Loading...
2011 07-21E IDIAN~-- MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING I D A H O COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA City Council Chambers 33 E. Broadway Avenue, Meridian, Idaho Thursday, July 21, 2011 at 7:00 p.m. 1. 2. 3. 4. Roll-call Attendance _X` Tom O'Brien _X Michael Rohm X _Xi Steven Yearsley _X Joe Marshall Scott Freeman -Chairman Adoption of the Agenda Approved Consent Agenda Approved A. Approve Minutes of June 16, 2011 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Action Items A. Public Hearing: AZ 11-001 Ten Mile Annexation by Janicek Properties, LLC; Fedrizzi Ten Mile, LLC; and SJJV, LLC Located West of S. Ten Mile Road and North of I-84 Request: Annexation and Zoning of 80.62 Acres of Land From RUT in Ada County to C-G Zone Continue Public Hearing to September 1, 2011 B. Public Hearing: ZOA 11-003 UDC Text Amendment -Wine and Beer Shops by Meridian Planning Department Request: Amend the Text of Certain Sections of the Unified Development Code (UDC) to Allow for Retail Wine and Beer Shops to Offer Servings of Such for Purchase by the Bottle or Giass Recommend Approval to City Council C. Public Hearing: ZOA 11-004 UDC Text Amendment -Water Conserving Landscapes by Meridian Planning Department Request: Amend the Text of Certain Sections of the Unified Development Code (UDC) to Encourage the Use of Water- Conserving Landscape Designs Recommend Approval to City Council Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda -Thursday, July 21, 2011 Page 1 of 2 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. D. Public Hearing: ZOA 11-005 UDC Text Amendment -Dispatch Centers by Meridian Planning Department Request: Amend the Text of Certain Sections of the Unified Development Code (UDC) to Allow for Dispatch Centers for Mobile Services Recommend Approval to City Council Meeting Adjourned at 7:35 p.m. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda -Thursday, July 21, 2011 Page 2 of 2 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting July 21, 2011 Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of July 21, 2011, was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Chairman Scott Freeman. Members Present: Chairman Scott Freeman, Commissioner Joe Marshall, Commissioner Michael Rohm, Commissioner Steven Yearsley and Commissioner Tom O'Brien. Others Present: Machelle Hill, Ted Baird, Pete Friedman, Sonya Wafters, and Dean Willis. Item 1: Roll-Call Attendance: Roll-call X Steven Yearsley X Tom O'Brien X Michael Rohm X Joe Marshall X Scott Freeman -Chairman Freeman: Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. At this time I'd like to call to order the regularly scheduled meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission, dated July 21st, 2011. And let's begin with roll call. Item 2: Adoption of the Agenda Freeman: Thank you. The first item is the adoption of the agenda and we do have one change, Item No. AZ 11-001, the Ten Mile annexation, will be opened only for the purpose of continuing it to September 1st. So, do I have a motion to adopt the agenda as amended? Rohm: So moved. O'Brien: Second. Freeman: It's been moved and seconded to adopt the agenda. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Okay. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 3: Consent Agenda A. Approve Minutes of June 16, 2091 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Freeman: Next item on the agenda is the Consent Agenda and the only item on there is the approval of the minutes for June 16th, 2011, Planning and Zoning Commission. Are Meridian Planning & Zoning July 21, 2011 Page 2 of 15 there any changes or corrections that need to be made that anyone is aware of? Could I get a motion? O'Brien: So moved. Yearsley: Second. Freeman: It's been moved and seconded to approve the Consent Agenda. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 4: Action Items A. Public Hearing: AZ 11-001 Ten Mile Annexation by Janicek Properties, LLC; Fedrizzi Ten Mile, LLC; and SJJV, LLC Located West of S. Ten Mile Road and North of I-84 Request: Annexation and Zoning of 80.62 Acres of Land From RUT in Ada County to C-G Zone Freeman: Okay. We have to open the item -- the public hearing for the continuance; correct? So, at this time I'd like to open the public hearing for Item No. AZ 11-001, Ten Mile annexation, for the sole purpose of continuing it to the September 1st meeting for the reason that the applicant has requested such continuance. Marshall: Mr. Chair, didn't they request like August 18th, but we are moving it to September 1; correct? Freeman: I'm not sure when they moved the date to, I just know that they have asked to continue it and we continuing it to our next -- Marshall: September 1. Freeman: September 1 meeting. Friedman: Yeah. Mr. Chair. Freeman: Yes. Friedman: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, yeah, initially that's correct, they had asked for a continuance until the 18th, but upon further discussion with us we -- they have requested it be moved to the 1st. Marshall: Sounds very good. Thank you. Freeman: Okay. So, could I get a motion? Meridian Planning & Zoning July 21, 2011 Page 3 of 15 Rohm: So moved. Marshall: Second. Freeman: It's been moved and seconded to continue Item AZ 11-001, Ten Mile annexation. