2000 04-03MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING
April 3, 2000
A special meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order
at 6:30 p.m. by Chairman Keith Borup.
THOSE PRESENT: Keith Borup, Sally Norton, Kent Brown, Tom Barbeiro.
OTHERS PRESENT: Steve Siddoway, Bruce Freckleton, David Swartley, Will Berg.
Borup: We’d like to open this meeting of Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission.
This meeting tonight is a special meeting to hear four items.
1. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR
40 BUILDING LOTS ON 3.98 ACRES FOR PROPOSED HERON BROOK
TOWNHOMES BY PINNACLE ENGINEERS, INC. – NE CORNER OF
MERIDIAN ROAD AND BLUE HERON LANE:
Borup: Steve. We’ve got your staff memo.
Siddoway: The site location is off of Meridian Road, Waterbury Park here, Fathergill
Subdivision here. This is the intersection of Blue Heron Lane and Meridian Road as it
sits today. This is the drain that runs along the north side of the property. This is a view
from taken across Meridian Road looking at it. You can see there is an existing house
on the property. This was the original plat that you saw the last time we met. Some
specific revisions were requested and in the motion by Commissioner Kent Brown and a
revised plat as been submitted. My memo dated 4/3/00 is in response to this revised
plat. It does change the common lot for the landscape buffer on Meridian Road to 35
feet as requested. The road width internal for the project has been increased to 30 feet,
curb to curb as requested. The zero foot setbacks for the carports do still remain.
There was also a requirement to prohibit on street parking, which has not been added
as a note on the plat but I did note it on here as a condition of the plat. A couple of
other minor things. The dimension in this location it dimensions the landscape buffer
along Blue Heron Lane incorrectly labeled as 18 feet. Should be corrected to show as
20 feet. The first note on the plat states that setbacks will be in compliance with current
zoning regulations and obviously they are getting some variance from that and the note
ought to reflect those changes that we are approving. Just note that and then we also
note that as a result of these changes with the added setback and larger roads, we did
lose one building lot and its in this location right here. You lost this one but picked one
up over here. I think there was 4 here originally now there is three. They shifted, these
is the same number you saw before. They just shifted them all to the east slightly and
there were two of these little 6 foot connections. It is now gone. Parking shifted around
but with those minor modifications they were able to retain the same number of lots
minus one and meet the requirements that we’re asked of them by the commission.
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
April 3, 2000
Page 2
This is how it lays out with the landscaping and the conditional use permit plan to reflect
those changes and that is all I have at this time.
Borup: Any questions from the Commissioner's.
Brown: Steve, about the parking curb painting. Was that what the note says? I did not
read the note.
Siddoway: My note just states on here that the requirement for prohibiting on street
parking has not been added as a note to the preliminary plat, but is noted here as a
condition of the plan.
Brown: So, the way the condition is worded, does it require that it be posted and
painted.
Siddoway: I have not written that specifically, so we will need to make that part of the
motion.
Brown: I went back and look at the minutes and that was a part of the original motion
for the conditional use permit that that be—
Siddoway: Right. Painted and posted, yes. That note has not been added to the
preliminary plat.
Borup: Anyone else. Would the applicants representative like to come forward.
Unger: Bob Unger with Pinnacle Engineers. Since our last meeting on this, we have
made the changes as requested through the conditions of the conditional use permit
excluding the notes to the plat. We have no problem with putting the notes on the plat
pertaining to the prohibiting on street parking, posting and painting the curbs is not a
problem. I am not quite sure over in this corner here how our dimensioning changed
from 20 to 18 but we made that change all ready. Essentially having gone through this
memo from Steve today, we really have no problems with the requests by the
commission and by staff. As Steve stated, we did we ended up dropping a unit right
here. We lost a unit here but were able to pick it up here in shifting the road somewhat
as we did. Then we shifted all of these down plus we took out this path that we had
shown right in this area. We do have a path that comes right in through here. We also
have a path there. We felt that the three paths gave everybody a good access to the
path along the Jackson drain back here. All of these units right here would have direct
access so we are looking at these handful of units. The majority of people probably
take access off this path right here. We have increased the width of the landscape lot
to 35 feet. We will also enter into an agreement with ACHD for maintenance of that 15
feet there which was not noted here but part of your conditions as I recall. Other than
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
April 3, 2000
Page 3
that, I think that pretty well covers the project. We have covered it extensively under the
condition use hearing so unless you have any other questions, I’ll stand.
Borup: Any questions for Mr. Unger. Commissioner Norton.
Norton: Mr. Unger I had a question. Is lot 25 still the clubhouse.
Unger: Yes that is still the clubhouse. That lot number may have changed, I don’t have
the most current one in my hands but that is still the clubhouse.
Norton: All right. Can you drive to the clubhouse or are you supposed to walk.
Unger: Right here is an access off of Blue Heron. There is parking here and here to
the clubhouse for any visitors that may come to the clubhouse. It is primarily for the
folks that live within the project. We would anticipate that they would walk over to that
point, but we do have access and parking.
Barbeiro: Mr. Unger, remind me again how far you will be paving Blue Heron Lane.
Unger: We will be paving to Blue Heron Lane from Meridian Road to this point right
here. That is the end of our property line. I believe the width on that is going to be 18
feet plus 12—not that’s not right. Standard ACHD requirement, half plus 12.
Borup: Any other questions? Do we have anyone else that would like to come forward
on this application. Seeing none, any final comments questions from the commission?
Siddoway: I would just like to note that all of our other staff comments from dated
March 10, 2000 for the plat stand as amended by today’s memo and the revisions to
the plat.
Barbeiro: I wish to move that we close the public hearing.
Norton: I second.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Brown: I would move that we approve Item 1 the request for approval of preliminary
plat of 39 lots on 3.98 acres for the proposed Heron Brook Townhouses by Pinnacle
Engineers, subject to all staff’s recommendations previous staff comments and
recommendations of today’s April 3rd
memo.
Barbeiro: Second the motion.
Borup: Motion and second, all in favor.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
April 3, 2000
Page 4
2. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR RV
SALES, RV RETAIL AND REPAIR ZONED I-L BY MAPLE GROVE R.V.—2490
W. FRANKLIN ROAD:
Siddoway: Mr. Chairman and members of the commission, this is an application for
Maple Grove RV. It is located along Franklin Road close to Ten Mile. The site is the
hashed in area here. This area in gray is all ready annexed to the City and zoned light
industrial. The area surrounding it in white still remains in the County. The reason this
is before you tonight is because of the addition of wanting to do RV sales. Currently
their site is all ready in operation and exists as RV repair and service. The (inaudible)
control requires a conditional use permit for all RV sales and such uses in light industrial
zoned, therefore it is going through the conditional use permit process. In scanning the
comments from Brad Hawkins Clark dated March 9, 2000 would note that Ada County
Highway District sees no additional trips coming from this project and are not making
any requirements of them in terms of dedication of additional right of way, etc. Staff
does have some hesitation over not dedicating right of way at this point. I don’t know if
we can require it, if ACHD is not however. This is the site as it exists. Looking east, the
RV service sign painted on the existing fence there. This is the entrance I guess—from
their site plan you’d say it would be exit to the lot. It is the drive isle that is closest to the
west looking in at the existing RV’s and the service area in the rear. This would be the
entrance to the site off of Franklin. This is backed off looking standing on Franklin Road
now looking to the west. Zooming in toward the back portion of this site. This is the site
plan submitted with the application. Conditions of staff include providing a 35 foot
landscape buffer along Franklin road. It is an entry corridor in the Comprehensive Plan.
We would ask that a landscape plan be submitted prior to this going to City Council.
Also there are no details about the type of perimeter fencing. We recommend that a
solid fence, especially in the rear where there is the repair going on so that the vehicles
that are in-operable are screened from view. The east driveway which is noted as the
entrance is only 20 feet wide on the plan. This is fine if it is clearly marked as one way
but in order to function as a two way drive, according to ordinance, we need to increase
that width to at least 25 feet. That is one thing the applicant may want to address as to
whether they are going to clearly mark this a one way loop or if they want to allow two
way traffic and increase the width of that drive isle. There is one sign proposed at the
southwest corner of the site. This location right here. There has been no other details
submitted for the sign. Brad has in here staff recommendation to remove the existing
signs the large fence sign, the two roof signs and recommends the maximum sign of 70
square feet with a height of 15 feet. The rest are standard handicapped accessible,
stalls and wrecked vehicles not to be visible from the public right of way. Bruce has
something.
