Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004 08-17Revised August 17, 2004 CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, August 17, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers 1. Roll -call Attendance: X Shaun Wardle X Bill Nary X Charlie Rountree 0 Keith Bird X Mayor Tammy de Weerd 2. Pledge of Allegiance: By Dave McKinnon 3. Community Invocation by Pastor Craig Flinn, with Meridian Alliance Church: 4. Adoption of the Agenda: Approve As Amended 5. Consent Agenda: Approve A. Approve Minutes of August 3, 2004 City Council Regular Meeting: Approve B. Waterline Late Comers Agreement — Debgar, LLC (dba Bodily RV Center): Approve C. First Amendment to the Development Agreement: RZ 04-006 Request for a Rezone of 16.1 acres from R-4 to R-8 zone for Sutherland Farm Subdivision No. 4 by Sutherland Farm, Inc. — east of South Eagle Road and north of East Victory Road: Approve D. E. Resolution No. 04-441 Approve F. G. construct sewer line within Approve provide mechanical Solid Waste Committee: Mile Drain: services and plan Meridian City Council Agenda—August 17,2003 Page l of 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 hour: prior to the public meeting. H. Revised August 17, 2004 reviews for structures constructed within the City of Meridian: Approve Lvnd, Inc. to provide plumbing inspection services and plan reviews for structures constructed within the City of Meridian: Approve 7. (Items Moved from Consent Agenda) 8. FP 04-050 Request for Final Plat approval for 6 commercial building lots on 5.23 acres in a L-0 zone for Valencia Plaza Subdivision by Roylance & Associates — east of South Locust Grove Road and south of East Overland Road: Approve 9. Continued Public Hearing from July 13, 2004: ZOA 04-001 Request for Zoning Ordinance Amendment to allow small antennas to be mounted on existing and new light and power poles within residential, office, commercial and industrial subdivisions by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc: Attorney to Prepare Ordinance 10. Public Hearing: AZ 04-014 Request for Annexation & Zoning of 30 acres from RUT to R-8 zone for proposed Sienna Creek Subdivision by Sagewood Development, Inc. — north of West Ustick Road and east of North Linder Road: Prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval 11. Public Hearing: PP 04-019 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 136 single-family residential building lots and 13 common lots on 30 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for proposed Sienna Creek Subdivision by Sagewood Development, Inc. — north of West Ustick Road and east of North Linder Road: Prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval 12. Public Hearing: CUP 04-021 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development for a residential subdivision for proposed Sienna Creek Subdivision by Sagewood Development, Inc. — north of West Ustick and east of North Linder Road: Prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval 13. Public Hearing: PP 04-018 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for a re- subdivision of Lot 2, Tramore Subdivision consisting of 16 multi -family residential building lots and 3 common lots on 5.7 acres in an L-0 zone for proposed Roundtree Subdivision by Big View Builders — east of North Linder Road on south side of East Pine Avenue: Prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval Meridian City Council Agenda — August 17, 2003 Page 2 of 3 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property ofthe 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 Revised August 17, 2004 14. Public Hearing: CUP 04-018 Request for Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development for a reduction to 10 -feet for the rear setback, minimum 5 -foot side setback, minimum 20 -foot front setback and no minimum frontage requirement for lots within the proposed development for Roundtree Subdivision by Big View Builders — east of North Linder Road on south side of East Pine Avenue: Prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval 15. Water, Sewer and Trash Delinquencies: Approve 16. Ordinance No. 04-1095 : RZ 04-006 Request for a Rezone of 16.1 acres from R-4 to R-8 zone for Sutherland Farm Subdivision No. 4 by Sutherland Farm, Inc. — east of South Eagle Road and north of East Victory Road: Approve Meridian City Council Agenda — August 17, 2003 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 Meetina August 17, 2004. The regular meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:00 P.M., Tuesday, August 17, 2004, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd. Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, Charlie Rountree, William Nary, and Shaun Wardle. Members absent: Keith Bird. Others Present: Bill Nichols, Will Berg, Anna Canning, Brad Watson, Gary Smith, Jim Musser, and Dean Willis. Item 1: Roll -call Attendance: Roll call. X Shaun Wardle X Bill Nary X Charlie Rountree Keith Bird X Mayor Tammy de Weerd De Weerd: Okay. I'll go ahead and open the regular City Council meeting. It's Tuesday, August 17th. It is a little bit after 7:00 and I will ask the city clerk to start us off with roll call attendance. Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance: De Weerd: Item No. 2 is the pledge of allegiance and we will ask our in-house Boy Scout Mr. Dave McKinnon to, please, lead us in the pledge. (Pledge of Allegiance recited.) Item 3: Community Invocation by Pastor Craig Flinn, with Meridian Alliance Church: De Weerd: Mr. McKinnon, I guess since we have asked you to fill in so very often, I would like to present you one of the new City of Meridian pins. Okay. Item No. 3 is the community invocation. We would ask you to join us or take a moment to meditate. Flinn: Let's pray. God, we thank you that you're the God of laughter. You created us in your image and I believe you smile. You say in your word that you rejoice over us with singing and I just thank you for laughter. What a great way to start a meeting. The emotions you put in us to express grief and sorrow and joy and so thanks for laughter. God, we acknowledge that you are the God of the city, that you have established this leadership team that stands -- or sits before me. You have appointed them and I pray tonight that you will give them great insight and wisdom into your ways and your will and you will give them a spirit of unity and vision and clarity in the decisions that you have Meridian City Council August 17,2004 Page 2 of 40 for them to make. God, we thank you for blessing us in the city. We pray tonight for the school administration and the staff that are scurrying around buildings now and getting ready for this next week, where we thank you for the educators you have raised up. We pray a blessing on each one. Lord, we pray for the thousands of children that will begin to roam the hallways of schools and, God, we pray for safety, we pray for fun, we pray for life change as they are educated. Lord, we just -- again, we just pray for education. Lord, we pray for a safe year. We pray for a year of honor and respect. We pray for a year of character development. Lord, we pray for all of the city officials, Lord, our police department, our fire department, the government. Lord, we just ask for a blessing as these men and women serve in the areas you have appointed them. Again, we just ask for your anointing on this meeting, for clear communication. I pray for more laughter and more joy and that as we walk away from this meeting tonight we will know we have met with you and we have had clarity on the direction you have for the city in Jesus name, amen. Item 4: Adoption of the Agenda: De Weerd: Thank you so much, Pastor Flinn. If I could present you with one of our new pins and thank you for joining us. We will go on to Item No. 4, adoption of the agenda. Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Nary. Nary: I'd like to add two items to the agenda, although one may have been added by the clerk this afternoon on the study, the Dr. Freilick study that is proposed, the joint MOU with ACRD, is that on our revised agenda? Okay. So, we'd like to add that MOU onto -- I guess it would be Item 5-G and also that the MOU with the Ada County Highway District with the City of Meridian for a traffic study in the downtown core, that would be added as Item 5-H and that the Mayor be authorized to sign after review by the city attorney of that MOU and that on the Freilick study MOU, that that be for the Mayor to sign and clerk to attest as well and on the resolution number -- oh. Okay. So, this -- I'm looking at the revised agenda, it was revised as of today's date, August 17th, but these two items aren't on there, so I would move to add those as items 5-J and K. And the resolution number is 04-441. So, anyway, I think those are the only items to add to the agenda. De Weerd: Do I have a second? Wardle: Second. De Weerd: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to adopt the agenda as amended by Councilman Nary. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Meridian City Council August 17, 2004 Page 3 of 40 Item 5: Consent Agenda: A. Approve Minutes of August 3, 2004 City Council Regular Meeting: B. Waterline Late Comers Agreement — Debgar, LLC (dba Bodily RV Center): C. First Amendment to the Development Agreement: RZ 04-006 Request for a Rezone of 16.1 acres from R-4 to R-8 zone for Sutherland Farm Subdivision No. 4 by Sutherland Farm, Inc. — east of South Eagle Road and north of East Victory Road: D. Water Main Easement for Treasure Valley Baptist Church: E. Resolution No. 04447 : Solid Waste Committee: F. License Agreement with Nampa Meridian Irrigation District to construct sewer line within the easement for the Ten Mile Drain: G. Personal Services Contract between the City of Meridian and RIMI. Inc. to provide mechanical inspection services and plan reviews for structures constructed within the City of Meridian: (:9 Lynd, Inc. to provide plumbing inspection services and plan reviews for structures constructed within the City of Meridian: De Weerd: Item 5 is the Consent Agenda. Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Nary. Nary: I'd move the approval of the amended Consent Agenda for approval, Items 5-A through K, including the new additional items, as well as the Mayor to sign, Clerk to attest on all the proper papers and, again, Resolution No. 04-441. Wardle: Second. De Weerd: It's been moved and seconded to approve the Consent Agenda. Is there any further discussion? Mr. Clerk, will you call roll. Meridian City Council August 17, 2004 Page 4 of 40 Roll -Call: Bird, absent; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Nary, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 6: Department Reports: None De Weerd: Thank you. There are no department reports. No? Item 7: (Items Moved from Consent Agenda) De Weerd: Okay. There are no items moved from the Consent Agenda. Item 8: FP 04-050 Request for Final Plat approval for 6 commercial building lots on 5.23 acres in a L -O zone for Valencia Plaza Subdivision by Roylance & Associates — east of South Locust Grove Road and south of East Overland Road: De Weerd: So, we are at Item 8 for FP 04-050. 1 will ask Anna to make staff comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is a six lot commercial subdivision. The lot was originally Lot 1, Block 1, of Resolution Subdivision No. 1. They are now requesting to divide it into six commercial lots or -- yes, six commercial building lots. They will be served by an internal drive. There are no new roads as part of this application. They have shown a preliminary layout for building pads and the final plat is in substantial compliance with the approved preliminary plat. Staff is recommending approval. I do not have an applicant -- or letter from the applicant at this time. De Weerd: Okay. Is the applicant here tonight? Do you agree with all of staff comments? Okay. The applicant agrees with staff comments. Council, do you have any questions or comments? Rountree: I have none. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. I would entertain a motion. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I move that we approve Item No. 8, FP 04-050, Valencia Plaza Subdivision, including all staff comments. Wardle: Second. Meridian City Council August 17, 2004 Page 5 of 40 De Weerd: It's been moved and seconded to approve Item 8. Is there any further discussion? Mr. Clerk, will you call roll? Roll -Call: Bird, absent; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Nary, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 9: Continued Public Hearing from July 13, 2004: ZOA 04-001 Request for Zoning Ordinance Amendment to allow small antennas to be mounted on existing and new light and power poles within residential, office, commercial and industrial subdivisions by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc: De Weerd: Thank you. Item 9 is a continued Public Hearing from July 13th on ZOA 04- 001. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, we -- you continued this item. We had a lot of discussion about how poles would be placed, whether the surrounding property owners would be noticed, would they be placed on some of the ornamental lighting features we had, how that license agreement would work -- there was just a number of outstanding questions for the Council. So, the applicant has met with both myself and Mr. Watson, to address those concerns, and we do believe that we have those straightened out. I think you got -- yes, you were -- I think you got a fax regarding this. It's probably in your packets. We have discussed some other changes with the applicant and he, I think, has those tonight, so I'll cut my presentation short and let him hand those out and so that we can let you review them. McKinnon: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. You should have all received a copy of my letter and I gave you a revised copy of the attachments for the revisions to the communication towers ordinance, and Anna and I just talked on the phone a few hours ago, actually, and made a couple of small additions to it, correcting the word antennas to antennae. I think that's the plural for antennas or antennae. So, we made a few corrections and I'll just go over some of the issues that we talked about last time and explain how we tried to resolve those, if you haven't had a chance to review my letter. Basically, after our last discussion that we had there were a lot of issues that were outstanding. I know there was a lot of discussion about the parabolic dish, the satellite dish, and there was some idea that we didn't want those hanging off of streetlights, so we have decided to eliminate that idea and there will not be any parabolic dishes or any sort of satellite dishes hanging off of streetlights and so we met with Anna and that was one of the first things we talked about and we said, well, it's an issue, let's get rid of it and we don't want to have any other reason to dislike streetlights. The next thing that we looked at was what type of issues would we have to deal with with getting to all the neighbors and how we have the neighbors have input in this. It was Anna's suggestion that we include all the neighbors within a hundred feet of the radius of the streetlight, if it's an existing streetlight, and receive their approval for this product prior to applying for a permit from the city. We felt like that was a great suggestion and we have included that in the revisions to the ordinance. In addition to Meridian City Council August 17, 2004 Page 6 of 40 that, we decided that for new subdivisions, that if the subdivision developer wishes, he could request approval of these types of antennas to be placed on his streetlights within the subdivision prior to construction and receive approval for those during the subdivision process, since we have made those revisions as well to the ordinance, and we have put in a requirement, a new standard that they would have to be separated by at least 500 feet in distance, the poles themselves that have the antennas on them, and we decided that after the discussion that we had with Council and based on your recommendation that we make a requirement they be painted to match the streetlights. So, we have added that into the ordinance as well. Then, after we met with Anna we were hit with another letter from the Public Works Department. The Public Works Department apologized for the tardiness of their comments, but we decided that Brad's list of comments were important enough that we needed to sit down with Brad or Bruce. Brad wasn't available, so he suggested we talk with Bruce Freckleton. So, we haven't actually talked to Brad, but we have talked with Bruce and Anna mentioned we talked with Brad and I saw him raise his eyebrows, but we have met with Public Works and discussed their issues and the first was concern with cost and we have discussed the issues of cost and we decided that we would be more than willing to bear the cost of the electricity for the light. In addition to that, we would be willing to pay, you know, on top of that, because this will be something that's running 24 hours a day, the streetlight isn't running 24 hours a day, so all electrical costs would be borne by the developer, if a person wants to put this up. Contacted Mr. Berg, your city clerk, to try to figure out the fees for that and he's contacted Idaho Power to determine how much a streetlight costs and we will get those costs eventually from Will. The second concern that Brad had, had to deal with ornamental lights, those lights that are more of an historical look. There is not a whole lot of historical lights in Meridian, a lot of ornamental lights, though, in these subdivisions and the downtown area. We have decided to completely eliminate any idea of any possibility for those to be placed on those types of streetlights and so that should not be an issue anymore. The new ordinance revisions eliminate the possibility of that happening, so there won't be any possibility of those being placed on the historical lights. The third concern that they had was how are we going to do the fees for this and what type of process that we go through for approval for this. The way the ordinance was prepared and presented was that under current ordinances the -- any type of a cell tower would require either a certificate of zoning compliance or a Conditional Use Permit as determined by either the Planning and Zoning Director or the Public Works Director. We have combined the two to say both the Zoning Administrator and the Public Works Director have to make the determination whether they need to get a Conditional Use Permit or a certificate of zoning compliance. After that, in order to build that, if it's a new tower, they have to get a building permit, that's where the fees for design review are paid, electrical permits would be required and they pay a fee for that as well. So, we have included that into the ordinance and that's how that would be handled. The fourth concern that they had was a surety for any new poles. We have decided to eliminate the idea of placing any additional new poles in neighborhoods, the possibility of replacing old poles with new poles, but the idea of us putting additional poles in old neighbors is an idea that we have done away with. There will be no new poles in old neighbors, unless there is a city request for those, but we have taken away that issue. Brad had raised that issue saying that if we were to abandon those poles in Meridian City Council August 17, 2004 Page 7 of 40 the future the city would be left paying the electrical bill and we didn't want to have the city left paying the electrical bill or having to remove those poles in the future, so we decided to eliminate the possibility of adding new poles, rather just replacing old, worn out poles, such as the old poles with the cobra head that hangs off of those, and there is a possibility of correcting that, which would be in the benefit of the city and for our client. The additional comments that Brad had had to deal -- he had a bunch of other comments, actually, four other additional comments and the first one was what kind of standards will they use to determine whether or not this is the type of use that we would like to see in the area and there are a list of standards that are in the ordinance and I just gave you a quick list of those, I'll just list them off really quick. One, is that we have to match those lights -- they have to be painted to match the streetlights. The size of the antenna can be no more than four square feet in size. Antennas cannot be located within 500 feet of each other. The height of the antenna has to be lower than the maximum height limit for the zoning district in which it is. In a residential district that's 35 feet. Adjacent neighbors within 100 feet have to sign off on the approval for those antennas and an antenna cannot be located on streetlights in neighborhoods with ornamental or historical light fixtures. The second minor issue that he had to deal with historical lighting, again, we are not -- we have taken that out of the ordinance. There will be no possibility of that happening. The third issue had to deal with the lease or franchise agreement. In talking with Will Berg he did not wish to pursue the franchise agreement, but, rather, go through the lease process or license agreement. We are open to either. That's very possible for us to do either of those issues. The fourth concern was a concern of both the police department. After the meeting we met with Bill Musser and he had some concerns about radio frequency and we met with Public Works Department about their radio frequency for their SCADA system and for the new water meters. There is a -- they are doing water meter testing where it's a radio frequency, rather than actually tapping those. And we have talked with the electrical engineer that's working on this project and we have looked at the radio frequencies that we are using, one is a 900 megahertz hopping system, it should have no interference with the hopping system that SCADA uses and the Public Works and it shouldn't because it hops from place -- it hops within that frequency and it should have no interference with the police department. Another one of the frequencies that would be used by this is actually a licensed frequency and so they would be the only ones allowed to use that frequency, so there would be no interference with the police department or Public Works. The final concern we had had to deal with the termination of this type of project. We felt that within the lease agreement there would have to be a need for just cause to eliminate the use. So, I'll just get back to that last issue. On the lease agreement they wanted to have the ability to terminate the lease and it was -- the way Brad Watson had originally -- Brad and Bruce had originally written the memo, it was without just cause, that they could terminate at anytime. In talking with Bruce Freckleton, he agreed that there needs to be just cause to terminate that and there needs to be a reason, plus a specific time. Well, so it was -- the meeting that we had with your staff were great. Anna was very helpful; she had some great suggestions for us. Brad and in talking with Bruce, Captain Musser -- I'm sorry, chief -- Chief Musser and I played phone tag over and over, but in dealing with the electrical engineer, we have realized that there won't be any interference that was hoped to be avoided and Meridian City Council August 17, 2004 Page 8 of 40 that will be avoided by this system. Just so that you know for your -- just for edification, there are other people doing this type of product out there. The radio frequencies are being used out there and that they have a different way of putting up receivers for this, they are typically in a different manner, but the types of radio frequency is out there and it's under use. I think we have tried to address your concerns. These are really small antennas. The idea that being a small halo was a bit over -- was a little presumptuous on my part to say that it would be all the way around. They are directional antennas. Not all of the antennas have to be omni directional; they actually have a range and so they would have a range that they are going -- not typically have to be a full halo. They are very small in size and they are typically above the eyesight and the eye line of the people that are within Meridian and we don't believe that it would cause -- the four square feet would cause any adverse conditions for the city as far as the beautification of the city. And after working with everybody and working with Public Works, they felt that we addressed their concerns. Anna had helped us out to address your concerns and additional concerns that had been brought up and ask for your approval at this time and ask if you have any questions. De Weerd: Council, do you have any questions? Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Nary Nary: It sounds like you have done a lot, Mr. McKinnon, from our last discussion about this, but in looking at the ordinance that you proposed to us, I don't see all of that in here, so -- I see some of it, but - like the issue on the poles and whether or not it would only be on new poles and not -- or that you wouldn't create new poles or those kind of things, I mean I appreciated those things, but I guess I didn't see language in here about that. Was that to just be incorporated in this license agreement or we would simply -- McKinnon: That's actually in the ordinance itself. 