Loading...
2000 12-12MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING DECEMBER 12, 2000 The meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday, December 12, 2000, by Chairman Keith Borup. Members Present: Keith Borup, Sally Norton, Bill Nary, Richard Hatcher, Jerry Centers Others Present: Will Berg, Bruce Freckleton, Tom Kuntz, Steve Stiles, Item A. Approve minutes of October 25, 2000, Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Item B. Approve minutes of November 14, 2000, Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Borup: We’d like to open the regular schedule meeting Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission. First item on the agenda, we have a consent agenda, which consist of the minutes from October 25 to November 14. Do we have a comment or motion? Nary: Mr. Chairman. Borup: Mr. Nary. Nary: I would move that we approve the Consent Agenda, Items A and B the approval of the minutes of the October 25 and November 14 Planning and Zoning meetings. Centers: Second. Borup: Motion second. All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 1. Continued from October 10, 2000: AZ 00-019 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 100.71 acres to R-4 by Kevin Howell for proposed Cedar Springs Subdivision – northwest of Meridian Road and Ustick Road Item 2. Continued from October10, 2000: PP 00-018 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 333 building lots and 25 other lots on 99.83 acres in a proposed R-4 zone by Kevin Howell for proposed Cedar Springs Subdivision – northwest of Meridian Road and Ustick Road Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting December 12, 2000 Page 2 Borup: Item No. 1 and No. 2 are continued from our October 10th meeting. Mr. Siddoway, have you got any comment on those items. Siddoway: Only that we have received message from Gary Lee, the representative from JUB on this project, requesting that this item be tabled or continued until January 9th is what his letter said. That’s not an actual Planning and Zoning Commission hearing date, but to be continued to January. Borup: And that would probably need to be the 18th. I believe our agenda is already filled until the 4th , which would be the first meeting in January. So we will not have any testimony from – is there any here that really feels would not be able to come in the future that wants to make a comment on this application tonight? Seeing none, Commissioners. Hatcher: I move that we continue Items No. 1 and No. 2 to the January 18th meeting. Norton: I second. Borup: Okay, motion is seconded to continue Items No. 1 and No. 2 concerning Cedar Springs Subdivision to our January 18th meeting. All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Borup: Oppose no. Thank you. Item 3. Continued from November 14, 2000: AZ 00-022 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 118.4 acres to R-4 by Gemstar Properties, LLC, for proposed Springdale Subdivision at the Seasons - east of McDermott between Cherry Lane and Ustick Road Item 4. Continued from November 14, 2000: PP 00-022 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 400 building lots and 7 other lots on 118.4 acres in a proposed R-4 zone by Gemstar Properties, LLC, for proposed Springdale Subdivision at the Seasons – east of McDermott between Cherry Lane and Ustick Road Borup: Our next Items No. 3 and No. 4, I am going to ask to be excused from these items and Commissioner Nary will take over at this point. Nary: Now we are on Items No. 3 and No. 4 with the Commissions preference to be to take both items together, AZ 00-0222 and PP 00-022? Commission: Yes. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting December 12, 2000 Page 3 Nary: Now it appears that we have received some information this evening from the Developers Representative from Ada County Highway District, but we do not have a Staff report at this time. Would that be correct, Mr. Siddoway? Siddoway: That is correct. Nary: So I am going to assume that you haven’t had an opportunity to receive even this to any detail. Siddoway: Have not. Nary: Does the representative from the Applicant wish to at least make a statement? I don’t think we’re going to be able to take any action tonight, but you can certainly put it on the record if you’d like. Wildwood: Thank you. Nary: Just so the records clear we’ll move to open the public hearing, sorry. Wildwood: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. For the record my name is Susan Wildwood, I am here on behalf of the Applicant. We have distributed to Staff and through Staff to the Commission two letters from Ada County Highway District, as well as, a set of three blue prints. I would like to address what these particular items are. Mr. Richardson’s letter indicates they have sort of plowed through their review of the original site plan. They did have some minor modifications that they requested be made to the documents is why we are very late hours on this, we apologize to the Commission and the Staff as well. But if you will see the letter was faxed over to me from Ada County Highway District at 4:25 p.m. this afternoon, so we’ve all been going huckley-buck on these things and what we have provided to Staff is the list of items that ACHD wanted us to address. We had changed the plat to reflect those particular changes. Mr. Stanfield is here to address those, we understand this is very eleventh hour to request the Commission to enter the Staff to review this. We did want to indicate to you and the purpose of the second letter is that I asked Christy particularly I said do you have any objection, this was assuming we might be able to proceed tonight, if the Commission proceeds making any approval if they decided to proceed in that fashion subject to ACHD requirements? She said, obviously we don’t. She said, we do realize they do not have the full blown report, but that is why she put in there other than a few modifications of the site plan, ACHD did not see any problems with the project itself. I understand that is late in the day for Staff to have any opportunity to review this, I haven’t even seen the drawings myself. We took ACHD’s request and basically made the modifications that they had. Primarily they deal with some culvesac’s in order to reduce the amount of traffic going into Turnberry and there is a list of other items that they have approved, but Bruce and Steve have not had a chance to review those items. It was my Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting December 12, 2000 Page 4 understanding that the