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. B. Public Hearing: ZOA 11-003 UDC Text Amendment -Wine and Beer Shops by Meridian Planning Department Request: Amend the Text of Certain Sections of the Unified Development Code (UDC) to Allow for Retail Wine and Beer Shops to Offer Servings of Such for Purchase by the Bottle or Glass Freeman: Okay. We don't have anybody in the audience today, but we have three items that we will open separately. They are all UDC text amendments. If anybody does show up, though, after we hear the staff report on the item we will give them three minutes, if they would like to address anything of concern. Let's go ahead and open the public hearing for Item No. ZOA 11-003, UDC text amendment for wine and beer shops. Staff. Wafters: Chairman Freeman, Members of the Commission, the first application before you is an amendment to the text of certain sections of the Unified Development Code to allow for retail wine and beer shops, to offer servings of such for purchase by the bottle or glass. The Planning Department is proposing changes to the UDC to add a new use category that is different from a restaurant use in that food isn't served and beer and wine is offered for sale and is less intense than a drinking establishment and offers beer and wine sales. The use includes, but is not limited to wine shops and brewing supply stores and does not include drinking establishments, restaurants or stores that sell wine and beer, but do not offer servings. The new use is proposed to be a permitted use in the C-N, C-G, OT and TN-C districts and an accessory use in the H-E district. I think failed to mention C-C district is also a permitted use. Specific use standards are proposed to regulate the proposed use that -- excuse me -- require the applicant to maintain a current wine and beer sales permit for on premise consumption, which does include retail sales and that prohibits liquor sales. The applicant is required to comply with all state, county, and local laws regarding serving alcohol. Wine and beer servings are limited to the hours between 11:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. Store hours of operation are not limited unless otherwise restricted by the UDC. Written testimony on this application has been received from Ilene -- I don't know how you pronounce it -- Dudunake, owner of New Vintage Wine Shop and Christina Branesky, owner of Divine Wine. Both submitted letters requesting the hours for wine and beer sales be extended to 10:00 p.m. for the reasons stated in their letters. Staff is not opposed to the extension of the hours as requested if Commission wishes to approve the request. Staff is Meridian Planning & Zoning July 21, 2011 Page 4 of 15 recommending approval of the application per the staff report. Staff will stand for any questions the Commission may have. Freeman: Thank you, Sonya. Any questions? Marshall: Mr. Chair, I do. Freeman: Commissioner Marshall. Marshall: Sonya, one question. Reading through that it appeared that this was for wine and beer by the glass as long as they were not mainly a restaurant or bar or something like that, which would beg the question, then, can 49 percent of their sales be by the glass and 51 percent be one other thing, making that one other thing a majority, as in beer and wine to go or something like that? Are we willing to live with that, I guess, of 49 percent of all sales -- that was my take on it. I'm just -- did I get the right take or not? Wafters: Commissioners, Commissioner Marshall, it dropped the primary use. Marshall: The primary use. And primary use would be by definition 51 percent of anything else; right? Wafters: It's for the use stated. It does not fall within the restaurant or the drinking establishment category. Marshall: Right. And beer and wine to go does not fall in the bar or restaurant category; right? Wafters: It's more retain sales. Marshall: Right. Friedman: Commissioners, also -- and I'm not fully up to speed on it, however, a large part of that is also governed by the state liquor board in terms of the type of licenses. You have beer and wine, wine by the glass, drinks by the glass, so forth. But the intent here is we have these existing businesses, they primarily sell wine, wine glasses, bottle openers -- they provide tastings now. Marshall: Right. Friedman: It's just that they want the ability or requested the ability to offer someone, if they want to buy a glass of wine and have it while they are wandering around looking, to do so. They still have the ability to do that, but it's a more onerous process, you have to go through a Conditional Use Permit application and so forth to get there and so that it was the opinion of staff, with some direction from Council -- a little direction from Council, that we should probably find a home for them in the UDC short of going through the full conditional use process, because they really aren't drinking Meridian Planning & Zoning July 21, 2011 Page 5 of 15 establishments, but that's the only classification we currently had for them. We had a