11-22-4, B, the language now says existing streetlights. It's the third line within there. It would limit that to existing streetlights. Nary: Well, it says can be mounted on existing or new poles. Existing streetlights, buildings, but I guess the one other thing you said was you didn't want -- the concern Public Works had was that if you would be replacing an old pole that would be fine, but if you had an issue where you put it on there and, eventually, you didn't want it, but we put a new pole in and part of it was supposed to be paid for by your client and they weren't going to be paid anymore, I guess I didn't see that kind of language in there. Were you thinking that would just be incorporated in the agreement on whether or not we did that, whether we allowed it to be there in the first place? Because, to me, all it says is that it can go on new poles or old poles. So, it doesn't say anything to me about who is going to pay for it, so was that going to be in the agreement? Meridian City Council August 17, 2004 Page 9 of 40 McKinnon: Councilman Nary, I guess the intent of that, if it's not specifically listed in the ordinance, would be that the Planning and Zoning director and the Public Works director have to approve of this and that they could make that determination. The idea originally was that there are some old neighborhoods where the streetlights are so far apart from each other in the old neighborhoods before the standards that we are using now were there, there may be a gap in coverage and we were proposing to put new streetlights in where there aren't any streetlights currently and the idea now is not to put in new streetlights in those areas, but, rather, just use the existing streetlights. And the intent was that the Planning and Zoning Director and the Public Works Director would make that determination. Those are not needed. We could make it explicit in there, the wording for that, your suggestions would be great for that. This is a revision. We can make revisions to the -- Nary: My only concern is I could see your client, you know, eventually in certain areas of town where there are -- aren't adequate streetlights saying, look, I'll put up a new streetlight for you, because I want to be able to put an antenna on it and -- like you said, at some point where there was a -- the demographics moved, then, all of sudden they want to take those out and the city has a pole there that they are paying for now that they didn't want in the first place or they didn't feel was necessary at the time that it was done. Canning: Madam Mayor? Nary: So, I didn't know if that type of language would just be incorporated in the agreement. De Weerd: Anna. Canning: The way I -- Madam Mayor, Councilmember Nary, the way I had read this was my understanding was the term poles was not referring to streetlights. That poles was something other than streetlights. That a new pole might just be like a cell tower pole, you know, just some pole out there. That's the way I understood it. But some clarification from the applicant might be in order on that and maybe we need to clarify it in the text, too, because when he used existing streetlights, I think that that's what he meant is that, no, he wouldn't do new streetlights, because that's what the city would pay for, but a new pole -- it might be a flag pole -- you know, who knows. But just the pole without the lights. He wanted to leave himself some options with that. Nary: And later on when someone is reviewing it, it may not be that clear. Canning: That's obviously -- it's obvious that we need to clarify it. Nary: And the only other comment I had is on number five Meridian should probably be capitalized to indicate it's the City of Meridian, not some term. McKinnon: The meridian Meridian City Council August 17, 2004 Page 10 of 40 Nary: Something that makes it clear that we are talking about the city's streetlights, versus a terminology, because someone certainly could read it that way, so -- but, otherwise, I really appreciate the time and effort it looks like everybody took to deal with all the issued that we raised that last time. McKinnon: Thank you, Councilman Nary, Mayor, Members of the Council. I think that Anna and I can come up with some language to clarify that if you'd like and direct us to do that. You know, upon approval there is still the requirement to getting it codified and that's one of the changes that we feel comfortable being able to make. De Weerd: I would ask, too, on -- if you thought about -- you talked about a lease agreement and what -- I mean how is that set and the figures and that sort of thing? McKinnon: Well, in talking with your -- Mayor and Members of the Council, in talking with the city clerk Will Berg, the numbers -- and in talking with Public Works Department, they don't know exactly how much streetlights cost to run for the city. They are all on one big contract that we have with Idaho Power and we pay into that, so we have to determine the cost of that and upon determination of cost of that it would be similar to a license agreement that you have with Ada County to be able to utilize the public space for that and we would pay our ratio of the electric bill, plus the cost that it takes to pay for the streetlights. So, the city's cost of the streetlights would go down and our burden could become higher, because we'd have the use of the -- of the pole. De Weerd: But I guess more in the loss of -- if this becomes more of a form of getting reception and we would have a loss of franchise fees that we get from the more traditional means, I guess that's what I was looking at. De Weerd: Oh, Mr. Berg. Berg: Thank you, Madam Mayor, since I didn't hear all the discussion, but we currently have franchise fees with United Cable -- or Cable One, whatever they changed their name -- and besides the other utilities, but that's the only one it affects. I think any kind of a competition of that nature. The other issues is Idaho Power charges us a flat rate for streetlights that we own and, then, a flat rate for wood poles that we don't own that are all owned by Idaho Power for them to maintain. So, they would have to figure out how much power tapped in for the use of that antenna and whatever we feel is a reasonable lease or any kind of maintenance on that streetlight. That I haven't got determined, because Idaho Power had some other rates that they are looking to see in their schedule it would comply with or the usage. But that's about all I have researched for that rate schedule with Idaho Power. De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Nichols, do you have any comments on the franchise agreement? Meridian City Council August 17, 2004 Page 11 of 40 Nichols: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, it's typical if you're going to lease a portion of city property to receive something in return for that and, certainly, if it were a cell tower lease on your property there are various mechanisms for calculating the call volume and the revenue generated by calls through a particular cell tower. There should be some method for leasing this space and some calculations, so the remuneration to the city is certainly review -able, probably write into the lease audit standards with regard to connection fees and different things charged just like you would in a franchise ordinance where you're allowed to see revenue and expenses. There are a variety of things that you could put into there and I would recommend that you do that, because, as you pointed out, you get at least a percentage of the cable TV fee, but I don't know if you get a percentage of the internet connection fee on a cable modem. I don't think you do. I think it's just on the cable TV, so -- and that's a bone of contention between cities and the cable industry. De Weerd: So, there are a couple of things -- I guess I have one more question. Anna, who is the zoning administrator? Canning: For the purposes of the zoning ordinance, I'm referred to as the zoning administrator. De Weerd: So, you want that title in there? Canning: No. I hate that title, but the rest of the zoning ordinance is written that way, so I live with it. De Weerd: I knew you hated it, that's why I -- Canning: In the new zoning ordinance you will find that I will be the planning director, but for the time being I am the zoning administrator, just to be consistent with the rest of the document. De Weerd: So, when that change goes through we will have to change all the rest of these? Canning: Well, we are changing the entire zoning ordinance. De Weerd: This will be part of that zoning ordinance? Canning: Yes. De Weerd: Okay. Okay. That's all I had. So, we still have some fine-tuning on this? Canning: Actually, Madam Mayor, I think it's a pretty simple fix, if I could run it by you quickly. I think where it says existing or new poles, just put a parenthetical statement there that says without streetlights and I think that that would clarify it. Meridian City Council August 17, 2004 Page 12 of 40 McKinnon: That works for us. De Weerd: And the other issues on financial can be dealt with in what manner? Nary: Probably in the license agreement. Rountree: License agreement. De Weerd: In the license agreement. Mr. Nichols, is that -- okay. McKinnon: All right. Thank you, Mayor, Members of the Council. De Weerd: This is a Public Hearing. Is there anyone who would like to issue testimony? Seeing no one eager to get up here, do you have anything further, Dave? Council? Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Nary: So, I think with those changes, I guess we could ask Mr. Nichols to put that into ordinance form in a couple of weeks? Three or four weeks? About four weeks? About four weeks? De Weerd: Okay. So, do we have need to close the Public Hearing? I'll entertain a motion. Nary: So moved. Wardle: Second. De Weerd: It's been moved and seconded to close the Public Hearing on this item. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: So, I would entertain a motion to instruct the city attorney to draw up the appropriate ordinance. Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Nary. Nary: I'd move to have the city attorney prepare the appropriate ordinance based on the comments and discussions, as well as the revised amendments that have been Meridian City Council August 17, 2004 Page 13 of 40 proposed by Mr. McKinnon and planning staff and return an ordinance back before us by the 28th of September. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: We will go ahead and ask the clerk to call roll on this and we will take a five minutes break. Roll -Call: Bird, absent; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Nary, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. (Recess.) De Weerd: Okay. I will go ahead and call this meeting back to order. We are pretending we have some order to this meeting tonight. We do have public hearings for 10, 11, and 12 and since I didn't begin with this, by ordinance we are required to ask those that testify to be sworn in and so we do it all in one big exercise. So, all of those that wish to provide testimony on Items 10 through 14, if you will, please, raise your right hand. Is the testimony you provide tonight the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? If so, answer I do. (Affirmative answers.) Item 10: Public Hearing: AZ 04-014 Request for Annexation & Zoning of 30 acres from RUT to R-8 zone for proposed Sienna Creek Subdivision by Sagewood Development, Inc. — north of West Ustick Road and east of North Linder Road: Item 11: Public Hearing: PP 04-019 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 136 single-family residential building lots and 13 common lots on 30 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for proposed Sienna Creek Subdivision by Sagewood Development, Inc. — north of West Ustick Road and east of North Linder Road: Item 12: Public Hearing: CUP 04-021 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development for a residential subdivision for proposed Sienna Creek Subdivision by Sagewood Development, Inc. — north of West Ustick and east of North Linder Road: De Weerd: Thank you. And we will open Items 10, 11, and 12, AZ 04-014, PP 04-019, and CUP 04-021 with staff comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this property is located north of Ustick Road, just to the west of Venable Lane as it's constructed into Cedar Springs Development right there. Baldwin Park is to the north and, then, new phases of Baldwin Meridian City Council August 17, 2004 Page 14 of 40 Park come down into the missing ten acres I suppose here and the project is around there. The proposed project is 136 single-family residential dwellings and 13 common lots. You can see the common lots here at the entry. A large -- I believe one -acre park here and another large park here. I think I probably have the acreages wrong on those, but -- the proposal includes a planned development, the R-8 zoning, and, then, the subdivision and I will try and go through some of the requested changes with the planned development. The applicant has an alley -loaded section in the center of the property with fairly narrow lots and, then, another section here with fairly narrow lots. So, some of the things they are asking for as far as reductions from the zoning ordinance is -- and city requires for the R-8 district a 4,000 square foot lot for attached units. They are asking for 3,910. For detached units the requirement is 6,500 square feet and they are asking for 5,000 square feet. As far as lot frontages, the R-8 requires 65 foot minimum detached and 40 attached. They are asking for 50 -foot minimum for the detached and 34 foot minimum for the attached. Block length, they are asking that one block be allowed to exceed 1,000 foot limit and that's this block here on the west. The school -- the middle school on -- on Linder is in this location here, so they share a boundary -- their western boundary is completely shared with the middle school. As part of that planned development, they are proposing 3.69 acres of common area and -- which is 12.3 percent of the gross land area and they will have playground equipment and picnic areas in the 1.2 acre park and the one acre park. The staff report does note that the applicant is requesting attached units on the alley product and this was incorrect. The applicant was actually asking for attached units on the southern boundary and in the central block here, which would be block -- Block 3. 