Freckleton: Members of the Commission, in our staff report you may have noticed that I
did have a comment in there about the available of sewer and water service. It is quite
a ways off from this site. We did request that the fire department submit something in
writing. The only thing I have in my packet is Kenny’s handwritten note. I don’t know if
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
April 3, 2000
Page 5
there is anything more than that. Will? That’s all you got. Okay. The other issue I did
want to point out is the applicant has, in their written response, asked some questions
regarding the requirement to contract with a licensed architect or engineer to develop
the drainage plans and that is an ordinance requirement. That is where my comment
came from there. Part of that process is you have to determine the elevation of the high
ground water and we require that that be done by a soils scientist. That is all I wanted
to add.
Borup: Thank you. Any questions from the Commissioner's or the staff.
Brown: Is this parking lot going to be paved?
Siddoway: Yeah it does have to be paved per Ordinance and their site plan does show
it as asphalt paving.
Norton: I had a questions regarding the handicapped parking that you suggested. Has
that been agreed to by the applicant.
Siddoway: I do not know. I have not had conversations with the applicant.
Borup: We’ll check on that. Any other questions. Is the applicant here this evening
and like to come forward.
Dugan: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner's my name is Matt Dugan. I am the president of
Maple Grove RV Service, Inc. at 2490 W. Franklin Road. Well we opened up a whole
can of worms when we tried to get a dealer’s license. All we were trying to do is—of
course we do repair and refurbishing of RV’s on the lot over here. When we do that
what we would have liked to have happen is that the ones that we fix and repair, we
would like to sell or occasional customers that come in and would like their RV’s on
consignment. To do that you can only do 5 a year by yourself, so if we did 6 we were
not breaking Idaho Transportation laws. We said okay, we will go down and get our
dealer license. Well then, this has all led us here today. We do have a problem with
the site. The site is that we don’t have sewer, we don’t have water and we don’t have
gas. When –you know we are not on the 20/20 planner to have Franklin Road widened.
We –so if we go in and pave the whole lot and do all that when it does come in and
widen up, and we do have sewer and everything we’d have to tear our whole lot up
again and hook us up to our sewer and water. It is a problem for us. I can say I grew
up in this town. I graduated from high school over here so I want Meridian to look as
nice as it possibly can too. We have no problem with whatever we have to do. I don’t
like the thought of having to pay twice to have a parking lot for a few years and then
tear it up and have to hook everything up again. It is a specialty piece. We have no
problem with fencing or handicapped parking. We need entrance ways off of Franklin
Road itself so it is easier to get on and off the lot. Again, the landscaping the 35 foot
buffer, in my opinion I think it is excessive. I don’t know what to do about it from the
edge of the road and 35 foot, what kind of landscaping we want in there—I myself try to
look at other lots and everything. I am not an architect. I am not a soils engineer. I am
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
April 3, 2000
Page 6
not a whatever. I look at other lots and that kind of deal and try to get their ideas off of
what we have to do for our landscaping and that kind of thing. Like I said, I just want
some consideration and what we are trying to do and financially to as far as that lot
having to be tore back up if we ever get Franklin Road widened. Again, Ada County
Highway District did not require any improvements for the site at this time. I’d be more
than happy to answer any questions.
Barbeiro: Steve could you please put back up the drawing of the site plan.
Dugan: When I first put in my site plan when I originally tried to do this a year ago, they
told me down at the working with the City, they told me I had to meet all these
Ordinances and dues had to be paid and I had to do this that and the other thing.
When I first submitted my package, I did not have any paving out there and through the
direction of the City was just like put whatever you want up there. Put your—build
Disneyland if you want is what I was told. So, we just on our own computers and with a
friend of mine, was drawing stuff up trying to get to this point of this meeting of what
exactly do I have to do. The reason I say that is because of I just don’t want to have the
expense twice of having to do my parking lot to sell 6 vehicles a year.
Borup: Did that answer your question Tom.
Barbeiro: I just wanted to look at that.
Brown: Matt, so if you put a sewer stub from the street, your engineer should be able to
help you do that, so that you don’t have to tear your parking lot up again and you could
have it end in your landscape buffer out by your street. Then, you really would not have
a problem putting that—what it would be—I imagine your on septic now, right.
Dugan: There is no drawings or there is no—it is not on the 20/20 planner, so where
would I put my sewer.
Brown: You’d just run it out to the street. My question was, from an engineers
standpoint he could tell you how to get out to the street and Bruce should have an idea
on how deep the sewer is going to be for their sewer study. Then you would have an
idea as to how you have to put that stub in. The cost of putting the sewer in is not the
problem for you. You just don’t want to tear your parking lot up and I don’t blame you.
You don’t have a problem with putting a dry pipe in there that someday you will connect
to.
Dugan: I don’t have a problem with that as long as its—you said he had some idea of
how high the pipe is or anything else. If I go put it in now and then end up adapting to it
later expense wise I wouldn’t be happy. What can I do.
Brown: Well, when they have the sewer done, they have an elevation that everything
works at. Generally it can go deeper which –obviously its going to go easier to connect
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
April 3, 2000
Page 7
and if you had to go back through your landscape berm 35 feet plus the distance your
out to the street, you talking quite a ways that you can make an adjustment.
Dugan: That’s true. When would the study be that—
Brown: The study has all ready been done, I would imagine. The study has been done
for –and to understand the study, what they do is go out and take crown shots on the
ground and say okay, this is where the main sewer line has to go, and this is the
elevation it will need to be. They have an idea where in the future that is going to be
and your within a foot and you’ve got room, you can plan for your connection.
Borup: Depending what the road right of way is going to be I think the other way may
be less expensive for the applicant to wait until the sewer does go in. a part of putting
that sewer line in there, they going to all ready put the stub in so then it would be just a
matter of you connecting onto that sewer stub that all ready be stubbed into your
property. Even if there is a little bit trenching to do, I think the cost would be less at that
point. He doesn’t know what the road right of way is going to be. I think we should
address here sometime too.
Barbeiro: Bruce and Steve, is this the center line of Franklin right here and this is the
(inaudible) property. I am trying to figure out where is the 35 feet that your asking for.
Siddoway: We don’t know. The center line is not delineated. We are not sure which is
the property line. Basically that oval that you see in there right now I believe is the
applicants attempt to show an entrance and an exit. We believe that that 35 foot
requirement from the property line will move back into this parking area and eliminate—
Borup: Could you clarify that Matt where the property line is.
Dugan: Well, actually on the front of it I believe the edge of the road—
Borup: Left of the oval there. Okay your property line does not show extending out to
where you say your property line is. At least on the plat. That is the property line there.
Siddoway: We’re saying the 35 feet would be beyond that.
Borup: Any body else have anything? Well, at this point what is your distance from
your property line to your building there.
Dugan: To the edge of the building, I actually went out there and put a rough tape on it
and it was like 73 feet from the edge of the road.
Borup: Our plat scales out about 40 feet from your property line.
Freckleton: They were probably measuring from the edge of the pavement.
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
April 3, 2000
Page 8
Borup: What is the existing right of way there now. Does anybody know? It probably
isn’t a 96 is it?
Siddoway: It’s certainly not currently but it will be. ACHD policy is that all (inaudible)
roads will go to that 96.
Borup: Is that going to take how much into their property at that point. Did you talk to
ACHD at all. They did not have much on their comments, but did they say what the
current road right of way was there.
Dugan: The only thing is when I first got the property they told me that they were going
to take 45 feet from the center of the road.
Borup: They are talking 90 foot. What’s the right of way further east on Franklin.
Siddoway: In town you mean. I believe it’s 96 at that point yes. I’d have to verify that
but I believe all those section line roads that are especially the entry corridors, have that
96 foot right of way on them in the center in town. We can’t find an ACHD report.
Borup: the only thing we had from ACHD was Brad’s comment on ACHD.
Brown: All future design plans and construction shall be coordinated with Ada County
Highway District policy manual.
Borup: That is there staff comments?
Siddoway: Brad’s comment does suggest that the 35 foot landscape set back would
encroach into those parking stalls.
Borup: That’s my confusion. I show a little over 40 feet to the building. That would not
leave anything there. Matt you mentioned I think you had some hesitation on the
parking paving. Is that what I took you to saying. You indicated you had a little bit of
problem of doing that much paving.