similar situation, sort of come to us with Brewforia down there. They originally were a beer retail -- retailing store, but they wanted the ability to sell beer by the glass. What they ended up doing is really becoming a restaurant, so they got a restaurant license, therefore, they weren't adrinking -- solely a drinking establishment. You go in there -- have been in there once on a Friday evening after work and it's packed. So, they really are -- so, again, we really are trying to facilitate their ability to do a little bit more than they do already without going through the burden of full conditional use process, because they really aren't drinking establishments. Do we want -- sort of a long winded way of saying do we really monitor the percentage of their sales? Not really, but I think, you know, if it becomes evident that, you know, basically, they have become a wine bar rather than -- than a retail outlet, then, it may be appropriate to revisit, but, you know, based on the input that we have had from the two owners so far their intent is really not to become drinking establishments. Freeman: Pete and Sonya, I -- in following up to Joe's question, I am aware of one or maybe two businesses that are primarily coffee shops. They sell lattes and snacks and such by day, but, then, in the evening they often become a wine shop where you can get a glass of wine and listen to some live music. Would they fall under the definition that we are setting up here or have we intentionally or unintentionally excluded them? Wafters: Do they sell -- Freeman: They do. Wafters: -- coffee also? Freeman: They have -- yeah. They sell coffee, that's what they sell during the day, but in the evening they are selling wine and glasses of wine and serving that and have live music. It seems to me this would be applicable to them. Wafters: I would believe that -- Freeman: But I would hate just because of a little tweak in the language to exclude them, because I think they probably ought to be included, but I'm not sure how we word that -- you know, it's primary use now? Wafters: It does say that the use includes, but is not limited to wine shops and brewing supply stores. Freeman: Okay. Waters: So, I think that, you know, allows for that. If you'd like to specifically put it in there, you know, I'm not -- Meridian Planning & Zoning July 21, 2011 Page 6 of 15 Friedman: Chairman, Commission Members, Ithink we -- I think we are okay with this. The example I came up with -- because I had another kind of twist on this whole scenario was what if say Albertson's or Fred Meyer, who have the wine section now and, you know, every now and then you get alittle -- they offer a little tasting, but if they were to set up a counter where you could go in and you could buy wine by the glass, would this cover that and it would. So, I think if you're a -- Freeman: Okay. Friedman: -- coffee shop Ithink -- you know, again, we look at the underlying use primarily. If a sign goes out that says wine bar and all that's being served is wine, you know, at a certain point during the evening, then, we might want to revisit them, but we know other things kind of -- we look at the underlying use, the primary use. Freeman: Okay. Thank you. Marshall: Mr. Chair, I guess my only concern, though, is revisiting that is more difficult after licenses have been granted and they are following the rules and, then, we have a problem with it and I'm curious -- I -- I know exactly the -- the establishments you were referring to and I like this idea, I think it's a good thing, I just want to make sure we get it right and my biggest concern is for those people that are willing to read and interpret the law and try to push it as far as they can to a point that we didn't intend and I'm just wondering how far are we willing to go with this and let's say we have a Fred Meyer where their majority is -- is groceries and sundries and things like that, I mean they could almost have a full blown bar in there where it's not even close to 49 percent of their sales and they still fall under the majority of the other and I don't know how to -- I don't think that's going to happen, but I worry about how -- how do we revisit that. mean that is very very legally difficult to do after the fact. Friedman: That's a good point, Commissioner, Members of the Commission. In addition to the UDC, all licenses issued by the state liquor agency have to be approved by the city, including the signature by the planning director. So, if they come through with a wine by the glass or a beer and wine license and that's solely what they are doing -- I mean we have another bite at the apple, if you will, because, typically, what we see -- I mean drinking establishments, as you know, come before you largely as conditional uses and that's defined in the UDC. The way we break it down is typically if you're a restaurant and you apply for a beer and wine license, again, that comes through the city, the city has to issue the license. We have an opportunity to see exactly what they are doing. We had our -- and I'll use Brewforia as an example again. We had followed that pretty closely and to make sure that they had a restaurant