Loading...
Minutes - 1997 - Planning & Zoning - 01/06/1997 - Regular EAGLE PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING MINUTES I.,.£agIÎ"Plånm n ü:gOmmission met in regular session on January 6, 1997, Vice-Chairman Brinton presiding. JANUARY 6,1997 The following members were present: DONALD BRINTON, RUSSEL MAYER, FARRIN FARNWORTH. ABSENT: BERT BRADLEY AND COLEEN MAILE. CONSENT AGENDA REQUEST FOR APPROVAL: A. Minutes of December 16,1996. BRINTON: Clarification. Page 11, last paragraph on page where it says "It might help to put part 5% of building face because that is really what you are saying. I'm not sure I sure I understand what we are saying there. Do any of you recall what we were saying? DISCUSSION BRINTON: We were going to put in parenthesis, that's what the "par" stands for. We can clarify those minutes with this correction. Moved by Farnworth and Seconded by Mayer to approve the minutes of the December 16, 1996, meeting as corrected. ALL AYE: MOTION CARRIED. OLD BUSINESS: NONE PUBLIC HEARINGS: Vice-Chairman Brinton announced it is the time and the place for the Public Hearing. A. Conditional Use (CU-11-96) Idaho Transportation Department, represented by Doug Chase, is requesting conditional use approval for gravel crushing and hot plant operation for the construction of the new State Highway 55 alignment. The site is located north of Hill Rd. In the newly acquired right of way,~þpfôX1imately 1/4 mile west of Horseshoe Bend Rd. H, \P&Z\MBBTINGS\PLAN_ZON\MINUTBS\1997\PZO1O697 . MIN 1 tlis keslthe entire operation on site and is not proposing to deliver I tOth . solt~y for the Highway 55 construction project. There is actually ditiônaIIU i L..lrime Earth and Idaho Sand and Gravel which encompasses this land. Staff recommends approval, it is a temporary conditional use permit, with site specific conditions and standard conditions in the report. EPORT: MARK BUTLER: Overview of the staff report. FARNWORTH: Are they actually going to be crushing at this site? BUTLER: I think the Applicant can give you the details better. I believe the answer to your question is yes. BRINTON: Is the Applicant present and would he please step forward. Public Testimony: Doug Chase Project Development Engineer ITD, District III Chinden Blvd. Boise, Idaho As you have been made aware there already is a Conditional Use Permit for a crushing operation at this location. We are requesting that we have one in our name so it is made available to our Contractor. The ability to place this operation at this location will save the taxpayers money as opposed to having to go somewhere else. As well save the Contractor time and to obtain his own source. You are probably familiar with the project. It starts at State Street, goes to Beacon Light Road and then pass Shadow Valley Golf Course. The property in question is between Hill Road and Floating Feather Road. FARNWORTH: The property you are talking about is North of Hill Road. Is it just the right of way land the State has acquired to put this road through. Is this the only property you are talking about. APPLICANT: Our proposal is to have this operation within the highway right of way. North of Hill Road. BRINTON: Just for clarification purposes. You are not intending to obtain gravel from any of the other adjacent locations. That all of the gravel will be obtained from within the right of way. Is that correct? H, \P&Z\MBBTINGS\PLAN_ZON\MINUTBS\1997\PZO1O697 .MIN 2 ingand hot plant in the right- APPLICANT: We are intending to have the operation of If the Contractor finds it necessary to go somewhere else to obtain gravel that ei up to his discretion. BRINTON: What are your hours of operation that you are proposing? APPLICANT: We are attempting to provide the avenue for the contractor if he wishes to place this operation at that location. His operations would have to met whatever requirements that you or Division of Environmental Quality, or whoever may have jurisdiction would apply. So I can't answer that. BRINTON: What are the plans for the clean up of the plant once it is complete? APPLICANT: The operation will be located within the right-of-way and it will have to be removed at the end of the project because that is where the road will be located. DISCUSSION APPLICANT: It will be a four lane highway from State Highway 44, which is State Street, to Beacon Light Road and then it will go through Beacon Light Road a couple hundred feet, there will be a left turn bay into Beacon Light and into