I’ll just put this back. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 61 Borup: Apparently they don’t everyone gets one before we do. Was there any conditions or any concerns that they had? Nickels: The only issues that they had, it wasn’t really issues, they require specific spacing between our entrances and we had already designed based on their standards. Borup: They didn’t have any concern on traffic on Magic View being able to handle the traffic? Nickels: we did discuss the future connection from the stop light on Eagle Road and that was—we have agreed to provide—I want to say impact fees, but the fee to, our portion of the fee for that future road and that future signal. Borup: That is an existing signal. Nickels: Yeah. Borup: So they did have some concerns on Magic View. Nickels: They didn’t have concerns, they just—they made it sound like they already made their decision that they’ve discussed it with the city. We are in agreement with whatever the city and the highway district come up with. Borup: I think what at least I was wondering, I’m assuming, maybe it depends on your time frame, but Magic View is still going to be your entrance for some time to come. Nickels: Commissioner, it would be a benefit to us to have that light and… Borup: And then what I was wondering about the future development. Do you have any anticipated usage at this point at all? I realize that there is no way of necessary knowing, but what do you visualize for the other. Nickels: We would really like to see medical, medical type uses. Conglomerates to the St. Lukes, if possible, but we obviously not going to turn down anybody who comes in with a permitted use in that CG zone. Our preference would be the medical type of office. At this point, we haven’t been approached by anybody. MacCoy: Commissioner De Weerd? De Weerd: You have responded to all the comments that you received from staff. Nickels: I have. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 62 De Weerd: And you are in agreement with the landscaping lots, Item #4, as far as increasing that from a 20 foot to a 30 foot minimum frontage? Nickels: That was on lot 5 our flag lot, that is not a problem. That was my only question. MacCoy: Commissioner Smith? Smith: Just a clarification on the access to Eagle Road, discussion with ACHD was tying Magic View into a route that accessed an existing signal light, not an additional light. Nickels: That’s correct. Smith: That’s what we’ve gone through with the Chevron thing. Nickels: Commissioner, we feel it would be a benefit to our development to have that proceed and we are in favor of it. Smith: Your application states that you want for your own site an equipment yard, I didn’t see any equipment yard indicated on the plat on the plan there. Nickels: Yeah, I don’t know, did you guys get a full sized copy of it? Smith: The same one you’ve got there. Nickels: Yeah, the equipment—let me try to hold it straight here. The equipment yard would be—it’s more or less to house our survey trucks, keep them safe, because they park in the garage and then the excess will be parked out in these parking areas right here. MacCoy: What is this, security section on it? That’s the one in the same area? Okay, that’s (Inaudible). Nickels: What they do is house the survey equipment to keep those protected we would have a small fence right in this area right here. Smith: What type of fence do you… Nickels: We were hoping for a razor wire, something—I hate to say that, but I don’t think you would allow us an electric fence, just kidding. Something low key, but something to help the cause. Smith: On your, I’m jumping around on these three items too, so wrap this thing up quickly, but your plant schedule is not keyed in on your plan. You’ve got a MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 63 plant schedule, but none of your planning is on your planner are described to what—which of these trees and shrubs are going where. Nickels: Right, and we will get more specific when we get a landscape contractor, we are going to meet the code requirements of the three inch caliber trees and we do have the locations on the site plan it's self. It’s just a matter of which specific trees will be there. Smith: Okay, I did look at the elevation earlier and… Nickels: If I may, I’d like to turn the page so everyone can see it. Smith: It’s all going to be a tilt up concrete? Nickels: That’s correct. Smith: And just painted color scheme? Nickels: As light and not obnoxious as possible. Probably grays and beige. Smith: What is the overall height of that building? Nickels: It’s one story, I’m not sure of the exact height. Smith: So maybe 14-16 feet, something like that? Okay, that’s all I have. MacCoy: Commissioner Nelson? Nelson: I have no questions. MacCoy: Now is a public hearing, is there anybody here who would like to get up and talk? RICH ALLISON, WAS SWORN IN BY THE ATTORNEY. Allison: I would like to speak in favor of this development. Rossman: When you say you speak for the owner of the development, who is that? Allison: I represent the owner of the property currently who is selling the property. Rossman: And who is that? Allison: His name is Randy Worden. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 64 Rossman: Please continue. Allison: This property is part of 30-40 acres in total that is currently in the mixed use zone of the City of Meridian that will probably be becoming forward during the next year, most of which—a lot of which is already sold and this type of development will lend itself well to the overall plan of developing the full amount of property. I do want to speak with regard tot he road because there does seem to be some confusion on many peoples part as to when the new road will be built from the signal light back into Allen Street and that really has more to do with the City of Meridian actually approving the easement for the benefit and the plats showing the road so that the road can be approved by ACHD and ACHD can then acquire the property that is not given by the developers. Apparently ACHD does have the money in impact fees to build the road, but this has gone on as staff know, for about two and a half years, maybe three years where the road has not been designated because the city had not approved the annexation and zoning for the Chevron station, Idaho Power Credit Union and then the next piece of property that is involved would be the next property going west which would be the remainder of the road, of which would be about additional two acres, which would have to be either purchased or given by the developer of the property to the west. Upon that being completed and the developer providing his portion which maybe required and the remainder of the road which will eventually be a five, five lane road is the way that it’s designed to tie back into the signal will be built by the remainder by impact fees. There should be clarification on that. It’s not like Hubble Engineering, or anybody else, everybody is willing to get their impact fees to provide for the road, an impact fees today are there to build the road. They can’t build the road until such time the easements are approved by the City of Meridian. So it’s kind of a catch 22 that has gone on for about two and a half years now. So this will be addressed and if anybody wants clarification they can discuss it with ACHD, I’ve done it on numerous occasions, as well as a number of the property owners who are currently involved in selling their properties. So that is kind of the issue and where that issue is today, but the road will be there and at such time the road is there, there will be five lanes of road eventually which can provide up to about 30,000-40,000 cars a day which will probably be generated by this development when it’s fully developed, if in fact the additional property to the west is placed in a mixed use development zone, by the new Comprehensive Plan changes, if in fact those take place. Right now, we have about 30 acres that is being addressed. I do want to look at this type of development as high quality development adding great value to the City of Meridian in the right location and I think it will benefit the city to have this quality developed in our city. Thank you. MacCoy: Thanks Rich. Is there anybody else who would like to come up and— come ahead. I thought you were waiting for something. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 65 WANDA BUCKERT, 971 WELLS CIRCLE, LOT 20, MERIDIAN, ID. WAS SWORN BY THE ATTORNEY. Buckert: I would just like to say that by using Magic View all the time, I would like to see the road go in before any construction starts. I’m not opposed to the new developments at all, but we can hardly get in and out on Magic View now, and if they start construction bringing in big equipment, it’ll be terrible. So there are several of us still in the back that this will effect very much, so if we can get the road in first and then the development. That’s all I have to say. MacCoy: Thank you for your statement. I think it’s needed. Is there anyone else out there that would like to make a statement? Sorry you have to leave your easy chair back there. BOB BARNES, 2855 MAGIC VIEW DRIVE, LOT 9, MERIDIAN, ID. WAS SWORN IN BY THE ATTORNEY. Barnes: Like I said, we are lot 9, we are adjacent to…the (Inaudible) Mr. Allison referred to the Comprehensive Plan change we are currently—30 feet of our lot is mixed use designation right now and the rest of our property is not, so Shari we would like to… (END OF TAPE) Barnes: …so as part of this whole development that’s one thing we’d like to see is the comprehensive plan changed to put our adjacent 5 ½ acres in this mix. Because we do believe this whole piece of property could very well benefit the city of Meridian as a high quality commercial development area. It’s low density residential right now. I say our lot is 5 ½ acres. This piece of property is 5.4 and the one next to us is over 5 acres. There’s a lot of area in there, and great access, a good tax base for the schools. Concerns I guess would be who buys the property that Hubble Engineering isn’t going to use I mean these other lots. I guess we wouldn’t mind if we are in the comprehensive plan for mixed use because then we can use our property to blend in to whatever else is going on. So that is a concern. The other concern would be I don’t know what kind of berms and fences and such they are going to put up, but we don’t want the visibility to our property messed up. We also it might be such a thing as we can berm it to cut down the noise factor. I don’t know how all that stuff works. Something that would be conducive to further development on down through the properties. Then the access road. We’d love to have the new access road. Whatever needs to be done there would be great. We can live with the way it is for a limited amount of time with the amount of traffic increasing all the time on Eagle Road and into that particular development. It would sure be nice to have a light to get in and out. That’s about all I have. MacCoy: Any questions for him? None. Thank you very much. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 66 Borup: Maybe just a clarification, Mr. Chairman, because there’s been two comments made to the comprehensive plan and mixed use designation. A comprehensive plan designates general areas. It deals more in generalities and someone correct me if I’m misstating this, but it’s not like a zoning map where there’s a specific boundary designating specific areas. It generally talks in a general area, so I don’t think we’re talking about specific lineal boundaries on a mixed use area. They’re just saying generally in that area. Is that a fairly correct statement Ms. Stiles? Stiles: Commissioner Borup, Commissioners, to a certain extent as far as being a generalized land use map for the park areas, well sites, of course those can’t be specific, but as far as the designation of the land use on specific pieces of property the city cannot accept applications or act on any applications that are not in compliance with that generalized land use plan. So they would have to submit an application for single family residential until the comprehensive plan is changed. Borup: Okay so there is a specific boundary on the mixed use designation on the comprehensive plan. Stiles: I guess you can just go crazy on that 30 feet. Borup: Okay so then my statement was incorrect. Stiles: There are some problems – Borup: There is a specific boundary. Stiles: I was being sarcastic there, but there are problems with the land use map. I think everybody recognizes that. We’ve also got some major problems with the – that I hope is being addressed now with the ad hoc transportation committee as far as designating at some point an access from Eagle Road to Locust Grove somewhere in that area. Our problem is we come up against time and time again is opposition to project is just based on the fact that there isn’t a plan in place for issues such as roads and buffering, and I don’t think anyone believes that that whole area is going to development as single family residential. I certainly don’t want to see it develop like that. I don’t think you are going to find a lot of people that want to live in a single family home next to the freeway. We definitely do need a plan. We’re going out for proposal for a consultant to assist with our comprehensive plan that should be in the paper within the next week or two and hope to have that completed by next year, but unless legal counsel has some other direction, I’ve always been taught is planning and part of the local land use planning act that you cannot make a decision unless it does comply with the comprehensive plan and that includes the designations on that map. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 67 Borup: So my question and this is something for my clarification is the designations on the map do have specific boundaries then. Stiles: Yes, they do. Borup: On some items but not on all. Stiles: I think when you’re talking about the proposed park sites it also goes with the text that one is needed in that area such as the school sites typically. Borup: A lot of the commercial areas are designated the same way, just general circles. Stiles: In that area, yeah. I mean you can’t say well this is commercial in this little circle here, but then you’re mixed planned use development so you’re okay for a – Borup: Okay, that clarifies it for me. Thank you. MacCoy: The transportation discussion you mentioned there, we have all the committee and we’re going to have our thing finished by the end of this year to the Mayor’s office, so I think we’re coming down the road right now. It looks pretty good. De Weerd: Am I to understand that on the roads, they cannot be built until the property is proposed and zoned accordingly; is that what I understood? So when someone says we’d like the road in there before any development is there, we can’t get development until we have someone developing the property next to it? Stiles: I’m not sure what Mr. Allison meant about the city approving easements for the road. I don’t know that that had been an issue that I was aware of as far as approving those easement. We have given them input of our preferred location for it out of two scenarios that they gave us. The problem comes down in the transportation element of the comprehensive plan when you’re planning a major five lane roadway you really need to plan that have that as part of your comprehensive plan to avoid all the issues later that well this was never proposed so therefore it’s in opposition to your comprehensive plan. I guess I would like that element of the comprehensive plan cleared up so we have some access and we have some policies on limiting access on certain roadways so we don't have the land lock and problems that we have now that you can get there there’s one way in, one way out and no cross access throughout the city so I think those kinds of issues need to be included in the comprehensive plan whether they’re in an exact location at this time is not an issue as much as some kind of a general grid system that can be approved and is logical for planning for the city. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 68 De Weerd: So until that’s updated, we’re always going to have this issue as far as how far is the road going to be built and will some of the congestion on Magic View be – will they have any relief from that. We’re waiting for the comprehensive plan to be updated? Stiles: Not on this issue. I mean I think Rich owns the parcel where actually – is that true where the road would come through or at least he has an interest in seeing that that develops. I don’t think even if you had all of that property zoned single family residential, you’re going to need public road access to that light. De Weerd: Will we have any response from ACHD on what their plans are with that and what kind of time frame so the next project we get, we’re not faced with the same issue as what are they doing with the roads and what kind of access relief are we going to have? Stiles: I’d like Rich to answer that. Rich Allison if you – Smith: And before he gets up, when we were hearing this Chevron project, Terry Records with ACHD got up before this commission and had four or five different alignments for this tie into the signal light road. I was under no impression by him that he was waiting for the city to tell him where we wanted him to put his easements in and I wasn’t under – he never made any statements to the fact that the impact fees were there ready to do the roadway. I hope that that is in deed true and that they are in place to build the roadway and it would go in as this project is being developed, because I drive Eagle Road through there every day and it is a nightmare. It is one of the – it’s going to get busier and busier and for this whole area here to develop into a kind of a C-G area is – they’ve got to have access to that signal light. It needs to be done now before we start building stuff out here. So it would be helpful to find out what ACHD’s status is on that and get a copy of their ACHD report with regards to this project. MacCoy: Before you answer Rich, I’ve been sitting on a regular basis with the transportation commission because they have failed to give us a lot of material which we are now really pushing for. One of the things that’s going to help us in this thing is having this land go to C-G which turns the tables on the fact that they’ve got to bring that thing back into the present day and not talking about the year 2000 plus that when we’ll ever see anything in there. Smith: Right and not waiting for additional parcels to the west here to be developed. I mean if we’re going to approve this one here, I mean we already had this bloody motel project come before us that’s got access Eagle Road the same way and we’ve got the same problems with that project. MacCoy: I understand. That’s the reason we’re pushing on a weekly basis with them. We meet – MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 69 Smith: I hope that they’re not using some excuse they’re waiting for this project behind where the Chevron was approved to go forward. If the impact fees are there now then it needs to go in now. MacCoy: Well I have not heard that as an excuse. Borup: But isn’t that where the road needs to go to the next project to the west? That’s where the alignment was coming in. Smith: Yeah, it was coming in behind that Chevron there. Borup: Right in the next parcel. Allison: I can clarify that because ACHD has made a decision on the long route. The long route goes basically from the signal light, it goes across the top of lot 1 which is where Idaho Power Credit which has already been approved by the City Council and then it swings along to the west and south to a line basically on the west line or a little bit to this side of the west line of lot 2 which is the alignment of Allen, and that’s already been decided by ACHD. The thing you really need to keep in mind with regard to the easement. These easements are very expensive property. This property on Eagle Road is selling for like $7 a foot and when you take 300 400 feet across the top of lot 1 by a width necessary to build a five lane road, which is about 90-120 feet and figure out we’re talking about somewhere in the vicinity as I recall $450,000 just in terms of the costs of the easements to build the road. Let alone the cost of building the road and it is my understanding and I’ve seen the plan from ACHD, they are going to initially bring in five lanes cut it down to two and bring it down to Allen and then at such time necessary, they’ll widen it out to five lanes, but they are buying the entire five lanes, so it’s a very expensive project. Not only in terms of easements, but also expensive because it is collector status street. They have to buy them with the exception of the portion the development may give if they didn’t already have access so there’s a lot more involved in that, and I’d rather have like Gary Smith with the city or Terry Little with ACHD come over and review it with him. I’ve gone over it with him. I know that Mr. Moore is here. Dick Moore who owns lot 2 and he is aware of all the easements necessary that would go through his property and they do prefer yes that the developer give a portion of the property. No question about it. It’s very expensive property and that being the case they’re trying to – but in addition to that my understanding from ACHD was the city must make their decision first with regard to the easements along the north boundary in the annexation and zoning to designate that first before ACHD can buy the alignment and create the final draft on the alignment and that’s something the city can clarify. I’m not involved in that, but I have had about six meetings with ACHD on that specific thing. That’s why it keeps getting delayed and delayed and delayed. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 70 Borup: Mr. Allison, when you say the city must approve the easement, you’re saying just approve the plat? Allison: That’s correct. Once the plat is approved showing the easement. Borup: But that’s all it is. Allison: Which has been on lot 1. It could condemn lot 2 at this point if they wanted to pay that much money for all of the easement that’s remaining. Borup: Who could condemn? Allison: ACHD. MacCoy: They have that power. Allison: They have the power to do it. But you’re talking about 3 or $400,000. Borup: The city is not really holding up the thing. It’s just a matter of approving the plat. Allison: That’s exactly right. That’s why I’m saying it’s just a matter of the process being completed by everybody to get to the point where the road can be built. Borup: Didn’t that happen the last city council meeting? Allison: On lot 1. Stiles: It’s only on lot 1. We never had any proposals for lot 2 so we can’t take action on property that’s not – Allison: That’s the whole point. MacCoy: And Rich before you leave, the thing that we’re looking at which is also tied into the city to the Mayor’s office and so on is that we’re doing our studies all over the entire Meridian area because it is costly ACHD realizes that they better buy now. It’s going to cost later. So it’s a rob Peter to pay Paul story and they want us to come up with a priority listing next month to say Meridian what do you want to do with your money right now? We’ve got the money, now where do you want to put it? And this exact place which she’s been speaking of is one of our prime targets. It’s where we’ve got to make that decision as a city tell ACHD what’s first on the list. Allison: That’s exactly true. One further thing I may say if you allow me, projects like this that’s 24000 square feet probably cost in the vicinity of $100 a foot on MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 71 per square thousand square foot basis they’re going to contribute an impact fee I’d have to calculate it exactly but Shari probably could you know we’re talking about a lot of money. We’re also talking about a lot of money for the motel. Seventy one rooms, I think that’s like $1200 per room. I can’t quote it, don’t use that figure. I mean it’s a lot of money. And also the Chevron station is a lot of money. We’re talking hundreds of thousands of dollars and we’re talking about a road that will cost a few hundred thousand dollars if everybody does – MacCoy: And we realize that. Allison: That’s why I’m saying it is a self servicing, but in addition to that if you look at ten million dollars worth of tax base there at two percent per year, we’re talking $200,000 a year in taxes. MacCoy: You’re right. Allison: Quality development. De Weerd: I just have one more question and that is there’s five lots in this parcel. Will each of those projects have to get a conditional use permit or are we approving this one whole project and what is the process? Stiles: The comprehensive plan does state that all uses within that mixed planned use area would be developed as conditional uses. De Weerd: Okay thank you. MacCoy: Is there anybody else who wants to speak from the public before we do anything else with this? If not commissioners are you ready to – remember we’re talking about item 14 which is annexation and zoning only right now even though we’ve had a discussion on all three of these. De Weerd: Well I wish I could say road first, but it sounds a little bit more complicated than that. I would like to make a motion that we have the city attorney – MacCoy: Let me close the public hearing. Okay are you ready? That’s the reason I was asking what we’re going to do. Okay I’m going to officially close the public hearing and now make your motion. Smith: Can I make a comment before you make your motion? It just seems to me that the way the thing is being planned to safely access these properties we got to tie into the signal light at St. Luke’s. I don’t have a problem with this whole thing developing in the fashion that we’ve been talking about tonight. In other words going to C-G but it seems like to me we’re zoning in a property here C-G and kind of land locking it away from the access that it needs to have to the MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 72 signal light at St. Luke’s because we got a barrier there right now that’s still in the county. It’s rural transitional and we’re creating a situation here which we have the same problem with the hotel that you can’t get to Eagle Road in a safe fashion from where these sites are until that road goes in and I mean I have a real concern about it. I have no problem with the application and the project and the concept and all of that, but lot 2 could stay in the county for ten years before somebody moves on it. It’s just the cart before the horse in my mind. I just got a real problem with it. MacCoy: Now if you wait for the roads to go in, ACHD takes the attitude that if it’s rural land or if it’s not planned like this they’re going to put it down the list. It’s going to off 2000 and something else. Smith: We already heard testimony tonight that the impact fees are there. So if the impact fees are there, then why can’t it be done now? Borup: Because they are there if the demand is there. I agree with Commissioner Smith. It’s kind of a chicken or egg situation there. And I ideally they both happen simultaneously but it’s not. But I guess I’ve got concern on where do we stop. Somewhere we got to say hey this is it until that road is in there but I think from ACHD and that’s kind of what I heard from them they want to make sure that the development is going to happen and the city is going to allow the development before they put the road in. So they’re looking for some direction too. MacCoy: If you look on Overland Road for example which is right at home here, we’ve been trying to get that thing widened to five lanes and ACHD says no way because you haven’t got the percentage of commercial and committed even though it’s all ready to be signs are all up buy it and even some say sold on them right now. ACHD says no way they are going to touch that road until whatever year it is that stuff is built. Borup: But here we got a situation where they’re going to be acquiring easement for the whole width that they’re going to need. So this is planning ahead and we’re not going to have that problem down the road. The right-of-way will be obtained. Smith: If this is lot 2 instead of lot 10, it would be a “no brainer”. Borup: Yes. Rossman: Sir, the public hearing has been closed. MacCoy: We just closed the public hearing. We’re discussing it among ourselves right now. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 73 Nelson: Can I make a comment? I think it would be prudent to at least approve the rezoning to encourage the development of lot 2. I think if lot 2 – whatever needs to happen with lot 2. But anyway I think if we were to change the zoning. Borup: I think that is what ACHD is looking for some movement that way. MacCoy: Sure. We hear it all the time. Smith: That’s all I had to say. Nelson: I don’t know whether it’s appropriate to rezone now but hold off possibly on the plats until – Borup: They don’t have to be simultaneous. MacCoy: So what’s the decision now. Are you going to go annexation and zoning? Are you going to table it or what? Borup: I’d be in favor of proceeding ahead with annexation and zoning. MacCoy: Okay, I got a motion? Borup: I move we have city attorney prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law on approval of annexation and zoning of this parcel. De Weerd: Second. MacCoy: I heard two seconds in that one. All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. ITEM NO. 15: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PROPOSED MIDVALLEY BUSINESS PARK SUBDIVISION BY HUBBLE ENGINEERING – NW EAGLE / I-84 INTERCHANGE AND WEST OF EXISTING TEXACO. MacCoy: Since we’ve all had our say on all three except Shari. You didn’t have a comment before. So I’m going to go back to you first. Stiles: Commissioners, I think that part of Mr. Allison’s frustration is because this is in a mixed planned use area that they can’t submit their annexation and zoning request until they have a use proposed for that property. I don’t know if it’s something they would at least – where the lot adjacent where the road would go through and go south. I don’t know in this instance we would want to consider going ahead and annexing the property so we could go ahead and get the MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 74 roadway taken care of. I don’t even know if Mr. Allison or the new owner would have any objection to that annexation contingent on having the conditional use permit be required as part of the annexation. They would have a problem. Allison: I don’t believe they would. I could certainly call them and get back with you tomorrow Shari. Stiles: We are still waiting on finalization of the Eagle Partners project. Some issues with the development agreement so that property is not actually annexed into the city yet. As far as the roadway issue with Ada County Highway District – excuse me. The last thing I knew from Ada County Highway District is that there were two proposals. One was a totally ridiculous proposal that would have just gone on the north side of Eagle Partners project and then down their boundary to the south that would have a street dumping off directly across from the Jackson’s. The only proposal that they had that made sense to me would be to continue the road and slope it down and have it line up with the existing Allen Street. I think with the development you’re going to have there, that’s the logical place to put it, so as far as that still being an issue, I guess I’m confused because I thought that was taken care of long ago and if it’s just the fact that they want this – that they need the roadway to be dedicated and in order to have that roadway dedicated they need to be in the City of Meridian. I think it would be appropriate for us to initiate annexation on that lot, get it in the city, require that dedication of the roadway or the purchase whatever that might be and to make any subsequent development on that lot be required to enter into the development agreement and be developed under the conditional use process as our comprehensive plan requires. In this instance I think that’s appropriate and if they would be willing to do that, I think that would apparently solve our problems as far as the road is concerned. At least what appears to be a big problem in Ada County Highway District’s eyes. MacCoy: Is that it? Stiles: Yeah. MacCoy: Okay thank you. We’re going to – you all right Shari? Commissioners, do you have anything else you want to add? Okay, this is a public hearing item number 15. We’re talking about the same project. This is the preliminary plat part of it and we’ll have the applicant come forward and state his material before can be carried on this one. Nickel: Mr. Chairman, Shawn Nickel from Hubble Engineering. Yeah, my comments from the previous application will stand on this one with one addition. I would hope that for item number 15 preliminary plat that you make a recommendation tonight. Hopefully in favor of the preliminary plat. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 75 MacCoy: Okay, before you leave. Is there any questions from the commissioners of him? Nelson: I have one question. What would Hubble Engineering’s opinion be on holding up the building of your project until that signal takes place? I don’t know what your time frame was on putting your building together. Nickel: Mr. Chairman, Mr. Commissioner we were looking at next November to actually occupy that building. We would like to go forward with it. I know the issue of the road is very important. We will be doing our part by paying some $30,000 to the Highway District for our portion of that road and that signal. We would support the zone change and annexation of lot 2 and the comprehensive plan amendment for the lot to the west, but we would like to continue on with ours. MacCoy: Okay. Borup: Mr. Chairman, I got another clarification question. Mr. Nickel you’ve mentioned this several times now that you’ll be paying for your part of that signal. Are you referring to the impact fees? Or are you paying an additional fee in addition to that? Nickel: I believe it’s in an additional fee in addition to the regular impact fees we pay the Ada County Highway District. When we met with them last week, they said they’re going to assess our property a certain amount of money per acre that will go directly towards that. Borup: Okay. That’s what I thought you meant at first and then I was wondering. Nickel: And I’m assuming that’s in addition to the regular impact fees that developers normally pay for development. Borup: Well that sounds good. It shows you’re making a contribution to make it work. Thank you. MacCoy: Anybody else that want to make a statement on 15 or carry their statement forward to 15. DICK MOORE WAS SWORN BY THE CITY ATTORNEY. Moore: Dick Moore, lot 2, 3050 Magic View. I don’t think you have to worry about ten years. I’m meeting with the purchaser tomorrow so I’m going to be gone hopefully very soon so I think he’s already aware that the roads like someone said is going directly west go south to tie in with Allen. He’s already aware of that. The offer has been made. We’ve accepted. Haven’t seen the money yet, but I think it’s coming to face very soon. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 76 MacCoy: Any questions of Mr. Moore? Okay. Thank you. WANDA PARKER WAS SWORN BY THE CITY ATTORNEY. Parker: I was wondering of the statement by Mr. Nickels. Does he mean he wants to start his construction of his building next month? Nelson: I would assume he was just wanting to be complete by the following November. Borup: Of ’99. Nelson: Be complete by ’99. Parker: Thank you. Yeah it just really worries me about all the traffic we have now. As you mentioned at Eagle is terrible and our one little street. We have one way in and one way out, which I didn’t think was really legal. But this is my only worry. It’s being land locked. MacCoy: We are too. Okay, anyone else who wants to come up and make a statement at this time. Nickel: Just to answer her question. We wouldn’t be developing there if we didn’t think that that road was going to be built. I’ve tried to turn left on Eagle many times and it’s a pain and I’d have to go turn every day to go home so we’re as a business we’re expecting and supportive of that road. MacCoy: Well I’ll tell you this, I’m glad it’s an engineering firm. Hubble’s a well respected firm in the area and that they’re coming into our town to work and live. So I figure if they’re going to park in that area as their headquarters, they are going to see to it. They probably got more pull than we have in many cases to get this thing done or you’re going to be joining us to do it. So I think you’ve got a good chance of getting the road done. Nickel: Mr. Chairman we will be good neighbors to the city and to the neighbors out there. (Inaudible – off the microphone) Nickel: If you’re referring to the equipment from our business, the only equipment we have is Suburban trucks that we have our survey equipment in. We don’t have any heavy equipment that will be coming in to – MacCoy: I think she’s really concerned about the construction to build your place is what she’s talking about. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 77 Nickel: Yeah, that’s – MacCoy: You’re going to have a lot of dirt, dust and heavy trucks and you can’t help it. Nickel: That’s why we’re going to get it done real quick so we can – MacCoy: That’s the point I was coming up or that you’ve made already. Okay. Anyone else out here? Anybody else got a hot foot to come up here and do this? Staff do you have anything else you want to add? Borup: I do have one question for Mr. Freckleton. There was several comments on water pressure in this area. Is that a real concern or is that something that’s been addressed and probably will be taken of? Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Borup, we are in the process of putting together a proposal to send out to engineering firms for some design work for some water main connections throughout the city. One of those would be to interconnect Overland Road to Eagle Road with water, and that would alleviate the problems that we have had up there so that is something that we are in the process of working towards. Borup: Okay thank you. MacCoy: I’m about ready to consider what’s going to happen next here. Commissioners what is your desires? Smith: Public hearing closed here? MacCoy: No, it’s not. Nelson: I’d be willing to approve the preliminary plat as is. Borup: We have not seen the ACHD report. MacCoy: No, we haven’t. Borup: And because of this location and the impact, I think that would be pertinent. Smith: All night we’ve been tabling preliminary plats until we’ve got the Findings on the annexation and zoning. Borup: And normally it hasn’t necessarily delayed the time frame for anything. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 78 Smith: Right. De Weerd: And don’t we want our preliminary plat to be forwarded with the CUP findings and annexation findings? Smith: Well Mr. Chairman, I’d like to make a motion that we table this item until our November 10th meeting. Borup: Second. MacCoy: All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Berg: Mr. Chairman, when you tabled this did you close the public hearing? MacCoy: We were discussing this and I forgot to do that. Berg: My concern is if you are going to wait for information from ACHD, you do not want to close the public hearing. MacCoy: That’s the reason I didn’t do it. Berg: But the proper motion isn’t really to table it as much as to continue the public hearing. I’m sorry I tried to get your attention earlier. Smith: I’d like to amend my motion from tabled to continue. Nelson: Second. MacCoy: All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. ITEM NO. 16: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR 24,560 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE BUILDING, EQUIPMENT YARD AND GARAGE WITH SECURITY FENCE, ASSOCIATED LANDSCAPING AND PARKING BY HUBBLE ENGINEERING – 621 ALLEN STREET, NORTH OF I-84 AND WEST OF EAGLE ROAD: MacCoy: Okay it’s still the same material, the same project and this is the conditional use permit. Staff you still there? Do you have any comments by the way? Anything new? MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 79 Stiles: Nothing new sir. MacCoy: To the public, is there any – well the first place want to come forward and make your statement? Nickel: I hate to sound like I’m whining up here but getting back to that last item, item 15, we’re under major time constraints because of the acquisition of this property to get this moving. Another month could affect our acquiring this property. Is there any way we could somehow have an approval of this and by the month when you come back with your findings, we will have the ACHD report at that time, make it contingent upon accepting that report as part of the record? It is a favorable report because I have seen it because I was at the meeting. I just feel that another month that will push us back two months and we’re really getting to a time – I don’t know if we can do that or not. Borup: Mr. Chairman, Mr. Nickels are you proposing that we approve a preliminary plat before we’ve annexed the property? MacCoy: That’s what we’re stuck with. Borup: That’s essentially what you’re asking. Nickel: I believe you’ve already recommended approval and you’re going to bring the findings back next month. Borup: And we can approve the plat without any additional hearing or findings. MacCoy: You’re in good shape. Nickel: That’s fine. I appreciate that. Thank you, never mind. Smith: Let it go on to the City Council until we approve the Findings and then it all goes on at the same time. Nickel: But there is an application for a conditional use permit that if tabled and continued to the next hearing will require another month for Findings on that. Borup: So it’s this next item could affect you. ITEM NO. 16: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR 24,560 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE BUILDING, EQUIPMENT YARD AND GARAGE WITH SECURITY FENCE, ASSOCIATED LANDSCAPING AND PARKING BY HUBBLE ENGINEERING – 621 ALLEN STREET, NORTH OF I-84 AND WEST OF EAGLE ROAD. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 80 Nickel: Let me beg on this next item then if I may. Number 16 I would submit my previous comments from 14 and 15 with the request that number 16 be approved tonight or recommended for approval to the Council. MacCoy: Okay we hear you. Anything else? Any questions for Mr. Nickel? Public hearing. Anybody else want to get back up here? Rich you want to come back up? No? Anybody else want to come back up here? All right. We’re going to the – (Inaudible) Rossman: Well once again before you close the public hearing, if you’re anticipating waiting for the ACHD report as Will said earlier, you need to decide whether you want to close the public hearing and table the matter or approve it or continue the public hearing or what. Before you close the public hearing that’s the decision you should anticipate. Borup: My concern on the ACHD is for the plat and the roads, not necessarily for the building. I mean we may be stuck with a building there with no roads to get to it, but – MacCoy: I agree with you. I think you’re right. Borup: But that would be the applicant’s problem. MacCoy: You’re all heart Keith. Smith: And the lady who spoke earlier about who lives on Magic View, her problem. Borup: Well but they’re not going to build a building without the plat. That’s not going to happen. In that sense what we’re doing on the conditional use is the building itself. If the plat doesn’t happen, then whether we approve the conditional use or not that’s a moot point. Smith: Okay. Borup: So I guess I’m saying I feel comfortable with – De Weerd: Then make a motion. Borup: I move that the city attorney prepares Findings of Fact – no, let’s close the public hearing first. MacCoy: Can I do that first? I’m trying to get discussion finished here among you people. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 81 Borup: I move we close the public hearing. Smith: Second. MacCoy: Thank you very much. All in favor. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. MacCoy: Boy, the hour is really getting late. De Weerd: You don’t have to vote on that. MacCoy: All right, now come on. Borup: I forgot what I was saying. I was saying along the lines – I move that we request the city attorney to prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law on the conditional use permit for approval of this project. Smith: Second. MacCoy: All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. MacCoy: Mr. Nickels you’re home free if you can produce that ACHD form for us. Thanks Rich for your service. Thank you lady. ITEM NO. 17: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR LAKE AT CHERRY LANE NO. 8 BY STEINER DEVELOPMENT – PORTION OF NW ¼ SEC. 3, T. 3 N., R. 1 W.: MacCoy: Before I move this thing on staff any comment on number 17 before we move into the public hearing? Hello staff. Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, members of the commission the staff has prepared comments for this application. It’s been very straight forward on this project. The applicant has responded back. I did not see anything that they had a problem with. This project will connect the Lake at Cherry Lane Subdivision with Ashford Greens Subdivision. The southwesterly portion of this project the extension of W. Harbor Point Drive will border the new clubhouse for the golf course so it will be nice to get this project all tied through and completed. We do have an existing sewer main traverses down Harbor Point Drive at this point in time. The sewer also goes up Wide Oak Way and W. Teeter Street so there will be no additional sewer mains extended. There will be sewer service lines to each lot. New water mains will be installed. The pressurized irrigation system MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 82 will connect up with the existing pressurized irrigation system built as part of the Lake at Cherry Lane Subdivision. It is owned and maintained by Nampa Meridian Irrigation District. MacCoy: Is that about it? Freckleton: That’s about it. MacCoy: Shari you have anything you want to add to that? Stiles: The only thing that I would add is that on adjacent projects the Eight Mile Lateral has been proposed to be a pedestrian walkway and I would like them to continue that and make sure that they continue the negotiations with the Nampa Meridian Irrigation District to make sure that that does happen. MacCoy: All right thank you. It’s a public hearing and the public is almost gone. Would the applicant please come forward so he can make his statement with almost an empty house. CHARLES EDDY 1295 S. EAGLE FLIGHT WAY BOISE WAS SWORN BY THE CITY ATTORNEY. (End of Tape) Eddy:.. a very straight forward uncomplicated zoning compliant and I repeat zoning compliant Steiner project. Like Mr. Freckleton said this is an in fill project to connect Ashford Greens with the Lake at Cherry Lane No. 4. The sewer has been installed. We’ll be installing the services and the water. The lots are above standard for an R-4 zone. There’s nothing magical about. I’ll take any question. Oh, excuse me I did have one comment. There is a little bit of magic. The Eight Mile Lateral in standard staff comments is to tile any existing irrigation ditches. The precedent has been in the past that over the larger ditches were waived as being tiled and we request that the Eight Mile Lateral be waived as a requirement for tiling due to the size of it for one and that it – projects up and down the street have not tiled it. So we would request that and we would certain negotiate with Nampa Meridian and we’ve all been down this road before about allowing a pedestrian pathway along their easement. MacCoy: Commissioners any comments, questions? Borup: None. De Weerd: Just that he could – if could get that agreement with Nampa Meridian you know you wouldn’t have to tile it. You would be a saint. If you turn that into a pedestrian or just a walking path, that would be excellent. I guess if you couldn’t you’d need to tile it. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 83 Borup: Is that enough incentive? Eddy: Well we all know the history of trying to get these pathways down these especially these larger ditches. So I haven’t had any discussion recently with the irrigation district to see if they’ve moved from their stance at all on this. You probably know about that more than – MacCoy: Yeah we heard from his this morning. We had a lecture from him this morning the head man talked about the liability and the problems and so on, but I still think you ought to go ahead and put your two bits in. Eddy: Again I revert back to the past projects we haven’t tiled due to the size. I mean this is an extremely large canal for this project and the size of pipe required would be very large, typically what I’ve experienced with this commission and council is we’ve used a number of 48 inches or larger. We’ve waived the requirement for tiling. This is quite a ways above the 48 inch pipe to tile this ditch. That would be my request that we waive that requirement due to the size of the pipe. MacCoy: I have one question on this that very thing. On both ends of this area you would have to tile, is that all open area? There’s no tile coming up to that point that you tile on? Eddy: No, Eight Mile Lateral runs through the golf course. It’s open all the way through. MacCoy: That’s what I was concerned about because I don’t think – that’s good. Eddy: They actually charge it’s a lateral water hazard. (Inaudible) MacCoy: That’s where it belongs. Any other questions? Borup: Is there any path along that lateral anywhere along the length that you know about? Eddy: There’s not a formal path. There’s the – Borup: An informal. Eddy: …that people use. So you can call that a path. De Weerd: You got to start somewhere. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 84 Borup: The same thing we’ve been saying on these waterways. It would be nice to start somewhere. I don’t know the answer -- MacCoy: Well we’re working with them on the total layout because that’s what we’re going to start at. We can’t do it piece meal because it’s not going to work and that fellow this morning, he was very emphatic about that, but we have entered him into our staffing situation where he is going to owe us something out of this thing so we hope we will get a whole run when we get --- he knows it. Anyway moving on Tammy do you have anything else you want to ask for? De Weerd: No. MacCoy: Okay, Commissioner Smith? Smith: Nothing. MacCoy: Commissioner Nelson? Nelson: I have no comments. MacCoy: Okay, thanks a lot. Public hearing anybody else in this great room of ours that – is everybody awake? Staff you have anything else you want to – Shari is having a hard time tonight. Nelson: I would ask Shari what the policy is on the tiling? He mentioned above 48 inches not to tile. Stiles: Today? I believe there’s already been a variance granted for this project. It initially came through with the Ashford Greens Subdivision. It was a portion of that project. They had applied for a variance for the Eight Mile Lateral and what is it Safford? Safford Lateral. I believe that was granted. The proposed new tiling of ditches ordinance that was at one time before you would allow them to keep the ditch open provided it was used as an amenity. That would be one of the requirements and also part of that proposed ordinance was if they could document to the satisfaction of the city engineer that it required a pipe greater than 48 inches they would waive that requirement. In the past it was always a formal variance application request. But with the new attorneys that’s waiving is just like that. No formal application required. They make the request to City Council and the Council may simply waive the requirement instead of having to go through the variance process. It’s a long story, but maybe it answered your question. MacCoy: But that was also confirmed this morning’s meeting too so you’re right. Borup: To confirm what I thought earlier that the waiver needs to come from City Council. We do not make a recommendation on the waiver here? MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 85 MacCoy: You can. Borup: We can make a recommendation? MacCoy: Yeah. Borup: Okay. (Inaudible) MacCoy: That’s okay. Borup: The recommendation on the variance, that’s what – because normally they haven’t come before us. Stiles: No. MacCoy: It may come in the future though according to our new attorney. Borup: In the Ashford Greens application there was a concept plan for this parcel already or – Stiles: It’s pretty much identical to the original proposal by Brighton. Borup: That’s what I gathered. MacCoy: Okay where do we stand now commissioners? Borup: Let’s close the hearing. MacCoy: It’s getting 11:35 – De Weerd: Close the hearing. I would not be opposed to closing the public hearing. MacCoy: Okay, I’m going to close the public hearing officially. Now commissioners what is your job? Smith: Mr. Chairman I’d like to make a motion that we approve this preliminary plat with the recommendation to city council to waive the tiling of the ditch requirement. Nelson: Second. Borup: I’d like to add and encourage a pathway along there. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 86 Smith: All right, I’ll amend that to incorporate that comment. MacCoy: All right, is there a second? Nelson: Second. MacCoy: All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. ITEM NO. 18: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 1.2 ACRES BY ROBERT F. BEEDE – 800 W. OVERLAND ROAD: MacCoy: Staff do you have anything to say about this? Stiles: Poor Dr. Beede has waited a long time for this tonight. He owns the veterinary clinic on Overland Road that’s just west of Mountain States Equipment. MacCoy: That’s where my dog goes, I know. Stiles: I believe if I’m incorrect he’ll set me straight, but he’s requesting annexation. He would like to expand his operation there. If he wants to do that because he’s really a grandfathered nonconforming use in Ada County, he had the choice of either coming to get annexed into the City of Meridian or he would have had to rezone actually I believe in Ada County. He’s also going to with his proposed expansion will need water to meet fire flow requirements and although there is not sewer available at this time he would have to remain on his septic system. The only way he could sewer that site would be by a lift station and I don’t think the city or Mr. Beede would like to see that, but he would extend the water to the site, provide the 35 foot wide landscape setback beyond the required right-of-way. We may require as a condition of annexation a development agreement. I made the statement in lieu of a development agreement, we could review detailed site plans at the time he wanted to propose his expansion. One issue that might have a problem is the Kennedy Lateral that runs across the southern boundary of this site. It’s quite a large ditch. It’s I believe located in the future right-of-way of Overland Road. It has been piped across the frontage of the Interstate Center. I don’t know if that’s the case that in the future he would have to – it kind of makes a difference what Ada County Highway District would say if they want him to put into a trust fund money for future tiling of that ditch when they expand Overland Road. MacCoy: We have to wait for that because the Overland Road ACHD request is that will be tiled all the way down to Ten Mile, so I don’t know if I were him I wouldn’t push the issue right now. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 87 Stiles: That’s something that we’re really going to need to address though because once he comes in for a building permit, we will have to issue a certificate of zoning compliance stating that this site is in compliance. It’s a hard little piece. They have landscaped it. I mean it’s a pleasant appearance. I like the open water and the sound, but there would be safety issues. I know that they have had maybe not directly in front of this site, but certainly along Overland Road incidents of cars going into it. MacCoy: which they do. Stiles: That is probably the major issues that I see. MacCoy: Is that it? It’s a public hearing and is the applicant here this evening? BOB BEEDE 800 W. OVERLAND ROAD MERIDIAN WAS SWORN BY THE ATTORNEY. Beede: I’m the owner and veterinarian at Intermountain Animal Hospital. The clinic had been there for about and I appreciate your patience and I’ll try to make this quick. It’s been there for – I’ve had it for 15 years, and it was there 10, 12 before in an R-T zone with the county. Sometime in the next one to three years depending on what the development costs and fees and everything else run, I would like to do some expansion in the next one to three years. I’m just not totally sure. We’re kind of looking at what all is going to be required and that will determine how much I can do in the building. I have met with ACHD about ten days ago. I do have their draft. Their comments were that they will need originally they had me give them part of the frontage 15 years ago when I went through the county. And they got it free. I think they did another 15 or 18 feet that they would buy at this stage. And so that would be part of the agreement which is fine. They want me to change the entry to the property in alignment with Linder Road and pull it away from Mountain View Equipment which makes sense safety wise and traffic wise and everything else so that I don’t have a problem. That will change maybe how we design our building. We had some preliminary ideas, but now we’re coming in the back door and having to drive clear around to get to the front so we may have to change some of the plans as we go along. They will also require curb and gutter and sidewalks and the lateral to be moved. But their comment and the ditch company’s comment was that it’s probably going to be a minimum of 5 and more like ten years before we get to that point and the ditch company said not to even bother doing any movement and covering and tiling that ditch at this point because Mountain View Equipment just remodeled. They didn’t do theirs. The property to the west, DBSI, when they develop then all three of us would go through and do that whole process and I don’t know if that 13 or 14 acres spot will develop or not. There’s also some talk it’s pure speculation at this point, but if the water park went in that canal would be sent down through the water park and then out toward Ten Mile and so whether that MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 88 happen or not who knows, but that is the other thing they said. You might as wait until we see if that happens rather than spend a lot of money now and then not have to have it tiled. And it would be an S-shape tile if I didn’t and Mountain View didn’t and the guys next to us didn’t, but I think we’re an improvement to the area. We’re looking for a C-G zone. We’ve got Mountain View next to us with a lot of equipment parked around which we want to screen off from our place. I’ve talked to him about doing something other than the chain link fence between their place and ours and we would have to cover that cost because they don’t want to spend any money, but we look at that and we’d landscape the front and handle the ditch. So I don’t really have any problems with the things in the report that Shari outlined other than it’s just not feasible to move the ditch at this time. The water is there and we’ve talked with the fire department and we’ll have to sprinkle or put sprinklers in when we remodel on part of it because the pressure is not sufficient to allow just the hydrant. The sewer, we’d have to upgrade our septic system to make a little more capacity if we expand in all likelihood. We’re working on that at this point. Until the sewer system gets developed further to the west, we would then hook into that, and we don’t have any problems with the rest of the process there. So basically at this point, we just want to get annexed and zoned so that then we can sit down and look at our development costs and do some planning, see what it’s going to take and see what we can afford and can’t afford to do if we remodel. MacCoy: I was glad to hear about your comment from ACHD. Because I thought that your neighbor got away with it. Plenty to stand on to say hey you know look at this. The other part about the water park has not come to here yet. We know that it’s coming, the press said it’s coming. One of the things we look at is the water. Where we’re going to get it from and so on and so on. They have collectively said Meridian, ACHD, etc. that you let everything sit till the time they show up and handle that at that time. So you may be the lucky one in the end. Beede: Any questions? Borup: Well maybe just clarification. Shari is your statement really that the applicant needs to request a formal variance on the ditch? Stiles: A waiver. Borup: Okay, just a waiver. Beede: That would be great. We currently landscaped some and we would be willing to landscape it more – Borup: You mentioned that her item number two was the only one you had any question on and that was in there because it is a city ordinance. Otherwise the waiver needs to be requested. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 89 Beede: That would be the case, yeah. MacCoy: Anything else? Commissioner De Weerd? De Weerd: Nothing. Smith: I like it. I’m ready to go. Let’s move this thing – MacCoy: Commissioner Nelson? All right you can sit down for a moment here. We’ll ask the rest of the public here if they want to talk on this. I guess not, so I guess we’ll close the public hearing and commissioners what do you want to say? Smith: Mr. Chairman, I’d like to make a motion that we ask the city attorney to prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law on this item with the recommendation to City Council for approval and with the inclusion of a waiver on tiling the ditch. Borup: Second. MacCoy: All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. ITEM NO. 19: ADA COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES – RE: 98-41-TLQ TERRY A. CUSHING – 2230 S. LOCUST GROVE ROAD, MERIDIAN, IDAHO. MacCoy: Now on this item 19 I’ve got a question for our attorney here. Rossman: It’s too late for that Malcolm. Go ahead. MacCoy: I’m not really sure what we’re going to do with this. Do you understand this thing? Rossman: Do this last thing? I have no idea. I looked at it and I – MacCoy: You’re a help. Rossman: No, I don’t see any – MacCoy: Okay, I’ll ask Shari then. Rossman: I don’t see any authority or any ordinance provision that would provide for such a hearing. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 90 Berg: Mr. Chairman and members of the commission in your packets you probably had the second page that is a form that’s designed by our city attorney that more or less said that we needed to make a recommendation to the county on projects in our impact area. According to certain code that are reflect – excuse we are on 19? MacCoy: We’re on 19. Berg: Yes. MacCoy: He said something was coming but it doesn’t say to me impact so I was really wondering after I read this material, I thought where do I go from here? Because he said he was going to give us a guideline and I didn’t have it in my box. Berg: Well the only guideline that I have is this formatted memo. MacCoy: So what do we do? Review it and say yes say no to it or what? Berg: Well we need to make a recommendation in writing to Ada County Development Services Department. De Weerd: On what? Berg: On this application. Borup: To have a temporary family residence. Berg: Yes. Borup: That’s been the county policy for a long time. MacCoy: What’s that? Borup: To grant it when it’s in the same family. MacCoy: Well I think it should be granted. Borup: And I don’t know in the past they even consulted the city. MacCoy: Well we’re going to now because of the law. Borup: Good. I think it’s good to do, but – MacCoy: We’re going to get variances, impact zones and everything else now because we have other things – I mean I agree and I have no problem with it. I MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 91 just want to know how from the attorney how do we go about next doing this and the city clerk says – Borup: I think Shari had a comment too. Rossman: I don’t see any public hearing provisions. I guess – MacCoy: So I don’t know what we do with this. We say yes we approve it and have you do something with it. Stiles: This is proposed to be a permanent part of your agenda from now on for you to act on these development requests. MacCoy: I understand that. What do we do? Stiles: Make a recommendation. The ordinance that has been adopted by Ada County that – long story. The ordinance that they’ve adopted is number 345 I guess that says the city shall make a recommendation either by the Planning and Zoning Commission or the City Council. They are saying that since you know they’ve had some flack from some of the opposition to some of the projects that because the city did not respond then the whole process is invalid so we just want to make sure that all of these items are included for either the Planning and Zoning Commission or the City Council to review and make their recommendation so that we can comment. And it’s also important I think to make sure that even though their ordinance say they shall we shall respond, they need to know that we are not even receiving these in time to respond. Sometimes we have even received them hours before a public hearing. MacCoy: Yeah, Bill explained it to me and he said it would be on our agenda, but he said I’ll put something in your box to tell you what to do next. And I said okay and we just have to say yes or yea or whatever we can do that. But he said it would be with us from now on. So I guess the commission has to make a motion and vote on it and say yes we’ll do it or no we won’t do it and then that’s recorded and then we go from there, right? Stiles: Make a recommendation in writing to Ada County. MacCoy: I mean we make a recommendation on the table here that gets written. Smith: Mr. Chairman if I just read part of this memo from the city clerk’s office it says pursuant to County Code § 944C the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission or the City Council shall make recommendation to the Ada County Development Services Department director on the attached application in writing and shall cite the Meridian Zoning and/or Subdivision ordinance or the Meridian Comprehensive Plan policies, goals, objectives or provision supporting such recommendation. It would seem like to me that this commission could put a MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 92 motion on the table to authorize you to put together a letter in support of this temporary living facility and we don’t need to get into the specifics of it here as the commission. We can say that we trust that you will cite the proper ordinances and provisions in the zoning ordinance and comprehensive plan that support approval of this. Rossman: Yeah, I don’t think we need a public hearing on it or anything. I think you just review the materials that you have and if you agree with it, make a motion to instruct P & Z or City Council to make a recommendation. MacCoy: Yeah, that’s what we do. Smith: But the recommendation says it’s got to come from the Planning and Zoning or the City Council. Rossman: You’re going to make a motion to instruct either P & Z staff or City Council to make a recommendation. MacCoy: And his boss has told me it will be P & Z that’s going to do it. Rossman: My partner to correct you on that not boss. MacCoy: Oh is that right? I didn’t realize that. Excuse me. Smith: I reviewed this material that we have here and I don’t have any specific things in the comprehensive plan or the zoning ordinance to cite in support of it, but I don’t see any reason why not to support it. MacCoy: You have made the statement in going around this that I think all has to be made and then everybody has to say yes I agree or I don’t agree. Borup: I agree. De Weerd: Yeah, do we vote on this emotionally then? Well I think they should allow it. MacCoy: Well you can’t go out and visit the site, so that takes care of that. Berg: Excuse me just one more comment Mr. Chairman and commission. If you see on the memo we address it to four different areas. Hopefully that covers legal public safety issues and of course our utilities and those concerns, so I think with getting comments from those departments, you can make a good judgement call and make some kind of a recommendation for Ada County. Borup: Are they expecting almost Facts and Findings? Suedo-Facts and Findings? MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 93 Berg: I don’t think so. Rossman: They are expecting a written recommendation. Borup: Well then how do you cite comprehensive planning and zoning and subdivision ordinance etc? Berg: I really believe that if there’s an issue that is that controversial that we can make written comment and say we need to have more time to research this. Borup: That’s what I was wondering. This is kind of – I mean it’s a pretty simple thing, but if someone’s planning some big project in our area of impact, then it’s – MacCoy: We’re going to talk to this area among other things come Thursday night anyway, so let’s just get this thing done. Borup: Did Commissioner Smith finish his motion? (Inaudible) De Weerd: I said emotionally I support it. Is that a motion? (Inaudible) Borup: Who is going to write it? Smith: Before I make a motion Will are you saying we need to get input from the Fire Department and Water? Berg: I’m saying in that packet you have, Chairman Smith, you should have comments from those departments. MacCoy: No, they’re not in this packet so we don’t have them. Borup: No, we don’t. It looks to me like all the stuff for the fire department and everything was requested by Ada County and they’re asking for direct input from them. Berg: I have the second to the last page a comment from the fire chief that says no problem, excuse me, fire marshal. No problem with the request. The last page from my packet is from Engineer Gary Smith that says concerning water and sewer lines. Borup: Water and sewer lines? MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 94 Smith: I don’t have either one of those. Berg: Well those were added and put in your box on the 13th . Borup: Oh. Berg: Single sheets. I’m sorry when I receive the material I get it to you as fast as I can. Don’t shoot the messenger. De Weerd: I think you’re really great Will. Berg: We did not have a lot of time to respond to this project. We received it on the 8th I believe. Borup: Was it decided that the city clerk would prepare the response? Was that what someone just said? Smith: I didn’t hear that. MacCoy: That’s what I said. Borup: That was my question. Who is going to prepare – (Inaudible) Smith: Okay, then I’m ready. Nelson: I’m just going to comment that on the second I guess the third sheet, the letter from Ada County Development Services where they’ve tagged which of us receive this letter, City of Meridian is on that. Lower down it says this application – please submit your comments on agency letterhead by October 20. A non-response shall be considered as no comment. Rossman: How about a non-response? Smith: Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a motion that we direct Planning and Zoning staff to draft a letter incorporating the memo sent by Gary Smith dated the 8th day of October and the letter by the Meridian Fire Department as well as any other written correspondence in support of this item and to draft a letter in support of this temporary modular home. MacCoy: Okay do I hear a second? Borup: Second. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 95 MacCoy: All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. De Weerd: I motion to adjourn. Smith: Second. MacCoy: All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 11: 57 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) APPROVED: ____________________________ MALCOLM MACCOY, CHAIRMAN ATTEST: _______________________________ WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., CITY CLERK MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1998 PAGE 96