HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004 12-21Meridian City Council Meeting December 21, 2004.
The regular meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:02 P.M.,
Tuesday, December 21, 2004, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd.
Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, Keith Bird, Charlie Rountree, Shaun
Wardle, and Christine Donnell.
Others Present: Bill Nary, Will Berg, Tara Green, Anna Canning, Lenard Grady, David
Overton, Kenny Bowers, Doug Strong, Ted Baird, and Dean Willis.
Item 1: Roll -call Attendance:
Roll call.
X Shaun Wardle X Christine Donnell
X Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird
X Mayor Tammy de Weerd
De Weerd: Okay. I will bring this meeting to order. It is the City Council meeting of
Tuesday, December 21 st. It is 7:02. We will start with roll call attendance.
Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance:
De Weerd: Thank you all for joining us here tonight. Dave McKinnon is going to lead
us in the pledge of allegiance. If you will all rise?
(Pledge of Allegiance recited)
Item 3: Community Invocation by Pastor Ken Wilde, with Capital Christian
Center:
De Weerd: Thank you. Item No. 3 is our community invocation by Pastor Ken Wilde
and he is with Capital Christian Center. I would like you to join us in the community
invocation or take this opportunity for a moment of silence.
Wilde: Let us pray. Father, at this time of the season of the year we thank you for the
season. Thank you for an opportunity to come to you and give our gifts and our talents
back to you. Lord, would come with a Biblical mandate to enter your gates with
thanksgiving. So, first of all, we thank you for your faithfulness. Thank you for your
goodness to each one of us. Thank you for a nation of freedom. Thank you for a
wonderful city that we live in. And we pray, particularly, tonight for our Mayor and City
Council members, that you give them divine wisdom, divine synergy of activity, Lord,
that you would enable them to do what might seem in the natural impossible, but you
give them of the ability to see through issues and come, Lord, with a sense of unity.
Lord, we know you command a blessing where there is unity. We thank you, Father, for
this evening. Let there be a unity of thought and action. We pray for divine wisdom
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 2 of 67
from heaven, for you are the author of wisdom and we pray grace now upon this time
we have, we pray grace upon our community, we thank you for Meridian and we pray,
Lord, that you would continue to guide us as we both lead this city naturally and
spiritually. Let your blessing be upon us, in your precious name, amen.
Item 4: Adoption of the Agenda:
De Weerd: Pastor, I would like to give you one of our City of Meridian pins. Thank you
so much for joining us. Merry Christmas. Okay. Item No. 4 is adoption of the agenda.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: First of all, the numbers of our resolutions, Item F on the Consent is 04-455, Item
G is 04-456, and Resolution H is 04-457, which when we do the Consent Agenda, will
be asked to be pulled. Item I and K under the Consent Agenda needs to pulled from the
agenda for tonight. To the department reports we need to add 6-A, the Mayor's report.
And on No. 20 we have one ordinance, which is 04-1120, Items 19 and 20 on the
regular agenda, will have to be pulled also. With that I move we adopt the revised
agenda.
Rountree: Second.
Berg: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Berg.
Berg: Just to relay this, Item 19 and 21.
Bird: Twenty-one. Yeah.
Berg: Twenty is --
Bird: I'm sorry.
Berg: -- stays on the agenda. It's Packard and we do have a development agreement
for them.
De Weerd: Okay. So, just to remove 19 and 21. Okay. All those in favor say aye. All
ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 5: Consent Agenda:
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 3 of 67
A. Approve Minutes of November 30, 2004 Pre -Council Meeting:
B. Approve Minutes of November 30, 2004 City Council Special
Meeting:
C. Approve Pawn Brokers Licenses:
Benny's Pawn Meridian Coin & Pawn
D. Approve Adult Entertainment Class B Licenses for Valley
Video:
E. Award of Bid for Storey Park Phase II Project:
F. Resolution No. 04-445 Amendment to Lease and
Trust Agreement Relating to Financing of Acquisition and
Construction of Law Enforcement Facilities:
G. Resolution No. 04-456 VAC 04-008 Request for a
Vacation of a portion of the 5 -foot utility easements located on each
side of the shared lot line of Lots 26 & 27, Block 1 for Lochsa Falls
Subdivision No. 6 by Ramsey Homes — 1660 West Glade Creek:
I. Development Agreement: AZ 04-024 Request for Annexation
and Zoning of 47.66 acres from RUT to R-4 zone for proposed
Silverleaf Subdivision by Centennial Development, LLC — 2683
West Chinden Boulevard:
Development Agreement: AZ 04-005 Request for Annexation
and Zoning of 5.27 acres from RUT to R-4 zone for Packard Acres
Subdivision No. 3 by Packard Estates Development, LLC — east of
North Locust Grove Road and south of East Ustick Road:
K. Development Agreement: AZ 04-026 Request for Annexation
and Zoning of 1.71 acres from RUT to C -G zone for Mountain
West Bank by Erstad Thornton Architects — northeast corner of
Venture Street and East Fairview Avenue:
L.
M. Personal Services Contract between the City of Meridian and
Whitman and Associates, Inc. to provide building inspection
services and plan reviews for structures constructed within
the City of Meridian:
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 4 of 67
N.
RIML Inc. to provide mechanical inspection services and plan
reviews for structures constructed within the City of Meridian:
O. Personal Services Contract between the City of Meridian and
DMH Enterprises to provide plumbing inspection services and
plan reviews for structures constructed within the City of
Meridian:
Harold's Electric Co.. Inc. to provide electrical inspection
services for structures constructed within the City of Meridian:
De Weerd: Consent Agenda.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move that we approve the Consent Agenda, which includes Item F, which is 04-
445, resolution number. Resolution No. 04-456, Item G. Item H we need to pull to 7-H
on the regular agenda. Item I and Item K needs to be pulled completely from the
agenda. And with that I move that we approved the revised Consent Agenda, for the
Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest on all proper papers.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Berg, you are requesting that H be removed to Item 7?
Bird: 7-H. Yeah.
De Weerd: Okay. Okay. Is there any further discussion? Mr. Berg, will you call roll.
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 6: Department Reports:
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Council, under department reports in front of you, you
have a letter of agreement that was submitted to us after we last met. It is a revised
agreement that kind of was taken from what you saw last week to discuss. This was
pulled together by the fire chief and Ada County as a -- kind of their proposal to the
county in lieu of what they had first received. Essentially, what it did was take away the
financial obligations to assume for the different activities, which are still unknown, and it
took out cities that did not have fire districts, as well as unions that don't have budget
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 5 of 67
authority or are not elected officials. So, they have streamlined it, but the agreement is
in front of you and since we do meet with the Ada County commissioners tomorrow
morning at 10:00, this issue might come up. It's not on the agenda. I did talk to
Commissioner Pevey-Derr last night, told her that a letter was forthcoming, would be
faxed this morning, which it was. I gave her the essence of the letter, what your
concerns were last week, and discussion regarding the original proposal, since we did
not -- had not seen this at that time, that we supported the vote to go out to the override
levy to go to the voters, that we also acknowledged that there is an issue that needs to
be addressed that we wanted to be an active participant at the table to discuss the blue
ribbon task force recommendations in full, to look at the feasibility and I guess do -ability,
for lack of a better word, to implement, because we cannot just piecemeal it for one
issue. I also reiterated that the main concern was the statement of agreeing to pursue
consolidation of fire and emergency medical services that it would add new tax to our
citizens and that that's something that we could not support. That was the hesitancy of
signing that document and I was not authorized to sign. And that was also stated in the
letter, as you all got a copy of that. This, like I said, is a revised agreement and I
apologize, it wasn't in front of you, we just had not received it at that time. I guess what
I would like to know is do you have any further comment on this as we go to meet with
the commissioners tomorrow morning?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I think one of our primary issues throughout this discussion has been
Meridian that has taken the position that we wanted a vote of the Ada County residents
on any override over increase in taxes. We continue to get from Ada County verbally
that that's what they are going to do, but they are asking us to sign a document that
dances around that issue and the strongest wording they have about that issue is:
Whereas Ada County Commissioners are willing to consider asking voters of Ada
County. I think our position has been that that's not what we want, we want them to say
that there will be a vote. I have heard that said that that's what's going to be done, but
this agreement does not say that.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I, too, agree with Mr. Rountree on that and also I believe before you take
anything, you have to figure out costs and I have yet to see any costs coming from
emergency services on what it costs to make these runs that they are losing money on
and I think they are just throwing dollars and stuff and I can't -- I can't support that and
I'm like Councilman Rountree, I -- unless it's a hundred percent guarantee that there is a
vote, I can't back it.