Brookside Lane, it will then narrow down to a two lane highway with wide shoulders from there to the north end of the Shadow Valley Golf Course. MAYER: On State Street from the existing 55 to the new bypass is there still going to be an area of two lane road there? APPLICANT: NO. There will be four lanes all the way. With traffic signals at Hill Road and Floating Feather with left turns lanes at that location. BRINTON: On State Street, the existing State Street from the existing 55 to the new 55, is that going to be four lane or two lane? APPLICANT: That will be widen to a four lane section. Diane Butterfield 2400 Hill Road Boise, Idaho When you say it is standard procedure, what is standàf shave lived through a few months of asphalt operation for Idaho Sand and Gravel d ~ta.nda,(d is no acceptable. They were keeping asphalt hot all night. You couldn't h e your witliÇ)ws open at night. H, \P&Z\MBBTINGS\PLAN_ZON\MINUTBS\1997\PZO1O697 .MIN 3 Y:e~ßonable whether that kind of asphalt should be, that kind of stuff that goes into ir should be around where kids are all the time anyway. We are starting to research at~ . NTOI.: Wou to speak. Hearing none we will close the Public Hearing at this time. Would you like to state anything else Mr. Chase. APPLICANT: We do have a State owned gravel source which is adjacent to Hill Road. There is a gravel source owned by ACHD adjacent to Hill Road and right next to that is a gravel source owned by the State of Idaho and I believe it wouldn't be necessary for use to obtain any permits to operate a hot plant operation in that location. BRINTON: Are you aware of any environmental conflicts with the hot plant. Has there been any studies that you are aware of as far as the affect on humans? APPLICANT: I am not aware of none. Hot plant operations are required to follow all the rules and regulations regarding air quality. FARNWORTH: I lived through the bypass they put on the other end. They didn't start up the asphalt plant until they were ready to lay it early in the morning and shut it off at night. That should be a condition that should go on. I am assuming that this highway would probably be laid the same way. I think we would want to condition it that they just run the plant during the day while they are laying the asphalt. MAYER: How many days would you project that it will take to lay this asphalt. How long will the plant be running? APPLICANT: I would defer that to the Contractor who is in the audience, I have no idea. LEGAL COUNSEL: The commission could go ahead and inquire of the contractor directly at this time. Jerry Cox Steelman Construction Clarkston, Washington It states in the specifications 12 hours maximum for crushing and asphalt. I think that would primarily be day light hours. I would suggest from 6:00 to 6:00 or 7:00 to 7:00. The asphalt plant would be running fewer hours than that, around 10 hours. The only fumes that I would know about would be from keeping the asphalt hot. That stuff has to be kept at about 250 degrees in an insulated closed tank but the venting involved in that. It is an air quality permitting situation where they have e)~~rernelysensitive to the fumes. It is controlled. I didn't answer the questions. Util4' paving days. You will H, \P&Z\MBBTINGS\PLAN_ZON\MINUTBS\1997\PZO1O697 .MIN 4 see 12 of those days in May and probably another 18 of those days in er. This is just a guess. :I"h s is, they really wouldn't have come in to get permission to is. There a y i mit to do this on the property. Even if we would turn this down they could still go ahead and do what they want and since they are following all of the environmental quality standards I'm not sure that we could say they can't do this. FARNWORTH: I move that we approve the Conditional Use Permit CU-11-96 Idaho Transportation Department for temporary gravel crushing and hot plant operation with no conditions other than the ones that are staff conditions. MAYER: Are the hours of operation in the staff conditions? BUTLER: No. FARNWORTH: Let me change the Motion. I would revise the Motion with the conditions that the staff has approved, the standard conditions of the staff and site specific conditions that staff approved plus specific condition that the hot plant and crushing is not running more than 12 hours during day light hours and Seconded by MAYER. ALL AYE: MOTION CARRIED BUTLER: Before you move on to the next item, point of interest, Doug Chase is the gentleman you would need to speak with regarding