license approved with that, otherwise, they were going to be considered a drinking establishment and not a retail outlet. So, your concern is appreciated. I do think we have the sort of belt and suspenders approach to -- to do that. Freeman: Any other Commissioner questions? Meridian Planning & Zoning July 21, 2011 Page 7 of 15 Yearsley: I have one. Freeman: Commissioner Yearsley. Yearsley: On your -- you basically ask from 11:00 to 9:00. Is your reasoning for 9:00 o'clock -- I mean -- or is it just a number you chose or -- I'm trying to get an idea what's the difference between 9:00 and 10:00. Friedman: That's -- Commissioner -- thank you, Commissioner. I get to blame this on the former director. She pretty much wrote this. Freeman: It's started already. Friedman: It's started. Yeah. You know, after -- so, we -- you know, we looked at the text and said 9:00 o'clock. Is there anything magical about 9:00 o'clock? I don't think so. And we received the comments from the two owners today, it seemed to make sense, you know, is the witching hour 9:00 o'clock, does that mean that someone who has a glass of wine at 9:00 o'clock is -- they are out of compliance? You know, if somebody really is intent on wanting to continue to drink wine or drink beer or something after 9:00 o'clock, after 10:00 o'clock, there is plenty of other opportunities throughout the city, but, you know, I think that this gives them a little more latitude -- I don't think there is anything magic about 9:00 o'clock. If they had said, well, we really want to open from 11:00 in the morning until 2:00 o'clock in the morning, that would probably be a reason to raise some eyebrows about what's really the intent then. Yearsley: Okay. I agree. Freeman: And just a reminder that as we state the -- as we state a -- what are we doing -- stating a motion, we need to specify whether we want to keep it as written or amended to read 10:00 o'clock. Yearsley: Okay. Freeman: Any other questions or comments? O'Brien: Yeah. Just a comment. Freeman: Commissioner O'Brien. O'Brien: I just think there is enough layers of -- of -- or levels of security, if you will, towards the success of this particular motion that I don't think that someone is going to go out there and purposely try to abuse this -- this area. I just don't think that we, as a group, need to insert policing activity, if you will, towards the compliance, making sure whatever. I think there is enough layers in the city and the state -- or city, whatever, that makes sure that happens. Meridian Planning & Zoning July 21, 2011 Page 8 of 15 Freeman: Okay. Thank you, Commissioner O'Brien. Can we get a motion? Marshall: Mr. Chair? Freeman: Commissioner Marshall. Marshall: Seeings how there is no one out to testify and provide any public testimony whatsoever, looking behind the desk, there being no one out there, so I move that we actually close the public hearing on AZ -- or ZOA 11-003. Rohm: Second. Freeman: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearing on ZOA 11- 003. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Freeman: Okay. Could I get a motion on the item? Marshall: Mr. Chair? Freeman: Commissioner Marshall. Marshall: I move that we recommend approval -- recommend approval to City Council on ZOA 11-003 with the change from 9:00 o'clock to 10:00 o'clock as discussed. Yearsley: I will second that. Freeman: Okay. It's been moved and seconded as amended to approve ZOA 11-003. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carried. Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. C. Public Hearing: ZOA 11-004 UDC Text Amendment -Water Conserving Landscapes by Meridian Planning Department Request: Amend the Text of Certain Sections of the Unified Development Code (UDC) to Encourage the Use of Water- Conserving Landscape Designs Freeman: Okay. At this time I would like to open the public hearing on Item ZOA 11- 004, UDC text amendment, starting with the staff report. Friedman: Thanks, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. The amendment before you tonight is a revision to our landscaping ordinance to further define and, hopefully, provide some incentive for water conserving landscaping. By way of history, our Comprehensive Plan encourages the use of drought tolerant and water conserving Meridian Planning & Zoning July 21, 2011 Page 9 of 15 landscaping in our -- in our developments in the city. Our current landscape ordinance says xeriscape is encouraged and that's about all it says. So, staff about -- well, it was over a year ago assembled a steering committee of three landscape designers, landscape professionals, and started kind of going through this -- through the code. Now, Council's direction is we don't want to regulate water conserving landscaping at this time, we want to provide incentives and some encouragement and enticement. So, we spent most of last summer crafting what you have before you tonight and the -- the primary purpose is that right now under our code if you do a project -- primarily commercial project, however, there is some residential projects also, you have to have 70 percent vegetative coverage at maturity. As you can imagine, sometimes the course of