outstanding issue, or the question that we were not able to answer for the Commission the last go around, was the traffic study. So, that’s why we wanted to be sure that you realize we had been working quickly on this. We didn’t receive it from the Traffic Engineer until shortly before we got over to ACHD, so that’s what the delay has been and it’s not really be ours, we’ve been trying to go as fast as we can. Nary: Mrs. Wildwood, before you get too much further, I don’t want to delay your project or anything like that our certainly waste these folks time, but -- and certainly we’ll hear from what the Commissioners prefer to do, but rather than you give a very lengthy report over what appears to be a sort of the highlights of what the report’s going to say when we eventually get a report. And that’s not really being able to have a fair dialogue about that, I am not sure that we want to go very in depth tonight but I certainly defer to what the Commissions preference would be. I don’t want to waste your time with these people either. Wildwood: And we don’t either, Sir. We did want to put on the record exactly what we’ve gone through and the fact that we weren’t purposely delaying it. We’ve gone as fast as we can and we understand that if the Commission needs to review this and Staff needs to review it, we believe that’s appropriate. But, I did want to make that on the record, Sir. Nary: Certainly. Does the Commission have a preference as to how you wish to proceed at this point? Hatcher: I think it would be prudent to table this project until January 18th. Giving Staff time, including us, to review the information that’s currently been given to us within the last few minutes and also give ACHD time to meet according to the letter, to meet on January 3rd . Which should give them, the Applicant, fifteen days to adequately address ACHD’s concern prior to coming before us. So hopefully we could resolve the project and get it moved forward one way or another on that meeting. Nary: Would that be a motion. Hatcher: Sure, make it a motion. Centers: I would tend to agree with that but there is no way we could include it in the January 9th meeting? Or January 4th . Hatcher: That would only give the Applicant 24 hours, or less than 24 hours to respond. Nary: That would be the concern, they’re not going to have a final report to be probably to be approved by the ACHD Commission until the 3rd of January, it may or may not be and rather than delay it a second time. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting December 12, 2000 Page 5 Centers: I would second that motion. Norton: My comment is if there are people here tonight that would want to do testimony, can we take public testimony in case they can’t come back in January? Nary: Certainly, it’s been moved and seconded unless we’ve asked for a delay, but before we take the vote. If there are people, since we did open the public hearing that cannot be here on January 18th, feel the need this evening to make a comment for the record understand it may be some what difficult for us to deal with that later and may problematic, but if you feel the need to do that. You certainly have the ability to do that. I see Mr. Crookston is standing up. Maybe we will delay on the motion for a moment and we’ll continue with the public hearing and we can take a vote on the motion in a moment. Crookston: Yes, thank you very much. I am here representing Tom Tebolt who owns Dew Right Nursery, he lives – Nary: We need your name an address. Crookston: My address? Wayne G. Crookston, Jr. 2125 Turnberry Way, Meridian, Idaho, 83642. I am here representing tonight Tom Tebolt who owns Dew Right Nursery. He’s not anti-this development at all; he would just like to see some things done with it. Tom lives on the North side of Cherry Lane across from Dew Right Nursery, if you know where Dew Right Nursery is? His home and land – the land’s where he grows any shrubbery and plants that you and probably many other people buy. He adjoins this proposed subdivision; they butt up right to each other. Centers: The nursery, or his home? Crookston: His home. The land that his home’s on. The nursery is on the North side of Cherry Lane. His home is on the North side of Cherry Lane; his nursery is on the South side of Cherry Lane. He wants a fence built separating his land and this residential subdivision. He would like to see, the fence must be a vinyl fence, cause you already know there are so many fences along Cherry Lane that fall down. They’re just wood fences and I think a vinyl fence would be much better. It must be constructed before the homes are built, that’s Tom’s position. The fence should be six feet tall. Tom also said he would not like to have a walkway between his land and this subdivision land and he also believes that this subdivision should have pressurized irrigation, I think that’s what you are doing done in most of the subdivisions. He was just wondering what size houses are going to be in this development? Can you answer that? Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting December 12, 2000 Page 6 Nary: I think that when we heard this the last time, I think there is a number of different sized homes. I do not think that it was all one size is my recollection, but I know specifically other than that. Centers: I recall a minimum of 1,400 square feet would that be contradictory? Crookston: Isn’t that the minimum in an R4 development. Nary: Right, but there was a variety of sizes. It wasn’t just all of one type. Centers: But that would be the minimum. Crookston: He also wondered when the park was going to be completed? Can you answer that? Nary: I don’t recall if that information was put on the record at the last hearing, I don’t believe it was. Hatcher: That’ll all be determined upon phasing. Nary: Yes. Crookston: I assume that the properties should be surveyed and the boundaries established before it begins development, is that correct? Hatcher: It’s a requirement. Crookston: He wants to see that done to. (inaudible) Crookston: The land where he grows his stock on is on both sides of Cherry Lane, North and South Cherry Lane. That’s all I have. Thank you very much. Nary: Is there anyone else while the public hearing is open that doesn’t want to come on the 18th , or can’t be here on the 18th and wants to put it on record? Yes, Sir. Langley: My name is Dean Langley, 3185 North Black Cat Road. We have owned property on the same section that this development is slated to go in. When this was first scheduled in the previous meeting, which go delayed