the concerns you have with the intersection of Ballantyne and State and Parkinson and State and I thought since he is here now you might want to ask him some questions. BRINTON: That was information that we were discussing at our last Planning and Zoning meeting. It has come to our attention basically visual on our part of the hazard that appears at the junction of State Street to the West where it meets the by-pass or the alternate route. #1. The sharp curve, the lack of lighting that you can visually see and particularly the lighting on the intersection itself of State Street and the Alternate Route on the West side. One of the arrow signs has been knocked over and I believe you can see what appears to be someone tried to climb the barrier on the West side. It was reported on the East Side where State Street dead ends East of Parkinson you have some barriers at the end of that where there are some black marks at the top of that. People are not recognizing that the road changes. What happens on the West End at night, it appears as you go out that way because you see lights coming to you in a straight fashion that the road is going straight and it doesn't. It was brought to the attention of P&Z that there is a real safety hazard there. Someone is going to get killed:<IanifiKithe design is pretty poor, it is a sharp curve and people are not slowing down for il~ H, \P&Z\MBBTINGS\PLAN_ZON\MINUTBS\1997\PZO1O697 . MIN 5 HASE: We are aware that there are some concerns at those locations. The 0 sign included luminaries at quite a few locations along the Alternate Route. It i ôlíc a h th òadway goes through a City the payment for utilities for I es i . il of that City and apparently the City of Eagle choose not to p ipatÎ a $d to eliminate the lumination at those locations. The contract is still open. This is a great opportunity for us to get back together and come to an agreement for lumination to be included at those locations. It would be the best time to do that now since we still have a contractor on board, we still have the opportunity to participate with Federal Funds for those activities. We just need to come to an agreement with the City of Eagle to pay for the utility costs for that lumination. DISCUSSION BUTLER: There are two illumination agreements that I am familiar with. One came through for Eagle Road and the Alternate Route and that was approved prior to my hiring on here. The Second one was at the intersection of State Highway 44 and the new connection with the North/South route of 55 and that was not approved based upon the fact that it was an intersection of two State highways. I don't remember a request for illumination agreements at these locations and the City might view these differently since they have more of an effect with regards to the City. I would recommend that ITD come forward to us with an illumination agreement for both of those intersections and we will see how City Council responds. DOUG CHASE: We would love to do that. DISCUSSION B. Rezone (RZ-5-96) McDonalds Corporation, represented by Loy Taylor, is requesting a rezone from A (agricultural) to C-2 (general business district). The site is located at 434 S. Eagle Rd., near the northeastern corner of Eagle Rd. And the Eagle Alternate Route. BRINTON: We have a request that this be continued to February 3rd meeting. STAFF REPORT: MARK BUTLER: The reason for the request is that he had submitted site designs and now has chosen to change those based upon his conversations with Albertson's representatives and so we have incorrect site designs. MAYER: I move that we continue the Rezone (RZ-5-96) and the Conditional Use (CU- 12-96) for McDonalds to February 3,1996, and Seconded by FARNWORTH. ALL AYE: MOTION CARRIED C. Conditional Use (CU-12-96) McDonalds Corpor~fipl'"l,repressl1ted by boy I"aylor, H, \P&Z\MBETINGS\PLAN_ZON\MINUTBS\1997\PZO1O697 .MIN 6 i~u~:I§:Q..!:r~questing conditional use approval for the construction of a fast food restaurant . a drive-thru window. The site is located at 434 S. Eagle Rd., near the northeast corner 9~Jd.'e e ernate Route. C.