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 6 of 67
De Weerd: Any other comments? I guess that from what I understand is what they
discussed today and it will go to the voters. I think it is safe to say that we support that,
we will support them in getting that out to the voters and educating our constituents as
to what this means. I also think it's safe to say we agree with them, that there is an
issue that needs to be addressed, and that we are also very willing participants to sit at
the table and discuss the blue ribbon task force recommendations and to find solutions
to move forward. Is that safe to --
Donnell: That's good.
Bird: That would be fine.
De Weerd: Okay. Okay. Well, then, we will — if they ask us to tomorrow, we will bring
it up, if it was not understandable in our letter, so -- okay. Thanks, Council.
Item 7: (Items Moved from Consent Agenda)
H. Resolution No. 04-057 Acceptance of Bear Creek
Pathway Property Lot 29 Block 15 of Bear Creek Subdivision
No. 8:
De Weerd: Item 7 is Item H removed from the Consent Agenda. Mr. Attorney.
Nary: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Mr. Brown from Briggs
Engineering is here and, if you recall, this is property that has a pathway adjacent to
Bear Creek. I think you heard a presentation about a month and a half ago from the --
both the parks department and Briggs. There is a requirement in the plat that they were
to dedicate this easement. They wanted to gift it to the city instead. Mr. Strong was
supportive of that and felt that was a good resolution for the city. There is a couple
things. The reason I asked to pull it was, one, if you had any questions for Mr. Brown
regarding the transfer of this property, he is here to answer that. Secondarily, on this
resolution there is a blank space for the value of the property. The finance department
had asked for a particular value, so they could add it properly in their accounting for all
the city's property. We will probably have to supplement that later, because part of the
gift of the transfer is going to be them building the fence on the property to fence off this
pathway from the rest of the subdivision, so they won't have a particular value and I
wanted you to be aware of that and if that was any concern to you, but they wanted to
get this transfer and this deed done before the end of the year and that's basically it,
unless you had questions for Mr. Brown, but I just wanted you to be aware of what the
particulars of this one was.
De Weerd: Did I see our parks director? Mr. Strong, do you have anything you want
to comment on?
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 7 of 67
Strong: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, as just further clarification, the
developer has also agreed to fence along the side of the pathway that's near the ditch
as well, so they will actually be fencing both sides of the pathway.
De Weerd: Kent, do you have anything you would like to add?
Brown: The only fence that we had --
De Weerd: If you will, please, state your name and address first.
Brown: Ken Brown, 1800 West Overland, Boise, Idaho. The only fence that needs to
be put in at this time is the fence between the pathway that we have already installed
and the Ridenbaugh Canal to make it safe. It's something that the parks department
was going to have to try to budget. They weren't sure if they could get it done before
water goes into the canal. Nampa -Meridian wanted that done and so my developer
stepped forward and volunteered to do that also, but we will need to add that fence.
The fence between the subdivision and the path has already been fenced between that
portion. So, this is just for safety for people as they walk down.
De Weerd: Well, great. Thank you.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, we can certainly supplement with a
subsequent ether a resolution or something else if you would like to -- when we have
the particulars of what the value of the property was, if you would like us to do that, but
you certainly can approve the resolution without it at this point and it has language in
there that allows us to continue with the process and whatever documents need to be
signed and all of those other things. So, if you prefer we can certainly supplement it
later with a value.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Would that be the desire of Council?
Bird: It would be mine.
Rountree: Works for me.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Nary.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move that we have approve Resolution 04-457 and to provide a dollar value and
the fence itself, so --
Rountree: Second.
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 6 of 67
De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve Item 7-H. Any further discussion? Mr.
Berg.
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 8: FP 04-075 Request for Final Plat approval of 49 single-family residential
building lots and 2 common lots on 12.14 acres in an R-8 zone for
Castlebrook Subdivision No. 5 by Liberty Development, LLC — 4000
West Pine Avenue:
De Weerd: Thank you. Item 8 is FP 04-075. Anna.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is a request for 49 single-family
residential building lots and two common lots on 12.47 acres. This is the fifth phase of
Castlebrook. Pine Street is down to our south. Black Cat is toward the west and this is
the area that is shown in the preliminary plat. The density is 4.0 dwelling units gross
and, then, 5.0 dwelling units per acre. This is the final plat and it is in substantial
compliance with the approved preliminary plat. And staff is recommending approval of
Castlebrook Subdivision No. 5.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions? Anna, was the applicant in agreement
with all conditions?
Canning: Yes. I spoke with the applicant before this hearing and they did state that
they were in agreement with the conditions of approval.
De Weerd: Okay. If the applicant has nothing they would like to add -- no? Okay.
Council?
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: I move that we approve Item No. 8, FP 04-075, final plat for Castlebrook
Subdivision No. 5.
Donnell: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve Item No. 8. Is there any further
discussion? Mr. Berg. Oh, sorry. You're not Mr. Berg.
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 9 of 67
Item 9: FP 04-076 Request for Final Plat approval of 16 multi -family residential
building lots and 3 common lots on 5.7 acres in an L -O zone for
Roundtree Subdivision by Roundtree Development, LLC — Lot 2, Block
1, Tramore Subdivision:
De Weerd: Thank you. Item 9 is FP 076. Start with staff comments
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is also off of Pine Street,
although further east. As you can see here, it is an odd -shaped parcel with a flag lot
that extends to Pine Street. The final plat is for 16 residential lots and three common
lots on 5.7 acres. Each of the 16 lots will have a multi -family building, one four-plex on
them, so it's a total of 64 units. The common lots consist of open space, landscaping,
and drainage lots. The amenities in the subdivision consist of a half basketball court, a
sand volleyball court and a gazebo. This is the site plan that was approved by the City
Council. It was a little more helpful to look at than the approved preliminary plat. But
the final plat is in substantial compliance with the approved preliminary plat and the staff
is recommending approval.
De Weerd: Thank you, Anna. Was the applicant in agreement with all staff --
Canning: The applicant just came up and I did not have a chance to discuss that with
them.
De Weerd: Okay. Is the applicant in agreement with the staff report? Okay. Unless
you want to come up and provide any further information? Okay. For the record, the
applicant agrees with all staff comments. Do I have a motion?
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: I move that we approve Item No. 9, FP 04-076, final plat for Roundtree
Subdivision.
Donnell: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve Item No. 9. Is there any further
discussion? Ms. Green.
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Had to remember your last name. Okay. We have entered into the Public
Hearing portion of our agenda and by our own city ordinance, that still has not been
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 10 of 67
changed, they are required to swear in any person who would like to offer testimony
tonight on any of the items for Public Hearing. Items 10 through 17 are all public
hearings. If you will raise your right hand, I won't require that you actually testify, but if
you think you have testimony, 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 yes.
(Affirmative answers.)
Item 10: Public Hearing: CUP 04-045 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a
beauty salon in the O -T zone for Rodney Shaul by Rodney Shaul — 116
East Pine Avenue:
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Item 10 is a Public Hearing on CUP 04-045. 1 will open
this Public Hearing with staff comments.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is a request for Looks Unlimited,
which will be a beauty salon. It's in the OT zone. It has OT zoning right now is what I
was trying to say. They are not asking for a rezone. It is not too far away from us. And
this is EI Tenampa out in front here, so it's right -- just one lot east of Main Street. It's a
.165 -acre parcel, with an existing home on it. The existing home is 964 square feet and
that is what they are proposing to convert to the beauty salon. There will no longer be a
residence there. So, this would be a commercial business only. This is the last
commercial -- or last residence on this block, I believe. All right. Now gets to be the
tricky part. At the Planning and Zoning Commission -- the Planning and Zoning
Commission has recommended approval to you. They did hold a Public Hearing and
Rod Shaul testified in favor, as did Chad Jones, Tammy Ward, and Gary Shaul. There
was no one in opposition. The key issues of discussion included the parking design and
access to Pine Avenue and the alley. Let me go through that briefly. The access
comes to the east of the existing home. It will connect through to the alley at the rear of
the property. The applicant is proposing 45 degree angle parking on the east side and,
then, 90 degree angle parking on the west side. There was a lot of discussion about the
requirement for a five-foot landscape buffer on both the east and the west for the
parking area. That's our standard requirement. Now, this is Old Town and we would
anticipate that some of those landscaping requirements would be modified. There was
discussion about doing two angled parkings. There is sufficient room to do that. The
applicant chooses to do the 90 -degree angle parking, because they can get more
parking spaces. Let me go on with the Commissioners' hearing. The Commission
recommends that -- the key conditions to this initial staff recommendation were that the
applicant be allowed a right -in access to the site from Pine Avenue, so that would be
this location here, and that the Commission also recommended that the applicant work
with staff to develop an appropriate parking scheme that meets the intent of the
discussion this evening. And, as I said, they had quite a bit of discussion and it was
clear from that discussion and from the motion that -- that whatever needed to be done
with the landscaping requirements could basically be done as alternative compliance.
So, the outstanding issues before the City Council: On December 1st ACHD
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 11 of 67
commission district met and approved the applicant's appeal for the requirement to pave
the abutting alley. That had been an ongoing issue, not necessarily with us, but with
ACHD. So, they did grant that appeal. And, then, they did submit a revised site plan
and that's the one that you see here tonight that shows a one way entrance into the site
from Pine Avenue with three 45 degree parking stalls and, then, the four 90 degree
parking stalls on the west side. If you go to the second page of the -- well, as I was
preparing for tonight, unfortunately, I found that staff had, in approving this
configuration, approved alternative parking requirements, instead of alternative
landscape requirements. The code does not allow staff or the City Council to approve
alternative compliance to the parking requirements that could only be done through a
variance procedure. I had a brief moment to talk with the applicant's engineer Chad
Jones and a very brief moment to talk to Mr. Shaul. There are a couple options. The
options -- the easiest option that I saw is to just remove this three foot buffer on the east
side. That would give the applicant enough room to get the required drive aisle width
and the required -- basically the required drive aisle width that they are missing. They
are also missing two feet of length on these angled parking spaces. The applicant, in
my brief discussion with him, was concerned about that. They have the pavers coming
tomorrow. He felt that they couldn't get any closer to the property line than the three
feet as is. If -- that would be staffs preferred alternative, I suppose. The other
alternative that I -- the only one I can think of is that if we have these all labeled as
compact spaces on this side, then, that would -- we could reduce that requirement by
two feet and, then, we will probably have to shift things up a little bit, because we need
to get 25 feet on this main drive aisle. So, it would be unusual to have a compact
handicapped access, but that's the only other option I can think of, other than asking the
applicant to come back with a variance. So, that is the outstanding issue before City
Council tonight. Staff is -- the Planning and Zoning Commission did recommend
approval of this application to you.
De Weerd: Thank you, Anna.
Canning: And depending on the way that the Council wants to go, there will need to be
modifications to the staff report that's before you tonight. Or not the staff report, I'm
sorry, the conditions of approval.
De Weerd: Okay. Anything else?
Canning: No. Sorry, ma'am.
De Weerd: Okay. I guess my concern is we have all seen what parks in compact
parking spots. They are not compact cars. So, would the applicant like to come
forward? If you will, please, state your name and address.
Shaul: My name is Rod Shaul. I live at 775 North Ten Mile.
De Weerd: Thank you. Do you have any comments?
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 12 of 67
Shaul: I guess the only comment is, like she said, we prepared for asphalt, because we
are on a deadline for asphalt. They shut the asphalt plants down. So, I can say that we
prep'd wider than what we are actually going to pour, so we can probably gain a little bit
there, but I can't tell you exactly how much we can gain, because I didn't know any of
this was going to happen until 6:55. So, we can probably gain another foot in width if
we gain it on both sides. Part of the problem -- do you have a pointer? Here. Part of
our issue is we had to put a drain along here for the driveway, so we had to have -- we
had to maintain that three foot width here to allow for the drainage for the drive aisle.
Obviously, it's easier to pour asphalt straight, so we -- our plan is to pour asphalt
straight here. We have the ability to move these down a little bit and what my plan was
is if we need to cut out for landscape, then, we'd actually cut the asphalt and do the
landscape afterwards, because it's so much easier to pour straight. So, along the
borders I can't tell you. Again, I can't tell you how much we can gain there. If we need
to pour concrete, we can pour concrete to gain, but if we pour against the fence, I guess
it doesn't make sense to me, because the bumpers are going to extend passed there,
so I can say we can probably gain at least six inches, maybe a foot, for what we have
prep'd, but I really can't tell you exactly how much we gain. We have chosen to do two
handicapped spots, simply for the fact that the person that owns the place or that's
going to manage this facility, Tammy Ward, which runs Looks Unlimited, is
handicapped, so we are trying to keep another access for handicapped, because she
will take one already. So, that's why there is two handicapped spots, just to be able to
try and maintain the handicapped access. So, I don't know if that makes any difference.
I have no clue what we need to gain here. Anna, can you --
Canning: Yes. Let me -- Mayor and Council, with your permission. The issue is you're
short two feet on these, so although you have got your wheel stop here, the parking stall
would actually come out much further this way. So, this is a particular problem. I think
if you have anybody parking there right now in any kind of large vehicle, they will
basically block this drive aisle as it is right now. With the applicant's suggestion that -- if
you can gain a foot on each side, is that what the applicant was saying?
