2010 10-07Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting October 7, 2010
Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of October 7, 2010, was
called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Michael Rohm.
Members Present: Chairman Michael Rohm, Commissioner Joe Marshall, and
Commissioner Tom O'Brien.
Members Not Present: Commissioner Scott Freeman and Commissioner Wendy
Newton-Huckabay.
Others Present: Machelle Hill, Ted Baird, Anna Canning, Scott Steckline and Dean
Willis.
Item 1: Roll-Call Attendance:
Roll-call
Wendy Newton-Huckabay X Tom O'Brien
Scott Freeman X Joe Marshall
X Michael Rohm -Chairman
Rohm: Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. At this time I'd like to call the regularly
scheduled meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission to order and begin with roll
call of Commissioners.
Item 2: Adoption of the Agenda.
Rohm: Okay. At this time the adoption of the agenda will be modified by Action Items
A, the continued public hearing for the Verizon Wireless will not be heard tonight and it
will be continued -- my presumption is to the next regularly scheduled meeting?
Canning: Yes.
Rohm: And so it will only be open for the purpose of continuing it. So, other than that
the agenda is as written. Could I get a motion to accept the agenda?
O'Brien: So moved.
Marshall: Second.
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to accept the agenda as amended. All those in
favor say aye. Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Item 3: Consent Agenda.
Planning & Zoning Commission
October 7, 2010
Page 2 of 13
A. Approve Minutes of September 16, 2010 Planning and Zoning
Commission Meeting
Rohm: The first item on the Consent Agenda is the approval of minutes from the
September 16th Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Any additions or
corrections?
Marshall: No, sir.
Rohm: Could I get a motion to accept the Consent Agenda?
Marshall: So moved.
O'Brien: Second.
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to accept the Consent Agenda. All those in
favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Item 4: Action Item.
A. Continued Public Hearing from September 16, 2010: CUP 10-
009 for Verizon Wireless Meridian High School by Nefi Garcia,
TAIC Located at 1900 W. Pine Avenue Request: Conditional
Use Permit Approval of a 100-Foot Tall Wireless
Communication Facility in an R-4 Zoning District
Rohm: At this time I'd like to open the continued public hearing from September 16th,
2010, of CUP 10-009 for Verizon Wireless Meridian High School for the sole purpose of
continuing to the next regular scheduled meeting -- I believe it's on the 21st of October,
2010.
Marshall: So moved.
O'Brien: Second.
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to continue CUP 10-009 to the regularly
scheduled meeting of October 21st. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion
carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
B. Public Hearing: MCU 10-001 Regency at River Valley by Bach
Investments, LLC Located at 2500 N. Eagle Road Request:
Planning & Zoning Commission
October 7, 2010
Page 3 of 13
Modify the Site Plan, Building Elevations and Certain
Conditions of the Conditional Use Permit Approved for the
Regency at River Valley Apartment Project
Rohm: Okay. The next item on our agenda is opening the public hearing for MCU 10-
001, Regency At River Valley by Bach Investments, LLC, and we will begin with the
staff report.
Canning: Thank you, chairman, and it's nice to see you Commissioners again. I'm
back for awhile subbing for Sonya today even, so -- this is the Regency At River Valley
modification to the approved Conditional Use Permit. The site consists of 10.56 acres
and it's zoned R-40 and it's located at 2500 North Eagle Road. You have seen this site
a few times before, so it should look familiar to you. The adjacent land use and zoning
-- it's mostly commercial C-G, with a little L-O across the street on Eagle Road and to
the east there is a residential subdivision zoned R-4 and a limited number of RUT
properties to the west, just kind of in a little corner of that property there. As I said
before, the application is a modification to the Conditional Use Permit. As you may
know, the director can approve small modifications, but any large modifications need to
come back to the Commission for approval. This project was previously approved for
annexation and Conditional Use Permit by the City Council in 2008. The summary of
their request today is they modified the existing development agreement to
accommodate the same changes that are proposed in this conditional use modification
and those were heard this week by the Council and they did approve those. So, that
was mentioned in your staff reports as kind of a fatal flaw analysis. It had to happen
before this could happen, so they did approve the DA modification. The applicant
requests approval to modify the site plan, the landscape plan, the building elevations,
and certain conditions of the Conditional Use Permit for the Regency At River Valley
apartment project as followed: There is a change in the maximum number of apartment
units from 204 to 240, an increase in the building height from three to four stories, a
decrease in the number of buildings from nine to eight and a reduction in the number of
gazebos around the pool area from five to four and, finally, an increase in the number of
garages from seven to eight. And I can go down to those two site plans for you. So,
this is -- thank you.