least resistance is just we will roll out a bunch of sod, throw in a few trees, and those are pretty thirsty types of landscapings to maintain. So, from a philosophical standpoint we were talking about -- and we said, well, you know, really, it's going to be the person or party that wants to do the right thing, that has a real interest in, you know, wanting to save themselves some money, yeah, in water bills, particularly if they don't have irrigation water or access to reuse water, if they are paying for potable water, you know, there may be some incentive there. But we also wanted to further define what water conserving landscaping was. So, what we have done is as an alternative to the 70 percent, layout some specifics in terms of some design criteria that the other thing that the steering committee wanted to be very careful was by if you give them an alternative to the 70 percent vegetative cover that you don't just end up with a bunch of perma bark with a tree stuck in it here or there. So, they said, all right, at least 40 percent of the area to be landscaped has to have vegetation and if you choose to use turf -- no more than 50 percent of your landscaped area can be turf and they have identified some species that are less thirsty than others. We started initially talking about coming up with a plant list and they said, you know, that's just too ambitious, it just depends on a (ot of different factors. It depends on your soil conditions, it depends on the species, it depends on your planting scheme and so forth. Why don't we -- they said the Boise Parks Department list of water conserving plants is a pretty good list, so we will just reference that. So, that you will find that referenced in there in terms of utilization for water conserving plants. They did come up with a list of -- however, with a list of trees, they did agree on that. So, that's sort of the essence of the amendment. It's not a requirement, it's merely an option. There is not a lot to incentivize it right now. We weren't going to wander into you know, talking about reducing water rates and things like that, I kind mentioned that once and the Public Works director had daggers coming out of his eyes at me, but -- you know. So, we have put that in there for some guidance. It's probably the first step, you know, as we mature. We also did add language in there where reuse water is available it should be utilized. Right now it's in a very very small area in the city. Hopefully, that is expanding or will expand some day. So, you know, that's sort of in a nutshell what the genesis of this amendment was and, again, it doesn't require anybody to vary from the standards they are used to right now, they can continue on just the way they are. One of the members of our committee was actually the landscape architect for the new paramedic station out here and so as an exercise she designed the landscape to -- for the project to comply with what we were working on, which I thought was interesting. So, if you have any questions I'm happy to answer them, but -- Meridian Planning & Zoning July 21, 2011 Page 10 of 15 Freeman: Thank you. Any questions of staff? No questions? Again, there doesn't appear to be anybody in the audience wanting to give public testimony on this, so could I get a motion to close the public hearing? Rohm: So moved. Yearsley. Second. Freeman: It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearing. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Okay. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Freeman: Discussion? Marshall: A couple comments. Freeman: Commissioner Marshall. Marshall: I have to admit when I read through I was a little worried about the 40 percent vegetative cover, but I think I understand it a little better -- better now with Pete's description. I think it was a very good move on the city's part and I'm all for it. Freeman: I agree. Any other comments? Well, then, can I get a motion? Marshall: Mr. Chair? Freeman: Commissioner Marshall. Marshall: I move that we recommend approval to City Council of ZOA 11-004 as written for the hearing date of July 21st, 2011. Rohm: Second. Freeman: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to approve ZOA 11-004, UDC text amendment. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. D. Public Hearing: ZOA 11-005 UDC Text Amendment -Dispatch Centers by Meridian Planning Department Request: Amend the Text of Certain Sections of the Unified Development Code (UDC) to allow for Dispatch Centers for Mobile Services Meridian Planning & Zoning July 21, 2011 Page 11 of 15 Freeman: All right. At this time I'd like to open the public hearing for Item ZOA 11-005, UDC text amendment, beginning again with the staff report. Wafters: Thank you, Chairman Freeman, Members of the Commission. The next application before you is an amendment to the text of certain sections of the Unified Development Code to allow for dispatch centers for mobile services. The Planning Department proposes to add a new use category in the UDC for mobile service providers. Contractors and other personal and/or professional services that travel to the customer as part of the service provided are included