till tonight I knew I could not be there and so I did submit a letter which should be on record before you as well, but since I go the opportunity I wanted to speak to the development. I believe this is something that is in the best interest to the City and residents of Ada County as well as Meridian City and I am in favor of the development. As in just speaking to the folks at Gem Star, we dealt with them for Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting December 12, 2000 Page 7 the past year or two and found them to be very cooperative and very willing to step up and do the things to make things right for all parties concerned including the City. I just wanted to make sure that was on record as well. Are there any questions? Centers: You’re an adjoining landowner to the 118 acres? Langley: We just recently sold property to Gem Star that would be Autumn Faire Subdivision adjacent there. So we are slightly familiar with that. Thank you. Nary: Any one else? I was going to ask Commissioner Hatcher on your motion, we have opened the public hearing would the public hearing remain open as part of you motion. Hatcher: Yes. Nary: Do you second or agree with that? Centers: Yes. Nary: Since there doesn’t appear to be anyone else who wants to speak tonight it has been moved and seconded that we continue this hearing AZ 00-022 and PP 00-022 Items No. 3 and No. 4 tonight the Springdale Subdivisions at the Seasons that they be continued to our January 18th meeting. Is there any further discussion? All those in favor? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Nary: Well I guess before Chairman Borup I can probably take care of this one other business, if there is other folks here that came this evening and did not see the notice on the front of the room here. There was a number of applications for projects that were not noticed up timely that have to be re-noticed and they are set over now for our January 4th meeting at 7:00 p.m. Those are for the Mountain West Bank, Ashford Greens #4 Subdivision, The Ameritel Inn, the Meridian Police Station, The Stontag (sic) Eye Associates, Autumn Faire #2, Tuscany Lakes Subdivision, there is two for that a CUP Hannah –I guess there’s another a CUP and zoning change and also a Preliminary Plat and a Re-zone and Preliminary Plat for Devilin Place #2. So if you are here for any of those projects we aren’t going to be taking any of those up tonight, because of the notice that was improperly done, so those will be on our January 4th meeting at this point. So if you were here for that we apologize that wasn’t done timely enough but we won’t be taking those up and now I can turn it back over to Chairman Borup. Borup: Thank you. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting December 12, 2000 Page 8 Berg: Can I add something to that? Borup: Yes, Mr. Berg. Berg: Thank you, Commissioner Borup. Just for the public to know those notices will be mailed out, posted and published in the paper again, so to be aware of that. There are a couple items that may not be on the 4th , they may want so more time, they may be on the 18th , but they will be noticed by the three requirements of the states statutes again so there won’t be any misunderstanding. Thank you. Borup: So that concludes our regular published agenda. Thank those for being here anybody wanted to say we have some other business to take care of also separate from the agenda. Item 5. Reconsider request for Preliminary Plat for PP 00-021 for Mallane Commercial Complex Nary: Mr. Chairman. Borup: Mr. Nary. Nary: It appears that after our meeting last on November 14, we had taken up an item from -- basically regarding a Re-zone and a Preliminary Plat for the project that’s being put together by Mallane Commercial Complex. It is RZ 00- 007 and Preliminary Plat 00-021 and it appears when I read the minutes and we had taken up both of these items together on November 14th , we had denied RZ 00-007 and then as we noted in the minutes we simply took up without really any further discussion on the Preliminary Plat and denied that as well. It as come to my attention that basically what’s been asked by the Developer there, Mr. Mallane, was that we review the Preliminary Plat once again because they did not need the Re-zone to go forward but they did need the Preliminary Plat to go forward and because we really didn’t discuss it to any length, I think at least myself, I am not going to speak for any of the other Commissioners. I assumed they went hand in hand. What we discovered later is they really didn’t need to be and so we denied the second one without really any discussion about whether that was the appropriate thing to do. So what I would like to do this evening is a couple of things. I am going to make a motion to second that we reconsider that denial of that particular Preliminary Plat. If that were to get a second and be approved then what I would ask then is that we set that Preliminary Plat over until our January 18th meeting because I don’t have the documentation, as I noted Mr. Chairman Borup is that you kept that, I didn’t keep that after we had denied it. I don’t know if the other Commissioners did either and feel comfortable in going forward without it before them tonight – Borup: As far as the plat? Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting December 12, 2000 Page 9 Nary: Yes, just to be able to look at it and feel comfortable. I think that’s the right thing to do, so I think if I am successful on the reconsideration. What I’ll ask is that we set it over to the 18th so that we can have the Staff report back, we can have the Preliminary Plat back again, we can take it up on the 18th and review it as we probably should have done the last time if we’d been aware that we could have taken them separately and they weren’t really that connected. With that really long winded introduction, I would move that we reconsider that denial that was done on Preliminary Plat 00-021, the Preliminary Plat Approval of the five building lots on 6.95 acres and the proposed zone from the Mallane Commercial Complex. I’d ask that we move to reconsider that denial from our November 4th meeting -- 14th meeting, I’m sorry. Centers: Second. Borup: We have a motion and second discussion, which may be a little appropriate. Does anybody have any concerns? Norton: Where they there in the audience. Borup: Yes they were, but we closed both – opened both hearings together and closed them both together. Norton: But there’s no comments to Staff or anything regarding – Borup: No, and I think the Applicant realized that now that he realizes that yes, if something would have been said we definitely would have reopened the hearing. That was a mistake on our – more the point probably on my fault looking back over the minutes I’m the one that made that statement that is probably a mute point which probably was not true. (inaudible discussion) Nary: And as I said, I am certainly not speak for anyone else I think I made the assumption and maybe we all did that they were part to parcel the same and I guess they were not. From what we’ve been told the Applicant feels that they can move forward without the rezone, but they do need the Preliminary Plat to be accomplished and reviewed and a decision made on it to go forward with what they were already planning on building there. Borup: The other question I have of the Commissioner, we’ve got all the papers here tonight if we’d want to take the time or do you feel we want to review the Staff comments? (inaudible discussion) Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting December 12, 2000 Page 10 Borup: Commissioners that was the other thing, when a Preliminary Plat is denied it stays here it does not pass on. Nary: So they can’t go to the Council to ask them to overturn that, they’re stuck. Borup: And I think one of the reasons we went the wrong direction is normally this is all part of an annexation-rezone-preliminary plat. Here it was already annexed and zoned. Norton: Is the Applicant here? Could we take maybe ten to fifteen minutes and review the packet that we have. Borup: Well the only reason that I brought that up I (inaudible) do we want to jam up future meetings any more than we already are? We have a short night tonight, if it works? Nary: I mean if we don’t have anything else I certainly wouldn’t object to taking a short recess and if we want to review that if we have any concerns we could certainly – Borup: You probably don’t have a staff file on that do you? Siddoway: No, I am just wondering if it’s reviewed, if it needs to be reviewed, if it’s part of a public hearing is what I am wondering? Nary: And that would be the only other concern. I think we can do it. I think parliamentary I think we can do it. I don’t know if Larry has an opinion. Moore: I believe you can. Nary: Because I think you can always reconsider and you always have the right to do that over. Borup: The public hearing had one neighbor, I believe it was just the one. His concern was with the rezone and the two story buildings; he did not even make any comment on the plat because the plat really doesn’t affect anything that’s already approved. Centers: Technically, we haven’t closed the public hearing. Borup: Yes, we did. Yes, we closed the public hearing and voted on denial. Centers: I thought we just – Borup: On this one – that’s what Commissioner Nary has done he’s ask for it – did we get a second on that one? Yes, we did. We are in discussion. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting December 12, 2000 Page 11 Nary: We are in discussion of the reconsideration of whether or not we are going to do this. Hatcher: Commissioner Nary, could you enlighten me on the whole request for reconsideration. The applicant has asked for us to reconsider it, reconsider the Preliminary Plat so that they could move forward with what? Nary: From what I – so that the record is clear Commissioner Borup called me and said that they had received a contact, I guess through the Finding department for us to review the Preliminary Plat, that they did not need the rezone to go forward. It is already zoned by the office. I believe what the zone is. And that they did not need the rezone that they requested to continue forward with the project, but they did need the Preliminary Plat to be reviewed and commented on or approved, I guess. And so that is what they were requesting that we review the Preliminary Plat again. I didn’t have the documents to be able to review it prior to tonight’s meeting. What I told Commissioner Borup was what I would be willing to do is certainly ask the Commission if they would reconsider it. We put the plat back basically at square one we still – all we would be doing is, okay we will take back the denial and we’ll review it and make a decision of whether it’s still appropriate or if it needs something else done or if it needs some other change or something else or cause I just don’t know. I didn’t have it to look at. Borup: And the question from the Applicant was more why was the plat denied and obviously we had no reason to give on why it was denied. Hatcher: The rezone was denied based upon the fact that they wanted to add the retail. What I am hearing without bringing the Applicant up -- what I am hearing is that even with the denied rezone they want to proceed with retail. Borup: No, they want to proceed with what they’re already approved with, which would be the other -- Centers: Which allows a restaurant presently, it’s going to be Louie’s. Hatcher: Right, but the Preliminary Plat is showing retail. Borup: Right now it’s all, isn’t that correct, is all one lot all one legal description? For the whole parcel? Siddoway: That’s correct. Currently, it’s one lot. The proposed plat plats it into five lots. Borup: Which would allow them to sell individual lots and buildings in the LO zone. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting December 12, 2000 Page 12 Siddoway: They could do office type projects. Borup: So they could have individual lots in a LO zone and that’s it at this point. Which is what they are already approved for. Nary: And again to clarify because I didn’t have the documents; I certainly wasn’t being able to comment on whether or not it’s appropriate based on the fact that we have denied the rezone. All I was saying is what I would agree to is that we bring it back up we put it back on our agenda we’ll consider the plat only and from what we’ve been told by our City Clerk they can’t go forward at all, they can’t even go forward to City Council to ask them to overturn our decision on the Preliminary Plat. Siddoway: Mr. Chairman. Nary: I am just asking to put it back to square one where we were just on the Preliminary Plat only and we will reconsider it and we will look at it again. Borup: Someone made a motion or comment about maybe a short recess. Who said that? Nary: Since it’s an early night and we have nothing else on the agenda I certainly wouldn’t be adverse to taking a short recess before we vote on the reconsideration motion to see whether or not we – Hatcher: Didn’t we just determine that we have to