Rohm: Those are really nice looking leaves, though.
Canning: Beautiful, aren't they. Sonya always picks nice photos. Okay. So, this is the
zoning and aerial that you missed and here are the two site plans. So, the one on the
left was the original approved site plan and the one on the right is the new proposal.
They are also proposing some changes to the clubhouse, which include a decrease in
square footage from 4,805 to 4,536 and removal of the 755 square foot cabana and
new building elevations. However, the proposed building materials have not changed
and I can show you those elevations also. If I do it on the right screen. There we go.
There is also a change from a water feature to a bronze statue at the entryway and they
have included a hot tub as a site amenity. Finally, covered parking spaces have
increased from 299 to 331, so I will go back to the site plan for you for that. They are
Planning & Zoning Commission
October 7, 2010
Page 4 of 13
also being asked to allow for temporary emergency access to be provided via Eagle
Road until such time as Allys Avenue extends from River Valley to the north and
connects to Ustick Road. So, they have agreements with the owner of the Chinese food
restaurant to have access -- an emergency access out here. So, that would provide the
secondary access, rather than Allys Way, which would come north, basically at the
quarter mile there. Finally, they have asked that they be allowed to remove the
requirement for a six foot tall chain link fence to be installed along the South Slough and
a pedestrian bridge to be constructed over the South Slough, because they tiled the
South Slough, so there is not much need for either of those features. The
Comprehensive Plan designation is mixed use regional, which does allow for dwelling
units between six to forty dwelling units to the acre. It does comply with the
Comprehensive Plan. The density has increased since the original Conditional Use
Permit, but is still well within the mixed use regional designation. It also complies with
the Unified Development Code with the conditions of approval proposed for the project.
We do have those elevations and we have received no written testimony and to our
knowledge there are no outstanding issues before the Commission. Staff does
recommend approval with the modified conditions of approval in Exhibit B of the staff
report. And with that I'll try and answer any questions you may have.
Rohm: Thank you very much. Any questions of staff?
Marshall: Mr. Chair, I do. Could we go back to the site plan, the new proposed site
plan?
Canning: Sure.
Marshall: Okay. Looking at the proposed. Now, if I recall -- now, we were trying to get
access to Allys Way on the old one over to the right; right? And there was some issue
about trying to put that lane there, when they were going to put in -- I can see -- trying to
-- right in that area.
Canning: Commissioner Marshall, I don't think we were trying to get access in this area
to Allys, because it would have been far too close to the intersection of Allys and River
Valley.
Marshall: As I recall, though, it was a -- locked poles -- it was a fire truck access only.
Canning: Emergency access.
Marshall: Emergency access only and it was knocked down poles or something in
there, a gate or something they could open and have that access.
Canning: And that's one of the items they are asking to modify.
Marshall: Now -- right. Right. And in the conditions is that when Allys Way goes in we
want that back in. That's what staff is asking for. Is there anything -- is that covered
Planning & Zoning Commission
October 7, 2010
Page 5 of 13
parking there in between that and Allys Way that would make that impossible to go back
to that if we required that?
Canning: Let me pull up the staff report and I will check.
O'Brien: Mr. Chair?
Rohm: Commissioner O'Brien.
O'Brien: Yeah. Anna, just -- just for my own information on the fencing thing,
remember going over this on the old site plan. Why are we removing the fence along
the slough?
Canning: Because the slough was put into a pipe and covered with dirt.
O'Brien: Okay. I didn't quite understand that the the --
Canning: We call it -- it's tiling, but I could have said it more simply for you. I apologize.
O'Brien: I thought tiling meant concrete walls or something like that. Okay. That's all I
have. Thank you.
Marshall: Concrete pipes are referred to as tiles.
O'Brien: Oh. Yeah.
Marshall: I know you're searching for that, but once you have got that one, I have got
another one for you that's going to --
Canning: Maybe I can answer the other one.
Marshall: Well, the access through the Great Wall of China access up there, is that
going to be a full access for everybody's use or is it going to be knock downs like the fire
department had before or are we going to be flooding people out -- trying to get onto
Eagle Road through that -- are we just flooding traffic right onto that location and isn't
the proposed East River Valley Street going to have a streetlight at the end of that?
