Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004 06-22CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, June 22, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers 1. Roll -call Attendance: X Shaun Wardle X Bill Nary X Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird O Mayor Tammy de Weerd 2. Pledge of Allegiance: Boy Scout Troop 190 3. Community Invocation by Pastor Gordon Slyter, with Treasure Valley Worship Center: Present 4. Adoption of the Agenda: Approve 5. Consent Agenda: A. Approve Minutes of May 18, 2004 Pre -Council Meeting: Approve B. Approve Minutes of May 25, 2004 Pre -Council Meeting: Approve C. Approve Minutes of June 8, 2004 City Council Regular Meeting: Approve D. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: MI 04- 004 Request for a Miscellaneous request for an amendment to the Development Agreement for Resolution Subdivision No. 1 by Aspen Grove Development, LLC — south of East Overland Road at Celebration Avenue and Gala Street: Approve E. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: PFP 04-004 Request for Preliminary Final Plat approval of 2 building lots on 2.3 acres in an I -L zone for Haztech Subdivision by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc. — 475 North Linder Road: Approve F. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 04- 008 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 5.22 acres from RUT to C -G zone for Magic View Court by Larry Hellhake — 2855 Magic View Drive: Continue to July 6, 2004 Meeting Meridian City Council Agenda— June 22, 2004 Page] of 3 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. G. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Denial: RZ 04- 004 Request for a Rezone of 9.47 acres from R-4 to L -O and R-15 zones for Southwoods Subdivision by Calderwood Community, LLC — 2090 South Meridian Road: Approve H. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Denial: PP 04- 007 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 15 building lots (14 office and 1 residential) and 1 common lot on 9.47 acres in proposed R-15 and L -O zones for Southwoods Subdivision by Calderwood Community, LLC — 2090 South Meridian Road: Approve I. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Denial: CUP 04- 008 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development for office and assisted living in proposed R-15 and L- O zones for Southwoods Subdivision by Calderwood Community, LLC — 2090 South Meridian Road: Approve J. Order Granting Remand to Planning and Zoning Commission: AZ 04-005 Request for annexation and zoning of 5.27 acres from RUT to R-4 zones for proposed Packard Acres Subdivision No. 3 by Packard Estates Development, LLC — south of East Ustick Road and east of North Locust Grove Road: Approve K. Resolution No. 04-435 Sale of Property at Public Auction: Approve L. Water Main Easement for Retail Building by Kimball Properties (L6, B5 Bonito Subdivision): Approve M. Water Main Easement for Sierra Plaza by Kimball Properties (1-6, B4 Bonito Subdivision): Approve N. Streetlight Agreement for Lochsa Falls #8: Approve O. Streetlight Agreement for Paramount #1: Approve P. Streetlight Agreement for Paramount #3: Approve Q. Water Main Easement in Silverstone Business Campus for Citigroup: Approve R. Public Pathway Easement for Clearbrook Estates by Clearbrook, LLC: Approve Meridian City Council Agenda — June 22, 2004 Page 2 of 3 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. 6. Department Reports: 7. (Items Moved from Consent Agenda) 8. FP 04-034 Request for Final Plat approval for 88 single-family residential building lots and 25 common lots on 25.15 acres in an R-8 zone for Settlement Bridge Subdivision No. 1 by Capital Development, Inc. — south-east corner of North Locust Grove Road and East McMillan Road: Approve 9. FP 04-033 Request for Final Plat approval for 32 single-family residential building lots and three (3) common lots on 10.09 acres in an R-8 zone for Paramount Subdivision No. 4 by Paramount Development, Inc. — east of North Linder Road and north of West McMillan Road: Approve 10. FP 04-035 Request for Final Plat approval for 86 single-family residential building lots and four (4) common lots on 30.64 acres in an R-4 zone for Messina Hills Subdivision No. 2 by Tuscany Development, Inc. — west of South Eagle Road and south of East Victory Road: Approve 11. Public Hearing: MI 04-005 Request to allow direct lot access to North Linder Road from an existing home on Lot 2, Block 2 of Cobblefield Crossina Subdivision by CMD, Inc. — south of West McMillan Road and east of North Linder Road: Continue Public Hearing to July 6, 2004 12. Public Hearing: MI 04-006 Request to amend the Development Agreement for EI Dorado Business Campus to include nursing homes and residential care facilities as permitted uses by W.H. Moore Company — southwest corner of South Eagle Road and East Overland Road: Attorney to Prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval 13. Public Hearing: PP 04-012 Request for a Preliminary Plat approval for six commercial building lots and one common lot on 2.82 acres in a C -G zone for Initial Point Subdivision by Robnett Construction — east of North Meridian Road and south of East Fairview Avenue: Attorney to Prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval 14. Ordinance No. 04-1083 Open Burnina Amended Ordinance: Approve Meridian City Council Agenda— June 22, 2004 Page 3 of 3 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. Meridian City Council Meeting June 22, 2004. The regular meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:00 P.M., Tuesday, June 22, 2004, by Council President Bill Nary. Members Present: William Nary, Keith Bird, Charlie Rountree and Shaun Wardle. Members Absent: Mayor Tammy de Weerd. Others Present: Bill Nichols, Will Berg, Anna Powell, Brad Watson, Bill Musser, Kenny Bowers, and Dean Willis. Item 1: Roll -call Attendance: Roll call. X Shaun Wardle X Charlie Rountree X Bill Nary X Keith Bird Mayor Tammy de Weerd Nal: It looks like it's 7:00 o'clock, our very brief Council meeting of Tuesday, June 22" , we hope. Mr. Clerk, if you could take roll. Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance: Nary: Thank you. We also have -- we have Troop 190 from Meridian and 198 from Meridian as well. Thank you all for being here tonight. We asked someone from Troop 190 if you would lead us in the pledge of allegiance. (Pledge of Allegiance recited.) Item 3: Community Invocation by Pastor Gordon Slyter, with Treasure Valley Worship Center: Nary: Thank you very much for doing that for us. We also have Pastor Gordon Slyter of Treasure Valley Worship Center tonight for the invocation. Thanks for being here tonight. Slyter: Let's pray. Dear God in Heaven, thank you for our city and the blessings we enjoy here. Thank you for those who serve our community, our Mayor, the Council, and the many department personnel. We ask your blessing on the deliberations and decisions made here tonight. Please grant wisdom, direction, and understanding. We sincerely ask that righteousness, justice, and common charity would prevail here in Meridian. And as we seek to implement a community vision, may your hand and grace be ever upon us, we humbly ask and thank you for your divine help and protection. We pray these things in the name of Christ our Lord, Amen. Meddian City Council June 22, 2004 Page 2 of 29 Item 4: Adoption of the Agenda: Nary: Thank you very much, Pastor, for being here tonight. Our next item on the agenda is the adoption of the agenda. Bird: Mr. President? Nary: Mr. Bird. Bird: We have one deferral in the Consent Agenda, Item F, which we will take care of that in the Consent Agenda and other than that, I believe that's the only thing that changes, so I move that we approve the revised agenda. Rountree: Second. Nary: It's been moved and seconded to adopt the agenda as presented. All those in favor say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 5: Consent Agenda: A. Approve Minutes of May 18, 2004 Pre -Council Meeting: B. Approve Minutes of May 25, 2004 Pre -Council Meeting: C. Approve Minutes of June 8, 2004 City Council Regular Meeting: D. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: MI 04- 004 Request for a Miscellaneous request for an amendment to the Development Agreement for Resolution Subdivision No. 1 by Aspen Grove Development, LLC — south of East Overland Road at Celebration Avenue and Gala Street: E. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: PFP 04-004 Request for Preliminary Final Plat approval of 2 building lots on 2.3 acres in an I -L zone for Haztech Subdivision by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc. — 475 North Linder Road: F. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 04- 008 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 5.22 acres from RUT to C -G zone for Magic View Court by Larry Hellhake — 2855 Magic View Drive: G. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Denial: RZ 04- 004 Request for a Rezone of 9.47 acres from R-4 to L -O and R-15 Meridian City Council June 22, 2004 Page 3 of 29 zones for Southwoods Subdivision by Calderwood Community, LLC — 2090 South Meridian Road: H. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Denial: PP 04- 007 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 15 building lots (14 office and 1 residential) and 1 common lot on 9.47 acres in proposed R-15 and L-0 zones for Southwoods Subdivision by Calderwood Community, LLC — 2090 South Meridian Road: I. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Denial: CUP 04- 008 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development for office and assisted living in proposed R-15 and L- 0 zones for Southwoods Subdivision by Calderwood Community, LLC — 2090 South Meridian Road: J. Order Granting Remand to Planning and Zoning Commission: AZ 04-005 Request for annexation and zoning of 5.27 acres from RUT to R-4 zones for proposed Packard Acres Subdivision No. 3 by Packard Estates Development, LLC — south of East Ustick Road and east of North Locust Grove Road: K. Resolution No. Sale of Property at Public Auction: L. Water Main Easement for Retail Building by Kimball Properties (1-6, B5 Bonito Subdivision): M. Water Main Easement for Sierra Plaza by Kimball Properties (1-6, B4 Bonito Subdivision): N. Streetlight Agreement for Lochsa Falls #8: O. Streetlight Agreement for Paramount #1: P. Streetlight Agreement for Paramount #3: Q. Water Main Easement in Silverstone Business Campus for Citigroup: R. Public Pathway Easement for Clearbrook Estates by Clearbrook, LLC: Nary: Next item is the Consent Agenda. Bird: Mr. President? Y Meridian City Council June 22, 2004 Page 4 of 29 Nary: Mr. Bird. Bird: On the Consent Agenda, Item F needs to be deferred to July 6, 2004, and Item K, the resolution, it's the -- we have two in our packet and the first one is the one that we are approving. And with that I move that we approve the Consent Agenda and for the President to sign and the Clerk to attest on all proper papers. Rountree: Second. Nary: It's been moved and seconded to approve the Consent Agenda with the deferral of Item F to July 6 and Resolution No. K on our agenda -- resolution number, Mr. Berg? Is 04-4035. Moved and seconded. Mr. Clerk, Would you take roll, please. Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Nary, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 6: Department Reports: Nary: Our next item on the agenda is department reports. I don't have any listed. Thank you. Item 7: (Items Moved from Consent Agenda) Nary: No items were moved on seven from the Consent Agenda. Item 8: FP 04-034 Request for Final Plat approval for 88 single-family residential building lots and 25 common lots on 25.15 acres in an R-8 zone for Settlement Bridge Subdivision No. 1 by Capital Development, Inc. — south-east corner of North Locust Grove Road and East McMillan Road: Nary: So, we are on Item 8, final plat, Settlement Bridge Subdivision No. 1, 04-034. Ms. Powell. Powell: We are moving fast today. This is the final plat for Settlement Bridge and it includes 25 common lots on 25 acres in the R-8 zone. This, as you recall, is near McMillan and Locust Grove and this is our first phase. This is the approved preliminary plat. This is the proposed final plat. It is in substantial compliance with the approved preliminary plat. Staff had just one outstanding concern and that was the fencing that was going to be along the southern boundary in this location. It got quite a bit of -- well, we will call it discussion. Mr. Yorgason received a fair amount of abuse regarding the southern fencing and it was left open. The options that were discussed during the hearings were a hedge link fencing, a wrought iron fencing, and vinyl fencing were discussed as not a reasonable solution. Some of the owners wanted to be able to burn along this property line, others wanted a nicer fence. So, it was left somewhat unresolved. The applicant is proposing chain link with slats, which was never discussed Meridian City Council June 22, 2004 Page 5 of 29 during the hearing process, so we just wanted to bring it before the City Council to -- to consider what type of fencing would be appropriate, just because that one had not been brought up before. So -- and I believe that there is one outstanding issue regarding the temporary fencing that the applicant also wants to raise. With that I will end staffs presentation. Bird: Mr. President? Nary: Yes. Bird: Anna, what is the staffs preferral on fencing or did I miss it? Powell: No. I didn't state one. I know that the developer is in a tight spot, because he has to have something that can't burn. I just -- my personal opinion is that chain link with slats is just about the ugliest fencing material available, so I don't know what to recommend. Bird: Okay. Nary: Any other questions? Bird: I have none. Nary: Mr. Yorgason. And I would disagree with Mrs. Powell, because that hedge link fencing, actually, is the ugliest fencing I have ever seen. Bird: Yes. He's the one that brought that forward. Yorgason: Members of the Council, Council Chairman, President Nary, Dave Yorgason with Capital Development. It's good to be before you tonight for our first phase of the Settlement Bridge Subdivision. It is correct, we've actually spent a lot of effort, more than I think I have ever spent on getting acquainted with fencing and fencing prices and fencing availability and types and appropriateness due to flammability or avoiding burning down the fence in this area. We've actually looked up -- there is a website, which I attempted to do some printing tonight, but their website was actually down, so I couldn't do the printing as I had hoped to, but there are actually about nine different choices of slats and so I'm not at all proposing a certain type of cheap wood slat that might break, there might be some concern about that. There is some polyethylene products that we have come across that can withstand temperatures over 200 degrees. They guarantee 200 degrees anyways. And so we think that's the best solution we have come up with so far, short of a concrete block fence, which we don't think is appropriate between two residential uses and so -- we were prepared to do wrought iron, but the neighbors, frankly, have been pretty adamant they want a solid fence next to us and so that's what we are trying to do is come up with a solution that works for them also, which is the reason for the slats. Our choice originally would have been some more ornamental wrought iron, but they want solid, so that's why we have gone Meridian City Council June 22, 2004 Page 6 of 29 that direction. Also as mentioned by staff on one of the questions, on condition number ten, the final paragraph reads, it's -- from our experience it appears to be a recently new condition on development and if that's what the Council wishes, then, we will comply with it. It reads: Temporary construction fencing to contain debris shall be installed along the boundaries of this phase, unless fencing already exists at the subdivision boundaries, which, again, we will comply with if that's the Council's wishes. Our practice is to require several things. First of all, we have hired staff that goes around daily and picks up trash. Secondly, we, actually, require builders' boxes, trash boxes at every builder's site to contain the trash. I admit fully that not all trash is contained within the boxes, but we are out there daily enforcing that policy. We would hope that the Council might allow for some slight amendment that if we could not -- I guess a better way of saying it, do the moral thing in keeping trash contained, then, we might be required to do the temporary fencing, but that's a pretty substantial cost when we start adding up the cost of the 70 acre site doing temporary fencing around it, so we are hopeful that there might be some latitude there. Otherwise, with those two issues in mind, we'd stand for any questions and request your approval tonight. Nary: Council, are there any questions? Bird: Mr. President? Nary: Mr. Bird. Bird: On the temporary fencing against the -- to contain the debris, I realize you can have all kinds of commitments and stuff from the builders, but that always don't happen with the subcontractors, and it only takes one afternoon of stuff left out and a wind storm come up that the neighbors gets their yards full, so I think the best we have had is -- and I know it's a very expensive item, David, is to put up a temporary fence, but we can't have that stuff blowing all over and I realize that you guys can have all kinds of things with the builders and that, but sometimes subs are pretty lax in picking up after themselves, so -- I understand where you're coming from. If you -- I don't think we necessarily have to fence it, if we can figure out -- if you can figure out some way to guarantee that the neighbors aren't going to be -- and, like you said, you hire people to go pick up everyday, but -- and I would agree with you