Shaul: Possibly. I haven't went out there and measured, but we did prep back farther
than the width, so they can pour asphalt. We can move this down, too. We haven't --
we can move this on down towards the alley.
Canning: As currently drawn we have got a 24 -foot drive aisle. It needs to be 25 feet.
If the applicant can gain one more foot on this -- in this area, then, that will leave a two
foot overhang for the bumpers and he's got a bumper concrete barrier to prevent them
hitting the fence, so that would provide the required distance from basically the fence
line to the back of those parking stalls and, then, a 25 -foot drive aisle. So, that would be
-- meet code. And, then, on this side if we were to gain a foot and, then, move the
concrete barriers to the very end of the pavement, then, if we -- if we determine that
they were just overhanging into that by another foot, I think that gets us there. I'm sure
that made no sense to anyone but me. But if the applicant can get another foot of
concrete -- asphalt on each side, then, I think we can make that work.
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 13 of 67
De Weerd: Rod, where will the applicant -- or where will the owner be parking? Will it
be in an angled one?
Shaul: No. We, actually, planned this as being hers -- her spot there.
De Weerd: Yeah. Because most your handicapped vehicles are not small.
Shaul: She has like a mini van, which that's -- I would say that is standard for most
handicapped people. A handicapped vehicle, you know, you have got handicapped
people that drive regular cars or pickups, so the mini -van is -- we did a lot of research
on that before we bought her vehicle and that's kind of a standard for -- I guess for
somebody in a wheelchair.
De Weerd: Okay.
Shaul: So, it appears that we have -- if we move these spots down, we have a couple
feet there and I don't have the drawings and I'm not familiar with it, but we do have
enough room to move those down to allow for more of a radius here to gain that. We
don't even have to have that as a handicapped, but we would like it as a handicapped,
so we can -- her whole plan is to -- obviously, if somebody in a wheelchair wants to
access -- you know, make it accessible for other people in wheelchairs. So, that's her
goal.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, do you have any questions?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I have a question for Anna. How many parking spots are required?
Canning: Five. So, they have more parking than is required.
Shaul: Part of the reason for that is Tammy has five employees and each one of those
employees has a customer, so we wanted to do as much parking as possible. We have
the ability to have two spots out front and that puts us at pretty much what she can
handle without having people park across the street and try and make it across the
traffic and other things like that. The girls are going to try and maintain as much room in
the back for customers as possible, plus our handicapped ramp is -- this isn't exactly
right. It actually comes out here on a pad and, then, the ramp starts about right here
and wraps around. So, the access to the front of the building will be off of this parking
lot and wrap around. So, we are going to modify the current walkway there to a four -
foot walkway, but just because of the parking situation, most of the parking we are
hoping will come off the back for safety issues.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 14 of 67
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Rod, you know, we are not here to design for you and we don't have any
dimensions that we can read on these particular graphics, but it seems to me that you
can probably from this point -- and you say you can go this direction some more, but
you could almost get three parallel parking places right there along that border and your
problem goes away.
Shaul: Right. And what made this drawing happen is because we were trying to do the
most we could -- we understood that we had a five foot boundary for landscape that we
initially had, which was different than what we had planned, so the reason we did that is
to add a little bit of landscape down there to try and make up for the five foot boundary.
So, we can move it down and I can -- you know, we can -- I can plant some trees over
here and do more landscape along the walkway. I'm willing to do what we can to make
this thing work, but, obviously, parking is essential and our room.
Bird: You say the problem -- excuse me. Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Rod, do you see any -- what Charlie just said, do you see anything wrong with
that? I don't. I think that would solve your problem real fast.
Shaul: No. We can -- we can move this down with no problem on down. We are
paving that anyway and if I have to cut it out, I will have to cut it out, but it's just going to
make it so much easier to pave flat than it is to do these cut outs. So, we can move
those spots down with no problem.
Bird: I think that would solve your problem.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, just shifting it northward doesn't
solve the dimensions to east to west. It's solves this problem here with the corner and
providing a 13 foot backup area, but it doesn't solve the problem from east to west not
having the required length of parking stalls.
De Weerd: Well, I think that would be still adding the --
Canning: The two feet?
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
Canning: Oh. Okay. I just wanted to --
De Weerd: Wouldn't it, Mr. Rountree?
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 15 of 67
Rountree: If they need that to provide the width of the approach there, that's an issue.
Canning: They would.
Rountree: The approach is the issue.
Canning: Yes.
Rountree: Or the entrance, whatever you call it.
De Weerd: Will that work?
Shaul: It works as long as we prep back that far. Our problem is they shut the asphalt
plants down -- they were supposed to shut down today, so they are going to hold up
until Friday and they are planning on pouring tomorrow, but we really don't have --
unfortunately, don't have the time to come back and prep a three foot strip on both
sides, so we will pour out as wide as we can and if that's not wide enough, I'm going to
have to pour concrete. But I guess I don't see a reason to, if the wheel stops here, to
pour concrete to the fence when it's not usable -- usable ground. But, obviously, we got
to do what we got to do, so --
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Well, if we go north -- and I don't know how many feet that is, what, five feet or
four feet or something like that farther north?
Shaul: Oh, yeah.
Bird: You could get away from -- you could actually get a little different other than the
45 -degree parking. That would give you longer ones and still get rid of your entry
problem. Swing the front end out a little.
Shaul: We could do that. I think that at a bare minimum we can gain a foot on both
sides I would say. But, again, it -- I didn't have enough notice to go out and actually
measure that tonight, but I know that we have close to -- close to a foot overlay to prep
this thing, so we should be able to pour, hopefully, two feet wider than our plan.
De Weerd: Well -- and it sounds like that would be sufficient.
Shaul: And that would be sufficient if we have that prep'd. And we will do what we can.
We will do as best we can.
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 16 of 67
Canning: Madam Mayor, I think we will just work with the applicant in the field on this
one. I don't think we have much choice. I think the dimensions are going to be tight no
matter what we do and we will make sure it's safe.
De Weerd: There you have it. Commitment from staff.
Shaul: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Is there anyone else who would like to provide testimony on this
application? Okay. Council?
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Seeing no other comments, I move we close the Public Hearing.
Donnell: Second.
De Weerd: All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: If I could ask Anna. Anna, if we approve this motion with the applicant's
comments, does that -- do we need to modify the staff conditions and bring it back for
final approval or --
Canning: I think we can do it now, if you're willing to be a little bit patient with me on
Exhibit A for the Conditional Use Permit. Item No. 1, let's add a new condition that
would move the angled parking one -foot toward the east property line or extend the
angled parking. And similarly extend the parallel -- or the 90 -degree parking one -foot
toward the west property line. And, then, maintain at least 13 feet for backup. And a
25 -foot width for the drive aisle. And, then, remove condition number four, which states
remove the wheel stops for the 45 -degree parking stalls. Then I think we are okay.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: See if we can get this right the first time. I move that we approve Item No. 10,
CUP 04-045, Conditional Use Permit for Rodney Shaul, modifying Exhibit A, number
one, adding the phrase extend angled parking one foot east towards the property line
and extending the 90 -degree parking one foot west toward the property line.
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 17 of 67
Maintaining a 13 -- maintaining 13 feet for backup and a 25 -foot distance for drive aisle
and to remove item number four in reference to the stops.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Amazing, Mr. Wardle. Okay. Is there any further discussion? The motion
is to approve Item 10 with the amendments as stated. Mrs. Green, will you, please, call
roll.
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 11: Pubic Hearing: RZ 04-014 Request for a Rezone of 2.4 acres from R-4
to R-15 zones for Cedar Springs Place Subdivision by Plantation Place,
LLP — southwest corner of North Meridian Road and West Ashby Drive:
Item 12: Public Hearing: PP 04-039 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 2
residential building lots on 2.4 acres in a proposed R-15 zone for Cedar
Springs Place Subdivision by Plantation Place, LLP — southwest corner
of North Meridian Road and West Ashby Drive:
Item 13: Public Hearing: CUP 04-048 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a
Planned Development for a new 27 -unit assisted living facility and 13 -unit
independent living facility in a proposed R-15 zone for Cedar Springs
Place Subdivision by Plantation Place, LLP — southwest corner of North
Meridian Road and West Ashby Drive:
De Weerd: Thank you. Items 11, 12 and 13 are RZ 04-014, PP 04-039, and 04-048. 1
will open these three public hearings with staff comments.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is a request only for a
subdivision. There is no accompany rezone -- what am I doing in Cedar Springs? I
pulled up Milliron. I'm sorry. Okay. Let's try this again. Madam Mayor, Members of the
Council, this is a request for a rezone, a preliminary plat, and Conditional Use Permit for
a planned development on 2.4 acres. The 2.4 acres that you see here, which is just
north of Settler's Park along Meridian Road north of Ustick and, then, this is Cedar
Springs residential sub here. We have Ashley Drive that provides the northern
boundary to the property. This property was kind of an out parcel when the original
Cedar Springs was developed, so it was not preliminary platted or it was added on. We
didn't feel it was appropriate to do residential development there, just standard
residential, so they have come in with this request today. As you can see, the site is
currently vacant and the applicant is requesting to rezone the entire property from R-4
to R-15. It does have a medium density residential designation on the Comprehensive
Plan. The preliminary -- or the combined -- yeah. The preliminary plat is just for two
lots. One of the lots would be for the assisted living facility and, then, one would be for
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 18 of 67
the independent living units. So, the Conditional Use Permit does include a request for
27 unit assisted living facilities and, then, 13 independent living units. Those are on the
west side of the property. The assisted living facility is a single story structure and I do
have some elevations of that and it would house 22 -- I don't have that information. The
independent living facilities are a range of buildings. There is one -- or two four-plexes,
one three-plex and, then, one duplex. So, you can see the -- here is a four-plex. There
is a four-plex. There is the duplex. And, then, there is the three-plex. As far as
amenities go, for the planned development, the applicant is proposing to construct two
open courtyards with water features and open patio adjacent to the dining room of the
assisted living facility and a garden plot and two sitting areas on the independent living
unit lot and the walkways that traverse the site would tie into existing walkways in
Settler's Park. You can see the tie at that location here and -- three on the south and
one on the west. The independent living units, each is proposing 156 square -feet of
private usable open space and, then, a 96 square -foot back patio and a 60 -foot square
foot front porch. So, they more than exceed the 100 feet of private usable open space
that we ask for in multi -family units. The Planning and Zoning Commission held a
hearing on November 18th. They have recommended approval to the City Council.
The applicant Chad Pollack spoke in favor of the application. There was no one
testifying in opposition to it. The key issues of discussion were the fire department's
requirements for all occupants to be capable of self-preservation. There is a follow-up
memo from Rich Green saying that that was only required for the independent living
units and does not -- it would not apply to the assisted living units. There are different
fire access requirements and sprinkling requirements for those units if they are not
capable of self-preservation. So, that he did write a letter clarifying that that only
applied to the independent living facilities. And I believe that was the only outstanding
issue before the City Council. It has been cleared up and I will end staffs presentation.
Oh, I have -- I'm sorry. This is another view of the site plan. You can see there is a
couple open courtyards in the assisted living facility. Landscape plan. And, then, these
are the elevations. This is the north elevation, so this would face the residences in
Cedar Springs. This is kind of an angled elevation as you look at it from the northwest,
so as you're looking down on it and seeing the full entrance to the independent living --
or the assisted living facility. This is the west elevation and I can't read them from this
distance. I believe this is the one that faces Meridian Road and, then, these are the
elevations of the smaller units. And with that I'll end staffs presentation.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions for staff?
Bird: I have none, Mayor.
Rountree: None.
De Weerd: Okay. Is the applicant here. If you will, please, state your name and
address.
Pollack: Chad Pollack with Petersen-Staggs Architects, 5200 West State Street, Boise,
Idaho.
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 19 of 67
De Weerd: Thank you.
Pollack: We have had a chance to meet with the fire department and have agreed to
their memo and agree with all staff comments, so I would be happy to answer any
questions.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, do you have any questions for the applicant?
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Madam Mayor, I see that in the packet the parks department commented on
allowing connection to the existing pathway facility for the park. What type of fencing
are you proposing for the perimeter that borders the park?
Pollack: We are proposing a decorative wrought iron fence.
Wardle: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you very much. Okay. Is there anyone who would like to
provide public testimony on this application? Application 11, 12 and 13. Okay.
Canning: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Anna.
Canning: To follow up on Councilman Wardle's question of the application, we did look
in -- it's not on the landscape plan, so if that's an important issue to Council, then, you
may want to consider that as a condition of approval.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Anna, I -- correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe we require open view fencing
adjacent to parks, unless special consideration is made; is that not correct?
Canning: Our only technical requirement is when it's along a micro -path. Oftentimes
when subdivisions do come through we require it adjacent to open space, so that there
is that ability to look in. So, it's not in the code, though. So, if you want it to be a
condition of approval, then --
Wardle: Madam Mayor, follow up. Which part of the application would that go to, the
plat or the --
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 20 of 67
Canning: May as well put it with the Conditional Use Permit.
Wardle: Okay. Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Any further questions, Council? Okay. This Public Hearing is open.
Do I have a motion to close?
Donnell: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mrs. Donnell.
Donnell: I move that we close the Public Hearing on Item No. 11, 12 and 13.
Wardle: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to close the public hearings on 11, 12 and 13. All
those in favor say aye. Okay. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Okay. Item 11.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: I move that we approve Item No. 11, RZ 04-014, rezone for Cedar Springs
Place Subdivision.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. Motion to approve Item 11. Is there any further discussion?
Hearing none, Mrs. Green.
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Thank you. Item 12. Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Madam Mayor, I move that we approve Item No. 12, PP 04-039, preliminary
plat for Cedar Springs Place Subdivision.
Rountree: Second.
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 21 of 67
Donnell: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. There is a motion to approve Item 12. Any further discussions?
Ms. Green.
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Madam Mayor, I move that we approve Item No. 13, CUP 04-048, Conditional
Use Permit for Cedar Springs Place Subdivision and to include as a condition
applicant's comments of their intent to install wrought iron fencing on the perimeter of
the development adjacent to the city park.
Donnell: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve Item 13 with the addition. If there is no
further discussion, Mrs. Green.
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 14: Public Hearing: PP 04-034 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 83
single-family residential building lots and 5 common lots on 25.86 acres in
an R-4 zone for Milliron Subdivision by Dyver Development, LLC —
northeast corner of North Black Cat Road and West Cherry Lane:
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Item 14 is Public Hearing PP 04-034. 1 will open this
item with staff comments.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this property is located at the corner
of Cherry Lane and Black Cat, as you see here. This property was annexed some time
ago, we believe in the late 1970s. It does have an R-4 zoning designation. The
applicant is before you here tonight with only a preliminary plat application. There is not
a rezone request or a planned development request. As you can see, there is one
existing home on the property and that has been incorporated into the subdivision at the
northeast corner of the property. The original submittal did not have an access onto
Cherry Lane. They did go back to ACHD and get that access approved, so there are
two accesses, one for Black Cat, one from Cherry Lane, and there is a fairly regular grid
pattern within the subdivision as you see and, then, there is a stub street to the -- or the
connect up to an existing stub street to the east of the property. Sorry. Looking for the -
- okay. The Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended approval of this
application. The applicant spoke in favor of the application at the Planning and Zoning
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 22 of 67
Commission. That was Ken Amar and he is again here tonight. In opposition there
were nine neighbors testified at the hearing on the 21st of October. There were two
hearings and I will explain that in a moment. And, then, ten neighbors testified at the
November 4th hearing. Most of the residents were from Golf View Estates, which is to
the north and east of the property. And there was one resident off of Black Cat Road
that testified in opposition. The opposition focused on lot size, house size,
Comprehensive Plan compatibility issues, traffic safety, and property devaluation. The
key issues of the discussion at the first hearing was the vehicular access to Cherry Lane
and, then, the applicant did go back and add that access to Cherry Lane. The key
issues of discussion at the next hearing were the existing zoning and allowed uses.
Actually, that was at both hearings. And, then, the neighborhood compatibility issues.
So, at the October 21st Planning and Zoning Commission hearing, the P&Z
Commission continued the Public Hearing with a directive to the applicant to pursue a
new street connection to Cherry Lane with ACHD, which they did do, and hold a
neighborhood meeting, which they did do. So, then, they came back on November 4th
with that revised plat. The key conditions and changes to the staff -- initial staff
recommendation were that the minimum house size of -- to require a minimum house
size of 1,600 square feet adjacent to Golf View Estates Subdivision. Again, that's on
the north and east property lines. and then, to add the application agreements with Golf
View Estates Homeowners Association as conditions of approval of the subdivision
CC&Rs. And I don't know if Council has those in their packet. It's just simply titled
Milliron Subdivision at the top and, then, it has a number of bulleted items. I feel it's
probably important to at least read those to you now. All houses shall have a front yard
light installed during construction. The yard light to include a 60 -watt bulb and photo
cell. All roofing material to be 30 year black architectural composition shingles or
greater as approved by the architectural control committee. A roof pitch to be a
minimum of a 6/12. All houses to be constructed using masonite siding, stucco, brick,
concrete siding or equivalent. No vinyl siding will be permitted. Minimum house size to
be 1,400 square feet, except on those lots along the north and east property lines and,
then, the minimum house size to be 1,600 square feet. There were lot line fencing
adjacent to the north and east property line, as well as those lots that are adjacent to
the park area to be restricted to four foot height maximum and to be vinyl material, as
approved by the architectural control committee. The pathway on the north and east
property line is private property and is owned and maintained by Golf View owners
association. Access from Milliron Subdivision is prohibited. Rear yard landscaping,
including grass and a minimum of one tree is required to be installed within six months
of occupancy of the home. Front yard landscaping on all houses, including the
following: The front yard sod and underground sprinkler system. Two two-inch caliper
trees and five two -gallon shrubs installed in the front yard. All trees to have a three-foot
diameter tree ring surrounding the trees. Corner lots to have an additional two two-inch
caliper trees installed on the sites -- street side of the house. Street side fencing to be
installed on all lots within 60 days from occupancy permit. Wing fencing on interior lots
and wing fencing plus street side fencing on corner lots. Wing fencing to be set back
five feet from each comer of the front of the house and street side fencing to be installed
ten feet from the sidewalk. So, again, those were the major— I would imagine major
items of discussion at the neighborhood meeting and, then, those were incorporated
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2404
Page 23 of 67
into the Planning and Zoning Commission's approval as noted previously. There were
some questions about ACHD's conditions of approval still mentioning that -- the no new
street connection to Cherry Lane. I believe the applicant has provided a letter from
ACHD and I have a memorandum from Ms. Christy Richardson stating that that access
was approved, so I think we have resolved that issue. And, then, revised preliminary
plat, site specific condition number three and four required the applicant to revise the
preliminary plat. Staff has asked that those two conditions be deleted, because they are
no longer necessary. The applicant has already revised those. And the only other
issue I noted as I was going through preparing for you tonight is on page three of five,
condition number 14 references that document that I just read, but it does not include it
as part of the recommendation and I just thought that perhaps we should attach that as
Exhibit F. And, again, those are just commitments that the applicant has made to put in
the CC&Rs. So, those would not be enforced by the city. Those are just -- would be
enforced by that homeowners association. With that I'll answer any questions that the
Council might have.
De Weerd: Council, do you have any questions at this time?
Donnell: Not at this time.
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: None right now.
De Weerd: Okay. Is the applicant here? Okay. If you will, please, state your name
and address.
Amar: My name is Kevin Amar. Address -- we just moved. 36 East Pine in Meridian. .
De Weerd: Okay. And you have 15 minutes for your presentation.
Amar: I wasn't here for the swearing in, so I'm supposed to do that. Sorry.
De Weerd: Is the testimony you provide tonight the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth, so help you God?
Amar: It certainly is.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Amar: Thank you. Madam Mayor, Council members, as I said, my name is Kevin
Amar, I'm here tonight representing Milliron Subdivision. Milliron Subdivision is 25
acres, 83 residential lots and, actually, 82 new residential lots. There is an existing
house out there, as Anna had indicated. Anna, do you have that -- oh, she's putting one
up for us that has fewer lines on it, so it's a little easier to see. The project is on the
corner of Black Cat and Cherry Lane. It's been a bare piece of property for years. The
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 24 of 67
house actually sits on this lot here in the northeast corner. It was constructed about 12
years ago and it's been -- there is a pasture and it's been an onion field for at least the
last year or so. The improvements along Cherry Lane exist and by improvements full
curb, gutter and sidewalk currently exist and we will be using that sidewalk. There are a
couple of curb cuts, one at this location and one here that will have to be redone and
put in actual curb and gutter, vertical curb and gutter and, then, there will be a berm
behind it as required by the City of Meridian. On this section that will need -- we will
need to put in sidewalk and it will be, actually, a meandering sidewalk within the berm,
as typical along -- along Black Cat. But, again, it would be within the -- it would be in
that area and it would be landscaped. The entire perimeter will be fenced by the
developer, by us, and on the arterials there will be a six-foot fence. On the area on this
section, the east and on the north, we will be putting in a four -foot vinyl fence and, then,
also around the park area will be a four -foot vinyl fence. The reason we are doing a
four -foot fence is although we can't use this pathway and we recognize that, we did not
want to create site obstruction to that pathway. This boundary of Golf View Estates has
been fenced -- currently is fenced and it's a four foot fence, so we can make matching
height with a cedar fence and we will put in a vinyl fence. On this pathway some is
fenced and some isn't, but we did not want to create a corridor there where safety may
be an issue. The park area is for once on the high side of the property and will be just a
park area. There is no storm drainage. There may be some underground seepage
beds, but it's not going to be a depressed area, it's not going to be an indentation, it's
not going to do anything but be a park area. We will put a playground structure in that --
in that park for the residents to use. This is our storm drainage. It does not count into
our open space, we certainly will meet your storm drainage requirements and it will
drain within the appropriate time frame and it will be a nice, green, grassy area, but it's
not something we counted as five percent. Storm drainage is everybody's friend and
foe, I think. The project itself, as I said, it was -- or the property was annexed sometime
in the 70s. It is an R-4 designation now. We are not asking for a rezone or requesting
anything other than the preliminary plat on the property. We did hold a neighborhood
meeting at the request of the neighbors and the Planning and Zoning. We held that on
the 20th of October and I will give you a copy -- do you have a copy of this on your --
this is the request that -- what we are requesting as conditions of approval. You can
either make those conditions of approval or require them to be in the CC&Rs. Either
way we intend on putting those in the CC&Rs and enforcing them. Those were some
items that came out of the neighborhood meeting. Also, a letter from the highway
district -- should have done this all at once. The first Public Hearing it was requested,
but we added an additional access onto Cherry Lane. We had intended on using this
access here and, then, going through Golf View. Neither the neighbors, nor the
Planning and Zoning Commission, thought that was a good idea, so that letter merely
states that this is an accepted access point and it is approved within the conditions of
approval for Ada County Highway District. With that I will be happy to stand for any
questions.
De Weerd: What is the water table in that area? `I know the area south of Cherry Lane
has a pretty high water table.
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 25 of 67
Amar: I have got my geo tech report. I'm going to give you a real number.
De Weerd: You know, high, low, works for me.
Amar: Low. Low in relative to seepage beds and storm drain ponds. It's about eight
feet in the corner where we are putting in the storm drain area.
De Weerd: But it would drain within the requirements?
Amar: Correct. It certainly would.
De Weerd: It's not going to be sitting there long.
Amar: No. And if you want more information on it, I will let the man answer your
questions. He, actually, is the designer, Chad Kelly with Bailey Engineering, and we
can answer those questions better than I can.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, do you have any questions for the applicant?
Bird: I have none, Mayor.
Donnell: No.
De Weerd: Okay.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I do. You indicated that there would be berming on both Cherry Lane and
Black Cat. Could you describe what that consists of and is it your intent to make that
consistent with what's currently up and down Black Cat and what's currently adjacent to
you on the east side of Golf View?
Amar: Yes. Madam Mayor, Council -member Rountree, that is our intent. We have
done a couple of projects on Black Cat and some of the neighbors have seen
Bridgestone, which is the one that we just did the landscaping and we intend on making
this landscaping similar to that style, but there is the berm, the landscape, lots of trees
and shrubbery and the fencing on the back side of it.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I would point out that both Golf View and what's the other one? Ashford
Greens. Have considerable architectural elements within their landscape berms, rock
Meridian City Council
December 21. 2004
Page 26 of 67
features, those sorts of things. Are you intending to be consistent with what's adjacent
to you in both north and west -- or east of you?
Amar: Madam Mayor, Councilmember Rountree, if I might ask for clarification. Are you
talking about the landscaping borders that they have installed?
Rountree: That, as well as some instances there is some retaining wall where needed.
Amar: Directly east of us there is a retaining wall and that is near the -- there is an
irrigation structure there, as I recall. We won't put the retaining wall there, because we
don't have that irrigation structure to protect, hide, obscure, but we do use extensive
rock on all borders. Landscape rocks and, then, berming, such as has been done on
the streets. But I don't anticipate any retaining walls, simply because there is no use for
that.
Rountree: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Anything further, Council, at this time? Okay. Thank you.
Amar: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. I do have a number of people that have signed up. When I read
your name, I will indicate if you signed up either for or against and if you would like to
provide testimony at that time, please, come forward. I have Clarence Malone against.
Okay. Would you like to provide testimony?
Malone: Yes, I would.
De Weerd: Okay. So, when I call your name and indicate for or against, if you would
like to provide testimony, just come on up. If you will, please, state your name and
address.
Malone: My name is Clarence Malone and I live at 2337 Black Cat Road.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Malone: In Ashford Greens. My concern is the size of the lots and the size of the
homes being consistent with the homes in Golf View and Ashford Greens. The people -
- the people have invested a lot in those areas and I'm just concerned that, you know,
our values are being protected and that is what I'm addressing at this meeting.
De Weerd: Okay.
Malone: So, thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Fred Becker against. Thank you.
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 27 of 67
Becker: Mayor and Council --
De Weerd: Please state your name and address.
Becker: Fred Becker, 2365 North White Ash Place, Ashford Greens.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Becker: I did not receive a notice of the neighborhood meeting. I don't know what
happened there. But my objection is that the homes are not compatible with the homes
in the area. Plus the lots are not compatible. And that's my main objection.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, sir. We will ask the developer when he gets up to
answer that, where all the notices for the public meeting went.
Becker: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Lorita Becker is against. Thank you. John Malone against. Thank
you. Dave Learner. Against.
Learner: Dave Learner, 4603 West White Ash.
De Weerd: Thank you
Learner: I'd just like to address the same thing everybody else is. Size of the homes
and the compatibility of the two subdivisions. We have had neighborhood meetings.
These same comments come up each and every time and the builder has agreed --
excuse me -- the developer as agreed to go with 1,600 square foot homes on the back
end or against our subdivision with the properties that join. Well, most of those homes
and anybody that lives in that area or have been in that area are well over 2,500 square
feet. Well over, what, 3,000 square feet. A 1,600 square foot home right in your
backyard and I'm one of the people that it's right in my backyard, it's not compatible. It's
not even close. We bought in there to protect our investment and figured that with a
little bit of -- we knew homes were going to go in there, I mean that's obvious. I'm not
against a project going in there, but get something that's compatible. In the
neighborhood meeting and every time we come into these meetings -- this is the fourth
one I have been to -- they always come back and say, well, the zoning is for R -- you
know, R-4, four units per acre. Okay. Four units per acre. But let's have something
that's compatible. And I think that that's not what the developer is planning on building
in there. That's all I have to say.
De Weerd: Thank you. Greg Embry for. Okay. Steve Peiper. Thank you. Against
Peiper: Steve Peiper, 4655 West White Ash Drive.
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 28 of 67
De Weerd: Thank you.
Peiper: My concerns are the same as the other residents of the neighborhood. It is
basically a compatibility issue and the protection of our investment. As has been stated,
the houses that are proposed to back up against ours are about half the size. There is
not going to be the space between the homes that we have in Golf View Subdivision
and the landscaping requirements are quite a step down from what is required in the
Golf View Subdivision. I'm going to look out into somebody's backyard that's not
necessarily even going to be sodded, they are going to have one tree and it's just a
compatibility issue. I mean there is people in our subdivision that probably have almost
1,600 square foot garages, let alone homes. Those, like has been stated, are about
half the size of the homes that they are going to be backing up against and that's all I
have. Thank you, Madam Mayor and City council.
De Weerd: Thank you. Sanda Randall is against. Thank you. Heather Lanehart,
against.