Because I believe across the street on the other side of Eagle is a school back in there
and we are trying to get a streetlight at the intersection there, because of school buses
turning across traffic and the like and so I'm a bit concerned about that.
Canning: River Valley is -- lines up with the half mile road. So, the eventual plan is to
have a light at the end of River Valley. Let me go back. The Great Wall of China was
approved for a temporary full access onto Eagle Road until such time as they have
access to River Valley. As those properties come in -- let me get that up for you. Hold
on. As these properties come in -- there is Great Wall. So, this property actually has a
little portion that goes out toward Eagle Road and they have granted cross-access and,
Planning & Zoning Commission
October 7, 2010
Page 6 of 13
then, we just need to get these two last ones to provide cross-access, so that the Great
Wall will eventually have access to River Valley. So, it is a full access at this point.
Marshall: Right.
Canning: But the intent is for it to become -- to be closed eventually.
Marshall: Right. So, at this time, though, with this proposal is -- is that a full access
through, then, for all the residents or is that just a fire only access that's locked that the
-- is in the proposal?
Canning: It doesn't appear from the site plan that it connects over. There is no
connection. There is a few parking spaces there. This goes into the empty lots.
Marshall: That other site plan had abetter -- no. No. No. That's the old proposed --
Canning: Oh. I'm sorry.
Marshall: That's the old proposed.
Canning: Sorry.
Marshall: Go on over. Now right there. See it? Right there in the middle. That doesn't
look like it's blocked to me. I'm thinking that's feeding all the residents right -- if they
want -- if they don't want to go down to the half mile, this is going to be quicker, they are
going to go right out through an access that we really didn't want in the first place onto
Eagle Road.
Canning: Let me move it over so I can look at it. It appears to be gated. There is a
gate right there. I can't read the text, but it does have swing marks for a gate.
Marshall: Sure does. Okay. I appreciate that. I guess further -- further questions might
be for the applicant. And, then, I guess my other question is the dark gray, is that
covered parking, then? No, it can't, because there is trees there, isn't it? In between.
Canning: The gray is covered parking.
Marshall: Okay. So, to the far right up against Allys Way --
Canning: This darn thing. Sorry. Can't get to the bottom.
Marshall: Understand.
Canning: There we go. So, now -- yeah. I'm trying to get to Allys Way for you.
Planning & Zoning Commission
October 7, 2010
Page 7 of 13
Marshall: To put that same access back in we have got to tear out some of that
covered parking. In the conditions we are saying that that -- that other access has to be
closed off once Allys Way is put in and they'd have to take access again through Allys
Way, but there is covered parking in the way.
Canning: We can have the applicant address that. It does look like there might be an
opportunity right here --
Marshall: Yeah.
Canning: -- to remove one of the trees.
Marshall: Yeah. Again, that access would be just for fire department use, but --
Canning: Or relocate one of the trees.
Marshall: All right. Thank you.
Canning: Okay.
Rohm: Any other questions?
Marshall: I'm good. Thank you. Thanks for your patience.
Rohm: All right. Would the applicant like to come forward. Please state your name and
address for the record.
Mason: William Mason. I'm with Mason
South in Nampa and, unfortunately, the
representative as the engineering firm and
I think there is some great questions that
client's already actually talked to me abou
ask your question again I will try to answer.
nd Stanfield. Our address is 826 3rd Street
applicant couldn't be here today. I'm his
so I will attempt to answer your question and
have been asked already and I'm glad my
t some of those. So, I guess if you'd like to
Marshall: Again, my question was that if -- the idea behind the city is that we want to
limit access to Eagle Road and I'm a little concerned that we are asking for access
through the Great Wall parking lot and I'm not sure -- is that a blocked access for the fire
department only?
Mason: That's correct. It's my understanding that what they would like to do is what --
we will eventually be on Allys Way, we will be up next to the Great Wall property and,
then, at the time that Allys Way extends to the north to Ustick they will switch that
blocked access or that fire department access only over to the Allys Way side and, then,
completely block off the -- permanently block off the access to Eagle Road. But it will
be blocked and gated, so that residents can't use it as a shortcut to get to Eagle Road.
Planning & Zoning Commission
October 7, 2010
Page 8 of 13
Marshall: Okay. Then, I would ask where do they plan to take access to Allys Way if
there is -- really, it looks like two very tight little areas -- is a fire truck going to be able to
get in between those covered parking areas?
Mason: And he did talk to me about that and I never noticed what you were talking
about, that it's through covered parking. So, that covered parking would have to be
relocated so that there is enough room for a fire department access in their full 20 feet
of clearance.
Marshall: And, then, we have got the issue of -- we have got a -- we are waiving some
of the requirements of covered parking, because none of the cover is allowed along the
canal area because of the easement and so you don't have enough covered parking to
meet UDC requirements and so is there someplace else to actually move it to?
Mason: I believe in the staff report there is a suggestion that we relocated some of the
covered parking around the clubhouse and I'm not sure if that is in the staff report or
not, but that was their intention to try to do a little more covered parking in the
clubhouse area. I think right now it's uncovered parking in that area.
Marshall: Then -- and I guess my question to staff is why we are agreeing to have less
covered parking than UDC requires?
Canning: The applicant has already received approval for a variance and the variance
runs with the property.
Marshall: But the variance was simply due to the fact that they weren't allowed to place
covered parking into the easement along the canal and feasibly with the old plan there
was no place else to move it to. But now with the new plan they are capable of putting
more on. I don't understand why we don't --
Mason: There is one less building in the new plan.
Marshall: Right. But more apartments.
Mason: More apartments, but there is more parking also, because there is less
buildings. There is an extra garage building and additional parking stalls because of
that one less building.
Marshall: But if I recall by the numbers, you're still not meeting the UDC requirements
for covered parking.
Mason: That's correct.
Marshall: Is that just because we got away with it before?
Planning & Zoning Commission
October 7, 2010
Page 9 of 13
Canning: Well, here, let me move the -- a larger version of the site plan over again. I'm
sorry. Good questions, Commissioner Marshall. Perhaps I can address that. As you
look at the site plan, there is --
Marshall: That's the original where we couldn't put any covered parking up against the
slough.
Canning: I'm getting there.
Marshall: Okay.
Canning: The only place where they didn't propose covered parking was kind of their
entry feature and I think that was for esthetic reasons.
Marshall: Understand that. Yeah.
Canning: So, it was a -- it was a balance.
Marshall: Yeah.
Canning: But they had pretty consistently provided it where ever they could. That's
certainly something the Commission can comment on and those balancing decisions
are certainly part of your role.
Marshall: Appreciate that.
Canning: Also, if the Commission wanted to clarify on the condition of approval that that
needs to be -- the future -- the future location of the Allys Way emergency access needs
to -- you may want to specify that that should be included on this CZC. It's mentioned in
the staff report, but it's not specifically -- it doesn't out and out say show this on CZC.
So, you could certainly do that if you want to.
Marshall: Thank you.
Canning: I can find the number for that one and give it to you.
Marshall: And it may well fit between those -- those covered stalls there. I just don't --
can't tell. 1 don't have a scale and --
Mason: I agree. I don't -- I haven't had a chance to look at it with electronic drawings to
verify that width either.
Marshall: Appreciate that.
Canning: That condition is the Planning Department condition 1.4.
Planning & Zoning Commission
October 7, 2010
Page 10 of 13
Marshall: Yeah. That's all my questions.
Rohm: Commissioner O'Brien?
O'Brien: I don't have anymore, other than I think the issues that Commissioner Marshall
brought up are certainly valid. I wouldn't have anything else other than that. The -- it is
somewhat confusing to me right now with the access around the Great Wall of China.
It's confusing for what it's going to be for all the people that will be using that particular
access. The other day going by there, that Great Wall of China is pretty crowded.
Marshall: I think the answer was that that's for fire department only and would be
blocked and gated and the fire department can unlock it and drive through. Other than
that, nobody else can use it.
O'Brien: Oh. Okay. I misunderstood.
Marshall: That was exactly what I was looking for and I appreciate that answer.
O'Brien: Okay.
Rohm: I suppose my only comment is I'm kind of looking for something from you saying
whether or not you accept the staff report as written or if there were any objections or
changes that -- beyond what the -- was presented in the meeting tonight and written in
the staff report. Is there any objections?
Mason: There is no objection. My client talked to me yesterday and he said that the
staff report is exactly what he's looking for.
Rohm: Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you. We do not have anyone else signed
up to speak to this project, but if anyone else would like to come forward now is that
time. Okay. Thank you.