that the temporary fencing is very expensive and we probably don't need it if you will make sure that they don't fly around. Yorgason: Councilman Nary, Councilman Bird, it's our feeling that temporary fence, to be honest with you, it's four foot high and it doesn't stop all the debris. Six foot is a little better, but even that doesn't stop all the debris. But whatever we can do that helps is the goal, I think, is what we are all trying to do. And I fully admit -- I'm not going to stand here and even pretend that we contain all the trash, not only our builders, but their subcontractors -- even ourselves, we have trash that flies, that's why we have people out there daily. We are just asking for some consideration there. If it's the Council desire not to allow for that latitude, then, we will comply with the condition as it's written. We are just hopeful that there might be something -- and maybe it's something maybe Meridian City Council June 22, 2004 Page 7 of 29 not to decide tonight, but we could sit down with staff to try to find a solution, because I'm not sure standing here tonight we can come up with the right solution, but it's our feeling that it's a pretty expensive cost trying to put a temporary fence, it just gets torn down, it's just a wasted cost and that it doesn't guarantee any protection, because it will only stop some, it won't stop all the trash. Nary: You know, I agree with Councilman Bird, I mean it probably is an expense that for most situations or with developers like yourself, it's probably not really that important, you know, you have already engaged in a lengthy discussion with these folks over a fence, I don't think you or we want to end up in a lengthy discussion over trash and I think just where it is in location and proximity to their homes, I don't know any other way to make at least some reasonable assurance to these folks that it's done. I mean they are going to have to trust you and you're probably going to do your business the way you do your business and that's probably not going to change much, but I think that's the only thing we can do. Otherwise, we are going to end up having to mediate this decision. If we put in there something softer that says as long as you keep cleaning it up, we are going to be arguing over cleaning it up and you have sat here and heard us listen to those types of things and we can't always fix that later. This is about the only thing. But I welcome your suggestion. I'm sure Mrs. Powell would welcome the opportunity to sit down and see if there is other ways to draft some alternatives, because I think that's a great suggestion. I agree with you, I don't know that we can craft it today. Yorgason: Yeah. I agree. Bird: Mr. President? Nary: Mr. Bird. Bird: I agree with you wholeheartedly and I hope that we can take that and do that, when we pass this, if we pass it, that that is a stipulation that -- that Mr. Yorgason sits down with staff and gets something determined, because this is something that would -- I'm sure I'm going to be looking into the future at a lot of places with, too, so I think it's something that the staff and the developer can handle. Powell: President Nary? Nary: Yes. Powell: If I could add just a quick history on this. This item or this condition was placed on some plats, not on others. It was fairly inconsistently applied, depending on which planner had it. We did decide I think about last maybe October to start making it a standard condition of approval. We did consider allowing alternatives, such as exactly what Mr. Yorgason has described, the boxes and the regular pick up and things like that. It just became a very cumbersome wording, so that temporary fencing was easier and we just went with that wording. I think the things that he has described are Meddian City Council June 22, 2004 Page 8 of 29 probably as effective as the temporary fencing. One solution might be just to have it, since mostly the wind blows -- if we could get it on the east boundary, that might be one solution. He's just got Idaho Power to the north of them right now and, then, his own property to the north and, then, Lochsa Falls is to the -- Copper Basin -- Yorgason: Havasu. Powell: Havasu. I always confuse those two. Nary: One of the many. Powell: Yeah. Sorry. So -- and that has large walls, so that's a possibility also Nary: Mr. Yorgason, I mean if the fencing was -- would it be of any value if the fencing was really just adjacent to other residential properties, so at least we can try to alleviate trash that's up in that -- it wouldn't be -- it may not be as much as having to do it around the entire site and that would be with the additional cleanup to make sure it doesn't become a mess the other way, would that be of some assistance? Yorgason: I think so. As I look at our plat, we have every intention of putting a solid fence on the west boundary, of course, along Locust Grove and on the south boundary of the existing phase one plat -- we will probably carry it a little further, as we typically overbuild it just a little past. On the north boundary is along Idaho Power, that fence is already in, actually. There is a fence and some landscaping along there. So, it's the quarter mile run that's from McMillan down to our south boundary that I'm talking about, which is the same that you were just referring to there. How to avoid that, I -- to be honest, the wind blows both directions, so I don't want to pretend we are going to solve all the trash problems just by putting fences on the east boundary. Typically, winds are pretty dominate to the southeast until you get a pretty good storm and, then, they blow northwest, as we have seen in our other community just a mile and a half west of here. So, if you're looking for an answer tonight, again, if you want us to comply with this, we'd probably just run a solid fence and open fences as we have described in our application and, then, on the east boundary we'd run on temporary -- I think it's four foot high is usually what they come in, but the orange plastic construction fence. It would be a quarter mile long and that's, I think, how that would comply with your request here, so I don't see any change with that. So, maybe it's just we will agree to do that tonight and, then, we will try to find a solution for future phases of the development. Nary: Thank you. Council, is there any more questions? Yorgason: I don't know if there is any other discussion you want to have on the southern fence with slats that are nearly as ugly as hedge link. Bird: We don't want those camouflage ones. Yorgason: There is nine different colors to choose from Meridian City Council June 22, 2004 Page 9 of 29 Nary: You know, I guess for me is -- I mean as long as it's not going to be flammable, which, obviously, is the key issue here, and you have had discussions about wrought iron fencing and that isn't what the folks want, I don't -- I don't know any other magic solution than what you're proposing, so I mean I think it's -- you know, I think to me the only language change that we can realistically put into these findings is the -- provide the fencing -- the fencing is going to have to be of chain link with flame retardant slats to provide a solid fence and I think it's just going to have to be, you know, whatever it can be to fit in there. Whether or not we want some other check on that, Council, that's your call. I don't know that we can do much more than that. I mean, Mrs. Powell, do you have something better than that? Powell: No, sir. That does seem like the only available option left. Nary: Okay. Powell: At least financially feasible available option. Nlchols: Mr. President? Nary: Mr. Nichols. Nichols: Mr. President, I would suggest that we just include in the condition that Mr. Yorgason submit the specification for the fence slats to the planning department to verify the heat resistant of the material and be subject, then, to their approval before he goes and orders and buys a bunch of it. Nary: Sounds like further language for number ten. Council, anymore questions or comments? Bird: I have none. Nary: Thank you. Yorgason: Thank you. Nary: Council, anymore input or ready for a motion? Wardle: Mr. President? Nary: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: I move that we approve FP 04-034 with the noted change to item number ten, provide fencing along the southern boundary of the subdivision and provide specifications for review before construction to the planning department. • Meridian City Council June 22, 2004 Page 10 of 29 Bird: Second. Nary: It's been moved and seconded to approve FP 04-034, Settlement Bridge Subdivision No. 1. Mr. Clerk, would you call roll. Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Nary, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 9: FP 04-033 Request for Final Plat approval for 32 single-family residential building lots and three (3) common lots on 10.09 acres in an R-8 zone for Paramount Subdivision No. 4 by Paramount Development, Inc. — East of North Linder Road and north of West McMillan Road: Nary: Next item is Item 9, FP 04-033, Paramount Subdivision No. 4 Powell: President Nary, Members of the Council, this is the Paramount Subdivision preliminary plat. The proposed final plat is in the circled area. It includes 32 single- family building lots and three common lots. It is in substantial compliance with the approved preliminary plat and there are no outstanding issues to staffs knowledge. I have not heard from the applicant, so I don't know if they have -- Davies: I'm Jason Davies with Engineering Northwest and we have read through the conditions and we agree with the conditions. Nary: Great. Thank you very much. Council, any questions for staff or Mr. Davies? Bird: I have none, Mr. President. Nary: Okay. Wardle: Mr. President? Nary: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: I move that we approve FP 04-033, final plat for Paramount Subdivision No. 4. Rountree: Second. Nary: It's been moved and seconded to approve FP 04-033, Paramount Subdivision No. 4. Mr. Clerk, would you call the roll, please. Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Nary, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Meridian City Council June 22, 2004 Page 11 of 29 Item 10: FP 04-035 Request for Final Plat approval for 86 single-family residential building lots and four (4) common lots on 30.64 acres in an R-4 zone for Messina Hills Subdivision No. 2 by Tuscany Development, Inc. — West of South Eagle Road and south of East Victory Road: Nary: Thank you. Item 10, FP 04-035, Messina Hills Subdivision No. 2. Powell: President Nary, Members of the Council, you may or may not recall -- you have already seen Messina Hills No. 2. They have resubmitted and in a moment I will show you why. This is -- this is the approved preliminary plat. The area of tonight's final plat includes this. The first one went across the Ridenbaugh over into this area. They have pulled back all of this and they are just going with this area here. So, this is the final plat before you tonight. It is in substantial compliance with the approved preliminary plat. There are some outstanding issues regarding the drainage lots. There are three drainage lots, one, two, three. I believe that's them. I got it wrong? One, two, three? Okay. At the time that staff was writing their staff report, the applicant was not sure whether these would be dry drainage ponds in the sense that the water is in them less than 24 hours or as they were terming what drainage ponds and, then, we weren't clear if the applicant meant what drainage as it's just six inches of standing water or if they meant a water amenity. So, we have asked them tonight to clarify exactly how -- apparently this will be a dry drainage pond and, then, these two will be wet. We are assuming that they are going to be water features, but we would like the applicant to address that and if they are going to be water features and ponds, we'd like to know the depth and the slopes and our ordinance requires -- the building ordinance requires that any slopes greater than three to one have some engineering checks done on them, so we would want them to do some sort of -- we need to look at these. We have had a problem in that some of them have been constructed already and they did exceed our slope standards and we are still trying to resolve those ponds. So, I'll end staffs comments there and wait to hear what the applicant has to say. Nary: Thank you. Mr. Brown. Brown: The top northwest corner is Lot 34 and that's a storm drainage pond that was also a part of -- and was built in phase one of Messina Hills No. 1 right up here and initially when we first came in with our preliminary plat we looked at that one being a wet pond, as well as Lot 53 that's located here. We were able to make this one a dry pond and we had to make it a little bit longer and bigger to make that happen. And, then, the Lot 2, Block 11 down there in the corner is a dry pond. This is the only one that we are concerned about. Our efforts are going to try to make it a dry pond, but if it is wet, the reason it will be wet is that the water can't go out the bottom, we will have to clay the bottom and the water will go out the side slopes. The side slopes would be four to one and you may -- maybe water is in there 48 hours, instead of 24 hours. I mean -- and, then, we will have some aerations, so that we don't have -- whether that's a waterfall or whatever, that when the water is there that it's aerated and, then, it goes away and that's kind of how we are looking at that. And so I propose some modifications to site specific condition nine and ten, that I think cover that, that if -- if it's a wet feature, it will Meridian City Council June 22, 2004 Page 12 of 29 be Lot 53, not 34, and that Lot 2 and Lot 34 would be -- would comply with that 24 hour time period. And that's my proposal. I stand for any questions. Nary: Council, any questions for Mr. Brown? Bird: I have none. Nary: So, it's a waterfall after it rains, but, then, it's not anything when it's not? Brown: You'd have a -- like a float, so that when there is water in there it will kick on the pump and it will circulate it. Whether it's a mechanical one that you have -- I have seen them that look like -- kind of like little rings and they shoot water up in the bottom or whether you have a waterfall similar to what they have in Two Rivers, in all of their ponds they have waterfalls where they just have a sump pump and they pump it up and, then, it runs down the rocks, just depending on what looks the best and what actually works. But our intent is to try to make it dry. I mean that's what we are hoping for, but I didn't want to say it was going to be dry and, then, end up back -- you know, having trouble with Public Works and, then, having to come back before you. So, initially, we are going to try to make it dry, but if it ends up being wet, it will be for a short period of time until the storm event and that is able to leach out the side -- the sidewalls of the storm drain. Nary: Any other questions, Council? Bird: I have none for Mr. -- Rountree: Mr. President? Nary: Mr. Rountree Rountree: Just a question on the pump, the waterfall, and that sort of thing. Two things come to mind. One, who maintains that and if it's the homeowners association, will they maintain it? It seems to me like it's a fairly elaborate approach that maybe there is a better engineering solution. Brown: If there is a better engineering solution, Commissioner -- or Councilman Rountree, we will look for it, but that -- that's at least what we have been told from a technology standpoint is a way for it to -- because it's going to sit there longer than that 24 hour period of time. Rountree: So, will it be the responsibility, then, of your homeowners association? Brown: Of the homeowners association. Over this 350 lots that we have over the whole subdivision, we are coming back in with two or three swimming pools, we have -- I mean there is a lot of open space and a lot that the homeowners association is maintaining in this development, so it would just be a part of that. Meridian City Council June 22, 2004 Page 13 of 29 Rountree: Okay. Nary: Mrs. Powell, did you have any comment about these suggested changes to the final plat or have you seen them? I guess that would be my first question. Watson: Mr. President, the microphone was stuck in front of me; so I guess I'll comment. Nary: Well, it looks like this went to you, so -- Watson: Yeah. It did. There is a little bit of history on a different part of this project regarding wet ponds and I just wanted to make absolutely sure that when this was brought to you that there was at least some knowledge up front that this was a possibility that there may be some standing water in these areas. I don't know of any other solution, other than what Kent's talking about, to get the aeration and the circulation. So, I guess if you're okay with the open water, standing water, I am, too. Nary: Thanks. Watson: All things being equal, no, we don't want open -- we don't want wet ponds, because they are a nuisance, but if that's all they can do in this case, then, we will work with them. Brown: We don't want wet ponds either. Nary: Thank you very much. Council, any other questions or comments on this application? Rountree: I'm not sure I heard Mrs. Powell's response to your question. Nary: Did you have any response, Mrs. Powell, on this sort of either/or option that Mr. Brown is proposing? Powell: A wet pond as described, I think we were under the impression it was going to be a water feature, which would be water there all the time, but a wet pond as described does not actually count toward your required landscaping, but I do believe that Tuscany had excess and they have come back and they have asked me if they can add swimming pools, so I know they have added at least one amenity to it that would balance out the loss of a small portion of the open space, so I wasn't too concerned about that. I haven't checked the numbers, but I'm fairly confident that they were probably over their required five percent minimums, so -- Nary: Thank you. Council, any other questions or comments? Bird: I have none, Mr. President. Meridian City Council June 22, 2004 Page 14 of 29 Nary: Mr. Bird? Bird: I have none. Nary: Oh. Rountree: Mr. President? Nary: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I move that we approve Item 10, FP 04-035, for R-4 zoning, Messina Hills Subdivision No. 2, with the stipulation that site-specific comments of the staffs letter dated June 22nd be modified as in the letter from Mr. Brown, dated the 22nd, for items nine and ten. Bird: Second. Nary: It's been moved and seconded to approve FP 04-035, Messina Hills Subdivision No. 2, with the amendments provided tonight by the applicant. Mr. Berg, would you call roll, please. Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Nary, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Nary: We now have the portion of our agenda that's public hearings. If you intend to testify, you think you might testify, you probably are going to testify, if you'd all raise your right hand, we all have to be sworn -- you all have to be sworn before we can do that, we'll do it all at once, if you can raise your right hand if you are going to testify. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you will provide tonight will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? (Affirmative answers.) Item 11: Public Hearing: MI 04-005 Request to allow direct lot access to North Linder Road from an existing home on Lot 2, Block 2 of Cobblefield Crossing Subdivision by CMD, Inc. — South of West McMillan Road and east of North Linder Road: Nary: Thank you. The next item is Item 11, MI 04-005 for Cobblestone Crossing Subdivision. Powell: President Nary, the applicant has asked for this to be continued to July 6. I'm sorry; I forgot to get you that information prior to your adopting the agenda. Meridian City Council June 22, 2004 Page 15 of 29 Bird: Mr. President? Nary: Mr. Bird. Bird: Did you open the Public Hearing? Didn't you? Nary: Yes. Bird: I would move that we continue Public Hearing MI 04-005 to July 6th, 2004. Rountree: Second. Nary: It's been moved and seconded to move MI 04-005 for Cobblefield Crossing to our July 6, 2004. All those in favor say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 12: Public Hearing: MI 04-006 Request to amend the Development Agreement for EI Dorado Business Campus to include nursing homes and residential care facilities as permitted uses by W.H. Moore Company — southwest corner of South Eagle Road and East Overland Road: Nary: Next, Item 12, MI 04-006 for EI Dorado Business Campus. Mrs. Powell. Powell: President Nary, Members of the Council, this proposal is for modification to the development agreement for Bonita or EI Dorado and that area is right here, as I'm sure you well know. They have specifically asked to allow a residential care facility or nursing home as a permitted use in this C -G zone. It would -- the way the development agreement is structured, though; it would transfer over into the C -C zone here as well. The C -G zone -- the development agreement approves any uses listed in the L -O district as permitted uses. However, if you go toward the end of the development agreement where it lists prohibited uses, it specifically calls out nursing homes. So, under one portion of it it would seem to be allowed, but, then, it is specifically called out as nursing homes and sanitariums are called out as prohibited uses. So, they are asking for that to be removed and for them to be listed as principal permitted uses. They have used the term residential care facility. Our zoning ordinance doesn't use that exact language, so Brad has provided you the two definitions that do address it. One is nursing home and the other one is convalescent or nursing home, rest homes, and what they are proposing seems to fit within that description as provided there. So, that's the change to the development agreement in brief form. There is a letter I wanted to point out to you from Ed and Barbara Strickfaden that -- it is -- the third to the last paragraph says: So, while we do not oppose a variance that would allow the skilled nursing home residential facility for 60 beds, we would request both the Meridian Planning and Zoning Committee and W.H. Moore Company supports our request that the canal banks are allowed to retain their natural growth of grasses. We would also ask that if the variance, if approved, is specifically for the skilled nursing home facility and it's -- it isn't a Meridian City Council June 22, 2004 Page 16 of 29 variance, I know you guys would know that, but just for the record, it is not a variance, it's just a change in the development agreement, so they did want to express their concerns, but not with regard to this specific application. Nary: And just for the record, this is a written memorandum that was submitted to us tonight, dated June 22nd from Ed and Barbara Strickfaden at 3044 Green Canyon Drive in Meridian. Council, is there any questions for Mrs. Powell? Or was that it, Mrs. Powell? I'm sorry. Powell. Yes. Nary: Okay. Powell: Unless you have more questions. Nary: Okay. Bird: I have -- not at this time. Nary: Okay. I think I see Mr. Seal back there. Seal: Good evening. Jonathan Seal, 600 North Steelhead, Boise, Idaho, representing W.H. Moore. If I can -- first off, I guess what I would like to say is I understand the purpose we are coming here tonight for is to amend the development agreement for a specific use, but I'd like to explain that. The impetus to this was that recently we were -- we were approached by this health care provider. You have pictures of some of their similar facilities. And this would be the type of quality of facility that they are proposing at EI Dorado Business Campus, so I think it's -- I think it's worthwhile to be able to see at least somewhat of the quality of it. I did have a neighborhood meeting last Tuesday, I think there was about 15 neighbors that came. They -- I think -- I certainly can't speak for them, but I don't see any here, but I think their feedback was they felt this would be a good use. It's as close, in my opinion, to a residential type use as you will get. This particular one will border the Ridenbaugh Canal, as the development agreement has said, we agreed to L -O zoned uses within that area, with a height restriction of 35 feet. We believe that this will -- this carries that spirit in the development agreement, even through there is I believe a possibility, certainly, of putting these in other areas of the project. Quite frankly, I think the reason that a nursing home was a prohibited use -- I think it was lumped in with the sanitarium and I think it's reasonable to say that I don't think anyone would want a sanitarium necessarily behind their home. I think it was, frankly, just an oversight on our part, but I do think that a healthcare facility, skilled nursing, would be a very good use within this project, I think. So, with that we would simply ask that it be approved. If there happens to be any questions with this particular operation, the person who will actually be managing and operating it is here and would be glad to answer any questions you'd like. And with that I certainly would be glad to answer any questions. Meridian City Council June 22, 2004 Page 17 of 29 Nary: Thank you, Mr. Seal. Council, is there any questions? Bird: I have none, Mr. President. Nary: Did you want to hear from the operator of the facility? Okay. Thank you. Seal: You're welcome. Thank you very much. Nary: Council, is there any other information you would like or questions or comments? Is there anyone else? Wardle: Mr. President? Nary: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: A question of Brad. Brad, you have got two definitions in here. Which -- are they both required or -- Powell: I should have clarified. It's the other Brad. Wardle: I'm sorry. Powell: Our zoning ordinance has many definitions that overlap and it's always a challenge, so both are, actually, currently in our zoning ordinance. So, it would -- they don't necessarily contradict one another, just one has a little more definition than the others. So, those are both city code. Wardle: So, would you prefer -- are we adopting just one of them or -- Powell: No. We are just changing the development agreement to allow nursing homes and we just wanted you to know what that meant by our code. Wardle: Thank you. Bird: Mr. President? Nary: Mr. Bird. Bird: Before we close the Public Hearing, I'd like to make a statement. I think that we are just amending the development agreement on this one particular case. I can't believe that we sit and not let that -- a nursing home hit. It's an ideal situation to be in a C -Z zone, I think, so I feel that it's a perfect marriage with the type of building that's going out there at EI Dorado Business Campus. And if nobody else has anything to say, I will move