Dugan: I do and I suppose the reason would be at this time is of course financial, but I
am going to say to that it’s because of my sewer. I guess I suppose I am concerned
about my drainage and how its (Inaudible). Right now its surface drain. I just kind of
wanted to develop it as everybody else develops around me, I guess. If that is right or
that’s wrong I don’t know, but it sure cleaned it up a whole bunch.
Borup: I understand. The problem is on things like a new developing area, somebody’s
got to be first. If no body did anything and everybody did what their neighbor did, then
we wouldn’t have anything.
Dugan: That’s why I am saying I have no problem with it. The fencing and cleaning up
the front of it but to require to pave the whole thing again, the site isn’t big enough to do
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
April 3, 2000
Page 9
a whole blown RV sales lot where you have 200 vehicles on it and its not what we were
looking for. What we were looking for was that once we refurbish and clean up we
would like to sell to make a few dollars. I just wanted some consideration on sewer not
being out there and the water not be out there and the gas not being out there. As a lay
man I am just winging it here and not really understanding.
Borup: I think basically the things that staff told you are things in the city ordnance.
This commission, our recommendations generally should be following the city
ordinance. The City Council has a little more leeway on granting variances. They’ve
got the authority to do that where we do not. I think at times we’ve maybe made some
recommendations then that this maybe deserve a variance or whatever. I think the one
thing that I do think is important. One of the staff comments and that is on this being an
entry corridor and preservation of right of way. There is a lot of things that we hear
people talking about now. Why didn’t somebody you know, where was the planning 20
years ago. I think that is one of the things that I have always hoped we could have
some influence on is just preserving the right of way. Make sure that permanent
developments not done along in this case, along Franklin. When it comes time to widen
the road or whatever needs to be done, tax payers are paying to buy a building. In your
situation (inaudible) proposing any buildings, I’ve got some concern whether the
building is too close—
Dugan: The building is all ready built.
Borup: I understand that. I mean down the road. If they are talking a 96 foot right of
way, I don’t know that you’ve got a legal setback at least the way the plat is drawn.
That is not anything we need to worry about today. That is something ACHD would
address itself with when the time comes. I think the idea of having that landscaping
buffer is something easier to put your sewer line through. You don’t have parking lot to
dig up and something easier to handle later on when we are talking about additional
right of way.
Barbeiro: In applying the 35 foot setback and losing the front parking, that is to be able
to work with the lot and have a satisfactory layout?
Dugan: Absolutely. Again when we drew this up, I was under the impression I could
draw Disneyland. I really didn’t know what I was drawing so I just drew up and said it
would be great if I had some parking here and that kind of thing but I have not problem
with whatever the suggestions of the Planning and Zoning Commission has.
Barbeiro: In selling both new and used RV’s.
Dugan: No new RV’s. All it would be is what we refurbish for customer consignment.
Norton: You said that you’d want to sell is it up to 6 RV’s or is it 6 or more RV’s.
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
April 3, 2000
Page 10
Dugan: It would be 6 or more RV’s. You could only sell up to 5 RV’s as an individual. If
you sell 6 RV’s, then you have to have a dealers license. That is why—
Norton: So do you have any idea—6 to 10, 6 to 20.
Dugan: Oh, again the site doesn’t—it is not going to be new and it doesn’t have the—I
would have as many as you possible could I guess. I would anticipate maybe 25 a
year. It is a used market, not a new market.
Norton: So whatever you fix and repair depending how much room you have there.
Are you familiar with the fire departments written comments regarding no use of torch or
welding equipment.
Dugan: No I’m not.
Norton: I think the fire department according to our notes are a little concerned
regarding not having any water. Are you prepared for explosion or fire or spark or
anything to that nature.
Dugan: What do you mean by that. Do I have fire extinguishers and water and hoses
and all that. Yes I do. I don’t know what the volume of it is either, but we have a well on
the lot and it is a big well if that is any consolation since I don’t have City services I can’t
hook up. I would be running a very clean, very neat shop that is very safe. I have a fire
extinguisher in every corner. That is about what I can say.
Borup: Any other questions for Mr. Dugan? You didn’t address the one staff comment
on your entrances, the 20 foot as opposed to 25. Did you understand what they were
saying there.
Dugan: Yeah, it had to be 25 feet wide instead of 20 and again—
Borup: Unless you want a one way.
Dugan: Right and I do believe there is enough room to go 25 feet or if we wanted to go
one way we would put up a sign to say one way.
Borup: One could be one way and one two way. Your feel that is something you could
comply with.
Dugan: Absolutely.
Borup: Okay. You may need to take some trees out or something, I don’t know.
Dugan: I think when we drew that plan up we put those trees in there. There is no
landscaping on the property right now at all. Just trees directly behind the house.
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
April 3, 2000
Page 11
Borup: Anything else from the commission?
Dugan: Can I get a copy of the fire report.
Borup: Anyone else like to come forward. Any additional comments from staff.
Commissioner's discussion.
Brown: Mr. Chairman. Bruce how far away is water from the site? Is that going to end
up being a problem fire department wise.
Dugan: There is water down at the First Interstate Building and it is west of Linder
Road.
Freckleton: Are you familiar where Gold Pest Control was or is.
Dugan: Yeah, it is approximately 3/10 of a mile.
Freckleton: I had it in my comments it was a half mile. As far as your comment about
the fire department, that was why I had site specific number 2 in there because my gut
feeling was that it was going to be an issue with the fire department and I wanted to see
something—
Borup: I didn’t think the fire department was all that specific, did you.
Freckleton: Not with Kenny’s comment here. That was why I didn’t know if you had
something more in your packet than what I had because that was pretty non specific.
Borup: I am assuming if he had a big concern he would have been more specific. This
is his time to say something.
Brown: It should be.
Borup: Any other discussion Commissioner's. I think maybe—
Brown: The only reason I bring it up is I know what with the business we have that all
of a sudden became a big issue as we started to try to get occupancy and the fire
department was trying to decide whether or not we have to run water to our site or not.
That is definitely something I would recommend to Matt that you take care of up front so
that you know cost before you spend money to do any of the other items. That could be
a big cost if that is the only way your going to get approved. As I read these conditions,
and we put that into place, then you’d be going to the fire department and you might not
be real happy with what they had to say long term.
Borup: I don’t think in this situation he needs to worry about occupancy does he.
END OF SIDE ONE
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
April 3, 2000
Page 12
Dugan: I talked to Kenny myself and asked for a letter. He said no problem that he
would write something up.
Borup: Apparently what we’ve got is he full comment.
Dugan: I guess so.
Borup: I think that might be one difference, this is an existing use that probably existed
before annexation. If would have been annexed and come before, things would have
been a lot different right from the beginning.
Brown: I know for our business that was the only thing that kept up from putting in a fire
hydrant was that it was an existing use and they felt that someone else would bring the
water down.
Borup: One staff comment on the landscape buffer—I still think the right of way
preservation which I don’t know if there is anything we can do or need to do other than
make sure there is no permanent structures built within a future right of way. Any
comment on those two things.
Brown: I guess the conservative approach would be is that we take the center line of
Franklin Road, half of the 96 foot right of way and ask the applicant to put 35 foot of
landscaping outside of that corridor and then design the site from that point. If we don’t,
we could end up with less landscaping buffering when the highway district decides to
widen the road in the future.
Borup: I think that is the case we’ve got now with this plat. I don’t think we’ve got
enough room to do 35 plus 48 depending upon where the property line is in relationship
to the road right of way.
Brown: But if you take –
Borup: In the old right of ways or the old property line just go center line to road. So
your saying your recommendation would be that that area there in front could be the
landscaping buffer rather than paved parking.
Brown: Yes, and if the existing building is in that area, I think you have to grandfather
that in as a part of that, but the rest of that needs to be landscape buffer.
Borup: Then the front is not existing. The stores existing but the paving isn’t.
Brown: Right. So are you saying that the building is all ready within that area.
Borup: No, I just think it is real close.
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
April 3, 2000
Page 13
Brown: Well I think you grandfather the building in if it all ready is close but what we
would be looking at is anything that future would be installed.
Borup: Permanent structures, yes. I agree with that. Any other comments?
Norton: I think Mr. Dugan, I appreciate his attempt to try to satisfy all of us
Commissioner's, but we also have a responsibility with the Comprehensive Plan in
Meridian and approving proper building sites. If the applicant is agreeable to all of the
staff comments, which is the landscaping, the compliance with the fire department, the
one way street for 20 feet, two way street for 25 feet, a solid fence and the removal of
all signs and put up another sign and then also the handicapped parking—one
handicapped parking is pretty standard that we have to do for the Comprehensive Plan.
I don’t think I’d have a problem with this at all considering he is trying to make a living. I
understand that. Also, to change that asphalt parking you understand that we are not
talking about having a landscape buffer. Maybe moving that concrete back behind the
retail store or on the side for your show area. I think we are all trying to work with you
so you can get this project going, but there is some problems that we can see from our
point of view.
Borup: Just a minute Matt. Just a couple more questions. Steve as far as –how much
of this area needs to be paved to comply with the ordinance.
Siddoway: According to the ordinance, all vehicular use areas are paved. The drive
isles, the parking stalls—certainly the drive isles. In storage areas we’ve been requiring
the drive access isles be paved but allow storage to be graveled. I suppose if there
was a long term storage of some of these, those areas could be graveled, but any
anything with frequent access of vehicles, needs to be paved by ordinance.
Borup: So anything other than that would require a variance.
Siddoway: That’s correct. Variances go straight to City Council. If you see a variance
as a desirable thing and necessary thing, then you could make that as part of your
recommendation with the conditional use permit that a variance be required and –no.
Swartley: (inaudible, away from mic). Mr. Chairman sorry. You could say we
strongly—we are very much in favor of this conditional use permit and point out the fact
that a variance is needed.
Borup: At this point the way it is presented a variance isn’t needed.
Swartley: I thought you just said it was needed.
Borup: Well, if it is done with what the applicant would like to do it is.
Swartley: I thought the applicant said he was in agreement with everything that staff
had said—
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
April 3, 2000
Page 14
Norton: I do have one question about the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law of
this meeting tonight. Who writes those up and –may I have a copy of those because
we have quite a few questions here.
Swartley: Please call our secretary.
Berg: Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, this application only requires one
public hearing so this body I would presume would create the findings and approve the
findings and pass it on to the City Council for their approval.
Borup: What we are trying to do here is make a recommendation that is going to work
for you and the City. I think what we’ve been leading to and we don’t know what extent
City Council may feel, but your saying you’d like to reduce the amount of paved area.
Dugan: I would, yes.
Borup: We are not able to grant that. We can make a recommendation. To request a
variance and to make a recommendation that maybe needs to be a little more specific.
Dugan: Can we pull the site plan back up again.
Borup: I would think that at one point that’s going to need to be reduced to paper to
show the specific areas that would be paved.
Dugan: What I’d like to do in this area here, now that I know the buffer zone and the
whole thing and what you guys are wanting. This area here would be our landscaping.
I have no problem clear back to the door and along our sides over here. Then, have
our entrance ways of course either being one way and two ways here or two ways here
and two ways here. Then have our paving which is our entrance ways in here up and
around our main travel area. Then have this other area and of course around the shop
where most of our dis-repair vehicles are and have that all fenced in here. So, what I’d
really like to do is have the paving come in like this and around and have the front of the
retail store and all that with our landscaping and beautification of the site. The only
thing that I asked about on the signs is there is a sign on my building here that is a nice
professional sign. I would like to keep that sign. The other signs I don’t have no
problem with and recommendation of having one sign out front and all that is fine with
me.
Borup: That should been allowed when its been on the building and doesn’t count as a
sign usually.
Siddoway: Yeah, I didn’t write these comments. I would agree.
Dugan: (Inaudible) along the fence and then I have a free standing sign on my building.
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
April 3, 2000
Page 15
Borup: Then your proposing a new sign and they are saying if you put a new sign in
that those others—
Dugan: I’ll take all those others out except I’d like to keep that.
Borup: That should be agreeable. That’s consistent with what had been done
otherwise. Where would be your parking for your retail customers. You said you got
your retail store—
Dugan: Actually we would have to have our parking—this is an existing concrete slab
right here. We would have to have our parking in this area right in here for our retail
store. This actually this area here is more room than the way it is drawn. This is all
open here. So, we actually make our parking in this area and there is a spot right
here—
Borup: How about this area here. That wouldn’t be used.
Dugan: That could be too.
Borup: The only comment I’d have with what your recommendation that would be I
think the retail parking will need to be paved.
Dugan: Yes, absolutely.
Borup: The other parking here your proposing to leave gravel. Any other questions.
Does this sound like that may be what our recommendation would be.
Barbeiro: Mr. Chairman, are we allowed to go ahead and make these
recommendations without the applicant drawing up a new plan.
Borup: No, I think it needs to be –I think we’ve got the option of either accepting what
he’s got drawn or seeing a new one.
Barbeiro: Well, seeing how a recommendation would not allow for the plan as drawn,
do we need to wait for a new plan.
Borup: My understanding we wait for a new plan or go with the plan you’ve got. I think
we are saying which would be your pleasure.
Dugan: Is there a way that we can go with the plan that we have and say with these
changes.
Borup: Well the PS for the changes need to be done in writing on the plan.
Dugan: Okay, do you want me to get a pen and a paper and write them down.
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
April 3, 2000
Page 16
Borup: No, it has to be a little more formal then that. I think you site plan will have to
be redrawn is what we are saying. You need to show which area is asphalt paving and
which area is compacted gravel paving. Or, we can go with everything paved like you
got it. Your going to need to redraw the site plan and come back at another meeting.
Barbeiro: Since all is necessary is a redraw and I think it will be a fairly quick process,
how quickly can we get this back in for the process.
Borup: Can we go to the 11th
. If it is continued we don’t need anymore notification. We
do have a meeting next week.
Dugan: That would be great. I’ll have one on your desk.
Borup: You can go first on the agenda on the 11th
. It just happens we have 2 meetings
this month. Next Tuesday. They need to get it in at least by Friday.
Dugan: That would be fine with me.
Siddoway: I would also advise the applicant that if you are revising the site plan to
show a gravel parking, that a variance application needs to be submitted. That
variance application will not come before this body. It will go to City Council, but it
would behoove you to have the variance application and your conditional use permit
heard the same night. The conditional use permit does not have a second hearing, but
a variance does and so that should happen the same night at City Council, otherwise if
they know it’s a variance coming up and for parking that has a public hearing, they are
likely to table the CUP and not act on it until they are able to have the public hearing on
the variance for the graveled parking areas.
Dugan: Okay, so I understand that I need to get a variance so I can get it into City Hall
because there is 2 council meetings on a variance. Where do I get this variance?
Siddoway: We have the applications at our office. Will do you have any here that he
could pick up tonight. We still have the same one. You can get one where you picked
up you conditional use permit application.
Norton: I like to move to continued this public hearing until April 11, 2000 for a request
for a conditional use permit for RV sales, RV retail and repair zoned IL by Maple Grove
RV.
Barbeiro: Second the motion.
Borup: Discussion. One thing would be at what meeting do we approve the findings?
Brown: Mr. Dugan in your revisit to the site plan, I would recommend that you ensure
that there is 25 foot of 35 foot of landscape buffering along the front which would
basically be everything in front of your existing retail. That you show us the width of
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
April 3, 2000
Page 17
driveways. We are asking you to decide whether you want a one way or a two way.
Show us that. Show us the areas that are going to be solid screened from fencing and
highlight the areas that your going to put gravel and which ones your going to pave.
Borup: We’ve still got the question of how to handle the findings.
Barbeiro: Mr. Chairman that would go to the next scheduled meeting of May 9th
.
Borup: Unless there is any possibility of having findings done by the 11th
. Can the can
the City Council have a hearing on a variance before the CUP comes before them.
Siddoway: I would defer to Will on something like that. I don’t know.
Berg: They could have that come before first, but to be real honest with you with the
project tied together it would be nice to have both come together. Procedure wise they
would table approving anything with the conditional use permit until they approve the
findings for the variance. So, if he knows which directions he going to do with the
variance. One hearing for the variance. Just another point, I think they need, this body
needs to make sure everything is in order when they give it to the council because they
are not going to have another hearing before that body, so they need to have everything
in black and white and a new plat, site plan whatever in their hands.
Borup: And, if its not clean when it gets to City Council it delays things anyway. We
take the time and get it to them right or half right and take longer. City Council does
have two meetings a month. Are you thinking they can handle them both in the same
month perhaps. It sounds like things are going to go smoother if we go ahead and get
the new plat, get the findings done here and then still the variance would have to go to
City Council, but they will have a clean project with all the changes made.
Dugan: So, I take it my next step is to get this variance paperwork—
Borup: The first step would be to get a revised plat to us. We’ve got a motion before us
right now to continue this to the 11th
. We can make our recommendation and then
when it goes to City Council we still won’t have the findings till our next meeting. How
about we wait and talk about this on the 11th
. Get a new plat to us and we will see what
–if you can get the site plan into staff by Thursday, we’ll have a chance to review it. We
will discuss this on the 11th
. We really should submit our findings to City Council at the
same time you do your variance. They are going to want to see them all at the same
time, otherwise they will hold up one probably. Aren’t we still in the middle of a motion?
Any other discussion from the commission? If not, the motion was to continue this to
the 11th
of April. All in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
April 3, 2000
Page 18
3. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION & ZONING OF 20.26
ACRES FOR PROPOSED STRATFORD BUSINESS PARK
RESIDENTIAL/PROFESSIONAL OFFICES FROM RT (ADA COUNTY) TO R-8
BY HOWELL MURDOCH DEVELOPMENT CORP.—WEST OF LOCUST
GROVE:
Siddoway: Mr. Chairman and members of the commission, the vicinity map for this
project is before you. The proposed Stratford Business Park as it is called is in the
cross hatched area here along Locust Grove. Stonebridge Business Park, also known
at Minamount is this area right in here. There also residences that are currently in the
county to the north of them. To the west is the Dee Jay Subdivision. This red area right
here is a new commercial industrial sub that is currently being built and has been
approved previously. To the south there are also county residences zoned RT and R-8.
On the east, this large square here is the proposed Woodbridge Subdivision now zoned
R-4 and there is also county residences zoned both R-1 and RT. The general
background of the application is that they want to annex the property to facilitate a
purchase of a portion of it by the Meridian Police Department. The applicant can clarify
because I really don’t have any lines but I understand it down in the southwest corner of
this property in this area here. There are some problems with their stated intent for the
business park with the current Comprehensive Plan. The current Comprehensive Plan
shows this as single family residential. The application states that their intent for this
site is to “continue the general commercial business uses anticipated for the area”.
Such uses would not be in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. On the other
hand, this is strictly annexation and zoning. They are requesting R-8 zone, which R-8
zone is in compliance with single family residential. The public use of a police station is
a conditional use permit in the proposed R-8 zone. I think it should be made clear that
the current Comprehensive Plan does have this site as single family residential.
Because of that I don’t particularly care for the name Stratford Business Park and don’t
think that as a name should be approved at the project name. Later, if there is a
Comprehensive Plan amendment or if the new Comprehensive Plan shows this area as
something other then single family residential that would allow for business uses then
that would be an appropriate title. The current draft of the land use map for the new
Comprehensive Plan does show this area as commercial. The only other comment is
that a minimum 20 foot buffer along Locust Grove should be required as a condition of
the annexation as well as a development agreement. That’s all I have at this point. I do
have a couple of photos. This is the site taken from Locust Grove looking to the west.
You can see some residences here on the north side.
Barbeiro: Steve can you go back to the (inaudible) thank you. Where will the road
extension go for Watertower.
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
April 3, 2000
Page 19
Siddoway: I believe that it connects from here straight through there. There is a road
that is connecting through and stubbing through at this point through Dee Jay and I
think that it would just connect straight through to Locust Grove. There is no plat,
nothing for this site currently for us to look at to say that, but this road is currently being
extended through Dee Jay Subdivision and I believe the intent would be for it to
continue through to Locust Grove.
Borup: Perhaps it would tie into Atkins Way.
Siddoway: Yes and this is Atkins. The intent would be for this one to connect through
and for it to stub also to Atkins. That would be what we would want to see. We have
no plat submitted at this point that would show that, but yes.
Barbeiro: In the future Comprehensive Plan proposal you said that is zoned
commercial and the existing calls for residential if I recall.
Siddoway: Single family residential is the Comprehensive Plan that we are currently
working under.
Barbeiro: How does that contradiction plan to a police station in that area.
Siddoway: The police station is or would be a conditional use permit in the R-8 zone.
The annexation and zoning request before you tonight is for R-8 zoning which is in
compliance with the single family residential use in the current Comprehensive Plan and
the police station would be a conditional use permit in the R-8 zone under current
ordinance.
Borup: Any other questions for the commission. Is the applicant here this evening and
like to come forward.
Lee: Gary Lee with JUB Engineers, 250 S. Beechwood in Boise. I guess I’d like to
start in saying that we erred in the application when we identified the project as
Stratford Business Park. It should have just gone before the City as Howell Murdoch
annexation and zoning request. There is no intention of filing a plat at this time on the
project. We are going to perform a one time split of the parcel, the 20 acres into two
pieces. Two 10 acre pieces. Obviously we will be waiting for the new Comprehensive
Plan Amendment to take effect and when that does happen the owner will be coming in
with some sort of application. We anticipate that (inaudible) as it is in the city. At this
point of time, it will be just strictly an annexation and zoning request to allow the split to
take place. We discovered after discussing this with Ada County that they weren’t
going to allow us to do a split because of some frontage issues in the RT zone. We
discussed the problem with the City staff and everyone concerned felt it would be better
to go ahead annex it into the city since we will be able to provide services for that 10
acre piece. Services will include sewer and water and pressure irrigation will also be
provided, which was originally planned for in the Dee Jay development. Same owner.
They will extent pressure irrigation into this site as well. I don’t know if there is any
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
April 3, 2000
Page 20
more that I can add to the discussion that staff has given you. If you have questions I’d
sure be glad to answer those.
Brown: How is the split going to go—north south—
Lee: Actually its –we had a copy of the Dee Jay Subdivision super imposed on the area
in red. Watertower Lane is just a due east extension. If you extend that line further
east into this 20 acre parcel, the 10 acre piece would be south of that line.
Dimensionally it is 1000 feet east west and 430 feet north south. It sits right in that
southwest corner. I’ve got a record of survey drawing. I’d be happy to show it to you.
Brown: So the parcel B, the 10 acre piece that the City would purchase would not have
any frontage on Locust Grove.
Lee: Correct. (Inaudible) on Watertower Lane extended and that portion of Watertower
Lane will be constructed as terms of the agreement of sale.
Borup: Commissioner Brown could you clarify what that showed—that parcel that
would be split on the west of this annexation parcel.
Brown: It would be right here. Southwest, leaving a portion here along Locust Grove.
Borup: So those other portions were not even—your not anticipating doing anything
with any of that other property.
Lee: Not at this time. Not until the new Comprehensive Plan is in effect.
Norton: Mr. Lee, is it my understanding this is a future police station.
Lee: Yes.
Borup: The southwest portion.
Lee: It is directly adjacent to a State Police facility.
Brown: Realistically the only part that you need zoned R-8 is the portion that the city is
looking at buying.
Lee: Probably so.
Borup: Otherwise your going to come back in with another rezone request.
Lee: Probably will be but I don’t know if the staff wanted us to go with a spot zone
portion of that property. They prefer to have the whole thing annexed.
Siddoway: Yeah. If we’re annexing we don’t want to annex just a portion of a lot.
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
April 3, 2000
Page 21
Brown: That is not what I was thinking of is until the Comprehensive Plan is done and
there is a public hearing on the Comprehensive Plan, we do have residential uses along
Locust Grove that maybe we put to a still as a residential use that would comply with
the Comprehensive Plan but maybe not as intense as an R-8 would be. If Mr. Murdock
did not have a real problem with it we could look at having a split zone an R-8, an R-4
or something like that.
Borup: I think R-8 is consistent with what we are doing at this end of town and
Woodbridge right across the street is –well it was a PUD so –but a denser residential
than an R-8 would be. I guess I was not quite sure what you were leading to there. Are
you saying annex it an R-4?
Brown: No, I’m saying that we’d annex the part that the city is looking at using for a fire
station or a police station in an R-8, but maybe looking at an R-4 on the other to match
the county zone where the residential (inaudible) until the Comprehensive Plan is
changed. That is just a thought. You have industrial uses on the other, so—
Barbeiro: I was just wondering how that would be done where you’d have a lot really
without a –we’ve got a record of survey here. Can you annex a lot.
Borup: Staff would like to see the whole thing annexed so we need to annex the whole
parcel. We can do two separate zones on them. I don’t know that it would make a lot
of sense. Right now this is all under one parcel. They are annexing one parcel asking
for R-8 zoning on the entire parcel.
Lee: Let me add too, I know the developer doesn’t have any intention of doing
residential there in the future.
Borup: Oh, one more for the applicant.