review this documentation in a public meeting? Borup: It’s been reviewed. Siddoway: Well if you are going to change it, I guess I would defer to the City Attorney on this, but if you make a decision to reconsider it tonight I believe it would have to be noticed that for reconsideration in a new public hearing because the public that was hear walked away thinking it was a dead deal and maybe they want to comment. Borup: They went away thinking the rezone was a dead deal. Siddoway: You denied both. Borup: Well yes we did but he had no concern on the plat. I mean he wanted to make sure – he was concerned about the change in the zoning. Hatcher: He was concerned with – Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting December 12, 2000 Page 13 Borup: He said he was expecting office buildings there. Hatcher: Well he was concerned about buildings right up against his property, about the traffic that retail would bring. Borup: Right retail. Centers: He knew it was LO zoned when he moved there. Hatcher: Exactly. Centers: He stated that and knew that it could be developed based on the LO zone. Borup: At this point would that have to be developed as a PUD, where it’s all one parcel? Siddoway: I am somewhat confused on that because there have been three conditional uses on that project. The first one certainly is null in void. The second one actually encompassed the entire site as a planned development clustered in the center of the project with a central plaza space and parking ringing it. That was modified with the third Conditional Use Permit to allow for Louie’s. Louie’s their building pad site did not match the previously approved Conditional Use Permit so it would be difficult, if not impossible today, to do what is the approved Conditional Use Permit for the entire site because Louie’s is right in the middle of what was their parking lot. Hatcher: So what we currently have then doesn’t confirm to the current enforceable CU. Siddoway: It was a modification of that Conditional Use Permit with another Conditional Use Permit so it’s fully –what’s there now is fully legal and in compliance with the third Conditional Use Permit which is for Louie’s. It came through only with a site plan for Louie’s so how the rest of that site now relates – Hatcher: How it gets changed because Louie’s changed it -- Siddoway: Exactly, I am not quite clear on that. Borup: And that’s what looks like the Preliminary Plat takes care of. Hatcher: Well it doesn’t take care of -- Borup: Well it’s got Louie’s on a separate lot and the other lots platted out. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting December 12, 2000 Page 14 Siddoway: Certainly they would not be able to do what’s shown on the second Conditional Use Permit, which is the overall project with the central plaza space with separate lots. I mean that much is clear, but I don’t know if that Conditional Use Permit is in effect since the third one modified it. Hatcher: As a designer I am extremely concerned about this project coming in before there is a board, as one congruent design. And now Louie’s has started this chain reaction to the point where we are at five individual lots, which could be sold off and developed off independently. That’s not what was approved, period. What was approved was one congruent development for the entire lot. Now if Louie’s comes in, which it has come in, and changes that that still doesn’t change the fact that it should be one congruent development. Borup: I think when Louie’s was approved we kind of threw that out the window. Nary: Mr. Chairman, what I was going to say, that I think it falls in line with what Commissioner Hatcher is saying is what it sounds to me and correct me if I am wrong and what it sounds to me what they should be doing, the Developer here, should be providing us with this Preliminary Plat since the rezone was not approved. If they are going to proceed without the rezone they are going to need to probably provide us with an amended – request to amend the CUP once again to conform with this Preliminary Plat because it doesn’t match up with what’s already been approved. Would that be correct? So maybe again a delay is maybe the most appropriate because they don’t really have all the information together. Siddoway: That would certainly clean it up if a second Conditional Use Permit for the remainder of the site maybe the whole entire site including Louie’s was submitted. I have not had a discussion with Shari about the Conditional Use Permit that was for the site as a whole and whether or not it’s completely null in void or whether the one that -- whether Louie’s simply modified a portion of it. Whether another Conditional Use Permit for the site as a whole would clean it up, cause frankly I don’t see how they can follow the Conditional Use Permit that was approved for the overall site now that the Louie’s one was approved. The question is whether the Louie’s one after it was approved simply just null in voids the previous one. Really the only thing that site is even affected by with the Conditional Use Permit is Louie’s and the rest of it is free and clear of the previous one. I don’t know. Hatcher: I wouldn’t think so, I wasn’t present for the meeting that Louie’s was reviewed, but if my memory serves right for that package, the information package Louie’s was presented on a single lot, right? It wasn’t presented for the whole site? Siddoway: That’s correct, it was just one parcel – one portion. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting December 12, 2000 Page 15 Hatcher: So the Conditional Use that was approved in that meeting is for that one parcel? The other four parcels would still be enforceable by – Siddoway: It wasn’t shown on a separate lot. (inaudible discussion) Hatcher: One building on the overall lot. Siddoway: One building on the overall lot. Hatcher: Then the original one would have been null and void by this board. So you are now – this board is now enforcing the third CU. Borup: Seems to me like they said they would be back later with more designs with the rest of the development. Hatcher: That’s actually what I am feeling or seeing, or that’s what I want what are you going to do with the rest of it? Centers: Can’t we tag that on there? Hatcher: We could, yes. Centers: Of course, you have four remaining lots Louie’s is one and we can tag it on there that we want to see the development of each lot. Borup: That they’d all be under conditional use. Hatcher: I want to say Master Plan, not the development of each lot. Nary: It sounds like we’re still back at the same question though, what we’ve moved for is do we want to go back in time and take this Preliminary Plat up again? I guess that’s question one. Second question is do we take it up tonight or do we take it up a different time. And it appears to me at least they way the discussion is, we can take it up tonight if we want to take the time to review this but there is a concern raised by the Planning Department that there might not be adequate notice. There may be people who wish to provide some input. Secondarily, the reason we didn’t get an amended CUP is because they asked for a rezone which wasn’t granted, so it would have been moved if we would have granted the rezone they wouldn’t have had to amend the CUP at that particular point anyway with what was presented on November 14, since we’ve denied half and are reviewing half they may need some other staff work with our Planning Department before we proceed on the Preliminary Plat. Is that sounding right? Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting December 12, 2000 Page 16 Borup: And it sounds like probably the safest as, Will mentioned. Our last experience City’s had with reconsideration of Valerie Heights, now that’s obviously a little more controversial project, but when they brought up the reconsideration they voted to have another public hearing. It was renoticed and another public hearing was – and that’s definitely the safest -- Nary: It’s always the safest. Borup: I mean we have one public testimony here compared to dozens at the other but still. Centers: Well I think in all probability that one home owner that appeared last time may appear the next time, in favor. Norton: That very well could be. Borup: Or just not even show up at all. We don’t have anything – well we do have a motion. I wonder and let me just ask this off – well Mr. (inaudible) is there any input you feel important to give tonight. We have a motion. Any other discussion? Hatcher: Refresh me with the motion. Nary: The motion was simply to reconsider the denial of the Preliminary Plat. Borup: And then we’ll probably need another motion as far as — Nary: And then if they would – if that were successful what I was going to propose to do is move, then we set this over to the January 18th meeting, also so we can have the Preliminary Plat and whatever Planning’s input can be done, can be done by then; that we not take it up tonight. Borup: All in favor? Oppose no. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Centers: Well you didn’t have a second. Borup: Yes we did. We had gone through a discussion after the second. Nary: Mr. Chairman, now that we are back on PP 00-021 I’d ask that we defer this matter until our January 18th meeting also to give time to the applicant to work out any other issues he may have in regards to the Conditional Use Permit for this property or any other questions that the Staff may have before we go forward, but we put it on our agenda for January 18th for our review of this Preliminary Plat. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting December 12, 2000 Page 17 Borup: As a public hearing? Nary: As a public hearing. Hatcher: Can I modify that motion with adding that we request the Applicant to provide to us Master Plan or Comprehensive Plan with the intent of what the proposed Preliminary Plat is? Are we that far along? Again it goes back to my initial concern is what we started out with, what we are dealing with now and what’s going to get built out there. Borup: Well exactly, we're creating a subdivision. Nary: I have no objection to the modification that either they provide some Conceptual Plan of where this is going or at least explain that they’re not there yet and provide us with some adequate information in regard to that. I think that’s reasonable either way. (inaudible discussion) Norton: And talk to the Planning department. Borup: Yes that might be the easiest. (inaudible discussion) Hatcher: I was wondering if we can ask that, I mean – Borup: We can ask anything. Whether anybody has to do it or whether it’s legal I couldn’t – (inaudible discussion) Borup: And they can certainly answer that – if they’ve got a Preliminary – a Conceptual Plan they can provide it if they say they are not intending to do that it will be up to each individual property owner as they sell the lots then they can tell us that. That’s easy enough to answer a question like that. You’re not saying you’re requiring them to have – Hatcher: No, I would – I am requesting that they be able to provide to us as much information as possible to help – Siddoway: The Applicant has indicated to Staff that they can provide a Conceptual Plan. Borup: Well that makes it even easier. Okay – Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting December 12, 2000 Page 18 Nary: There has not been a second. Borup: Oh, we haven’t got a second but we a modification Nary: And I agree to the modification – Borup: So we do have a motion – Hatcher: Then I’d second the motion. Borup: Motion seconded. Any other discussion? All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Borup: Couple other items I have. One didn’t recognize Larry Moore and should have – I intended to do that at the beginning of the meeting. This was a little different meeting tonight. Larry, is there anything you’d like to say? Maybe explain to Commissioners what are you doing here? Freckleton: And why you are trying to pass yourself off as David Swartley? Moore: I thought that was probably the best way to go. In case something went wrong I wouldn’t get blamed. What I am doing here is eventually David is going to bow out and I am going to take over his position here on the board, Commissioners. I will be the one who is here for legal advice. (inaudible discussion) Borup: I have one – I do have – well Staff is busy. I did have one request from Staff looking ahead to next meeting that was on the Eagle Road, Eagle Partners whichever one it is, the motel. Board: Ameritel Inn. Centers: Did everyone get a letter. Borup: And that is to see if we could get a copy of the previous approval, a copy of the Findings of Facts or something. Nary: What was addressed in the letter? Borup: Well they – yes that was addressed in the letter. I was thinking of that before I saw the letter that it would be good to know what was – I mean we well most of us how many of us where even here when that other thing was approved. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting December 12, 2000 Page 19 Hatcher: It was before my time and I the oldest here. Borup: No, not the Chevron, but the one behind Chevron. Hatcher: Yes – Borup: That wasn’t that long ago. Norton: I wasn’t here for that. I was here for Chevron. Hatcher: The Credit Union was like – are you talking about the Credit Union? Borup: No. There was a thing approved behind the Credit Union the other lot, the other parcels there. Hatcher: Yes, I think that was just before my time. Like right when I started. Borup: Anyway, I think it would be good if we had a copy of that to review what was approved at that time. And I will make that request from Staff. Hatcher: I don’t have the package in front of me, but was that the same lot that the bank is asking to go on? (inaudible discussion) Centers: Exactly where was Ameritel proposing? Borup: Now? Centers: To the west. Norton: To the west of Chevron. Borup: That’s not – (inaudible discussion) Borup: Well I guess we should not be discussing this, but that was only – Steve I don’t know if you’ve heard any of that could we request a copy of the previous Conditional Use Permit that was granted on that parcel, that the Ameritel Inn is going on. Siddoway: Oh, I thought you were talking about Mallane? (inaudible discussion) Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting December 12, 2000 Page 20 Siddoway: It came through as Magic View Office Complex. Borup: Would we be able to get a copy of that? Siddoway: It should actually be Will who would give it to you from the Public directly. Borup: That’s whom I need to ask? Okay we'll make that request from the City Clerk then. Nary: I think that the letter that we all received from Mr. Heartly makes reference to that approval. Borup: Well it was – we know it was already approved. Okay. (inaudible discussion) Borup: And this is on for the 18th Mr. Hepworth? Anything else? Mr. Berg. Berg: Hopefully, if you got your ordinance in your boxes to redo your calendar. I did put kind of a year calendar circle the dates so that we can refocus our lives since the City Council will be meeting every Tuesday night of the month. You get to have two Thursdays. The arrangement with the Council or the input I have been plugging in is on the fifth Tuesday of the month we possibly have a workshop with the P&Z and the City Council. Borup: Alright! Hatcher: So that would be March and August and November? Berg: Well there are four Hatcher: Not March, May? Berg: It’s quarterly isn’t it? Every fifth – Borup:: January’s the first one. Would that start in January? Hatcher: Oh every fifth Tuesday? Berg: Every fifth Tuesday. Hatcher: Oh I was looking at Thursday’s. Berg: Tuesday. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting December 12, 2000 Page 21 Hatcher: Every fifth Tuesday. (inaudible discussion) Centers: You mean if you have a fifth in a month. Berg: Every fifth Tuesday. Borup: January, May, July. Berg: Anyway, I will still encourage that and see if we can make that a reality. Borup: Would that start in January? Berg: I would hope so. Borup: So that’s only four a year. Yes, one a quarter (turned tape over to side #2) Borup: And we do have some items for the first one. In fact does anyone want to add anything to that tonight? Norton: What do you have on the – Hatcher: I forgot. We put that request in so long ago. Borup: Only note I had was that – well that’s already over with. Hatcher: What was it? Borup: To have two meetings a month for the P&Z. Hatcher: Oh we wanted to have a workshop with City Council to discuss giving the P&Z Commission authority on some of the smaller items so that we can approve them and be done with them so that it didn’t bog them down at the City Council level. Borup: Some of the other cities P&Z handles everything. The only thing that goes to City Council is if there is a – Nary: Rezone, annexation and appeals (inaudible) Borup: Okay, rezone, annexation and appeals. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting December 12, 2000 Page 22 Freckleton: Don’t plats have to go to Council by State Code? Nary: Annexations, yes plats do have to be approved by the – Borup: Now my feeling is I don’t know if Meridian’s ready to go to that extent, but I would think they are going to want to probably see commercial and residential applications. But everything else, this would be a good first step. Nary: Well if they have to approve Preliminary Plats they’ll see all the residential subdivisions. Hatcher: Yeah it’s something worth talking about because maybe they don’t. Maybe there’s stuff they don’t want to deal with. Borup: I don’t think they do. I don’t think they want to spend their time going over Daycare applications and old towns deals and all the other stuff that we do – They’re meeting later than we are. Nary: At least what we’ve seen in Boise is that there seems to be this sort of litigiousness in our community anyway, so they may see it on appeal anyway. Maybe if they understand that if they’re concerned that they’re not going to see the things that are really important, they probably will because they’ll probably appeal it anyway. There is a lot – Borup: What’s the appeal procedure on either side? Is it a fairly simple process? Nary: It is a very simple process. Fill out the paper and pay the fee. It’s really pretty simple. The only requirement in Boise there is on appeal is that you have to have been an appellant – Borup: You’d have to been at the meeting. Nary: You’ve had to have been at the meeting and spoken at the meeting. Is the only requirement, but you can come – but if you aren’t the appellant you can certainly come to the appeal hearing and speak anyway, but that’s the only requirement. And it does allow the Planning Director in Boise to also appeal the findings of the Commission. So the Planning Director can also appeal it – the decision. Borup: This would require a new ordinance for Meridian. Nary: If they want to go that far, but at least from an appeals stand point if the concern that the Council may have is that things that are really hot public concerned issues, they won’t see them because they would have a final decision here they probably will. They probably will anyway. People are hiring – Mr. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting December 12, 2000 Page 23 Crookston came tonight on a pretty minor issue, but somebody hired an attorney to hear that. People hire attorneys for lots of things. So I think they’ll see them anyway. Hatcher: There was another thing to that we wanted to talk on that workshop. If you remember we discussed having a designer establishing a design review sub committee. Myself and Brad were gung-ho for that. Basically, we don’t necessarily know if we want to start a design review process – a design, I mean the City of Boise they actually have a design review committee, but we didn’t think Meridian’s big enough to require a whole panel just for design review. But if we had a design review sub committee how we could possibly get better control and start establishing minimum requirements for certain zones to start getting rid of some gray boxes and you know – Nary: And especially in light of the Landscape Ordinance and the Sign Ordinance they are percolating through. That’s a good opportunity to do that. Hatcher: Correct and the other thing in that workshop for us as a Board to start getting organized on how we are going to attack our P&Z ordinances because we have redone the landscape, we’ve redone the signage -- Borup: And City Council does that – pass the signs yet, have they? Nary: Well we have the Comp Plan. Borup: That’s where I really feel we need to get some direction on the Comp Plan– (inaudible discussion) Hatcher: What’s holding it up? Norton: That was my comment was— Borup: Staff, I believe. Norton: was the Comp Plan. Borup: Staff wanted to review it. Nary: Planning Staff I think. Borup: They wanted to spend some time to review it, but I think we need to take the initiative and – Freckleton: Yes. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting December 12, 2000 Page 24 Borup: But that also means we’re gonna have to start reviewing it ourselves too. Hatcher: Right. Berg: There’s a lot more hearings that have to take place for that Comp Plan (inaudible). Borup: Well we haven’t had any hearings yet. Berg: No, I mean all you’ve got is preliminary basis (inaudible). Hatcher: Didn’t we want – the objective was to have that approved in the year 2000. Obviously, it’s not going to happen. Berg: Good objective, but you want it done thorough so – Hatcher: Exactly. Borup: Well it doesn’t get done if you don’t start. Berg: It’s started. Borup: Public hearings? Berg: No, we’ve started with public input. Borup: Well public inputs done and over with. (inaudible discussion) Borup: Well maybe we need to clarify that. I didn’t think there are anymore public committee meetings or – I thought they were done. Hatcher: I thought it was good to go we were just – Borup: Maybe that’s what we need to do get a clarification if there’s one more step before public hearings. Norton: I think it definitely needs to be brought up and brought to the forecourt – Borup: I’d like to – I’m going trying to get an answer on that before – Hatcher: I think that it’s sitting on someone’s desk not being moved forward. Borup: On the 30th , on if something else needs to happen. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting December 12, 2000 Page 25 Norton: There’s been too much public input for having it just sitting around. Nary: I think the Council needs to hear that this Board really does want to take on more things. I think they have heard it in pieces from different people, the Mayor’s mentioned that to me once, one of the Council, Tammy de Weerd mentioned that once. But I don’t think they’ve heard it collectively. That yes, we would be more than willing to take on more responsibility. Borup: I mentioned this other to Tammy and (inaudible). Nary: That message, I think, really needs to be (inaudible) forward. Borup: If we do something on design review I definitely would be in favor of having it as a sub committee rather than as a separate board. Those things can get out of hand. Hatcher: Right, and I don’t think that – Nary: In Boise – the Boise Design Review Committee is a sub committee of the, but it’s its own board, but it has a member of the Planning and Zoning Commission on it. Borup: They still answer to Planning and Zoning Commission. Nary: The appeals from the Design Review go the Planning and Zoning Commission. Hatcher: I don’t think we are at a level yet where it warrants it’s own meetings and it’s own public hearings and -- nary: Probably not to that review. It may simply be something that’s additional comment added to the Staff report; it’s been reviewed by the Design Review Sub Committee, or whatever. Hatcher: I think I could potentially see that there’s additional information required to be submitted by the Applicant. Borup: That’s what I was going to say which means we need to make sure that gets in. Apparently, from past testimony the Applicant has submitted some of that stuff and it always doesn’t get into our packets. Hatcher: Sometimes they submit it, sometimes they don’t, sometimes when they do submit it, it doesn’t get to us. We just want to make sure that we are clear to the Applicant of what we want – Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting December 12, 2000 Page 26 Borup: That might be the only thing that need be done is just add to their list of requirements is that a full review set that will be gone through some type of design review process, where they know they need to submit that. Hatcher: And that’s where we need to talk to City Council about, about how we adopt minimum design standards for the City based upon zoning. Borup: That is – I guess that’s true you’ve got to have some – Hatcher: A gray box in a light industrial is acceptable, but a gray box in the middle of an R4 is not. Borup: I agree and I think on the most part things have done pretty good. There have been a few that have not been – Hatcher: There’s been a few lately should have not gotten through. Nary: Is this January 30th meeting taken care of with the City Council? Borup: I think so. I think we have a full agenda. Hatcher: I think January is full. Just to be on record too, just a reminder I won’t be here on the January 4th meeting. (inaudible discussion) Borup: Maybe we could continue everything to the 18th ? Hatcher: We could do that. That’s fine. I was planning on doing them tonight. Berg: They need to notify us if someone else isn’t going to be here. Borup: Oh right yes – Berg: I have at least three. Borup: So everyone else is fine. Norton: I’m planning on it. Borup: You’re planning on it? Norton: If we get Staff comments. Borup: Okay did anybody want anything else? Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting December 12, 2000 Page 27 Norton: Planning Staff comments. Hatcher: I motion that we adjourn the meeting. Nary: Second. Borup: Motion seconded during the meeting that at 7:58. All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:58 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) APPROVED: KEITH BORUP, CHAIRMAN WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., CITY CLERK