øh -86) The City of Eagle, represented by D. Korey Lowder, is requesting conditional use approval for a 672 sq.ft. temporary mobile office located directly behind City Hall. The site is located at 310 E. State St. approximately 200 feet east of Second St. BUTLER: This Applicant didn't get their sign posted in time so Staff is recommending that the item be continued so that there is proper posting. The recommendation would be to continue it until the meeting of the 13th. BRINTON: If we can in a motion, I would like to move 6-D and 6-F which is the Facts of Findings off from 6-D to February 13th. MAYER: I make a Motion that we do that and Seconded by Farnworth. ALL AYE: MOTION CARRIED NEW BUSINESS: A. Design Review (DR-22-96) New Horizons, represented by Debbie Anderson with Idaho Electric Signs, is requesting Design Review approval for a 36 sq.ft. exterior- illuminated monument sign for New horizons Day care facility. The site is located on the north side of State Street at 1740 E. State St., approximately 900 ft. East of Edgewood Ln. BUTLER: The Applicant is requesting that this item be continued, they are still working on their landscaping plans and would like the item continued until the meeting of January 21st. BRINTON: It has been requested that we move item 7-A the Design Review of New Horizons Day care sign to January 21st. FARNWORTH: So moved and Seconded by MAYER. ALL AYE: MOTION CARRIED B. Design Review (DR-23-96) The Land Group, represented by David Koga, is requesting Design Review approval for redevelopment of an existing residential site for use as a professional office facility. The 0.42 acre site is located at 128 S. Eagle Rd. On the southeast corner of Eagle Rd. and Aikens Rd. H, \P&Z\MBBTINGS\PLAN_ZON\MINUTBS\1997\PZO1O697 .MIN 7 STAFF REPORT: MARK BUTLER: Overview of Staff immediate comment from our Legal Counsel before I continue, which is whether recommendations from the Design Review Committee can really be given to the rr! u Ilfact that three of the five members had to abstain due to a c nte liêr was not there, the one member that was there made the 'on bdtnò onld.......s.etond it. I don't believe the items that are written here are a real motion. LEGAL COUNSEL: Technically I believe the Zoning Administrator is correct. Without a second to the Motion their action has not legal force. They did not have a voting majority. At most they could have moved to have that matter just come straight before Planning & Zoning. This is the most appropriate way to treat that. Your decision will be binding and if the Applicant or any third party wanted to appeal your decision they could do so to the City Council. I think you can go ahead and act on that tonight. BUTLER: It appears that the Applicant has a couple of things they would like to talk to the Commission about. There is one item that is quite a point of interest and that item is outlined in Site Specific condition #7. I have given you a copy of a memo dated to day and I have give a copy to the Applicant. It is stating what would be violations of our current Design Review Ordinance with regard to set back and lot coverage if this site was approved. I could not get myself to recommend denial or recommend that the building be modified. I have worked with Legal Staff quite a bit to come up with some language to allow the Applicant to take advantage of this building. BRINTON: The question I would have of Staff is six months a sufficient and realistic time frame for the Applicant. BUTLER: Three months is possible. Maybe more than six months is needed. Maybe the Commission would consider a longer time frame. Dave Koga 82 E. State Street Eagle, Idaho This is the first time we have seen this letter in regard to #7 in regard to the set backs. We would like to work with the City on this problem. This would probably take more than six months but we are willing to work with this Design Review Ordinances. I guess our only comment on this is that we should look at more than a year to go through this process. The other item, since it was not a recommendation from Design Review, we would comply with those recommendations. BRINTON: Based on the fact that it wasn't a official rev! y~esign Review it might be well for you to go through what you plan to do. Can you a moment and dothat, either you or your people? What we are here tonight is to ap veth~ actûal designrevi~w. H, \P&Z\MBBTINGS\PLAN_ZON\MINUTBS\1997\PZO1O697 . MIN 8 ')was not prepared for this but I can walk you through the site. The existing home h a lofof existing pines and an existing pool in the back. We have provided a parking I n:::tlitêbåi. Ijj)st . g alkway system and a patio system in the front. Install a h dicåÞ:i:rarti ended landscape foundation planning around the building. dtlite~ r r a 8' wide hedge as a buffer. To the South there is Drainage District #2 canal and we have saved the existing vegetation. There is an existing four car garage which would not be used for parking, we will use that four car garage for our trash, for our dumpster. We have requirements for curb, gutter and sidewalks to be installed along Eagle Road and Aikens. We have to provide 50% glass on the garage. All the other site specific and standard conditions requirements are approved. DISCUSSION Franz Witte 9770 W. State Boise, Idaho It appears we have an unique situation here and that these properties were not taken into consideration when the Ordinance was developed. We are very agreeable, we want to do what we believe Eagle is interested in. Retention of the existing trees. It becomes an issue of where what is most important for this piece of property, do we want to have expansion of the building so that we have 40% of this ground cover at the loss of trees, really what do you people want to have. It is a unique situation and it maybe something as simple as putting language in the Ordinance that judgments may be made by Planning & Zoning or the Council to take unique situations into consideration. FARNWORTH: I have got to agree with what he said. We have other projects that are going to come forth in this particular area or other areas. We need to really look at this and see if we can't fit some language into our code that would give us some latitude to look at a particular nice looking property. BUTLER: I would like to clarify a couple of points. This italic language could actually be placed with condition #4. Which is the condition that the garage door should be replaced with glass. I would rather see that than see a deferral. I think they would rather see Code Amendments. I think that paragraph I wrote there could apply to Site Specific Condition #4 and #5. #5 would be the condition for the store front going into that garage. DISCUSSION BRINTON: Lets see if we have a clear understanding of what direction we are going. On Site Specific #4 which has to do with the garage doOr dirêplacing it with frame and glass, Item #4 on Page 10 of 12, I believe it is the Commi nsdesir:e to continue that and relook the Code requirements on that and the same wi 1êm'7, the frontbuilding set H, \P&Z\MBETINGS\PLAN_ZON\MINUTBS\1997\PZO1O697 .MIN 9 d the side building set backs, have that reconsidered as far as the Code goes. where we are talking about building the enclosed trash container that we could do a . Pfr~ry . to e at and as long as they were meeting the requirements of a nsideiisto ot closed in an inside storage, then they need to construct a J capêd, r d 'closure. I think we could come in and do that. The only other thing I see is on the recommendation that is on Page 1 of 1, the Motion that was made that wasn't a Motion because it was never seconded is the Bonding on the sidewalk and the street side for Aikens Road. You need to make a decision on how you want to handle that. It sounds to me that what you are looking at there is have them be required to put the 10' sidewalk in from Eagle Road to the eastern edge of the building and then bond for the rest. DISCUSSION BRINTON: I will state the Motion. On Design Review DR-23-96 The Land Group Professional Office it is moved that we accept the site specific recommendations as shown by Staff and also the Standard Conditions as shown by Staff on the Site Specific location, Item #4 we will postpone that for the actual implementation of that for a one (1) year time frame to modify Code as we believe that was not the intent of the existing Code to make a complete building modifications in order to meet the Code and the same thing would apply with Item #7 of Site Specific Conditions as far as the building set back goes. On Item #6 of the Site Specific Conditions we would allow the trash to be placed within the garage or within enclosed within the building, if at anytime it becomes not within the building then they have to construct the appropriate trash enclosure as outlined by Code and they would also then provide a 10' width of sidewalk at the time ACHD does their work on Eagle Road, the 10' sidewalk would be along Aiken Road to the East point of their building and they will bond for the remainder across the Eastern most portion of their property until such time as we have a design for the entire Aiken Road. MAYER: That was my Motion, and Seconded by FARNWORTH. DISCUSSION BUTLER: Point of clarification. You didn't get the deferral on Site Specific Condition #5 and I just wanted to clarify if you wanted that