in this category. Examples are taxis, landscape maintenance contractors, carpet cleaners, maid service and food delivery. This use excludes the service and/or para-fleet vehicles. This use is different from a contractor's yard in that equipment associated with the mobile service is contained within the vehicle and the provider travels to the customers to perform work. Work is not carried out on the site. The new use is proposed to be a permitted use in the C-G and I-L zoning districts and a conditional use in the C-N, C-C, L-O to ME zoning districts. Specific use standards are proposed to regulate the proposed use that prohibit outdoor storage of materials, require adequate off-street area to be provided for fleet vehicle storage and it prohibits the site from being used as a contractor's yard, a vehicle wrecking or junk yard and/or a freight or truck terminal. No written testimony has been received on this application and staff is recommending approval per the staff report. Stand for any questions the Commission may have. Freeman: Thank you, Sonya. Questions? Marshall: Mr. Chair, one real quick. Freeman: Commissioner Marshall. Marshall: Sorry, guys. I'm curious. But, Sonya, I saw in there one caveat about fleet issues, those that service fleets. Is that correct? Wafters: Uh-huh. Marshall: And I'm a little worried -- I'm always worried about somebody backdooring something. If we had a contractor that only contracted with other fleets, not their own fleet, but contracted to do service to other fleets would they, then, be excluded here -- Wafters: Commissioners, Commissioner Marshall, I'm not sure if I understand your question. The use specifically excludes the service, repair of fleet vehicles. Marshall: Right. Freeman: Just parking space for them, basically. No storage is allowed. Marshall: Oh. Okay. As on -- on the property. Meridian Planning & Zoning July 21, 2011 Page 12 of 15 Freeman: Yes. Wafters: Right. Marshall: Okay. I guess I misread that. I have read through pretty quick and Iwas -- felt that maybe we were excluding anybody that was servicing fleets. Wafters: We don't want there being a minor vehicle repair -- or major vehicle repair on the site is basically where we are going with that. Marshall: Right. Freeman: Okay. Thanks for clarifying. Marshall: On the record. Thank you. Yearsley: I have a question. Freeman: Commissioner Yearsley. Yearsley: Are we starting to see a lot of this come in? Is that the reason why? Wafters: Commissioner Yearsley, Commissioners, there have been some different requests, one being a maid service, that had a fleet of -- I don't know, like 20 vehicles. Friedman: Sixteen. Wafters: It was -- it was a lot. And there was just, you know, quite a few other -- like smaller businesses, carpet cleaners cropping up -- Friedman: Taxis. We have had a couple taxi companies now establishing themselves in the city and, as Sonya indicated, we have had this one maid service -- great company, love to see them in the city, unfortunately, a couple sites they choose just weren't going to work for them. Yearsley: Okay. Friedman: So, yeah, we are beginning to -- I think, you know, as the city has grown, as our -- as we have become much more of a full service city, with an employment base, as well as a residential base, we are seeing, you know, all the accompanying service providers following. Yearsley: Well, that's good to know, because I wasn't quite sure what brought the necessity of this ordinance to come in, so -- Wafters: Our current categories just didn't really include these type of uses, so -- Meridian Planning & Zoning July 21, 2011 Page 13 of 15 Yearsley: Okay. Thank you. Freeman: Any other questions of staff? Okay. Could I get a motion to close the public hearing -- O'Brien: So moved. Freeman: -- as there is no one here to testify. Rohm: Second. O'Brien: Second. Sorry. Freeman: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearing on Item ZOA 11-005. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Freeman: Any further discussion? Yearsley: I don't have any. Rohm: No, sir. Freeman: Could I get a motion? O'Brien: Mr. Chair? Freeman: Commissioner O'Brien. O'Brien: After hearing applicant and public testimony -- which we didn't receive -- move -- I recommend approval to the City Council of file ZOA 11-005 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of July 21st, 2011, with no modifications. Marshall: Second. Freeman: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to recommend approval of ZOA 11- 005. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Friedman: Mr. Chairman? Freeman: Yes, Pete. Meridian Planning & Zoning July 21, 2011 Page 14 of 15 Friedman: Before the .meeting started Commissioner Rohm and I were kind of talking about the lack of activity recently for the Commission, but I said we have a few things -- Freeman: Would you like the floor for a moment? Friedman: If you would like. Freeman: Please. Friedman: I would like to share with you the fact that you're not going to be getting off that lightly. You will get the month of August off. We do have a couple applications already in, as Sonya had mentioned. There is the Walmart application. We have taken in a Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezone application for some property down in South Ridge. You will be seeing that in the next couple of months. We have had pre- apps with people. There will be -- we had apre-app this week for a rezone of a residential -- parcel of residential subdivision. They are -- now that we are clearing a lot of our bigger projects through out of the pipe line, both Sonya and Kristy and going to be working on another round of UDC amendments of things that we have either noted or things that we have had in our action plan to address this year. So, as I was saying to Commissioner Rohm, what's happened over the last few months is a lot of the development proposals that came before the Commission and ultimately received approval by the Council, has been lying dormant for the last year and a half to two years, as you can imagine. Well, those are starting to resurrect themselves. Sonya has been doing a yeo person's job of knocking out some pretty good sized applications in the last few weeks, Center Cal being one of them, the certificate of zoning compliance for Center Cal. The Big AI's entertainment center. She's going to be working on the -- one of the Walmart applications and so -- and Regency At River Valley was another certificate of zoning compliance she recently completed. Bill's going to be working on another Walmart, he's got a couple of other projects, so -- Wafters: Meridian Vision is coming up. Friedman: What's that? Wafters: Meridian Vision is going forward. CZC. Friedman: Oh, yeah. The CZC on that. Right. So, you know, there is not a lot of hearing -- you know, you are not going to get hit with, you know, a lot of hearing level applications, I think there will still be some, but it's -- a lot of what you have worked on in the past now is starting to come out of the ground. So, I just want to let you know that -- and, again, we have an action plan that was very ambitious and, in fact, Anna took a look at it a couple of months ago with the Mayor and said, you know, I think I overestimated on this one. We do have another Comp Plan amendment and another revisit to the south Meridian plan for late -- later in the year, probably early part of next year, going to be issuing RFP for consultant services, probably in the fall on that. So, you will be looking at that. And possibly another Comp Plan amendment up in the Meridian Planning & Zoning July 21, 2011 Page 15 of 15 northwest corner of the city, although that's going to be taking some more discussion with the Mayor's office. So, never fear, we will have work for you. Freeman: Okay. Thank you for that status report, Pete. There being no further business on the agenda, I think we just need one more motion. O'Brien: Move to adjourn. Marshall: Second. Freeman: It's been moved and seconded to adjourn. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Freeman: We are adjourned. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:33 P.M. (AUDIO RE~`~bRDING ON FII,~ OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) SCOTT FREEMAN, ~CJrtAIR DATE APPROVED JAYCEE L. HOLMAN, CITY CL Y .r A. -~":i~zA y 1 V~ y ~;lr p ~~ ~,^r"~S t~` d~4~ i~ ,1 P ~J 9 ~?c~ ~ P `' ~ ~:~m '~' ~ ,-- ,.~, ti ~, ~~ ~~, iP 151 \-r ~ `z:~L ~~~ 0 ~~~~'~~~ ~ ~ T Y , ~~~ Meridian Planning Zoning Commission Meeting DATE: July 21, 2011 ITEM NUMBER: 3A PROJECT NUMBER: ITEM TITLE: July 21, 2011 PZ Minutes Approve Minutes of July 21, 2011 PZ meeting MEETING NOTES ~a~ ~/ ~ y- s-o CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS Mer~lian Planning Zoning Commission Meeting DATE: July', 2011 ITEM NUMBER: 4B PROJECT NUMBER: ZOA 11-003 ITEM TITLE: UDC Text Amendment -Wine & Beer Shops Public Hearing- Amend the text of certain sections of the UDC to allow for retail wine and beer shops to offer servings of such for purchase by the bottle or glass by Planning Dept. MEETING NOTES ~-~~~y Jet ~v ~L" f~ a3 S=(~ CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS Mer~ an Planning Zoning Commission Meeting DATE: July f, 2011 ITEM NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: ZOA 11-004 ITEM TITLE: UDC Text -Water Conserving Landscapes Public Hearing- Amend the text of certain sections of the UDC to encourage the use of water-conserving landscape designs by Planning Dept. MEETING NOTES ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~.,~`m~/ ~~ CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS Meridian Planning Zoning Commission Meeting DATE: July 21, 2011 ITEM NUMBER: 5D PROJECT NUMBER: ZOA 11-005 ITEM TITLE: UDC Text -Dispatch Centers Public Hearing- Amend the text of certain sections of the UDC to allow for dispatch centers for mobile services by Planning Dept. MEETING NOTES CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS Meridian Planning Zoning Commission Meeting DATE: July 21, 2011 ITEM NUMBER: 4A PROJECT NUMBER: AZ 11-001 ITEM TITLE: Ten Mile Annexation Public Hearing -Annexation and Zoning of 80.62 acres of land from RUT in Ada County to C-G zone by Janicek Properties, LLC; Fedrizzi Ten Mile, LLC; and SJJV, LLC -west ofS. Ten Mile Road and north of I-84 MEETING NOTES CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS