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