that we close the Public Hearing on MI 04-006. Rountree: Second. Meridian City Council June 22, 2004 Page 18 of 29 Nary: It's been moved and seconded to close the Public Hearing MI 04-006 for EI Dorado Business Campus. All those in favor say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Nichols: Mr. President? Nary: Mr. Nichols. Nichols: Just a point of order. In the letter from the Strickfadens, it might be appropriate for someone from the city to send them a letter that explains that Nampa -Meridian Irrigation District has deeded title to the Ridenbaugh Canal right of way and, therefore, they own the grass on both sides of that and this particular developer can't trespass onto the district's right of way and do anything with that grass, just so that they know that their concerns were heard and that it wasn't something, really, the city has any control over with regard to the development itself. Rountree: And so when that grass is mowed or burned or maybe maintained by Nampa - Meridian, depending on -- Bird: They know who to get a hold of. Nichols: Right. The maintenance of the ditch would be by the irrigation district, not by the developer or the city. Nary: It sounds a little like maybe a unanimous consent, Council, if you wanted to simply direct staff to provide a response back to the Strickfadens, so at least they know the right answer. I don't know if it would be more appropriate from the Public Works Department or from the planning department, but that seemed to make sense, for someone to simply respond to the Strickfadens to make sure they understood what the issues were that they were concerned with and where they need to really get redress for those. Powell: Councilmember -- or, I'm sorry, President Nary, Members of the Council, the applicant has just given me a letter addressed to the Strickfadens from Winston Moore and it does talk about all the issues raised in the letter. It talks about the Nampa -Meridian Irrigation District and the fact that they maintain those properties adjacent to the canal. It also addresses the project lighting and it addresses the trees and the little parks within the subdivision, so I think that the applicant has addressed those issues and if you'd like staff still to send another letter, we can, but this -- at first glance, this does appear to address all the concerns raised by the Strickfadens. Bird: Mr. President? Nary: Mr. Bird. Meridian City Council June 22, 2004 Page 19 of 29 Bird: I believe that seeings how they come to the staff -- sent to the staff, I think you ought to respond also. I appreciate the developer doing that, it shows some first class on his part, but I think they address this, the Meridian Planning and Zoning, and I think we need to -- if you want to make a copy of the letter and send it with your name on it or just a little note, that's fine, but I think we need to do it from our staff and I don't know how the other Council feel about it. Rountree: I agree. Wardle: I agree. Nary: And I would agree. I mean we know Mr. Moore and certainly are comfortable with his response, but I think Mr. Bird's right, it was sent to the city, so it probably should have at least a response, even if simply to say we have also received a copy of the same letter and we are in agreement with it and if you have concern you can certainly contact us, too, but -- Powell: We will do that. Nary: Thank you. Bird: Mr. President? Nary: Mr. Bird. Bird: I would move that we approve MI 04-006, the request for development -- amend the development agreement for EI Dorado Business Campus to include nursing homes and residential care facilities as permitted uses. Rountree: Second. Nary: It's been moved and seconded to approve MI 04-006 for the EI Dorado Business Campus to amend the development agreement. Mr. Berg, would you, please, call roll. Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Nary, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 13: Public Hearing: PP 04-012 Request for a Preliminary Plat approval for six commercial building lots and one common lot on 2.82 acres in a C -G zone for Initial Point Subdivision by Robnett Construction — east of North Meridian Road and south of East Fairview Avenue: Nary: Next Item is a Public Hearing on preliminary plat PP 04-012 for Initial Point Subdivision. Mrs. Powell. l Meridian City Council June 22, 2004 Page 20 of 29 Powell: President Nary, Members of the Council, this is a -- one of the closest things we get to as an in -fill development in the City of Meridian on occasion. This is -- the property is located in this area. It's right behind JJ Auto and Ultra Touch Car Wash and, then, you will see that the access to the site is from this 40 foot dedicated easement on the property to the east. The applicant is proposing to -- this was originally one lot that's part of a three lot subdivision and the applicant is now proposing to subdivide the remaining parcel into six new build -able lots and there is five buildings, one, two, three, four and five and the sixth lot is to accommodate the drive aisles. The build -able lots range in size from about 5,892 square feet to over 17,000 square feet. And the property is currently designated as -- or zoned as C -G and it is designated as commercial on the 2002 Comprehensive Plan. In April the applicant submitted for a CZC for -- I'm sorry, a certificate of zoning compliance to build a structure here. Staff was not able to issue that, partly because the development agreement for the property had never occurred, so staff is also concurrently working on the development agreement with the applicant on the development agreement and it will come to you at a later time. It was not able to arrive at the same time. However, this plat can -- we felt could go forward without the development agreement at this time. The Planning and Zoning Commission have recommended approval of this project. Chad from Bailey Engineering was representing Robnett Construction and he testified in favor of the application. He discussed flood elevation and fill issues in the northwest corner. The Five Mile Creek comes through this area and eventually connects to Fairview after it goes through this property to the west. So, a portion of it does clip the corner of the property and has a fair amount of flood issues associated with it. The applicant is proposing to raise the site in this -- it sounded -- from the minutes it sounded like a fair amount of the site will be raised to bring that out of the requirements for flood insurance on that property. Lucy Levele or Levele representing Creekside Arbor Apartments testified with concerns about how the drainage pond, which is located in this area here, would be maintained. Her concerns were satisfied when she realized that it was on the common lot that would be owned by -- by all the business owners and, then, maintained by that also. And Rich Jones from JJ Auto noted his willingness to work with the developer to provide a cross -connection through his property here and this is where a lot of the fill discussion came in. I think there is a grade break at this location, but they were able to satisfy the concerns of Mr. Jones regarding -- property will not be draining this way. The applicant might want to discuss that a little bit more. I was not at the Planning and Zoning Commission and the discussion was unclear from the minutes. The key Commission additions and modifications of staffs recommendation included that the applicant not be required to do all the landscaping at once, that he bond for the landscaping buffer improvements and, then, just improve them one by one as each building went in. So, for instance, this building would just do the landscaping around it and, then, as this building went in it would do it there. So, the Planning and Zoning Commission did approve that concept. If the Council is in support of that, then, we need to delete site-specific condition number seven. The Meridian parks department condition notes that the applicant needs to construct a pathway along the Five Mile. It did not specify the timing of that, though, and I did talk to Elroy Huff this afternoon regarding that matter. Typically we require that prior to the first certificate of occupancy being issued on the property and he was still in Meridian City Council June 22, 2004 Page 21 of 29 favor of that. I suspect that the applicant, because of the fill they wanted to put on the site, would not be in -- would want that postponed as well. But the parks department did want that pathway constructed prior to the first C of O. As I mentioned, this was a remnant parcel from a previous subdivision that included these two properties. Ultra Touch -- some of you may have been here and probably know this story better than I do, but I'll try and summarize it, but Ultra Touch is basically short 11 parking spaces and those 11 parking spaces are supposed to be provided on this property and that the development agreement does address that concern. So, you won't see that specifically addressed in the preliminary plat that's before you tonight, but that is still an issue on the development agreement. We did want to take this opportunity, though, to have the applicant verify that he is willing to dedicate the 11 parking spaces for joint use -- or up to 11 spaces for joint use with Ultra Touch and just clarify that tonight, because it was a little unclear from the staff report and from the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing. I think that addresses the remaining issues. There are conditions of approval that the applicant stubs out this way. The fill concerns were an issue there, because it wasn't clear when that would become an emergency access. I think they resolved it that fire at this time doesn't need to be able to get out there, but that, eventually, when this property is developed that they be -- have that cross -access agreement in that location. There is no north -south cross -access agreement. There are two drive aisles that exit onto this shared 40 foot easement, so there is a loop, basically, that goes that way. And I think I will end staffs presentation with that and just answer any questions that you may have. Nary: Council, any questions for Mrs. Powell? Bird: I have none, Mr. President. Nary: Mrs. Powell, just on that piece that JJ Auto said they would work on a cross - access through their property. Cross -connection. Are they talking of a pedestrian access? Because it looks like there is a building right there and it looks like a trash enclosure or something in the north -- on the JJ Auto piece. Isn't there a building across that anyway? Bird: Yes, there is. Powell: Yes. And that's why -- and I read through the whole minutes trying to find it -- figure out what was going on there. Unfortunately, Brad Hawkins -Clark was sick today, so I wasn't able to find out a little bit more, but I do believe that cross -access that he was talking about was -- well, I don't know. I think that the applicant needs to explain it, because at this point I don't know. Nary: All right. Thank you. Is the applicant here? Why don't you come on up, please. I think I saw you raise your hand at the swearing in portion, didn't I? Kinkela: Yes. Meridian City Council June 22, 2004 Page 22 of 29 Nary: Okay. Would you state your name and spell your last for the record. Kinkela: President Nary, Members of the Council, my name is Chad Kinkela, last name is spelled K-kn-k-a-I-a, with Bailey Engineering, 1117 East Plaza Drive. I believe that staff did a very good job representing what our project is. I'm not sure, really, where to start here. About the cross -access to the north, you're absolutely correct. There is an existing building that is there. The gentleman from JJ Automotive was trying to be supportive and we were having some secondary access issues. I believe that we have that resolved. We are going to move the trash enclosure and we have already put together legal descriptions and made modifications to the plat to show access going to the east. Thank you. Powell: West. Kinkela: West. Thank you. I was -- only one comment and concern that I had about the recommendations by staff were about the Meridian Park's department condition on the pathway. Currently I'm working on another project in Meridian and we are having a bit of a problem with Nampa -Meridian in paving a pathway along -- I believe that it's Five Mile Creek out towards Black Cat Road and I don't know where we are headed. My client has no problem providing that pathway, but I just wanted to make note of that, but there could be a potential problem with Nampa -Meridian on this one as well, so -- Nary: What about the parking? Kinkela: Parking. That's a problem that this client inherited and he has, to my knowledge, been doing his due diligence to work on that with staff. To my understanding a revised development agreement has been submitted and they are very eager to move forward with that. Nary: Anything else? Council, questions for Mr. Kinkela? Bird: I have none. Rountree: Question about the landscaping. Nary: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: There was an indication that there was a desire to develop the landscaping on an individual development site basis, as opposed to the entire site at once? Kinkela: Yes, sir. Rountree: At what point in time is the common area landscaped? When the development is done or at the start of the development? Meridian City Council June 22, 2004 Page 23 of 29 Kinkela: Councilman Rountree, the problem that the developer was foreseeing with this is that if he established all the landscape before buildings were put up, that the majority of the landscaping would be destroyed The developer does not have any problem putting the landscaping on the north, which is required between the Ultra Touch. The area down by the storm drain pond that will be outside of any improvements, so that will also be landscaped. I think that the issue was in the cluster where the building sites were going to be, so -- Rountree: So, my question is is it a matter of timing on the common areas? That would be one of the first things done or -- Kinkela: In the common areas it would border the north and the south, that's correct, sir. Rountree: Okay. Thank you. Nary: The question I guess I have on that landscaping issue is -- I mean do you have some idea at all on the phasing of the rest? Because I guess what I envision is that first piece that's immediately adjacent to Ultra Touch -- I mean I don't know which one -- building is developed first, so you have got landscaping adjacent to one of them and not the other and it's not the first one, I mean it's going to look pretty odd there to have it that way, so I mean do you folks have some phasing idea of how this is going to work out? Kinkela: To my understanding the first building to the north that's directly in line with the Ultra Touch Car Wash will go first and, of course, that's always market dependent, but to my understanding they have had some -- what's the proper word that I'm looking for? Interest in the other development site, so -- okay. So, the landscape requirement will be that there is going to have to be a five foot landscape buffer here. So, that landscaping will be put in with the sewer, water, street improvements and all of street improvements in the common area will also have to be placed or bonded for this to be a final plat. The developer has also indicated that -- that the landscaping around the pond would be placed, so we would have somewhat of a buffer on the south. So, to answer your question, if this building were to be constructed and built, it would have all of its landscaping around it on its lot. At such time when these buildings would go in, then, they would fill in with their landscaping as well. Nary: So, if I could ask you on the pathway, you're not necessarily asking us to amend the condition as it's written, you're just saying you don't know whether or not that may be a problem -- Kinkela: That's correct. Nary: -- in getting it done. Meridian City Council June 22, 2004 Page 24 of 29 Kinkela: That's correct. We are not in opposition of doing the work. However, sometimes getting the logistics to work with license agreements with Nampa -Meridian and -- Nary: And if I understood you correctly on the parking issue, you said a development agreement amendment -- I don't know if that's the exact words you used, but so what we are anticipating is that someone is going to come back and ask them to remove the requirement to have that -- Kinkela: Oh, no, sir. No. No. No. Nary: Okay. Kinkela: To my knowledge when this -- I wasn't working on this project when it was originally subdivided. There was an outstanding development agreement that was never executed -- apparently it needed a little bit of work to be done to it, so I apologize for the word amended. I should say finalized development agreement. The developer that's currently working with the project has every intent to follow through with that and to my understanding they have already submitted that and committed to the 11 parking stalls. Nary: Okay. Thank you. Kinkela: You're welcome. Nary: Mr. Wardle, did you have a questions? Wardle: Mr. President, I just have a question for Anna and having worked with the parks department and Nampa -Meridian Irrigation, they are having some difficulties achieving all of the requirements by the irrigation district for those pathways. What would be a -- as opposed to requiring that to be constructed before certificate of occupancy, what would be a feasible way of doing that? Powell: President Nary, Councilmember Wardle, we could tie it just to the release of a building permit per Lot 7. Lot 7 is the only non -common lot -- Lot 1 and Lot 7 are the only two lots that have the pathway on them, so that might be another trigger to release to set it to. And, President Nary, if I might address the -- what seemed to me maybe one option for the landscaping would be to have all the landscaping on Lot 1, which, again, is the common areas and, then, along the perimeter, the north and west perimeter, installed and, then, the ones just immediately around the buildings could fill in later, in which case we would still need a revised landscape plan for the whole site. The landscape plan that they submitted that's referenced in Item No. 7 is just for the first building that they wanted to build, so the extent of the landscape plan is approximately like that. We have not seen the landscape plan for the entire site. Wardle: Mr. President? !s r Meddian City Council June 22, 2004 Page 25 of 29 Nary: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: And just to follow up with that, Anna, are you saying that this needs to go back for -- to staff, so that you can review the landscape plan for the entire site? Powell: It isn't uncommon for us to require a revised landscape plan be submitted with the final plat and that's how the condition reads. We could allow still some phasing in of the landscaping immediately around the buildings, but I think if -- if we got the perimeter and, then, the common area landscaping, that that would give the workers enough room to get around and do their construction without damaging -- Wardle: Mr. President? Nary: Mr. Wardle Wardle: Anna, so you're comfortable with the Commission recommendation that's currently there? Powell: No. The Commission recommended taking out Item No. 7 and not having them do a revised landscape plan. So, we have not seen a landscape plan for the whole subdivision. Typically, we do, even if we don't see it constructed. Fairview Lakes, which will be right across the street, they submitted a whole landscape plan, but they said, you know, we are going to be working on this -- the interior of the site, we just want to do the frontages and the -- I think they did the frontage and, then, whatever phase they were working on at that time, so -- Wardle: So, it would be your preference to leave condition number seven? Powell: I think staff would like to see a complete landscape plan, rather than having to piece it together time by time. It's just typical of what we see. Bird: Mr. President? Nary: Mr. Bird. Bird: I believe the applicant answered Mr. Rountree saying that -- the perimeter and the common areas, he would landscape and I understand, Anna, from the developer's standpoint, that, you know, there is not a guarantee that those buildings are going to sit just exactly like they are shown on the preliminary and sometimes you can't -- you have to do different on your landscape. I mean I'm sure he can draw some kind of a preliminary landscape for your preliminary plat, but -- I don't know. I don't see where that's a real hang up on my part of having -- if he will do the exterior and the common lots, then, I don't have any -- I'm like Mr. Rountree, I have no problem with it. Wardle: Mr. President? to r Meridian City Council June 22, 2004 Page 26 of 29 Nary: Mr. Wardle: Wardle: And just to clarify -- and correct me if I'm wrong, Anna, but as I understand what Anna's saying is they have only seen the landscape for Lot No. 1, not -- and the developer is committed to do that. Condition No. 7, as I understand it, requires them to submit a revised landscape plan and it can be phased, which I think we all agree is the best way to do it. Is that correct, Anna? Powell: Yes. And I must not have been clear before, because I'm not opposed to the phasing at all and I -- that's probably appropriate. It's just that we don't know what they are planning to do for the landscape plan and we do have requirements that generally we look at how they relate to the subdivision, the preliminary landscaping requirements, the one every 35 feet. It will just be -- typically staff reviews it for the subdivision as a whole and, then, when the certificates of zoning compliance come in, we just look to make sure that they are consistent with the subdivision landscape plan. Nary: Council, any other questions or comments? Bird: That answered mine. Wardle: Mr. President? Nary: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Hearing no more comments, I move we close Public Hearing PP 04 -- Bird: You haven't asked for other -- Wardle: Oh, I'm sorry. Nary: Is there anyone else that wants to testify or did you have any further response, Mr. Kinkela? I'm sorry. Kinkela: I just wanted to say that we would have no problem with submitting per the request. Nary: Thank you. Okay. Now. Wardle: Now? Mr. President? Nary: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: I move that we close Public Hearing PP 04-012, preliminary plat for Initial Point Subdivision. Meridian City Council June 22, 2004 Page 27 of 29 Rountree: Second. Nary: It's been moved and seconded to close the Public Hearing for PP 04-012 for Initial Point Subdivision. All those in favor say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Wardle: Mr. President? Nary: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: I move that we approve PP 04-012, preliminary plat for Initial Point Subdivision, leaving in site specific condition number seven and requiring construction of the pathway along the Five Mile Creek before release of a building permit for Lot No. 7. Rountree: Second. Nary: It's been moved and seconded for approval of PP 04-012, Initial Point Subdivision. Is there any other comment? Mr. Wardle, on number seven there is a second sentence that says if the buffer between land uses and the perimeter landscape are approved to be delayed, this condition is null and void. It appears that isn't -- it isn't going to be delayed anyway. Is there a necessity to remove that sentence or is it -- does it matter? Powell: I think it would be better to remove that second sentence and if you want to add -- or modify the sentence to say something like phasing within the individual building lots is approved by Council or something like that. Nary: Your choice. Wardle: Mr. President, I would move to amend my motion to delete the second sentence in item number seven and say that phasing of the landscaping is allowed with staff approval. Nary: Second agree? Bird: Second agrees. Nary: It's been moved and seconded and amend to -- for PP 04-012 for Initial Point Subdivision. Mr. Berg, would you call roll, please. Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Nary, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Meridian City Council June 22, 2004 Page 28 of 29 Item 14: Ordinance No. _Open Burning Amended Ordinance: Nary: Our last item is Ordinance No. 04-1083, the open burning amended ordinance. Mr. Berg, would you read that ordinance -- is there other discussion before we read it by title? I was trying to hurry. Sorry. Are you ready for Mr. Berg to read it by title? Berg: Okay. Thank you, Mr. President, Members of the Council. Ordinance No. 04- 1083, an ordinance amending the following sections: Section Four, prohibition against open burning in Section Six permits to Chapter 2, Title 5, open burning in Section Four, definitions, Section Five air quality designations and alert criteria and Section 12 penalty of Chapter 3, Title 5, to provide for Subsections A and B within Section Four and to provide for additional language within Section Six, Chapter 2, Title 5 and to provide for definitions for air quality index, operator and permit holder, and to eliminate language within Section 4 and in Section Five to provide for addition and elimination of language within Subsection A, to delete the existing Subsection B and to add a new Subsection B and C and in Section 12 to provide for an additional enforcement from the title of the section and to eliminate and add language in Subsection A and to provide for a new Subsection B and C to Chapter 3, Title 5, for the City of Meridian, Idaho, providing for conflict, severability, savings clause, and providing for an effective date. Nary: Thank you, Mr. Berg. You have had now Ordinance No. 04-1083 read by title only. Does anyone in the audience or Council want the ordinance read in full? It's eight pages long, it's as interesting as that title. Are you sure? Council, is there a motion? Rountree: Mr. President? Nary: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I move that we approve Ordinance 04-1083 with suspension of rules. Wardle: Second. Nary: It's been moved and seconded for the approval of Ordinance 04-1083, open burning amended ordinance. Mr. Berg, would you call roll, please. Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Nary, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Nary: And it looks like we are almost to 8:15. Council, we have reached the end of our agenda. Mr. Willis, before we started, said we would be done at 8:15, so -- Bird: I move that we adjourn. Rountree: Second. Meridian City Council June 22, 2004 Page 29 of 29 Nary: It's been moved and seconded to adjourn. All those in favor say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:15 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) MAYO - RD l,nna,,, M ATTEST: 4SEAL WILLIAM G. BERG, JR, GgITYtL TYt„.��``. -7,/3 ,O� DATE APPROVED