Canning: Commissioner, I did want to put in one positive comment about the revised
site plan. In the previous site plan I was always a little concerned about these units
being physically separate from the sense of community that was created with the
internal open space over here and we had a lot of conversations with the Bach Homes
folks about that and I was pleased to see when they came back that this one's not to
any extent that the other ones were, I mean this one's a little separate, but given the
shape of the property it was inevitable. So, I think it will provide a better sense of
community for these folks that they are, basically, all on the open space, so thought that
was a positive part.
Rohm: Okay. Thank you. Could I get a motion to close the public hearing?
Marshall: Mr. Chair, I move we close the public hearing on MCU 10-001.
Planning & Zoning Commission
October 7, 2010
Page 11 of 13
O'Brien: Second.
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearing on MCU 10-001. All
those in savor say aye. Opposed? Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Rohm: Any discussion?
O'Brien: Mr. Chair, Ijust -- I'm still a little bit confused in that comments that were made
by Mr. Marshall -- Commissioner Marshall earlier about the full access on Eagle Road
and I thought you were referring to the one near the Great Wall of China. Right? Is that
-- but, then, you're saying that's access for fire department only. So, I'm confused
between the two. Not --
Marshall: Commissioner O'Brien, my -- that was my question as to whether or not
everyone in the apartment complex was allowed through that access through the Great
Wall to Eagle Road or was it blocked and allowed only for fire department use. 1 wasn't
sure. And he confirmed that -- Mr. Mason confirmed that it is blocked, it's for fire
department use only and that is the answer I was looking for and I'm very happy with
that answer.
O'Brien: Okay. Just wanted to make sure I was clear on that. Okay. Thank you.
Rohm: Any further discussion? Commissioner Marshall, do you have anything else
you'd like to add or would you care to make a motion?
Marshall: Mr. Chair, I'll make a motion.
Rohm: Okay.
Marshall: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony -- actually, I want to
make a comment first. I almost think once access between the Great Wall and -- what's
the road there at the bottom.
Canning: River Valley.
Marshall: River Valley. Thank you. Between when that property does develop and
there is cross-access easement, when that access easement opens -- is finally
available, I would hope that maybe we would take time to look at whether or not we
really want the fire department -- and I'd like the fire department to take a look at it and
determine whether or not the access through either those commercial areas or to Allys
Way would be better, because I don't know until that develops that maybe a better
access for the fire department and that's simply my comment that when that comes
back to us I'd hope we would take a look at it. I don't know.
Planning & Zoning Commission
October 7, 2010
Page 12 of 13
Rohm: I think typically when additional properties are developed those things are
looked at, so --
Marshall: So -- but, see, we are conditioning that the minute that this would go to Allys
Way period, that that will be terminated and blocked off. So, I'm just saying that I would
-- I don't know whether that would the better access or not at that time. Don't know how
it's going to develop and I don't know, there may be a road back there as an access
road that runs through there and maybe that's appropriate for the fire trucks to make an
access loop. I don't know. And considering it's for fire trucks only and emergency
vehicles only, that's just my thought. And that an access to Allys Way may or may not
be better. I don't know. And I'm going to leave that up to them and beyond that I'm
going to say, Mr. Chair, after considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony,
move to approve file number MCU 10-001 as presented in the staff report for the
hearing date of October 7th, 2010, with the single request of the future access to Allys
Way be shown on the CZC to be considered at the -- and I further move to direct staff to
prepare appropriate findings document to be considered at the next Planning and
Zoning Commission on October 21st, 2010.
O'Brien: Second.
Rohm: It has been moved and seconded to forward onto City Council recommending
approval -- or are we just approving this one? It doesn't have to go to City Council
again, does it?
Canning: Correct.
Rohm: It has been moved and seconded to approve MCU 10-001 as stated in the
motion. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Rohm: Could I get one more motion, please?
Marshall: Mr. Chair, I move that we adjourn.
O'Brien: Second.
Rohm: It's been moved and seconded that we adjourn. All those in favor say aye.
Opposed? Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Rohm: We are done.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:33 P.M.
Planning & Zoning Commission
October 7, 2010
Page 13 of 13
(AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.)
APPROVED
~~
MICHAEL OHM -CHAIRMAN DATE APPROVED
~ ~ ~~R~ ,,
JAYCEE L. HOLMAN, CITY C \ `~~y ~~~,~, ,/
c~' ~o~p~r 2 '~
Fo
- ~~~L _-
~~ ~~' ;
,''90,~ UST's ~.~~ ~`~
~~~
\~
a
ATTEST: C~,C;~'l~.-~~
LE K ~~~'''