same postponement. BRINTON: I didn't get #5, it needs to be under the same Code scenario as #4 and #7. With that clarification do I hear an OK from the one making the Motion. MAYER: Yes and Seconded by FARNWORTH. ALL AYE: MOTION CARRIED H, \P&Z\MBBTINGS\PLAN_ZON\MINUTBS\1997\PZO1O697 .MIN 10 C" .. .. g~sign Review (DR-25-96) Pastor Bill Hereford, with the New heights Baptist C rch, is requesting Design Review Approval for a new 6 foot high monument sign. The r~po fib t~~ at the southeast corner of Mission Drive and Eagle Road, xitnåte rthiibf State Street. STAFF REPORT: MARK BUTLER: Overview of Staff Report Staff had recommended approval I think I missed what the Design Review caught. Which was that the sign didn't seem to have a character from the 1870's to 1930's look. The design didn't have any building materials that were similar to the building. I probably should have recommended denial. The Design Review Committee did recommended denial based on the fact that the sign does not provide a turn of the century appearance and does not have any design features that are similar to the existing Church building. FARNWORTH: I have a question for Legal Counsel. I have property directly across the street from this, would I be in conflict with this. LEGAL COUNSEL: You have a potential conflict of interest if you believe that your situation being across the street would cause you to make a decision one way or the other. In other words not have an unbiased decision. FARNWORTH: As I saw this I wasn't excited, I had a lot of questions about this. I really don't have a lot of problem with it other than I didn't particularly like the sign that was going to be sitting there. Maybe I better not. I think I will excuse myself on this item. BRINTON: We do not have an Applicant here tonight? BUTLER: No we do not. I mailed him the notice. BRINTON: I have a question of Staff. It is hard to tell from the information that has been given to us whether this piece of property that they are proposing to place this on is owned by them. Do you know whether it is or not? BUTLER: The applicant told me it was. I asked him that question. DISCUSSION BRINTON: I guess I have mixed emotions. It doesn't have the appearance of the existing church. Does it specify in our Code that the monument sign must match the existing building or structure. I think that would be crucial as far as that goes. DISCUSSION H, \P&Z\MBBTINGS\PLAN_ZON\MINUTBS\1997\PZO1O697 .MIN 11 . .COUNSEL: If you want to give the Applicant the opportunity to make a p ntation and perhaps some minor modifications they may be considering you could c ,tin. i .. yo deny it tonight they'would have to go through the process a in. DISCUSSION MAYER: I make a Motion that we continue this to give them a chance to change the size of the reader board and also to show us how this meets the design of the building. To continue this to January 21, 1997, and Seconded by BRINTON. ALL AYE: MOTION CARRIED D. Design Review (DR-26-96) Dennis Baker, with B.B. One loC., is requesting approval of a landscape plan for the Channel Center Subdivision. The 18.2 acre site is located at the southwest corner of the Alternate Route and Eagle Road. STAFF REPORT: MARK BUTLER: Overview of Staff Report The Design Review made two recommendations. #1-Proposed unmowed grass between the pathway and the barrow pit along Eagle Road shall be green throughout the year. #2- That the variety of trees proposed to be along the river shall be given additional consideration to be similar to what is currently along the river. The Applicant agreed to provide some trees to what are similar to what is down by the river. DISCUSSION MAYER: I make a motion that we approve Design Review DR-26-96 Channel Center landscaping and that the Applicant give the variety of trees that he is going to put along the river, that he bring that back before Design Review and have it approved by Design Review before signing of the final plat by the Engineer and Seconded by FARNWORTH. ALL AYE: MOTION CARRIED E. Ada County Transmittal (96-30-V) The applicant is requesting that Ada County allow a variance of the 100 foot river setback requirement in the floodway district to allow construction of a single family dwelling 50 feet from the river. The site is located at 1727 S. Trout Road approximately Y2 mile south of Hatchery Road and Y2 mile east of Linder Road. The site is within the Eagle Area of Impact. STAFF REPORT: MARK BUTLER: Overview of Staff H, \P&Z\MBBTINGS\PLAN_ZON\MINUTBS\1997\PZO1O697 .MIN 12 I need to clarify an important fact. The report says the A . I~family dwelling SO' from the river, It is actually SO' from the floodway line. A 100' thefloodway line is required. The floodway line is a bit away from the edge of the .::uh1fôlí pqftstill stands. ggHcant. I would like to bring this forward to the Commission a .fâxJ:iere at this time. Terry Peugh 9SS0 Bethel Court Boise, Idaho I have been involved with this property for about 3-1/2 years. There are two building pad sites on this large piece of property. One of them has a house on it already. Mr. Kerstein purchased the other 11 acres and wants to build a house on the remaining buildable area. By buildable area I mean outside the floodway district, outside the 100 year flood. Unfortunately when I staked the house I used an architect disc that had SO' to far towards the floodway district boundary. I was aware of this only I didn't catch it in time. There is two options here. One is to move the house back where it should be SO' or apply for a variance. The owner wanted to apply for a variance. There is a bluff up there. By granting this variance the house is more situated not to disturb the use from up above. We are not requesting a variance from the set back from the river. It is from a floodway line that goes through a vacant field. I can show the Commission some pictures. (Commissioners' look at pictures supplied by the Applicant and discussion in regards to same). We are providing access to the Pioneer Irrigation District. We have put some gravel in the turn around area near the dam. DISCUSSION FARNWORTH: I'm pretty liberal. My feeling is, if the water is going to flood in one spot SO' is not going to make any difference, it is going to flood the same direction. I realize it was a man made mistake and we don't punish anyone for making a mistake. Even if he moves his house back SO' we have the same amount of height, dirt, flooding, the same amount of water moving. What difference does it make, especially if it is not right against the river. MAYER: What Farrin said I agree with it. By moving the house it is not going to change the elevation or any of the ground. It's just going to change the position of the house. I walked the property and there was standing water and there was one spot where there was a building pad. The building pad is going to be there the only thing is the placement of the house. In this situation I would say I would find no problem with putting the house where they have it right now. H, \P&Z\MBBTINGS\PLAN_ZON\MINUTBS\1997\PZO1O697 . MIN 13 DISCUSSION : I have to agree in this particular case. We don't have a clear view of where that actually is. They are imaginary lines to a certain extent and in this particular case gòl e rigs that much. I would be receptive to a motion from qt. I. ents tonight would go before Ada County for their review on e$~åY. DISCUSSION FARNWORTH: I move that we approve this Variance Ada County Transmittal 96-30-V for the reasons that we have stated that additional fill would possibly create a bigger problem in a flooding situation and Seconded by MAYER. ALL AYE: MOTION CARRIED F. FINDINGS OF FACT FOR CONDITIONAL USE APPLICATION FOR THE CITY OF EAGLE'S MODULAR OFFICE The Zoning Administrator is requesting Commission approval of the Findings of Fact for the conditional use application submitted by the City of Eagle. The site is located at 310 E. State St. approximately 200 feet east of Second St. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT We have not had a Council Meeting since our last meeting so I have no Council items to report on. I would like to bring this item up. (Mark provides Commissioners copies) It is regarding the poles. It is pretty self explanatory. DISCUSSION ABOUT MORATORIUM DISCUSSION ABOUT MERRILL PARK Mark to gather information about Merrill Park and report on January 13th. MOVED BY MAYER AND SECONDED BY FARNWORTH TO ADJOURN. ALL AYE: MOTION CARRIED H, \P&Z\MBBTINGS\PLAN_ZON\MINUTBS\1997\PZO1O697 .MIN 14 D.;'kOREY LO EAGLE CITY CLERK t,~,~~~r:-, . . ~\"tA (\-; ""~""\' .~- ..", '" .""~" .: ".. . co'>- ~ Ç,,¡,,' ,.-.- :: .1" <" ';, . : tc./ .. t';. " A~-" , .. CI __A '. : '0 : ~-;;, c¡...~ ': e;-ü"'~ . ~ ...Oð .-' ~ ~ .i'~~~"":;-' ':';>, .:' ~.-~ ""'ô.è:"O". " "... ~ '}o>'" . ~. '." ~....t""'O""'-'" ,~~ '.. """'l$ ~1 .. "..' ~-;¡¡¡ ...:'.S.Þ ~ , A TRANSCRIBABLE RECORD OF THIS MEETING IS AVAILABLE AT CITY HALL H, \P&Z\MBBTINGS\PLAN_ZON\MINUTBS\1997\PZO1O697 ,MIN 15