Loading...
2004 03-18Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting March 18, 2004 The regularly scheduled meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:00 P.M. by Chairman Michael Rohm. Members Present: Michael Rohm, Wendy Newton-Huckabay, and David Moe. Members Absent: Keith Borup and David Zaremba. Others Present: Chris Gabbert, Jessica Johnson, Bruce Freckleton, Anna Powell, Craig Hood, and Dean Willis. Item 1. Roll Call Attendance: O David Zaremba X David Moe X Wendy Newton-Huckabay X Michael Rohm O Chairman Keith Borup Rohm: Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. I'd like to open the regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission and start with roll call of the Commissioners. Item 3. Consent Agenda: A. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: AUP 03-021 Request for an Accessory Use Permit for a bookkeeping office out of home for Susan Rice by Susan Rice – 230 West Pine Avenue: Rohm: The next item on the agenda is adoption of the Consent Agenda. Newton-Huckabay: I move that we approve the Consent Agenda. Moe: Second. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded that we approve the Consent Agenda. All in favor say aye. Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, TWO ABSENT Rohm: Thank you. Before we move forward with any of the projects on this agenda tonight, it's come to our attention that a number of the projects are potential for continued and because the schedules are very tight in all the existing schedules that are out there, we are going to discuss possibly adding a third P&Z meeting in the month of April and so with that being said, I open that discussion for comment from the fellow Commissioners. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission March 18, 2004 Page 2 of 14 Newton-Huckabay: I have no additional comment. Rohm: No additional comment? Moe: No additional comments. Rohm: Does the fifth Thursday of April work for both of you? Moe: That would be the 29th ? Rohm: That would be the 29th . Moe: Yes. I believe so. Newton-Huckabay: Yes. Rohm: All right, then. That sounds good. If we could have a motion, we will add a third. Moe: Okay. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion that we plan for another Commission meeting on April the 29th for a regularly scheduled meeting. Newton-Huckabay: I second the motion. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded that we have a third meeting in the month of April on April 29th at the regular scheduled time of 7:00, I believe. All those in favor say aye. All opposed? Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, TWO ABSENT Item 4. Public Hearing: AZ 04-003 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 16.73 acres from RUT to R-8 zones for proposed Jaydan Village Subdivision by Packard Estates, LLC – 5325 West Ustick Road: Item 5. Public Hearing: PP 04-002 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 75 residential building lots and 8 common lots on 16.73 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for proposed Jaydan Village Subdivision by Packard Estates, LLC – 5325 West Ustick Road: Item 6. Public Hearing: CUP 04-004 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development with request for reduction to the minimum requirements for lot size, street frontage, and front yard setbacks for side entry garages for proposed Jaydan Village Subdivision by Packard Estates, LLC – 5325 West Ustick Road: Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission March 18, 2004 Page 3 of 14 Rohm: Okay. With that being said, now, we can open up Public Hearing AZ 04-003, Public Hearing PP 04-002, and Public Hearing CUP 04-004. Could I get some comment from staff on these three? Powell: Yes, sir, you may. We -- the applicant is requesting that this item be continued. They wanted to work on a concept plan for the parcel to the west, so they are still working out things, and they also had some problems with their sewer issues. They didn't have enough cover on their sewer. They are asking to be continued. Rohm: Okay. Before we close the open discussion on this, if there is somebody from the public that cannot be here for testimony on the 29th , then, we would be willing to listen to somebody this evening. With that being said -- Powell: Ma'am, you need to get up the microphone. Rohm: State your name. Priess: Jennifer Priess. Rohm: Address? Priess: 3138 West Pudu in Meridian. Hi. No, I just -- first of all, I wasn't sure if this was the one on Ten Mile and Ustick. It's not. Oh. Okay. Sorry. If we don't need to be here, then, that's what we were wondering. We are all as a community here for that project and we were wondering what it is. Rohm: Okay. Those will be continued to the 29th as well. Priess: Okay. We didn't want to leave if we shouldn't be here or -- okay. Rohm: Okay. Thank you. Priess: So, we do -- we can go ahead and go and, then, be here? Rohm: Yes. Priess: Okay. Thank you very much. Powell: Commissioner Rohm, you might want to talk about which items are going to be deferred, so that anybody that's here for those items can go ahead and leave. Rohm: Okay. Can we -- seeings how I have already opened up this one, can we go ahead and finish this one first? Moe: Okay. Mr. Chairman, I move to continue the -- well, wait. I move to continue the Public Hearing on -- hearings AZ 04-003, request for annexation and zoning of 16.73 acres from RUT to R-8 zones for proposed Jaydan Village Subdivision by Packard Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission March 18, 2004 Page 4 of 14 Estates, LLC, 5325 West Ustick Road. Also, Public Hearing PP 04-002, request for preliminary approval of 75 residential building lots and eight common lots on 16.73 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for proposed Jaydan Village Subdivision by Packard Estates, LLC, 5325 West Ustick Road and Public Hearing CUP -- Powell: Commissioner Moe, you only need to do the file number, just to save you from reading all that over again. Just do the file number. Moe: Okay and Public Hearing CUP 04-004. Newton-Huckabay: I second that motion. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded that we continue Items 4, 5, and 6 on our agenda to the third P&Z meeting on April 29th . All those in favor say aye. Opposed. Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, TWO ABSENT Moe: It sounded pretty good, though, didn't we? Powell: You sound great, sir. I'm sorry I had to interrupt you. Moe: I appreciate that. You can hear me right? Rohm: Okay. We have two other projects that I believe will be continued and they are the McNelis Subdivision and the Rock Creek Subdivision. Both of those projects, I believe, will be continued to that same meeting. If there is anybody in the audience that would like to speak to that tonight, let it be known and we will open them before we do the continuance. Okay. Powell: Commissioner Rohm, also, Cafarelli Subdivision failed to post the site, so that you will not be hearing that one tonight as well. Rohm: We won't be hearing it, but we are not going to continue that. Powell: Correct. I just wanted folks to know before they stayed through the Troy Place application. Item 9. Public Hearing: AZ 04-004 Request for annexation and zoning of 34.6 acres from RUT to I-L, L-O, and C-G zones for proposed McNelis Subdivision by Falcon Creek, LLC – northwest corner of North Ten Mile Road and West Ustick Road: Item 10. Public Hearing: PP 04-004 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 16 commercial building lots and 5 common lots on 34.6 acres in proposed I- L, L-O, and C-G zones for proposed McNelis Subdivision by Falcon Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission March 18, 2004 Page 5 of 14 Creek, LLC – northwest corner of North Ten Mile Road and West Ustick Road: Rohm: Okay. Good. Thank you. Appreciate that, Anna. Okay. With that being said, I will open Public Hearing AZ 04-004, request for annexation and zoning of 34.6 acres from RUT to I-L, L-O, and C-G zones for proposed McNelis Subdivision by Falcon Creek, LLC, northwest corner of North Ten Mile Road and West Ustick Road and Public Hearing PP 004. Both of these are open. Moe: Mr. Chairman, I move to continue the Public Hearings on items AZ 04-004 and Public Hearing PP 04-004 for the McNelis Subdivision. Newton-Huckabay: I second that. Rohm: And to continue them to -- Moe: Excuse me and continue those hearings to the April 29th meeting. Rohm: Thank you. It's been moved and seconded that we continue AZ 004 and PP 04-004 to the April 29th regularly scheduled P&Z meeting. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Thank you very much. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. TWO ABSENT. Item 12. Public Hearing: RZ 04-002 Request for a Rezone of 7.48 acres from L- O to R-15 zones for proposed Rock Creek Subdivision by Treasure Valley Development – east of North Linder Road and south of West Pine Avenue: Item 13. Public Hearing: PP 04-005 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 52 residential building lots and 1 common lot on 7.48 acres in a proposed R- 15 zone for proposed Rock Creek Subdivision by Treasure Valley Development - east of North Linder Road and south of West Pine Avenue: Item 14. Public Hearing: CUP 04-006 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development consisting of a mix of residential and commercial uses with reductions to building setback requirements for proposed Rock Creek Subdivision by Treasure Valley Development – east of North Linder Road and south of West Pine Avenue: Rohm: The next item on our agenda is the continuance of Public Hearing RZ 04-002, request for rezone of 7.48 acres from L-O to R-15 zones for proposed Rock Creek Subdivision by Treasure Valley Development, east of North Linder Road and south of West Pine Avenue. PP 04-005 and CUP 04-006. All three of these are open. Moe: Mr. Chairman, I move to continue the Public Hearings on Items RZ 04-002, PP 04-005, and CUP hearing 04-006, to our Commission Meeting of April the 29th . Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission March 18, 2004 Page 6 of 14 Newton-Huckabay: I second. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded that we continue Items 12, 13, and 14 to the meeting scheduled for April 29th . All in favor say aye. Opposed same? Good. Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, TWO ABSENT Item 7. Public Hearing: PFP 04-001 Request for Preliminary Final Plat approval for 3 residential building lots and 1 common lot on .73 acre in an R-15 zone for Troy Place Subdivision by PPN, LLC – 1236 East 2 ½ Street: Item 8. Public Hearing: CUP 04-003 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development to allow for a multi-family development consisting of 1 tri-plex and 2 four-plexes with reduced street frontage, setbacks and minimum lot width requirements in an R-15 zone for Troy Place Subdivision by PPN, LLC – 1236 East 2 ½ Street: Rohm: Moving right along. I'd like to open the Public Hearing for PFP 04-001, request for preliminary plat, final plat, approval for three residential lots and one common lot on .73 acres in an R-15 zone for Troy Place Subdivision by PPN, LLC, dash 1236 East 2 1/2 Street. Public Hearing CUP 04-003, request for a Conditional Use Permit for a planned development to allow for a multi-family development consisting of one triplex and two four-plexes with reduced street frontage setbacks and minimum lot width requirement in an R-15 zone by Troy Place Subdivision, by PPN, LLC, 1236 East 2 1/2 Street. With these two open, could we get comments from staff, please? Hood: You bet. Thank you, Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission. As you stated, this is an application for a multi-family development, including three new buildable lots on 2 ½ Street. The site is located on the east side of 2 ½ Street, approximately 450 feet north of Carlton Avenue in an R-15 zone. The property is currently designated high density residential in the 2002 Comprehensive Plan land use map. Here is the aerial for the site. Just north of the site is an existing single-family home right here and, then, there is also a large vacant parcel on the north side of this lot. There to the east is a multi-family residential development. To the south is a salon spa that was recently approved, I believe in 2002 by the city. Then some other single family homes to the south. Across 2 ½ Street is a duplex and, then, this is the school, the Cole Valley Christian School. Two of the three lots you see here in the preliminary plat are going to contain one four-plex each and the four-plexes will be on these two lots here. The existing triplex is nearer 2 ½ Street in this location. This existing triplex was recently approved by the city, as CUP 03-038 just late last year, I believe, is when that actually went through. The gross density of the development is 15.06 dwelling units per acre and as part of the approval to convert that existing home into an apartment house. The applicant was granted approval to construct a driveway on 2 ½ Street in this location, with additional off-street parking. Now, again, they are coming back and going to redevelop the backside of this parcel. The Conditional Use Permit includes a request for Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission March 18, 2004 Page 7 of 14 reduced street frontage, reduced building setbacks, reduced lot sizes, and the driveway modification in the R-15 zone. The applicant is proposing to construct a 25-foot wide driveway the entire length, basically, of the north property line. There is a turn around in this location with basketball court, which is one of their amenities and, then, there is a barbecue pit over here, which is the other amenity. In the report -- in the staff report that you have before you I did ask the applicant to clarify a couple things on the submitted site plan. They both had to do with the open space requirements of the city, just to get those calculations and I believe he's prepared to give those tonight. Also in the staff report a note was made that the applicant submitted a revised site plan. That's, actually, the plan you see here. The original site plan had these parking spaces on this side -- all the parking was adjacent to the units. They have added three stalls here on the east property line -- or near the east property line. I do have a couple -- a few comments about the revised site plan that I was not able to include in staff report. I just got it a couple of days before the -- it went to print and so I didn't want to -- didn't have an opportunity to fully look at this site plan, but after reviewing it, they do have 13 parking stalls here. City code requires a landscape island to break up those parking stalls, so I believe that's something that they can accommodate. The original site plan did show a landscape island to break those parking stalls up and there are 15 stalls there. I think they can still make it work. The other thing I did not to want point out is I don't have anything -- I haven't been able to talk to the fire marshal as of yet and I have not gotten his thumbs up on this revised plan. It appears to meet their requirements, but it will have to be approved by him as well. The third thing that I just wanted to call out -- and I don't know if it needs to be a site specific. I'm imagine that the applicant will agree to do this, but this area here is mainly for -- well, there is a van loading area for the van accessible stall here and also it's a -- the other half of that is a backup area for this last parking stall and the loading area. I just -- I do have some concerns, I guess, with this new design that someone may park in there and, then -- so, just some appropriate signage for that, so that there is no parking and people are aware it's a loading zone only. These stalls get filled up and, you know, people are tempted to park in there, even for a little bit, and I don't -- but, really, that's my only concerns with the revised plat. I did get a letter from the applicant, it looks like he's pretty much in agreement with staff's comments in the staff report, but I will let him tell you that. I did also want to tell you that I spoke with the neighbor just to the north in the existing single family home. I do see he's in attendance this evening and will give you a little bit of testimony. At least what we talked about was the fencing and landscaping adjacent to his site. They are proposing a new six-foot wood fence, which is consistent with the previous approval for the triplex, but I believe that he has some concerns as well. With that, I will end this presentation and any questions you may have I'm available. Rohm: Thanks, Craig. Moe: I have no questions. Rohm: Would the applicant like to step forward? Nickel: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners. For the record, Shawn Nickel, 52 North 2nd Street in Eagle, representing the applicant tonight. First of all, I want to thank Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission March 18, 2004 Page 8 of 14 Craig for an excellent job reviewing this application. We are, actually, in agreement with all the conditions of approval. There are several conditions that require us to do some revisions, plat notes, things like that, that will come back to staff prior to the City Council reviewing this upon your recommendation. We are in agreement with that. If you did receive my letter, I think it was dated yesterday, it's a letter that says -- that has a whole bunch of okays, referring to the site specific conditions, with a couple of will discuss at the meeting tonight, so that's what we will do. Also present tonight is Troy Palmer, who is the developer, and he will get up and talk to you about the actual living units and the concept. I just want to go over Craig's specific comments regarding open space and the site layout. If Craig could put up the screen -- that one there. Thanks, Craig. Staff's comment to me was regarding open space. It's a little unclear, I believe, in the code on calculating the open space for this PUD -- or for the multi-family PUD and staff can probably explain that a little bit better than I can, but I did calculate what we do have in green open area and if you consider our buffer here, the green open space area that surrounds these units, the basketball court area, which is an open space amenity and the -- oops, I forgot to color in the barbecue kind of social area right here, which is also an amenity. We have in excess of 29 percent of the site is greened -- green area, open space area, non-asphalt area. I will leave that up to staff to make that determination if that doesn't meet the intent of the code. I believe it does. Secondly, as staff explained, we did revise -- this is the revised plat or plat and development plan to what was originally submitted and the reason we did revise it is Joe Silva with the fire department had a concern about the distance between this center line area on the turn around and the distance to the east property line. It was in excess of the -- I believe 150 feet necessary to provide proper protection of fire -- with the fire vehicles. One of his suggestions, actually, was if we did locate parking spaces here, then, as a fire truck came in it could only go to this location right here, thus meeting that distance requirement from that turn around to that area right there. We did revise this and submitted it to Joe and Joe did verbally state it was okay. I don't believe he has gotten back with staff, but you do have a condition of approval that we do get a sign off from the Fire Department, which we will abide by. Let's see. Tom is here he is the property owner to the north. I just spoke with him very briefly before the meeting and he has some concerns about the property line and future access for his van along that driveway right here and we will work with Tom -- he'll get up here and explain his concerns. I have already talked to Troy and will work with Tom and make sure that we provide him with proper, you know, access. I think Craig is willing to work with us if we need to modify some landscaping or maybe a placement of the fence slightly. I think we can work that out. I think that was all. If you have any other questions or if I didn't answer anything that I was supposed to, please, at this time you can -- Moe: I would imagine, then -- do you have a problem getting the landscape buffer where the parking -- the 13 stalls? Nickel: No. Absolutely not. We can make that work, as staff has suggested. We will also -- I guess to follow up, we will properly notice that as well for no parking. Rohm: And you will note that on the plat? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission March 18, 2004 Page 9 of 14 Nickel: Yes, sir. Rohm: Okay. I don't have any questions. Newton-Huckabay: I have no questions. Nickel: Oh, sorry, one other thing that I guess that staff didn't bring up. Or maybe he did and I just forgot to mention it. There was a question -- part of the multi-family requirement or standards in the code requires 100 feet of usable area per living unit and I just wanted to point out in our building layout that each unit has a deck area that's approximately 100 square feet in size and that does meet, I believe, the intent of that standard that's in the code, so -- Rohm: Good. Thank you. Nickel: Thank you. Rohm: Appreciate that. Is there anybody else that would like to testify to this applicant tonight? Come on up. Roe: My name is Bill Roe. I live at 312 East Washington. My property is adjacent to your plan and I'm kind of new right here, so I had some questions. Are your units single level or multi level? They are multi level? Then, I can -- and, basically, my concerns are on the north -- or the back north side that's apparently been revised, part of which being multi level is going to be overlooking into my property and I think that's a concern to me and my family. I think my concerns are multi levels will be looking into my property. Almost all those properties around there, except for the multi unit ones, which is farther to the north, are all single level properties or with a basement. None go two stories above ground. It's kind of out of place. I guess what I'm getting to, it's going to be a little bit out of place, it's going to be looking down into -- in essence, the privacy of my property now. I was wondering about the setback from that fence -- from my fence line to the building, how far that was going to be. I was kind of concerned about the traffic. I live on East Washington, which is only a half street now. I know this is around the corner, although my -- our properties do adjoin each other. Even 2 ½ Street is not a very traffic friendly street. Thirdly, is -- is the irrigation. In essence, there was a ditch that runs on the north side of the property that's an overflow ditch that loops back around into the watering system. How will this complex affect that, what will the runoff be. I don't know -- I'm sure you have thought of that and I guess I just need to be brought up to speed on all those thoughts. Those are kind of my three main things. I'm concerned about the height of the buildings being out of place with the neighborhood housing that's there now. I'm concerned about the road conditions accommodating another 50 people living on this lot and I'm concerned about the irrigation runoff, since most of those houses in that area are -- flood irrigate still. Newton-Huckabay: Mr. Roe, would you mind pointing out your property on that map for me? I think there is a pointer. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission March 18, 2004 Page 10 of 14 Rohm: There is a pointer right there on the podium. You just push the button and it's infrared. Roe: Thank you. I believe this is my property here. Rohm: And your home is -- Roe: Here. Rohm: Okay. Roe: As I see it, these two four-plexes -- or three-plexes, I believe -- or four-plexes -- the two four-plexes which will be multi story, will be right along my fence line looking straight into my property and although this appears like a long way, there is already a -- kind of a see through right into my home and into the privacy of my backyard. Those are my concerns. I think there is ways around those concerns, but those are my concerns today. Rohm: Thank you, sir. Powell: Commissioner -- or, yeah, Commissioner Rohm, just for the benefit of the public that is here, what will happen is that everybody that wants to testify will testify and, then, the applicant will get an opportunity to rebut and so that's why he's not answering your questions right now, if you were expecting him to. It's that he's required to answer the Commission for questions, so -- he will get around to it, so -- that's all. Rohm: Is there anybody else that would like to testify to this application? Stephens: Okay. Are we on? Okay. Tom Stephens is my name. I live at 1304 East 2 ½ Street, which is just north of Mr. Palmer's property. As was mentioned earlier, we were talking about the fence, the six foot fence going in, but now with the adjacent -- or with the additional four-plexes, I was really concerned about the traffic and the noise and was hoping to get some evergreen shrubbery put in for the noise conditions. As you were saying, I talked to this gentleman representing Mr. Palmer and I don't believe it's going to be a problem, but I just thought it should be put on the record, that would be something that would be nice to have with all the additional traffic in that area. I think that's probably all I need to say. Rohm: Okay. Thank you. Does anybody have any questions for this -- Stephens: Oh, yes, excuse me. When I first moved into my house, which was 17 years ago, the existing owner, then, was Walt Howard and the two of us got together and he just kind of just -- he said, well, the property stakes should be right here. Neither one of us ever actually seen a stake and so, in the meantime, Mr. Palmer has had the place surveyed and the stake is a lot closer to my property than what I was expecting. I was just discussing about whether or not we can move the fence over a little bit, so that we would have adequate room for getting the driver's door open when we had to back in, Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission March 18, 2004 Page 11 of 14 so that I could get out on my left. That doesn't seem to be a problem, from what they are saying. I just wanted to make sure that that was also covered, that we wouldn't have a problem being able to get out. Rohm: Yes. I think that that would be between you and applicant on that particular issue. Stephens: Okay. Yes. Just maybe getting the extra noise condition with the shrubberies put in, with the extra 20 something spaces, I think that extra traffic, would be really nice. I think that's it. Rohm: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Stephens. Is there anybody else that would like to testify for this application? Hearing none, Mr. Nickel, you're back on. Nickel: Again, for the record, Mr. Chairman and Commissioners, Shawn Nickel, 52 North 2nd Street in Eagle. First of all, the first gentleman that spoke, I guess I do understand his concerns regarding the two stories. I did look at the scale and the elevations and those buildings will be 24 feet in height to the peak of the roofs, which definitely meet -- or below the maximum requirement for that zone, even for a single family dwelling. I don't believe that's really going to be an issue. There are also existing trees on the property that are going to be retained that should provide some additional buffer to the south property right here. With regards to the drainage, I believe he's talking about the drainage ditch that -- little drainage ditch that runs along here. Per Idaho state requirements we have to maintain that drainage at all times, so that will remain intact. As far as our drainage, we are going to retain and detain our drainage on site or we will take it off the site at historic rates, but it will be at least retained and mostly -- or detained completely on site. As far as traffic, ACHD did approve this application with our existing -- with our existing and current use proposed and we meet the allowances for 2 ½ Street. I'd like to point out that there are, I believe, two story four-plex or apartments units to the east right over here, so we are compatible with what's in the surrounding area. I believe we do meet the -- Rohm: And I think it’s sufficed to say that a single family dwelling of two stories would have the same height that the four-plex has. I think that's what your point is. Nickel: Absolutely. Rohm: Okay. Thank you. Nickel: And, then, regarding Tom's comments, again, yes, we will work with Tom. I think staff will show us some flexibility on -- I don't know if we need to work it out before we get to City Council, but we can, in deed, do that if you'd like to put that as a condition of approval to accommodate the gentleman to the north. Rohm: Okay. Now, that would be for the evergreens -- Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission March 18, 2004 Page 12 of 14 Nickel: The evergreens and also he had mentioned that because of our survey he thinks that our boundary is about a foot closer to him than what he expected and if that's the case and he is going to have a problem with his access for his van, we would be willing to offset our fence if need be to accommodate that and I don't believe staff would have an issue with that. Rohm: Okay. Appreciate that consideration. Moe: One other thing he was curious about was the -- I assume the dimension on the setback off that property where the building was. Nickel: We are proposing in the PUD a setback of 9.9 -- nine feet nine inches from the property line. Moe: Okay. Nickel: On that south side. Now, just -- and, then, just for the record, the existing house, which is located right here, currently is six feet eight inches from the property line. Rohm: So, the new structures will be further from the property line than the existing -- Nickel: Slightly, but yes a little bit further. Yes, sir. Rohm: Thank you. Moe: I have a question as far as on staff in regards to the percentage of the green space now that he's proposed. What's your opinion? Hood: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, usually, just for an example, single family homes we don't count setback areas as open space. However, these multi-family units -- I think the applicant's proposing plenty of green space and open space to meet the intent of the ordinance and the minimum ten percent requirement. In addition to that, this is an in-fill site. We do have a little bit of flexibility on in-fill sites to -- specifically that ten percent open space requirement can be -- so, I'm satisfied with what the application has shown. Moe: Okay. Rohm: Thank you, Craig. Is there any other testimony on this application at this time? Hearing none -- Moe: Okay. Mr. Chairman, I move that we -- I'm going to get there yet that we close Public Hearing PFP 04-001 and Public Hearing CUP 04-003. Newton-Huckabay: I second. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission March 18, 2004 Page 13 of 14 Rohm: It's been moved and seconded that we close PFP 04-001 and CUP 04-003. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same? Hearing none, carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, TWO ABSENT Rohm: Any discussion? Moe: A couple things I'm curious about in regards to the -- the revised site plan. Would we just be noting that in the motion in regards to that? Hood: The date on that revised plan is March 11, 2004, by Anderson David. That's when that was prepared. Moe: Okay. Mr. Chairman, I move to recommend approval of file number PFP 04-001, Request for Preliminary Final Plat approval for three residential building lots and one common lot on .73 acres in an R-15 zone for Troy Place Subdivision by PPN, LLC, 1236 East 2 ½ Street. Rohm: Would you like to include all staff comments? Moe: Excuse me with all staff comments. I knew there was something I was forgetting. Of the hearing date March 18, 2004, transmitted date of March 15, 2004. Newton-Huckabay: I second. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded that we approve PFP 04-001. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same? Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, TWO ABSENT Moe: Mr. Chair, I move to recommend approval of CUP 04-003, request for a Conditional Use Permit for a planned development to allow for a multi-family development consisting of one triplex and two four-plexes with reduced street frontage, setbacks, and minimum lot width requirements in an R-15 zone for Troy Place Subdivision by PPN, LLC, 1236 East 2 ½ Street, along with staff comments for the P&Z hearing date of March 18, 2004, transmitted date March 15, 2004, along with additional revised site plan from Anderson David, dated March 11, 2004, with additional comments of a landscape buffer to allow for no more than 13 parking stalls within the parking area. Fire Department final approval for the revised site plan appropriate signage for the no parking area as noted on the plan. Additional evergreens shrubbery as noted -- which area is that? On the south side of the property excuse me on the north side of the property. Newton-Huckabay: I second that motion. Rohm: Okay. It's been moved and seconded that we move to approve CUP 04-003. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission March 18, 2004 Page 14 of 14 MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, TWO ABSENT Powell: Chairman, just for clarification, when you say the north property line, did you only mean that adjoining Mr. -- Rohm: Stephens? Powell: Mr. Stephens? Moe: Yes, I did. I'm sorry. Powell: Thank you. Item 11. Public Hearing: PP 04-003 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 2 building lots on 2.7 acres in an I-L zone for Cafarelli Subdivision No. 2 by Shawn Fickes – 1950 West Franklin Road: Rohm: Thanks for that clarification. Okay. That concludes that. We have one item left on our agenda here tonight and it is Public Hearing PP 04-003, request for a Preliminary Plat approval of two building lots on 2.7 acres in an I-L zone for Cafarelli Subdivision No. 2 by Shawn Fickes, 1950 West Franklin Road and that project was not properly noticed and so we will not be continuing it, it will have to be renoticed and we will more than likely include it on the April 29th P&Z meeting, but until it's been properly noticed, we can't add it to any agenda. That one we will just have to wait and see if it's properly noticed. I think that's it. Moe: Mr. Chair, I move we adjourn. Newton-Huckabay: I second that. Rohm: It's been moved and seconded we adjourn. All those in favor say aye. We are done. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, TWO ABSENT MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:45 A.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.) APPROVED ______________________________ _____|_____|_____ KEITH BORUP - CHAIRMAN DATE APPROVED ATTEST: Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission March 18, 2004 Page 15 of 14 _____________________________________ WILLIAM G. BERG, JR, CITY CLERK