Williams: My name is Dave Williams broker for Diamond Properties. I am a limited
dual agent for the sell as well as for the buyer which is the City of Meridian. I did want
to make clear that we did make a mistake on calling this a Stratford Business Park for a
name for the application. What happened was Dee Jay Subdivision to the west of this
subject property has been renamed for marketing purposes to be called Stratford
Business Park. That is where that came into play on the 20 acres. All the seller is
intending to do is to annex the 20 acres, request the R-8 zone and then do an
administrative lot split to sell the ten acres to the City for the new police department.
We have entered into an agreement subject to annexation and zoning and
administrative lot split with the City and also with that agreement, the seller is agreeing
that within an 18 month period of time the seller will bring Watertower to Locust Grove
and then extend Atkins which comes through Stonebridge directly through to connect to
Watertower as well. Until such time as that happens, there is absolutely nothing that
can be done with the property anyway because we need the ingress egresses and we
also need the city services etc. Essentially at this time all the seller applying for is
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
April 3, 2000
Page 22
annexation and zoning to R-8 and then we can move forward with the administrative lot
split to sell to the city—that 10 acre parcel—the balance of it the seller has not intention
of doing anything at this time. Until such time that the new Comprehensive Plan is in
place.
Brown: Steve, when Woodbridge came in did they annex this little piece right here?
Siddoway: Yes they did.
Brown: What zoning did that get?
Borup: CG, commercial neighborhood.
Siddoway: No I think it was –it would have had to been a residential zone. I don’t
know. Oh LO, limited office.
Borup: Do we have anyone here who would like to come forward?
Smith: Robert R. Smith. 335 S. Locust Grove Road. I have some concerns about my
irrigation water. Right now the Hunter Lateral runs right in that area. We have our main
water source that goes to a head gate right about where my pointer is there. Then, it is
diverted through that Minamount Subdivision to our lots that irrigate all of this land right
here. Through the course of this Commission and the City, we lost all the access to our
irrigation rights along this road because we are fenced out now. I own this 2-1/2 acre
parcel right here. I know have to drive clear out here and go over and get my water
through a diverting head gate right here. This area here needs to be completely
separated from this pressurized irrigation water that they are talking about for the City
or whatever. Right now it is diverted out of another head gate to water part of this
parcel and another head gate that waters to the west. This ground breaks both east
and west at that point.
Borup: Right at the lateral?
Smith: Right about where—(Inaudible, Chairman Borup talking over testimony) That is
exactly right and the lateral right there falls both ways. There is a irrigation weir that
brings water to the west and then there is a irrigation weir about in here that brings it for
this parcel of land here to be water clear to the east. Ours runs straight through out of
that another weir and goes across that land. There is a portion of that land that is
completely dry that is in that area there that does not receive water at all. It never has
and it can’t because it does not have any access to water. My concern is that we don’t
loose anymore of our water right. I trust this with the city and fought over this thing ever
since Minimount was put in and now all of that is fenced away from us and we don’t
have access to our irrigation boxes. We’ve got a 6 foot chain link fence now that
isolates us from that and as I say now I am about 300 yards from it where I use to go
and could still go that way if they hadn’t fenced me completely away from it. I don’t like
this access here changed because it can’t be changed. Again, like I say, I don’t think
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
April 3, 2000
Page 23
they ought to take their water out of that lateral that we have right now. They have
another weir that delivers water to that property and would not foul our water up.
Borup: Any questions for Mr. Smith? One comment sir, before any development can
be done with the police section or the other, well nothing is going to happen on the
other, but the police station would need to come back for a conditional use permit at
which time the site plan and street layout and all that stuff would be presented. At this
point they are not proposing to distribute any of the property at all. I hear what your
saying that’s the intention something’s going to happen.
Smith: Right , (inaudible) matter of record here so that it can be put in the minutes, then
I am addressing it
END OF SIDE TWO
Brown: creating a lateral users association.
Smith: We have and I am the water master on my lateral. That is why I am here
tonight.
Brown: Being the lateral users association, don’t you have the ability to open up that
and not be fenced off from your—
Smith: We have tried in every way shape or form and we even have matter of
testimony that it wouldn’t have happened. It did and we can’t gain it through Planning
and Zoning nor through the City now.
Brown: I know a similar situation exists in my subdivision and by creating a lateral
users association then they had the ability to open that back up and they also got some
support from Nampa Meridian to do that.
Smith: The only problem lies after it leaves that weir, it ours and Nampa Meridian will
not get into it. We’ve tried that and it won’t happen. If it were before the weir, your
absolutely right. After the weir Nampa Meridian has no jurisdiction. As long as that is in
accordance on his property he can move it anywhere he wanted. We objected to him
fencing us away from it but it didn’t happen that we got fenced away from it.
Borup: Your saying you want to be able to cross his property.
Smith: I just want to make assurance that we have access to that weir which will be
there and I don’t know what is going to happen with the main Hunter Lateral. You
allowed J-built to not pipe that much of the Hunter Lateral that went through there.
They landscaped it and it was a condition that did not occur, which isn’t a problem.
When you get down here where the police station and that I wondering if your not going
to completely tile the Hunter Lateral through that area to make that one piece of ground
without a division of the Hunter Lateral, which is a pretty good sized irrigation lateral. It
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
April 3, 2000
Page 24
is not a little irrigation ditch. It is a good sized ditch and it has now Nampa Meridian has
a driving right of way that drives through the cemetery on through that piece of property.
Borup: At what point does it enter your property.
Smith: It enters it now. It goes to a diversion head gate right there and comes down
this line and it goes right about—you have a 25 foot buffer area between us and it is on
west side of the fence of the buffer area that buffers us from the Minimount Subdivision.
Borup: This gate here is where your at.
Smith: Our water divides right now and goes over to this 12 acres that is in this parcel
here and irrigates that 12 acres and it goes this way (inaudible) plus 2 acres that is on
the other side of Franklin Road.
Borup: What prevents you from coming on down your ditch here and right over to
there.
Smith: That is on private property and fenced away from me. That is not on my
property.
Borup: Thank you sir. Any one else. Mr. Lee any final comment.
Brown: I move we close the public hearing.
Barbeiro: I’ll second the motion.
Borup: Any discussion. All in favor.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Brown: Mr. Chairman I move that we approve the annexation and zoning of 20.26
acres for residential professional offices from R-T to R-8 zoning by Howell Murdoch
Development Corp. subject to staff’s recommendations.
Barbeiro: I’ll second the motion.
Norton: Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to make it of record Mr. Smith’s comments
regarding access to his irrigation. Let’s keep that in mind as we go forward.
Siddoway: Mr. Chairman, this may be better answered by Mr. Swartley if there is
something concrete that can be pulled from this that can be made part of the
development agreement as part of the annexation, this issue could be addressed in
there without waiting for the CUP and the site plan, to require access to the irrigation. I
bring this up as an idea.
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
April 3, 2000
Page 25
Swartley: Steve could you repeat that. Are you saying put something in the
recommendations right now. Oh in the development agreement. We could probably do
that. You have water rights, correct. Are they adjudicated. Okay.
Borup: By rights I think he met access, physical assess.
Swartley: That’s an area—I’m sorry-or getting to it, okay. That is an area I think we
could do that . I don’t want to commit myself to it because when I was listening him talk
about It I was thinking he is going to get his property on somebody else’s property. It is
his water that he has a right to, but I don’t know enough about water rights to be sure. I
think we can do that. Don’t hold me to it.
Borup: Is that something the commission would like to recommend that it is included in
the development agreement.
Swartley: I am going to guess that it is more than just this gentleman.
Borup: You’d have to be down the whole line there.
Freckleton: Dave, could there be some citations of state statute as they pertain to
irrigation right.
Swartley: I don’t know when he obtained his water right. If it was before a certain date.
If it was after a certain date like 1970-71 right in there, his water right has to be
adjudicated if it was prior. Your getting into an area that I don’t know a whole lot about.
Your right there are state statutes that can help us out in that area.
Borup: So maybe when this goes before City Council might be some more information.
Okay sounds like there is some discussion amending this motion.
Norton: Yes. Would you consider amending this motion?
Brown: To include the development agreement about access for irrigation purposes,
would be fine.
Norton: Physical access where actually get to where he needs to get to.
Borup: Subject to legal verification or something. Okay we clear—a second to agree
with the amendment.
Barbeiro: Yes.
Borup: All in favor.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
April 3, 2000
Page 26
Borup: Thank you.
4. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION TO STAFF: ADA COUNTY
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REQUEST #99-13-S/99-22-PR BY FRANK AND
CONSTANCE STAUTS REGARDING A 3-LOT SUBDIVISION IN RT ZONE
PLUS A PRIVATE ROAD –4280 S. EAGLE ROAD:
Borup: This is a county project in which staff is looking for—You ready Mr. Siddoway?
Siddoway: This is a county application. Brad Hawkins Clark requested that it be put on
the agenda to night for a recommendation from the Commission for us to send to the
County. You have in your packets a letter from the applicant summarizing our issues.
This is a preliminary plat, I am looking at this for the first time today, to develop 3 lots.
The issues as far as we are concerned as staff in the county is that we have a 5 acre
minimum lot size and we require submittal of a redevelopment plan that will show how
this Subdivision can be redeveloped in the future at an urban density of 4 units per
acre. That is it for Planning and Zoning. I think Bruce noted some issues regarding
sewer and water.
Freckleton: Members of the commission I believe this comment was actually from Gary
Smith. It is a September 15th
letter to Ada County Development Services. A comment
from Brad Hawkins Clark. (Inaudible) sewer and water will not be required at this time.
I don’t remember making the comment.
Brown: Mr. Siddoway I’d like to be schooled in how you process these. I happen to be
present at Ada County when this application came. Ada County took the City of
Meridian to task and said that we were bad guys for not commenting on these non-
farms and area of impact developments. Tell me as if I’m a developer so that I
understand.
Siddoway: I’d like to be schooled myself from Mr. Berg as to how these are usually
processed. This is the first one I have seen since I began doing Planning and Zoning
meetings as staff last September or so. We have not processed any. This is the first. I
think they are sent to Will and I think Will sends them to Shari.
Borup: We use to get them every month and I think we finally directed Shari to handle
them on a staff basis unless these was something unusual that the Commission should
take a look at. Everyone that we saw within one or two was just really routine.
Brown: Are we not required to sign them.
Borup: No, we were directing Shari to write a letter under her name.
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
April 3, 2000
Page 27
Brown: As an area of impact Subdivision, does not the Subdivision’s receive the city’s
signature Mr. Berg.
Berg: Mr. Chairman and members of the Commission, Commissioner Brown, my
instructions from way back was to make copies and distribute to the Planning and
Zoning Commission and staff Departments, Public Works, Planning and Zoning
Commission and the comments were made from the P&Z Department which consisted
of one person at that time. Then we started bringing them up before the commission
and the commission got very weary of seeing all of them. They instructed the P&Z
Department to review them and make comments and if there was an unusual one to
bring it before the P&Z commission. From that I more or less thought the P&Z Dept.
was handling all the situations.
Borup: So your saying the county is not getting any comments back?
Brown: The county said they are not getting any comments and because of our
process this costs the developer at least another two months.
Borup: They eventually get comments—they are just not getting them right away?
Brown: They (inaudible) comments—
Borup: So they are getting tired of waiting and proceed ahead.
Brown: Well they have but as the news came up about what they did to the PAL’s
program, that is exactly what the P&Z commission has been doing at Ada County. They
have taken the stance that if the City of Meridian doesn’t comment, they don’t send it
forward, just like (inaudible) that they did with PAL. They would not send it forward
even though their comments and their comment sheet say if we don’t hear from you in
10 days—
Berg: No response means no comment. Exactly, they are saying they need a
comment.
Borup: Maybe they should change their word. What they are saying they need to
change what they are saying. The letter says no response means no comment.
Brown: But the staff is different then the P&Z commission that is saying we want a
comment. (Inaudible, Mr. Chairman speaking over Commissioner Brown) on to City
Council is my question. The City Council does not make a recommendation or
approval—
Berg: Excuse me, unless Shari determines that it needs to go before council. So we’ve
been under the direction of she’s been—
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
April 3, 2000
Page 28
Brown: So Shari recommends that they approve it and they send comments to the
county. The applicant goes through all the county conditions. One of the conditions is
that the City signs the plat so then because Shari has written a letter, you sign the plat?
Berg: On a final plat, it does come before the City Council and the City Council
approves it with comments from the staff and the City Engineer and myself sign the plat.
That’s on a final plat. Development projects for instance like this one that may not have
a final plat (inaudible) get whatever comment at the beginning.
Brown: Are we in compliance with state code that these P&Z these preliminary plat’s
which state code requires and the attorney can correct me, all plats have to go to P&Z
or that body, whatever that might be, some have hearing examiners. The City of
Meridian has chosen the Planning Dept. to do that and not requiring that to come to this
board.
Berg: When your saying the plat are you meaning the final plat or preliminary plat? To
me honest with you, I don’t know what the process is for a preliminary plat. I do know
the final plats are brought before the council for approval and their recommendations.
Borup: Maybe we need to look at another policy. So many of the things we are getting
were conditional use permits and things along that line. From what I understood we
made recommendations and the County just ignored them anyway so we thought what
difference does it make.
Siddoway: The county must be getting more adamant about getting city comments and
approval before acting on things. Just based on the number calls I have received in the
last 3 weeks from county applicants stating, I am submitting an application to the county
but they told me that they have to have approval from you at the City before they will act
on it.
Borup: Are these all Subdivisions.
Siddoway: No, it is everything from a re-approving an existing mobil home as a second
residence on an existing site for a mother in law to—
Borup: That’s the kind of stuff we felt at least the commission two years ago felt they
did not want to spend the time reviewing at this meeting.
Siddoway: I am confused. I don’t know what the process is and—
Brown: Mr. Chairman, I know for a fact in the meeting that Mr. Berg and the city kindly
paid for us to go to stated specifically in the information we got that P&Z has to approve
preliminary plats. I would say that preliminary plats can still go to the city but if there are
these –
Borup: Preliminary plat should come here.
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
April 3, 2000
Page 29
Brown: They have to come. That has to be a given but the other items, if they so
choose, we can have staff comment on those. Other jurisdictions, specifically the one I
work for, they did bring those items up to P&Z just for comment. They would say these
are the items we are sending forward and they would do it in a discussion like we have
today with this plat. Personally I don’t believe that this should be a discussion. I
believe that our code would require this to be a preliminary plat hearing. If the city’s
ordinance requires a preliminary plat hearing in my opinion, this needs to be a
preliminary plat hearing.
Borup: For every public hearing.
Brown: State code does not require us to have a hearing, it is our code as I understand
requires us to have a public hearing.
Borup: But (inaudible) our city limits though. Does our code just require within city
limits or the impact area.
Brown: In my position I would view that if the City of Meridian has an impact area, then
they need to be commenting as if those future developments are going to be in the city
someday. They need to act as if those are. Just like the discussion we had to night
with the RV guy, we are talking about planning for the future and if there is something in
our Comprehensive Plan that says don’t build in this location, then we should be looking
at those items to protect those things. That is what the county expects from the city.
Borup: I think it would be appropriate of us many come with a new policy. From what I
hear you saying, maybe what I would recommend is any Subdivision plats come before
us.
Siddoway: What about rezones?
Berg: I think you could go through every application that they would send to us and—
Borup: What I would recommend then is all these other things –the relative use and
conditional use and can’t we maybe get a receive a copy of that and put those on
consent agenda.
Siddoway: We could do it that way—you get them all. That what your saying get a
copy of all them—
Borup: Maybe we need to –put them on a consent agenda so we can take care of them
all at one time and not spend time on it.
Brown: Other than the preliminary plat I think that if staff wants to make a comment
and this is what they are going to send to the Ada County, then we just review it and like
you said review it as a consent, but we see the comments we are sending and if there
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
April 3, 2000
Page 30
is something that we are aware of. Generally I would say we aren’t going to have any
comments, but at least we should have the option to look at them.
Borup: That makes sense. That would probably be an easy way to handle it. If
something deserved discussion, we could pull it. We also need to encourage staff to
get the comments back to county in a timely manner.
Siddoway: May I paraphrase just to make sure what you proposal is. When Will
receives application from the county for comment from the city, he will give copies of
those to all of you Commissioner's as well as us on a consent agenda if there are
specific items that we feel are problems, hot topics, then at the beginning of the meeting
we request that they be pulled off the consent agenda for discussion. Otherwise
everything else we just on a consent agenda basis approve and recommend approval
to the county. Then we discuss those other items at the end of the meeting and make
recommendations on those.
Borup: I think what commissioner Brown is saying thought maybe staff makes a
comment we need to see what that comment is.
Brown: My recommendation would be for not for Will to send them to us but to send
them to staff. Staff can make comments and then all of those items be grouped
together –new business or county business—and we can look at those and we can
review and approve them—other than plats. Unless corrected I would say that plats
require us to have a hearing, all plats. Those should staff can still make a comment.
Siddoway: You don’t see the same thing for rezones.
Brown: But we still need to see the comments that staff is sending out and concur that
that is the city’s position. In our workshop with the City Council I would recommend that
that what the City Council do also.
Borup: Can we add that to the agenda, the workshop. Does everybody remember the
date on April 25th
. If we can slip that in there I think that would be a good idea too.
Brown: A preliminary plat should be noticed and I would view that we approved the
item that we have tonight, we are not approving a preliminary plat. This is just to
discuss it. I would love the city to make a comment so that this guy can get forward but
I think that we should have if it is a preliminary plat and eventually the city has to
approve it, then we need to approve a preliminary plat.
Siddoway: So are we going to acquire him to pay the city a fee for the mailing to all
property owners of 300 feet.
Borup: How do you handle that then?
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
April 3, 2000
Page 31
Brown: I know how I handled it. We had a county processing fee. It was a lump sum.
We had a final plat fee and we had a preliminary plat fee. It did not matter how big it
was, we just charged one fee. Other jurisdictions I go in for preliminary plats you still go
through a preliminary plat process and they charge you a base fee. Nampa does the
same thing for their area of impact.
Borup: At this point we would have to have a fee established, which would be in a
ordinance I assume.
Brown: But until we do that, we at least need to (inaudible) preliminary plats.
Borup: Sounds like a City Council resolution could handle it. Then you need a
recommendation from staff on a fee amount.
Berg: Mr. Chairman, what I am afraid of is making sure we follow everything there is, so
we may need to have the attorney research and see. If just the preliminary plat is the
only thing we have to do and I am concerned about making sure the time restraints.
When Ada County wants this back, we have to do the 15 day notice and make sure
there is no time pushes for us to get whatever process we need to do so they don’t
have plenty of time.
Borup: You saying right now they are late 2 months.
Brown: This particular applicant was on old business. He had made an attempt to try
and get a comment from the City. He had been deferred for a month and then he got
sent to another hearing and they deferred him for another month hoping the City of
Meridian will write them a letter.
Berg: That what it shows in the packet is this applicant actually made contacts with
certain agencies and put that name of the contact and paraphrased what they said.
That was not good enough. They wanted letterhead.
Brown: They wanted written correspondence from the city. I think to get this applicant
moving, I would move that we direct staff to make a comment that we are going to
process the preliminary plat. I think we need to have a public hearing because that is
the way we process them. Until we have a fee, it is a free-bee as far as I am
concerned.
Borup: Your saying on this one or can we get by just recommending and then get it
straightened for next time.
Brown: You can do it and take that approach too. To follow the letter of the law we
should process this as a public hearing.
Siddoway: Mr. Swartley, do you think this needs a public hearing on a county
application.
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
April 3, 2000
Page 32
Swartley: Mr. Chairman I don’t think it does but I understand Commissioner’s Brown
reasoning. How can you make any comment without an application and a hearing. I
could do some research on that. I am going to guess that it doesn’t need a hearing for
the preliminary plat.
Brown: In our presentation and everything that we received from Idaho Cities, state law
does not require a public hearing for preliminary plats. What I am saying is the City of
Meridian ordinance does require a public hearing.
Swartley: Right, and your talking about in the county.
Brown: No, the City of Meridian for preliminary plats requires—
Swartley: Right but this is an application of the county of Ada County. Therefore, the
Meridian City Code would have absolutely no jurisdiction. I understand your reasoning
and that is your looking to the future like we said earlier in that eventually they will be
inside the city limits. Problem is the Meridian City Code has no application outside the
City of Meridian.
Borup: Would we be on firm ground if we take a look at these case by case. These
people are really splitting off two lots from their house. If some application comes in
with a 10 lot Subdivision or something along that line, that is a different matter. That
would merit a public hearing in my mind.
Brown: In our area of impact agreement with the county states that our zoning
ordinance does not have the effect our Subdivision does. We have a Subdivision
ordinance right.
Siddoway: We have one but it is just for the City.
Brown: So for example you have Vienna Woods going in the area of impact and City of
Meridian fire chief wants these things done. We want to require all the ditches to be
tiled. We want street lights to be put in. Those items, we are given the authority to
decide those items and the authority is given to us by our area of impact agreement
though our Subdivision ordinance. We have to meet the counties zone until such time
as annexation takes place and then that Subdivision automatically complies with
Meridian zone that is in effect. A good example of a standard condition that should be
on every county plat is instead of stating what Ada County’s standard note is for
building setbacks, their note states that you should comply with Ada County building
setbacks at the time issuance a building permit. The City of Meridian should require
that it should be Ada County and Meridian City which ever at the time of issuance of a
building permit. That would be a standard condition that we should place on every
County plat because there is a chance that we could go out and annex Vienna Woods
and our building setbacks are going to be different than Ada County and all of a sudden
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
April 3, 2000
Page 33
they are under a different guideline. Those are some of the things to protect our area of
impact and to allow us to put the conditions on developments.
Borup: Didn’t we cover that on Vienna Woods.
Siddoway: Was that the final plat though.
Brown: If I was designing a plat I’d try to do that.
Borup: I think Vienna Woods did. So far the only thing we’ve see in the county other
than Vienna woods has been acreage, Subdivisions—5-10 acre.
Brown: I think your going to see more development in the area of impact as certain
areas in the county—
Borup: Small residential lots?
Brown: Doubt it.
Borup: I definitely think we need a hearing on those or if not a hearing a full
presentation from the commission then. It is a good night to discuss it.
Brown: I move that we recommend approval of this non farm and as staff to write a
letter and get it to Lora Bishop or back to Ada County Development Services and ask
the city attorney to look into whether we need to approve all preliminary plats in a public
hearing.
Borup: In lieu of that what policy we’d like to have on preliminary plats.
Swartley: Mr. Chairman, I think you going to have to make it your policy because I can
almost guarantee you there is nothing in the city code. As Commissioner Brown has
pointed out, Idaho code does not require it. That is something you’ll have to make
policy or –just make policy. Deal with it our don’t deal with it.
Borup: That something we want to discuss at a workshop or make a motion tonight.
Swartley: Meridian City Code is not that comprehensive.
Brown: The council is not doing it either, right.
Borup: Okay a workshop with the council. I think it important to move this on. This was
applied for last September.
Norton: I would like to second that motion. I would also like to have some discussion
regarding do we have any control of a name of a Subdivision (Inaudible). Is that cult or
what kind of name is that.
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
April 3, 2000
Page 34
Brown: Ada County engineers have total control over Subdivision names within the
county. He has a list of what is acceptable and what is not and he also determines
sound alike and so forth. Your going to see some really off the wall—
Norton: With your experience, is this permissible Subdivision name.
Brown: Yes.
Borup: Doesn’t make a lot of difference. People don’t go by the Subdivision too much.
We’ve got a second. Any other discussion. All in favor.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Borup: Again, just reminding April 25th
—another thing I think were going to need
address here real soon is if we want to have a regular second meeting date
established. Will just mentioned that City Council is talking about going to 3 meetings
which would take all three Tuesdays. Didn’t we have a problem with Tuesday.
Norton: I just have a meeting on the 4th
Tuesday, but this would take precedent over
that.
Borup: That is the only free Tuesday is the 4th
Tuesday. Do you want to get a regular
meeting set up so we don’t have to keep figuring it out every month.
Barbeiro: So the second meeting would be a part of our workshop with City Council?
Borup: No. We’ll discuss at the workshop when we can do a second meeting. It
would really be helpful is we went to that workshop with some things in mind. We come
and say these are the dates that work for our commission. Wouldn’t that be better then
discussing the whole thing in front of the Council. What are we looking at then. Right
now City Council meeting 1st
and 3rd
Tuesday.
(Inaudible--commission talking with one another)
Norton: Mr. Chairman I move that we adjourn this meeting.
Barbeiro: Second.
Borup: All in favor.
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
April 3, 2000
Page 35
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Borup: Meeting adjourned at 8:56 p.m.
(Tape on file of these proceedings)
APPROVE:
___________________________
KEITH BORUP, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
______________________________
WILLIAM G. BERG JR., CITY CLERK