1 talked with the applicant briefly before. Generally, on a planned development when they are asking attached units, we do require that they provide the elevations. They have not been asked thus far and I apologize for that, to supply the elevations, so what I suggested was that we skip asking for the attached units at this point, but make it clear that the applicant could come back for a modification to the Conditional Use Permit, which would -- for side lot setbacks, which normally would go just to the Planning and Zoning Commission and that would be an option at times she does have product type that she was looking at for an attached unit. Otherwise, staff is proposing tonight that it just be single-family detached housing. And with that, those are the major points of the staff report and I will end staffs presentation. Oh, I'm sorry, you did get a revised plat tonight. The -- I forgot to tell you what the Planning and Zoning Commission did. Sorry about that. The laughter has affected everyone today. Sorry. The Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended approval of this application. At the July 15th hearing testimony was provided by Shawn Nickel, who testified for the applicant, as well as Lisa Wanna-Sissler, who is the developer for this project. Jim Paulsen, who is an adjacent property owner to the south at the end of the stub street on the eastern side of the property to the south, testified about concerns regarding the future access to his property to the south and as a result of that discussion, the applicant was asked to install that second stub street to that property and they have shown it here. The original application, just so you know, had a cul-de-sac along this -- this southern road that connects to Venable Lane. That used to be a cul-de-sac. ACHD did require that that be a full connection and the applicant has made those changes as well. So, the Commission discussion did center on the stub streets and they recommended adding Meridian City Council August 17, 2004 Page 15 of 40 the additional stub street to the south and the letter -- the staff summary letter -- I think we had not received a new layout at that time, so it notes an outstanding issue for City Council that the applicant is requesting that the subdivision be approved with a single stub street to the south, but as you can see, they have turned in an amended application that's no longer an issue. The reason you have one on your desk tonight is that the previous one that you received did not have a 13 -foot sewer easement at the north end of the property, so they have recently added that. And with that I will end staffs presentation. De Weerd: Council, do you have any questions for staff at this time? Okay. Would the applicant like to come forward? If you will just state your name and address. Nickel: Thank you, Madam Mayor. Shawn Nickel, 52 North 2nd Street in Eagle. I'm glad the microphone's working again. Mayor and Council, I'm representing Sagewood Development and the Sienna Creek Subdivision. Staff did go over in detail some of the issues that came up at Planning and Zoning. The main one was that secondary stub on the south and the applicant has decided to work with staff and the suggestions of P&Z and place that second stub as you see to the south and what that will do is that will allow access to two parcels that are located adjacent to the subdivision. There is 133 single-family dwelling lots, 15 common area lots, with a density of 4.43 dwelling per acre. Just so you know, we did lose three lots by adding that second stub street and modifying -- this stub street was originally located right there. It was modified to line up with this interior street and, then, we placed the second street right there. In addition, as staff did explain, we do have 12.3 percent usable open space. That's 3.69 acres. The developer is going to get up and kind of explain the amenities to you in more detail. These are the open space areas. As you can see, the subdivision has been designed as a pedestrian friendly development to include access. This will have a detached sidewalk and these buffers along the main road, which provide access to all the open space. We did coordinate with Wendell Bigham of the school district on the placement of this pathway to the -- is it Sawtooth? Sawtooth Middle School. That's just to the west of the property. This open space area right here is a drainage slash open space. The rest is strictly dry open space areas. We did have two existing stub streets from the existing subdivisions to the -- or subdivision to the north and northeast that we did connect into and we do meet the Comprehensive Plan, which is a medium density residential designation. I believe that's all we have. Staff did a good job of explaining the PUD waivers that we were asking for through the DP process. I'll stand for any questions you may have. De Weerd: Okay. Council, do you have any questions? Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Nary. Nary: Shawn, the front -- essentially, the front of this subdivision or the entryway is where that small little cul-de-sac area is and that green space there on the eastern side, Meridian City Council August 17, 2004 Page 16 of 40 is that the -- is that where the access point is -- the initial access point is? Because the other two -- the southern one are just stub streets, aren't they? Nickel: Over here? Nary: Right. Nickel: Yeah. This is another access to Venable as well. And, again, originally we just had the one access point and ACHD recommended or requested that we get rid of that cul-de-sac there and punch out to Venable for better access. Nary: And, then, the elementary school will be essentially north and -- Nickel: The elementary school is right -- Nary: That's the middle school that's on the -- Nickel: Oh, I'm sorry. Nary: Isn't there an elementary school, then, on Venable to the east? Oh, okay, I see where it is. There we go. Okay. All right. Great. Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Madam Mayor? Staff mentioned that they had a requirement for elevations for the -- for the attached housing and had a suggestion for a requirement to bring that back or leave the meeting tonight with those single family dwellings. What was -- I didn't hear a preference. Nickel: I think what we have agreed to is to recognize that right now they are single family detached and in the event that a builder would like to attach those, we would bring it back in on a case-by-case basis. Canning: Bring it back as a modified Conditional Use Permit that could go just to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Wardle: Okay. Nickel: That gives some flexibility for future consideration. Wardle: Sure. Thank you. De Weerd: And you're in agreement with that? Nickel. Yes. Meridian City Council August 17, 2004 Page 17 of 40 De Weerd: Okay. Anything further? Thank you, Shawn. Nickel: Thank you. De Weerd: Would you like to come and comment? Just state your name and address. Wanner-Sissler: Good evening, Madam Mayor, Council Members. My name is Lisa Wanner-Sissler and I reside at 2752 South Goshen Way in Boise. This is my first project before you in Meridian, so I did want to take a few moments personally introduce myself. It appears that you're an engaging bunch from what I have seen so far in my first meeting here, but I have been actually developing for a number of years in Boise and Kuna and Caldwell, but this is my first development in the City of Meridian, so I did want to take a few minutes to stand before you and I specifically wanted to talk to you about housing types, as well as common area features, so -- Canning: Madam Mayor, while she's setting up, I'm going to embarrass her. Her husband just started a new business in the City of Meridian as well. Wanner-Sissler: That is true. We just as of Friday received on occupancy permit to open Stealhead Collision Center, which is a 10,000 square foot auto body repair facility on Baltic Avenue. We are right next door to Idaho Fleet Service, which was the business of the year for Meridian last year, so we are -- De Weerd: Well, welcome Wanner-Sissler: Thank you very much. I think based on the amount of money that we have spent at this point; I think we are here for the long haul. So, as far as Sienna Creek goes and the common area features for Sienna Creek, I do have several of them, but for the tot lot area I am proposing a tot lot that looks very much like this one. This is the tot lot that is in Waterbury Subdivision, which I think is off of Linder Road. I like it, because it has a little bit of an architectural element to it, it is supposedly one that children -- has better popularity for the amount of time that it's played on with children and I like it because it's kind of muted colors that I think for a residential setting blends in nicely, rather than stands out as kind of a -- you know, an eye sore to some people. So, I'm proposing to place that tot lot right in this location here. The reason that I want to put it there is because the densest part of the development, of course, is right here, that is where the smallest lots will be and so my thinking is that that's where the folks that have the least amount of land outside to put that kind of equipment will live and so I'd like to place it in the densest part of the development. As for the rest of the common areas, it was very important to me to have large common spaces and to have connectivity between the spaces and so to that extend we designed the meandering detached sidewalk that blends itself well to all three areas. And in this first area right here that will be the primary entrance and egress for the subdivision and I would like to put a very special -- I'll call it a park -like feature in that area. This is a photograph that is actually outside of Eagle City Hall and the Eagle Senior Citizens Center and they have created some kind of meandering pathways that come into a circular area and I'd like to Meridian City Council August 17, 2004 Page 18 of 40 create something that is similar to that and, then, include some black wrought iron benches and place those in kind of a circular seating arrangement and, then, embellish the landscaping not just with trees and kind of the normal bushes that you see, but some flowering perennials, some rose bushes, some lilies, come things that are easy care, but provide some color and some further interest. So, my thinking is to create kind of a peaceful, restful area that will sort of just beckon you to just come in and sit for awhile and that area will be a up front here, whereas I'm thinking more physically oriented area with kids and stuff will be back in these two large areas. As far as a housing type that I foresee to be built, I will clarify the detached and the attached house issue. I really have no plans to put attached housing in this development. It actually came up at Planning and Zoning, someone said to me would you like to have the opportunity to do some detached housing and I don't build, I strictly develop, and I said, well, you know, that would be kind of nice. I'm really not planning on having any attached housing in the area at this point. So, if we would change our minds on that, then, yes, we could come back to the Planning and Zoning Commission. This is the type of housing that I am proposing to see in Sienna Creek. The top three photos -- and I guess it's not mine either, because my frame fell off as I was walking up here, so -- but, anyway, these top three photos are pictures of homes that are in some of my other developments and I think this kind of represents the gamut of what Sienna Creek will be like. I would expect that we will see these kinds of homes on the lower end and, then, these on the middle and upper end. I would expect the price range to probably go from about 140 to 275 on an overall basis. In the alley loaded section I will be encouraging this type of a home right here, if you can all see that. Particularly, the one block that looks out over onto a large expanse of common space I'd like to see some front porches, because, you know, it would lend itself very well to that style of home. And, then, I did want to point out I do have a number of 50 foot wide lots. The 50 foot wide lots in this area you will notice all have greater than a hundred foot depth. That was very much by design. There are a lot of great floor plans out there where if you can jog the foundation out enough in the back you can get some awesome views on a 50 foot wide lot with the back of the home. And given that it will be backing onto such a nice common space, I wanted to take advantage of that. So, I think, in summary, we spent a lot of time designing the plat. I think it lays out very nicely. I think it has a lot of usable open space. I'm excited to be here and get out there and turn some dirt, so I would stand for any questions or comments that you might have. De Weerd: Thank you very much. Council, any questions? Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Nary. Nary: I was curious, because I -- maybe I should ask Mr. Nichols as well, on this -- on this one stretch here, this one that exceeds our normal block length of 1,000 feet, it troubles me only a little bit, but it appears that it's going to end up looking very tunnel like. I mean you have got houses -- not very large lots, but you have houses that are going to be set fairly close together. There is no green space, there is nothing that Meridian City Council August 17, 2004 Page 19 of 40 breaks up this street at all and I can't recall how long the street was from Mrs. Canning, other than this one pathway to Sawtooth, but I mean there isn't any other design way -- I recognize you have got a school on this side, so it makes it awfully tough, but it appears that there is nothing in this to break this up at all. I mean it just seems like it's going to be house after house after house as you drive down this street, you're not going to see really much break between homes, because these homes are fairly close together because of their size, because you have got a two story home with probably a ten foot setback on each side. Wanner-Sissler: Uh-huh. Nary: Or is it five? Wanner-Sissler: Five. Rountree: If it's two story it's ten. Canning: Five. Nary: So, it's five on each side, so it's ten feet between houses. So, it seems like it's going to be a fairly -- fairly congested sort of look through here and that's part of the reason for the block length requirement is to not have that type of look. So, maybe if you wanted to talk a little bit about that and why that's your proposal to do it that way, because it appears like all the other ones they all front the street, so on these other ones they are all fairly short and this is the only one that is going to be one continuous spot, other than the street that's right there. Wanner-Sissler: Sure. Well, I think, first of all, it's -- that having a school on the side really is a great benefit in the future. It's very limiting, because there isn't a lot that you can do as far as a stub street onto it -- you know, a school, we wouldn't want to do that. So, it is limiting from that perspective. There also is a large ditch that is an open ditch on the property now. That ditch has to be tiled and placed underground and, of course, we have had to -- you know, to work out all the engineering to make that drainage flow appropriately and, then, there is, you know, the open space consideration to take into effect. I did play with a number of plats to get the best design and I could certainly have Mr. Bailey, the engineer, you know, address that a little further if you'd like, but I think that we -- we worked to come up with the absolute best design given the piece of land that we had to work with and that constraint on that boundary. I guess I would further say that from -- I think that the exterior elevation of a home has a lot to do with what that street presence will look like and I work very closely with a local property management company and also personally look at every home that comes in for approval and we look for nice stone accents and, you know, nice window treatments and doors and landscaping and I think that's another way that you go about giving the right look to it, you know, to a long street. And so I would certainly, you know, make a promise to the Council that we will do our best to make sure that the homes on that street have a nice appeal to them from the front and they will not look the same and particularly where I Meridian City Council August 17, 2004 Page 20 of 40 don't build, I usually work with a team of six to eight builders and that provides for some nice variety, at the same time providing some continuity. So, I think it will get broken up just by the nature of the fact that there will be a number of builders also building in there at the same time. Nary: Thank you. Wanner-Sissler: You're welcome. De Weerd: Council, any other questions? Thank you. Is there anyone else who would like to provide testimony? Mr. Bailey. Bailey: Madam Mayor and Council Members, my name is David Bailey. My office address is 1500 East Iron Eagle Drive in Eagle and I'm with Bailey Engineering and representing Lisa Wanner-Sissler. I did the layout for Lisa on this thing -- on this project and we actually spent about four months doing it, had about 30 different layouts before we got to where we were, which I'm real proud of her for, but it was sure a lot of work to get there, you know, in putting together what we did and did a lot of things and I see -- I work with quite a few developers and I see the way that Lisa thinks about the way she puts these projects together and thinking about those looks and those ideas, rather than, you know, how can I get the max density here, how can I make the thing easier to build and we try to keep that as part of the design as we go along as well. As far as the western street on this, we were restricted by the school, but some of the things that we looked at when we did that is -- I guess the first issue is that it's actually 1,100 feet for street length. Now, if you measure the backs of the lots at the corners -- and I think that's actually the way you measure it, from back of the corner lots, as opposed to the actual street frontage, it's closer to 1,300 feet along there and you have a thousand foot minimum. We did break that up with the landscape lot at the south end of this project and we looked at moving that up, but, as Lisa talked about the irrigation ditch, actually, the out fall point for that irrigation ditch is there, so that was the most reasonable place to put that. I guess I would point out that the lots -- there are a significant variety of lots in this, from the 34 -foot wide up to 70 and 75 -foot wide lots in this project. There is a huge range of lot sizes. The lots on the west side there -- in the southern portion they are 60 feet wide, instead of the 50 feet wide, what you're asking in some other areas, and they are 62 feet wide north of our phase line there along the west side. So, we do have larger lots to help break that up. The other thing is on the east side of that road those lots are 115 feet deep and so we have some variation and some ability and they are still all -- I think there are 54s and 56s around the park and were 60s down in the lower area there. So, we do have some potential for some variation in some setbacks and I know that doesn't happen a whole lot by itself, but when we provide that extra depth on those lots for some different house plans, I think that would help that. There is some opportunity here for us to just curve that road a little bit, make those a little bit wider on the -- deeper on the west side, but it comes out of our open space park. So, you know, there would be -- I guess we wouldn't lose any lots out of the project. I would have a little problem with my space at the top there, if I -- I suppose I could stay away from that, but getting some reverse curves and a nice look, as opposed to a jog in the Meridian City Council August 17, 2004 Page 21 of 40 road. And we could push that over and just push that into the park area a little bit and have that road just kind of bend a little bit. That might help some. Another thing we have done in a couple of projects that I have been working on is at the intersection there we could -- we call it bulging out the corners, where we actually go to a 29 -foot street section at the intersection, so when you get to the intersection the corner comes out and the road narrows a little bit there to slow the traffic and to provide some visual look in that area. We have also done some mid block islands on things where we do a small island that's mid block on that. So, I think any of those would be options. I think -- we have also done some mid block narrowing, chokers we call them, in the streets of 29 feet. There is no parking allowed in those areas, they meet the highway district standards, but I usually like to put those at areas where we have a pathway crossing, so when we have the pathway coming to that point, we have that choker area in there and, then, we can do a stamped concrete look in that area or something to provide some good looks. So, I guess if you require any one of those, you know, three options, that's certainly something we could make happen on the plat. I'd rather not take any area out of the open space, because we have got some really good plans for what we are doing with the open space and like to keep it there. So, if we'd want a choker at that intersection or a choker on the northern or southern portion of that, I think that's something that we could work into the plan and get it approved through ACHD. Nary: Thank you. Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Mr. Bailey, while I've got you up here as the engineer, this open space here is a combination drainage and park area. How much of that will be usable dry open space? Bailey: We have done the soils testing on the ground out here and we are expecting that our highest seasonal groundwater levels at about six feet and so we don't expect to have groundwater encroaching in any of the pond area. We have been doing a lot of work lately in working with ACHD and trying to interpret DEQ's rules as far as how we do the ponds to avoid the wet ponds and avoid any areas that are going to stay wet, even from landscaping. I can't say we are great at it yet and everybody's working the same we are and I'm trying to fix those issues, but we are leaving larger and larger open spaces. Our goal on what we have been doing on these designs lately is we have an area where we have a deeper area where the water can come into the pond and allow it to drain and allow our nuisance water to catch, because you see in any subdivision the water running down the gutters when it's a hundred degrees out and been dry for three weeks from people's sprinklers and that's what's causing most of our wet ponds. So, we are trying to have a small area for that that we can get to drain easily and, then, raise the storage level of the pond up so we can make as much of it usable as possible. So, if I were to guess out of that 50, 1 think we got about 55,000 square feet left in there and about 10,000 square feet of that or 8,000 square feet of that is going to be a bowl, Meridian City Council August 17,2004 Page 22 of 40 you know, and it will be landscaped and grassed and the remainder of it would be less than two feet below the roads that are around that and so it would be a flat area that would be very usable. I don't know if that's too much information or not enough, so I'll stop there. Wardle: Madam Mayor, just to follow up -- and I'm trying to do math in my head and not great at it. Fifty-five thousand square feet, ten thousand square feet, so you're talking about 20 percent of this? Twenty percent will be unusable? Or it will be a wet pond, essentially? Bailey: We don't intend to have it wet and that's what we are trying to avoid, but it would not be a flat area that you could, you know, play ball on. It would be a bowled area. Wardle: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Any further questions? Thank you. Bailey: Thank you. De Weerd: Is there any further testimony on this item? Okay. Staff, anything further? Canning: No, ma'am. De Weerd: Okay. Shawn, do you have a wrap up? Nickel: Again, Shawn Nickel. And that 50,000 square feet is just that one open space area, as opposed to trying to divide that drainage up amongst the three, we wanted to make sure that we had two of them that were completely dry and just have the one. That was the combination and, Madam Mayor, the area that Lisa was talking about up here, I think that's the mediation -- have a mediation area. De Weerd: A mediation area? Nickel: Yeah. De Weerd: Thank you. Nickel: Have a meditation meeting. De Weerd: Well, thank you. Nary: Some people will tell you anything just to get a perk. Meridian City Council August 17, 2004 Page 23 of 40 De Weerd: I think just having the mediation area is the sell for me. How about you, Council? Okay. We have an open Public Hearing. If there is no further discussion or questions -- Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: I'm sorry. Yes, Mr. Nary. Nary: Mrs. Canning, on the -- on that -- on the street there, the western boundary, that 1,300 foot street section, they talked about some alternatives and I assume -- everybody knows I like islands in the road and it's probably because I'm the only native Hawaiian that's up here, so that's probably why I like them, but I don't really have a particular preference as to whether or not they do something as suggested, but I just wondered what your thoughts were as to something to break up that street. It just seems like a fairly long section of street with houses on both sides that are going to be fairly close together without really any break, other than that street section in the middle and I didn't know if you had any input as to how they might improve that particular portion of this, but -- Canning: Madam Mayor, Councilmember Nary, I have to agree with the applicant, it would be a shame to lose the large open space, just -- Nary: Oh, yeah. And I didn't want to do that. Canning: -- for the sake of an island and, personally, I like the intersection chokers. I think they have a nice look to them and provide an interesting focal point and slow people down as well once you get to that point. So, those are nice. I have seen subdivisions where they are mid block and they are effective as traffic calming devices and as breaking up that street. I don't think they are as attractive -- sometimes you wonder -- I wonder what that's doing there. It's seem a little odd, but - so I think at the intersection a choker design can be a nice -- a nice feature. Is the Council familiar with what the applicant is proposing as far as a choker design? It would be similar to like what you see around the Ada -- the former -- let's see, the Boise City Hall and some of the old town ones downtown Boise where they bump out the sidewalk, basically, into what would be the parking area and wrap it around, so that it's a shorter distance across the street. So, it might also facilitate kids getting across the street, if they are coming down through Baldwin Park or Cedar Springs, it would kind of help them across the intersection, too. De Weerd: Kind of like what we have on Main Street. Canning: Thank you. Sorry. De Weerd: Just thought I'd help you out. You know, we have more -- on West Chateau they had one of those bulb outs and people just drove through them. It was very confusing to the motorists -- motoring public. So, until you put a fence up there, it does Meridian City Council August 17, 2004 Page 24 of 40 cause for a great cut -through opportunity. Mr. Wardle, did you have something? I like the chokers that you're talking about. Wardle: No, Madam Mayor. Unless anyone has any other questions, I move that we close the Public Hearing. Nary: Second. De Weerd: It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearings on Items 10, 11 and 12; is that correct? Wardle: Yes. De Weerd: All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Okay. Any further clarification or discussion? Okay. Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Madam Mayor, I move that we approve AZ 04-014, annexation and zoning for Sienna Creek Subdivision. Nary: Second. De Weerd: It's been moved and seconded to approve Item No. 10. Is there any further discussion? Hearing none, Mr. Clerk. Roll -Call: Bird, absent; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Nary, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Thank you. Item 11. Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: I move that we approve PP 04-019, preliminary plat for Sienna Creek Subdivision, to incorporate all staff, applicant, and public comments, including the discussion of the traffic mitigation for the increased block length. Nary: Second. De Weerd: It's been move and seconded to approve Item 11 with the noted amendment. Mr. Clerk. Meridian City Council August 17, 2004 Page 25 or 40 Roll -Call: Bird, absent; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Nary, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Thank you. Item 12. Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Madam Mayor, I move we approve CUP 04-021, Conditional Use Permit for Sienna Creek Subdivision and to incorporate all staff, applicant, and public comments. Nary: Second. De Weerd: It's been moved and seconded to approve Item 12. Hearing no further discussion, Mr. Clerk. Roll -Call: Bird, absent; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Nary, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 13: Public Hearing: PP 04-018 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for a re -subdivision of Lot 2, Tramore Subdivision consisting of 16 multi -family residential building lots and 3 common lots on 5.7 acres in an L -O zone for proposed Roundtree Subdivision by Big View Builders — east of North Linder Road on south side of East Pine Avenue: Item 14: Public Hearing: CUP 04-018 Request for Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development for a reduction to 10 -feet for the rear setback, minimum 5 -foot side setback, minimum 20 -foot front setback and no minimum frontage requirement for lots within the proposed development for Roundtree Subdivision by Big View Builders — east of North Linder Road on south side of East Pine Avenue: De Weerd: Thank you. I will open Items 13 and 14 for Public Hearing PP 04-018 and CUP 04-018. We will start with staff comments. Canning: The applicants have come out of hiding. I was wondering where they were. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is a request for a preliminary plat approval of a re -subdivision of Lot 2 of Tramore Sub and the applicants have proposed 16 multi- family residential buildings and three common lots on 5.7 acres and it is currently zoned L -O. For reference, the Tramore senior apartment complex is here and, then, just recently an apartment complex was approved to the east of the property. I can't remember the name of that new subdivision right now. And, then, there is a church to the east of that in this area. The applicant is -- there are some significant features, one being a creek that cuts through the property. They do have a flag lot that goes out to Pine Street and, then, they have the railroad at the south end of the property. This one is a little bit better. The applicant is proposing the street connection to Pine Street. They have curved it coming across the creek, so that it serves as a traffic -calming Meridian City Council August 17,2004 Page 26 of 40 device and they bring it into the subdivision. It is just an internal access, it isn't a street, it's, actually, just a driveway. You will see the parking areas. There is a significant amount of open space on either side of the creek. And, then, they varied the open space and the placement of the buildings as you see here and a fairly large buffer at the south end of the property next to the railroad track. There is a common area with a sand court at the central part of the project. There is also a small open space here and here. And I believe that the -- on the adjoining property there is an open space in this location and that -- that connects to a walkway. Yeah. And that issue becomes important with one of the Planning and Zoning Commission's conditions regarding some window placements on the sides of buildings. So, I will get to that in a moment. The proposed amenities -- this is a planned development and the applicant has proposed two amenities. One is the picnic area with the sand court in the center of the project, as I pointed out before. The other one is that there is -- 21 percent of the site is set aside for open space. In exchange for those amenities, the applicant is requesting that the minimum frontage in the L -O zone be reduced from 50 feet to zero feet and, as I mentioned, the internal circulation is via a private driveway, basically a commercial driveway. It is not a private or public street. And, then, as far as building setbacks, the minimum requirement currently is five feet per story and, then, a 20 -foot on the side and, then, the 20 -foot in the rear. They are proposing five feet on each side, not per story, and ten feet in the rear. And this is one of those instances where each of these units will be on an individual lot and so the issue of setbacks -- it becomes a little awkward. Normally you would consider the setbacks for the property as a whole for an apartment complex, but because they are requesting individual lots is where the need for all of these requirements comes from, basically. I did want to spend a little time on the unit. Each of these buildings, as you can see in the heavy dark outline, is actually four -units. They are up -down units, so each is two -stories. This is the front of the building. You will see the four entrances. One. Two. Three. Four. And, then, this is the -- actually, the rear elevation and you can again see the four back doors with the little private covered area. This site may look familiar. It did come before you earlier this year and it was denied. The reason the City Council denied it -- there was five reasons and I'm going to kind of rush through those. One was that the proposed roadway configuration, along with the proposed access to the east, would allow cut - through traffic, causing safety issues for the senior citizen residents of the Tramore apartment complex. The second was that foot traffic was a safety issue and they -- for the present residents of Tramore and Sunbridge, which is just to the west, as well as any future residents that would be in with -- within the future apartment complex. Three, the multi -family residential use design proposed was incompatible with the surrounding Tramore senior complex. And, four, the project did not provide an adequate amount of private space or open space for each living unit. And, five, the applicant did not provide sufficient information as to the compatibility of the multi -family use in this particular area. The applicant has addressed -- or staff felt the applicant had addressed a lot of the site - related concerns with the -- they did drop one building, so four units they dropped. It did allow them an opportunity to kind of open up the site design a little more. They did move the open space to a more central location and tried to make it a little bit more of a focus of the project. They did try and break up the kind of uniform layout that they had previously of the units and they did bring back a completely different unit as far as the Meridian City Council August 17, 2004 Page 27 of 40 architectural design and it does have -- it's nicer than the one that they had before. I think that's pretty easy to say. And as part of that design they do have the area on the back door, which allowed for the private open space, where before there had just been a -- I think it was a 48 square foot concrete pad and so now they have got a little better defined area. This application does come forward to you with a recommendation for approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission. At the hearing the applicant's representative John Rennison testified in favor of the application. He clarified some issues regarding the proposed storm drain system and possible traffic calming devices along the entrance drive. I should mention that. I'm sorry. The Planning Commission spent a great deal of time talking about how to provide some additional traffic calming in this flag portion of the lot. The applicant has provided this curve in the road. It was suggested at the Planning Commission that perhaps it might be appropriate to have like a speed bump or some other physical device in this area. If it were past this primary entrance to Tramore Subdivision, the fire department could still get in there quickly or any emergency services. Apparently this entrance is just kind of more for a storage area, not really the primary area for the apartments. So, if there were a device located south of that first entrance, then, that wouldn't affect them very much and it might slow down traffic in this area. The planner was not able to talk to the fire department about that and the fire department was not at the Planning and Zoning Commission, they did not have a representative there. Unfortunately, Mr. Bowers called today and asked me if there was issues on tonight's agenda and I didn't know that this was an outstanding issue, so I told him I didn't see anything. The way that the condition is worded as it's before you now it gives staff a little opportunity to work with the applicant on what would be appropriate and we would certainly include the fire department in those considerations, because I know they don't like speed bumps, so I wanted to point to that as perhaps some outstanding issue that's not mentioned in the summary sheet. Going on further, other testifiers that night were Maxine Johnson representing the Tramore senior center testified on the application. Again, it centered on the speed bumps and, then, in general just on how much better the new site plan is compared to the previous one. Key issues of discussion were the secondary and emergency access, including cross -access with the property to the east, Rock Creek Subdivision. And that was one of the Council's concerns is that in the last proposal staff had been supporting a full loop through the two apartment complexes. The City Council was concerned about the traffic issues associated with that. Police and fire have agreed that a swing gate at this location would be sufficient, so there would be a paved travel surface between the two - - between the two projects, but there would a swing gate, a locked gate, that would -- could be opened by the fire department, but would otherwise be closed. And, again, the traffic calming provisions on the flag portion, storm drainage, and, then, adding windows to the end of the buildings that are adjacent to common open space lots. And these would be this elevation here, this elevation, and, then, this one as it opens up here and, then, this one here. The way that this project is set up right now, each individual building will have to come in for a certificate of zoning compliance and staff can check for those -- those individual windows to make sure that they happen to be on those buildings. It would be on this elevation as you see it. The idea is to get more eyes looking on those common areas. Each of them has the front windows that -- there is a fair amount of visibility of those common areas, but it would -- it would just add more Meridian City Council August 17, 2004 Page 28 of 40 and add a closer one if there were one on the side elevations. So, the key commission additions or modifications to the initial staff recommendation, the Commission added two site specific conditions. The first condition requires that the applicant work with staff on traffic calming devices and the second one requires the applicant to install windows on the second floor of the buildings that are adjacent to common open space lots. So, I will end staffs presentation with those issues. De Weerd: Council, any questions for staff at this time? Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Nary. Nary: So, Anna, who owns the gate? Is the gate on this property, so it's their responsibility that this isn't open, so that the gates aren't left open, so that it becomes a drive aisle for everybody? Canning: My understanding is that the fire department would have the key. I'm not sure that the owner would even have the key. I think it's just the fire department. Nary: Okay. Thank you. Canning: And other emergency vehicles. Nary: Okay. De Weerd: Do they have a lock box situation or something. Is that right, chief? Musser: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, that's usual the situation is we try to set those up with a knox box format, so that the typical knox box can access and get either a key out of it or deactivate the lock, so we can swing the gate. And in rare instance they are set up so we can also push free on them and drive through them if need be. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Okay. If there is no further questions for staff, is the applicant here? Would you like to come forward or -- or not? Bradbury: Sure. De Weerd: Were you part of the swearing in? Bradbury: No, I wasn't. De Weerd: Is the testimony you provide tonight the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Meridian City Council August l7, 2004 Page 29 of 40 Bradbury: It is. De Weerd: Thank you. Please state your name and address. Bradbury: My name is Steve Bradbury and my office address is 1015 West Hayes in Boise. I have been asked by the applicant to present the project tonight. I'd like to say it's good to see you all again. It's been a little while since I have been out here. De Weerd: It's been awhile. Bradbury: Yes, it has. Anna really did a pretty good job of going through all of the basic information and I thought summarized the project really well and even addressed, you know, most of the -- the change issues, if you will, that I intended to address, but maybe I can just expand on a couple of things. One of the things that I think would be good for you to have in front of you are some elevations, so you can see the difference between the elevations that were proposed when the project was here last time and the elevations that are being proposed now, the building elevations. It looks like you have one. She put up one on the screen up there, too. And other than just showing those to you, so that you get a good, close look at them, I didn't really have much to say, except you can see that there are some additional architectural features, both to the front and to the rear of those building to improve what I understand was something that was not particularly appealing to the Council when this project was proposed a few months back. Let's see. Sixteen building lots, one four-plex each, for a total of 64 units. You probably will recall that when the project was before you last time there was a proposal for 72 units total, 18 buildings, so they have eliminated two of the buildings and, thus, eight of the units, to bring the density down to something that the applicant hopes the Council will find somewhat more acceptable. Another issue that I understand was something of a concern to the Council was how the private open space was provided. And, unfortunately, you didn't get a very good picture and my drawing of it is so small that when you have eyes like mine, you can't really -- can't really make it out very well, but let me try to describe it to you in words. At the back of each of the units is a private patio, a hundred square foot concrete patio, and each patio will be partially covered, about two-thirds of it is covered, and if you look at the rear elevation, you can see how the cover comes out from the back of the building. In between each of the patios is a six foot high privacy fence and supplemented with landscaping, so that the entire patio area is blocked either by fencing or landscaping from view to the adjacent patio area and the intent -- the applicant's intent is to, essentially, create a visual barrier that encompasses approximately 200 square feet for each unit, one hundred square feet of those -- of that area is in concrete patio. So, the hope -- not only to get the visual barrier, but you have some really nice usable space back behind each of the units as well. Anna told you that this is accessed by a private drive and there has been conversation about trying to find some traffic calming devices, in addition to the curve that's been included in the driveway. The applicant's certainly willing to work with staff to try to find something that would be acceptable to -- not only to the staff and to the city, the emergency folks, but also to the neighboring property owners and there were a Meridian City Council August 17, 2004 Page 30 of 40 whole bunch of ideas discussed and, hopefully, between the engineering people and staff you will be able to come up with something that will work. They have talked about some speed bumps, but there is pros and cons to those, of course, as you know. We have talked about something I think maybe it's a speed table, maybe, one of the flat tops, which in my personal experience are a little bit better than the humps, but the applicant is perfectly willing to work with the staff to work that one out. I gather that the - - part of the problem last time through was a concern with cut -through traffic from across this property and the adjacent property. And, of course, that's been solved, I gather, by making that connection an emergency access only with the gate that has just been discussed and so that should help quite a little bit. With respect to foot traffic and getting people back and forth, in addition to the sidewalks along each of the drive aisles, the applicant is proposing a sidewalk -- right. Thank you, Anna. A sidewalk along the south side of the Nine Mile Drain and staff had asked for a small extension to be made on the west side up -- yes, up in that area -- of a sidewalk to connect the property over to the neighboring property to the west and the applicant has agreed to include that as well. It's only like I think 12 feet long, something like that. But that will help to get that continuity all the way across all of the adjacent properties. As I said with respect to the density, which I gather was an issue, they have reduced that down some from the 72 down to 64, which I understand is comparable to the project that was approved here not too awful long ago on the adjacent property, which, as I recall, is called Rock Creek, I think. Is that right? Anna could come up with -- so, it seems to me that with respect to the compatibility issue, maybe that question is perhaps answered by the fact that the Council has recently approved a very similar project right next door. I talked about the private open space. I have given you the elevations, so that you can see the architectural features and those changes. I guess the only thing I'd have left to add is just that the applicant is satisfied with the conditions of approval in the staff report, including those recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission. And with that I will respond to any questions, assuming they are not too hard. De Weerd: Council, questions? I guess I just have one about the sand box. You know -- well, apartments are notorious for feral cats, because dumpsters are oftentimes left open and I guess the sand pit would be of concern how it's finished off, how it's maintained, and that sort of thing. And I am serious. We do have problems with cats in apartment complexes. Bradbury: Do you have a -- do you have a suggestion or something? It's on common area, so it will be owned and maintained by a homeowners association. And I guess I'm not sure -- I understand your problem. I have young children and I have a sand box in my backyard, so I know exactly what it is you're talking about, and I suppose the best answer I can give you is that since there is a body, there will be a management body which will be in charge of maintaining all of the common elements, including that -- you know, that sand area, like I say, I hope that the association would do a good job of taking care of it. If you have got some thoughts about some sort of -- you know, some treatment or something that might be included, we -- I know the applicant would be happy to try to take that into account and do something with it. Meridian City Council August 17, 2004 Page 31 of 40 De Weerd: Certainly none I am familiar with. I just know that that can be a problem and is it -- how is it laid out? Is there a border? You know, is it -- Bradbury: Boy, I knew -- you see, it was only going to take one question for it to be too hard for me. You know, I might have to defer to the engineer John Rennison or the applicant, but my suspicion is we haven't gotten down to that detail. Any ideas, guys? It's kind of what I was afraid of. Would you like to suggest -- or have staff put together some conditions to address that particular amenity? Because I don't think we would have any trouble with that. De Weerd: Well, it just seems like -- I have gone on one walk through on an apartment complex and where there wasn't much specific on that area, it seemed like there was some real lacking in that area and so I guess once you walk through and there is not real specifics to it, you kind of want to see that there is something that can be applied. Now, the sand area is one of the amenities in the open space. What was -- what else was -- Bradbury: Oh, there is a covered picnic area as well, which doesn't show. Anna, can I borrow your pointer or can you point to where the -- Canning: There is one on your podium there, if you move your -- Bradbury: All right. Nary: You haven't sued us in awhile, that's why you -- Bradbury: Why do you think I'm here tonight? Nary: Well, we know. Bradbury: Right. Have I got it right, John? Right there where the picnic area goes? I really didn't mean that. Right in that area there. That picnic area. You see, you got me so nervous now I can't stop shaking. I can't even point. Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Nary. Nary: I mean I think you have raised a good concern that's very valid and there may be even some health concerns about that, but I don't know that we can solve that. I guess what I would ask -- and if the applicant's agreeable, is certainly through the applicant and the planning staff they could see if there are -- I don't even know what of kind conditions you could put on that. I'm assuming it's not something that's unique, so it's probably been at least thought about in another areas and maybe between now and then we can figure out some conditions that are appropriate to address that, if there is any, between yourself and maybe with the planning staffs assistance or maybe with the Meridian City Council August 17, 2004 Page 32 of 40 parks department's assistance as well, because, obviously, they deal with that with playground equipment, but they use different material than just sand and in a sand volleyball court there isn't as many things you can use, but I don't know that we can solve it tonight, but I think it's -- as long as you're amenable to them looking at some possible conditions to that, I think that's -- Bradbury: I'm sure the applicant won't have any problem with that. We would be happy to work with staff to try to find a solution to that problem. De Weerd: Perhaps you could maybe point out where the garbage dumpsters are. Bradbury: Yeah. I couldn't. De Weerd: You couldn't? Bradbury: John knows. Can I defer to the engineer? De Weerd: You certainly can. Is there any other questions from Council before Mr. Bradbury leaves? Okay. Bradbury: Great. Thank you very much. De Weerd: Thank you. Were you sworn in? Rennison: I wasn't either. De Weerd: Okay. Is the testimony you provide tonight the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Rennison: It is. De Weerd: Thank you. Please state your name and address. Rennison: John Rennison. 128 South Eagle Road in Eagle. And the trash enclosures are -- there is one there and one there and one there down here. And, then, we also have this area here reserved for a trash enclosure, too. De Weerd: And, Anna, Sanitary Service, did they comment? Canning: Yes, ma'am, they did. You will notice the one to the south is kind of angled a little bit and that was so that they can get in and get out of there. My understanding is that they have approved this layout. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. That's all I have. Rennison: Thanks. Meridian City Council August 17, 2004 Page 33 of 40 Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, as staff we are not familiar with a whole lot of options regarding sand volleyball courts. If the Council could leave it open for maybe the applicant to do some research, I'm sure some community in California has probably addressed it at some point, you know, but -- and maybe leave the applicant the option of doing some other activity court if they can't address the concerns raised by the Council, such as a basketball court or just some hard surface court, rather than the sand court, and there may be other options like there may be some form of bark that would still work, assuming people didn't participate barefoot, it makes diving for a ball a little tough, but I think staff can work it out with the applicant, like prior to the first CZC application that the applicant address this issue with staff. Nichols: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Nichols. Nichols: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, perhaps the condition would be that if the sand pit becomes a health concern, that the property owners association would convert the sand pit into a different amenity, perhaps a hard court amenity. It would be the property owners association who owns that common lot to have the responsibility to take care of it. It would be an expense to them at that point, but it would only be if the sand pit becomes some sort of health issue because of feral cats or other associated problems. Perhaps that would be a way to take care of it. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Nichols. Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Nary. Nary: And I was going to suggest, too, just for some alternative ideas, I mean there are certainly a number of these in local complexes in both Meridian and Boise, as well as places I can think of. Red Robin down by Park Center pond has an outside sand volleyball court. So does the Sports Zone or something like that by Edwards. Same thing. So, I'm sure that they have addressed this and maybe there isn't an answer. I mean they may all say the same thing, that they just deal with it, but, you know, to find some alternatives or some ways at least address it, so it doesn't become a health hazard, I think that's probably the easiest way to address that, so -- Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Mr. Nary, Mr. Nichols, I'm not sure if staff could ever make the finding that it was a health concern. Maybe if there are complaints from the residents that might be the best way to go, because that's what's going to happen is one of the residents will call and complain that there is a problem and -- but do you trigger it to one complaint? I guess I'm not sure quite how to work with that one. We may not be able to enforce it, but -- Meridian City Council August 17, 2004 Page 34 of 40 Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: My preference would be we take care of the issue now. It's going to be an issue. To me there is another -- there is other solutions, another hard surface, another feature that could be usable by the future residents of this complex, some kind of an activity center for children, something other than just a sand box. But I would just as soon have that taken care of now and not have staff become the health department and have the city have to field complaints, those kinds of things. I don't see that this project gives a whole lot in that regard anyway, so I would be inclined to think that as part of the planned used that there ought to be some planned use in the complex. De Weerd: Mr. Nary? Nary: And I guess I don't disagree with Councilman Rountree, other than I guess I wasn't ready today to say nobody could put a sand amenity in their common area and I know we have approved other ones and we have happened to raise the issue today that I think is a legitimate issue, I just don't have a way to really put my hands around it very well and say, well, can't have one now and now you just have to put a hard court of some sort, which is an additional expense and I don't really have a real good sense as to when or if it might ever become an issue. So, I agree that it may become one, but I guess I just wasn't willing to say today, from now on we are not going to approve anybody that wants to do that, since we have approved other ones. De Weerd: At some point -- I don't know. I don't think we have had a sand pit in front of us since I have been up here and I guess the reason I raise it is I was the apartment coordinator in married student housing at Washington State University and those sand pits are just -- they are disgusting. And they become hard and they become nasty and they are just -- they can get really disgusting. So, I don't see it as an amenity, but, again, that's from personal experience. And as has been raised, there are other ones somewhere, so someone must have figured it out. Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Madam Mayor, just to defend sand pits -- and from my personal experience, I lived for a number of years at the University of Idaho with a sand pit and didn't have those similar experiences and have known many in the community to not have those experiences. I believe it's probably tied to the upkeep of that area, but I -- my personal opinion is all sand volleyball pits -- De Weerd: Are you saying WSU didn't take care of it like the U of I did? Wardle: I would never infer that. However, my experience was certainly different than yours. De Weerd: Okay. Well, we still have an open Public Hearing. Would the applicant care to comment on any of this? If you will just restate your name. Meridian City Council August 17, 2004 Page 35 of 40 Rennison: Yeah. Madam Mayor and Council, John Rennison. I've got a great idea. We could put a mote around it and that would solve it, but -- De Weerd: So easily solved Rennison: Actually, we do have another idea, if the Council would hear us out here. Heres to the sand volleyball courts. I spent some time up there and I am from U of I and not everybody was completely -- Wardle: Thank you. Rennison: Yeah. Okay. So, we have got a suggestion. The sand volleyball court is here. There is more than ample room to accommodate an additional amenity and we'd like to offer that here this evening to work in this same space to add a half court, hard surface, to help remedy the situation and if there does become a situation with the sand, then, it can go away. It can be put into grass with very minimal expense to the HOA and solve the problem, if it did arise, but I think we would like to afford the future tenants here the opportunity to use the sand court and so if that might be a suggestion, we would offer that at this time. De Weerd: Thank you. Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Nary. Nary: To follow up Councilman Rountree's comment. I mean wasn't it anticipated that this was going to be like with a family sort of housing. I mean there isn't really anything for young children in this, you know, like a tot lot or those kinds of things, but I don't know what you're really intending this type of facility to really be marketed for. Is this just more young adults or is it families -- I guess sometime based on the size it's usually going to be one or two people or maybe just one child, but I didn't know what your intentions were, since there weren't really anything towards younger children towards -- in the common area. Rennison: Well, I don't know that I can answer that question directly. I don't that the marketing campaign really focuses on one particular age group, so -- Nary: That's fine. Thank you. Rennison: Any other questions? De Weerd: No. Thank you. I'm sorry I threw that whole discussion in there. Nary: Half an hour on a sand box. Meridian City Council August 17, 2004 Page 36 of 40 Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Just a comment on the elevations of the building. I think the applicant's done a wonderful job bringing the new elevations back. I believe that the comment heard -- and might have even made at the last siting of this project was barracks and the lack of open space and I think they have done a nice job addressing all of those individual concerns that we had. De Weerd: Anna, on the northern side of the property along the creek is that -- is there a path amenity? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, my understanding is that there is a path just about right here. It's ten -- five to ten feet off that northern property line. It was built on the Tramore one. The extension that we were talking about would take it from kind of this point right here over across like that. De Weerd: Okay. But Rock Creek, where is their pathway? Didn't they have a path amenity? Canning: They connected to the pathway on the north. Their property goes the full length up to Pine. So, their pathway did connect on the north. De Weerd: Okay. So, the path is on the north side? Canning: Yes. De Weerd: Okay. Okay. Any other questions from Council? Mr. Bradbury, do you want to have further comments? Bradbury: Only if you have questions for me. Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Hearing no further discussion, I move we close the public hearings. Nary: Second. De Weerd: It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearings on Items 13 and 14. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. Wardle: Madam Mayor? Meridian City Council August 17, 2004 Page 37 of 40 De Weerd: Mr.Wardle. Wardle: I move that we approve PP 04-018, preliminary plat for Roundtree Subdivision. Nary: Second. De Weerd: It's been moved and seconded to approve Item 13. Is there any discussion? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: There was an offer of additional amenities. Does the motion include that? Wardle: Just ask Mr. Nlchols if that's the proper place or if the CUP would be a better place for that. Nichols: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I think the Conditional Use Permit is where you want to include that. Rountree: Okay. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Anything further? Okay. Mr. Clark, will you call roll. Roll -Call: Bird, absent; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Nary, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Okay. Item 14. Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Wardle: I move that we approve CUP 04-018, the Conditional Use Permit for Roundtree Subdivision to include all staff, applicant, and public comments, including the addition of an additional amenity and the concerns addressed of the sand volleyball court. Nary: Second. De Weerd: And that additional was a half court; correct? Meridian City Council August 17, 2004 Page 38 of 40 Wardle: Yes. Half court basketball court. De Weerd: Okay. Any further questions? Mr. Clerk. Roll -Call: Bird, absent; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Nary, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 15: Water, Sewer and Trash Delinquencies: De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Item 15 is the sewer, water, and trash delinquencies. This is to inform you in writing, if you so choose, that you have the right to a pre- termination hearing at 7:30 p.m., Tuesday, August 17th, 2004, before the Mayor and City Council to appear in person to be judged on the facts and to defend the claim made by this city that your water, sewer and trash bill is delinquent. You may retain counsel. Your service will be discontinued on August 18th, 2004, unless payment is received in full. Is there anyone present who wishes to contest his or her water, sewer, and trash delinquency? Hearing no response, I guess you can't hear responses from -- Rountree: From no one. De Weerd: From no one. They are hereby informed that they may appeal and have the decision of the city reviewed by the Fourth Judicial District Court pursuant to Idaho State Code. Even though they appeal, their water will be shut off. The amount of the turn-off list is $23,426.31. Council, do I have a motion to approve the turn-off list? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I move that we approve the delinquency turn off schedule for August 18th in the amount $23,426.31. Nary: Second. De Weerd: It's been moved and seconded to approve the turn-off list. Mr. Clerk, will you call roll. Roll -Call: Bird, absent; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Nary, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 16: Ordinance No. 04-1095 : RZ 04-006 Request for a Rezone of 16.1 acres from R-4 to R-8 zone for Sutherland Farm Subdivision No. 4 by Sutherland Farm, Inc. — east of South Eagle Road and north of East Victory Road: Meridian City Council August 17, 2004 Page 39 of 40 De Weerd: Item 16 is Ordinance No. 04-1095. Mr. Clerk, will you, please, read this item by title only? Berg: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Ordinance No. 04-1095, an Ordinance finding that the owners Sutherland Farm, Inc., for certain real property has made a written request for rezone of the zoning classification for real property located approximately one half a mile south of Overland Road on the east side of South Eagle Road, Meridian, Idaho, and lies within the boundaries of the City of Meridian from R-4, Low Density Residential District Zoning District to R-8, Medium Density Residential District as defined under Meridian City Code Section 11-7-2,D, repealing all ordinances, resolutions, orders, or parts thereof, in conflict herewith, and directing the city engineer to add said rezoning designation to the official maps of the City of Meridian, Idaho. De Weerd: Thank you. You have heard this ordinance read by title only. Is there anyone who would like to hear it read in its entirety? Thank you, Frank. Okay. Council? Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: I move that we approve Ordinance No. 04-1095 with suspension of rules. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: It's been moved and seconded to approve Item 16. Mr. Clerk, will you call roll. Roll -Call: Bird, absent; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Nary, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Council, I have a request by Vern Uhlman to be placed on the Council agenda to discuss an area in our Old Town that has to do with a ditch that his -- that he feels we have responsibility for and I have asked Gary to do some research on it and discuss it next week. But, apparently, we have an ordinance that has us as the enforcer to ditches when they get plugged and I have no idea what our enforcement is of that, but we will ask Mr. Smith to report back next week and perhaps when we need to look at getting out of the enforcement arena for clogged ditches. So, if you don't mind, we will add that to the agenda. Nary: For pre -Council? De Weerd: Yeah. Meridian City Council August 17, 2004 Page 40 of 40 Nary: I mean as long as we can give Mr. Uhlman time to have notice, but, Madam Mayor, if it's all right, we will maybe do that at pre -Council. I don't know if we are full up next week or not. I don't think we are, but if we can't do it next week, it will have to be two weeks, we will try to get it done. De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Semanich is also going to be a guest next week at pre -Council. Nary: I think we are glad we don't televise these meetings, but, yes, I think at pre - Council Mr. Semanich wanted to talk about his property off of Ustick and whether or not he could attach to the sewer. De Weerd: Okay. Is there anything further? Okay. Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Move we adjourn. Nary: Second. De Weerd: It's been moved and seconded to adjourn. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:14 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) �> 2 9 1 0'1 / P 4 - MAY _DE WEERD DATEAPPROVED or 5b5,mm�lunaoi ATTEST: , ` 4't A4&71 WILLIAM G. BERG, JR, olk BEAL q :moo Gc T1sz.�Cr %,c�li1VTY °l�.Ii 111141b55