Lanehart: Heather Lanehart, 1801 North Golf View Way and I'm also on the Golf View
homeowners association board. Madam Mayor and City Council, first of all, I'd like to
thank you for your service to our community, especially at this holiday time. We
appreciate your dedication to the city. In this city's Comprehensive Plan one of the six
community values is to enhance Meridian's quality of life for all residents. One of the
listed objectives is to maintain integrity of housing areas, to preserve values and
ambience of areas. Although Milliron Subdivision does meet all the zoning
requirements in lot size and minimum house size, as proposed it does not preserve the
ambience with the adjacent subdivision for two reasons. Number one, the irrigation
easement on the north here, our walking path from Golf View goes all along the
northern and the eastern border and cuts off just a little bit off into our property. On the
northern border there is an irrigation easement where the developer cannot build and he
has proposed to keep it as a common lot and weed free and I think we can do better
than that. I think we can use this open space and require some landscaping there to
beautify the area. We have talked with the Settler's Irrigation District and they will allow
landscaping on that easement, as long as it is not higher than three feet. The second
reason is the backyards of all the lots adjacent to the walkway are not equal in
landscaping requirements or appearance controls and if you will put that paper up that I
left. I have a comparison chart that I prepared with the landscape requirements for --
that's kind of small. I don't know if you can zoom in on the bottom at all, but Golf View is
listed on the left and the proposed Milliron on the right. Specifically right here, the
backyard next to the common area landscaping is what we are talking about. The Golf
View homes, which are existing, have a minimum of four trees and 14 shrubs, whereas
the Milliron houses will have one tree. Because the fence that -- and you can go back
to the map now, please. Because the fence that goes along the walking path has been
proposed as only four feet high, you will be able to see into these backyards, but also
have no screening requirements for pet enclosures or any other nuisances. It will totally
detract from the esthetic value of our walking path as we go along here. Therefore, we
propose that the fence be increased to six feet in height of a solid vinyl fence and I have
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 29 of 67
spoken with Planning and Zoning yesterday and they said because it's not a micro -path
that could be approved. That's all.
De Weerd: Thank you. Any questions?
Donnell: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mrs. Donnell.
Donnell: When you were giving the comparison, are those the current shrubs and
trees?
Lanehart: What we have --
Donnell: Or were they the requirements when those homes were built?
Lanehart: They are the requirement and we control it and maintain it.
Donnell: Now, okay, I'm going to ask you again. The 14 -- the seven five gallon and the
seven one gallon shrubs were requirements of the home when they were built?
Lanehart: When they were built.
Donnell: Okay.
Lanehart: They had -- and down here they had to be in within 30 days of completion
and the Milliron has six months to put it in.
Donnell: Thank you.
De Weerd: Anna, can you give that to the city clerk, so we can make a copy for
Council?
Lanehart: I'm sorry. I should have --
De Weerd: No. That's fine. Any further questions? Thank you.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Mrs. Lanehart spoke about the fencing requirement and I did
want to verify that she did talk to Brad Hawkins -Clark and the four -foot is generally a
requirement we have on public pathways. Because this is a private pathway and we
don't anticipate that it will ever become a public pathway, a six-foot fence adjacent to
Golf View Estates would be -- would be okay. Or would be allowed. Or could be
allowed if the Council wishes to do that. If the Council wishes to go that way, you do
need to make a modification to the P&Z recommendation, because they have
specifically recommended a four -foot fence.
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 30 of 67
De Weerd: Thank you. Harry Woodruff. Against
Woodruff: Harry Woodruff. I live at 4386 West White Birch Court in Golf View Estates.
I'm the president of the Golf View Estates homeowners association currently and,
obviously, I'm against the proposal for many of the same reasons that Heather
commented to you on. I brought a letter down to Council chambers earlier in the month
and I hope you all received a copy of that. I think it's self-explanatory what I wrote in the
letter. I hope it's considered strongly. But here, again, I would like to make the Council
aware that we went to some extensive costs to do research on the Comprehensive Plan
for the city, which we found to be in noncompliance with this subdivision, mainly in
compatibility issues. We don't feel it's compatible. Our research didn't indicate that it
was. And that's basically what we are really looking for is a continuation extension of
the subdivision we currently have that is in likeness and manner and style and to
enhance the property values, the living area for ourselves, as well as the city to be
continued as a well planned development like we already have. We don't feel this
development is up to the standards of our subdivision landscaping standards, et cetera.
With those things in mind again and with the letter I wrote to the city and so forth, I
would hope you reconsider what the Planning and Zoning has recommended as a do
pass and deny the application of the applicant to the subdivision. I thank you for your
time.
Bird: Madam Mayor, I have a question.
De Weerd: Thank you. Mr. Bird.
Bird: Sir? Harry? What is the minimum house size for your CC&Rs in Golf View?
Woodruff: Our minimum house size started at 1,800 square feet and the only reason
that was that small was because of a small number of odd -shaped lots that were hard to
get any larger homes on it without going multiple stories.
Bird: But your minimum is 1800?
Woodruff: Yes, it is.
Bird: Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Sandy Hoover against.
Hoover: I'm Sandy Hoover and I live at 4625 West White Ash Drive.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Hoover: And I live right behind where they are going to build -- the home that's going to
stay there and, actually, I should have addressed you right. I have never done this
before. But I am concerned about the fence also. We have our house for sale at this
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 31 of 67
time and we had a buyer and they were concerned about the building that was going to
be going on behind our home, this big subdivision, and I am -- I would like to see a six
foot fence go up, because they did not buy my house because of all this going on. So,
I'm concerned about this procedure that's happened with our subdivision. I built in this
subdivision because of the resale value. We are doing a two year plan where we are
going to move on to build another home somewhere, nicer subdivision, but we built in
this subdivision on purpose to have a nicer home to be able to resell and I might not be
able to find better, because of this being able to see into the backyard of someone that
has one tree or no sod like that. So, I would just proposed on my thoughts if -- that we
could put a six foot fence up, at least do that much and, then, also landscape behind, so
that it has a nicer approach to it. And I appreciate your time. Thank you very much.
De Weerd: Thank you. Ron Anderson. I'm sorry. Even though you were sworn in I --
Rountree: He deserves it.
Anderson: I'll probably need three or four of those before you're satisfied.
De Weerd: Please state your name and address.
Anderson: Ron Anderson, 4327 West Quaker Ridge Drive.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Anderson: Madam Mayor and City Council Members, I'm here before you tonight to
oppose this subdivision and to ask for your assistance. I'd like to start off with my wife
and I, Debbie, have lived in the community for a lot of years and for about the last three
or four years we have been looking for someplace to move where we could kind of
move to our final home, if you will, before we retire and plan on living the rest of our
lives here in Meridian, and so we have been looking for quite awhile and have been
keeping our eyes on Golf View Subdivision and Golf View is a very impressive
subdivision. If you have driven through there or walked through there, there is some
very nice entryways with ponds and fountains and walking paths and we finally bought a
home in there about a year ago and we always knew that the property to the west of us
was going to develop, as well as all the neighbors did. What we always hoped was that
it would be developed in a fashion similar to what Golf View had been developed in.
You can imagine our delight when we heard that it was finally going to develop and you
can also imagine our delight when we found out that the development was going to be
one that would be soon developed by Hubble Homes and not to say anything bad about
Hubble Homes, but they typically develop more starter end or middle of the road homes
and so the homeowners as well looked at the plans that were presented to us, had a
number of concerns and when we look at our Comp Plan there are a couple of issues
that really stand out and one is compatibility and also buffering and protecting existing
properties and we feel like this development -- we know the property is going to
develop, we know the City of Meridian has ordinances to meet minimum standards, but
I got to tell you, we are less than thrilled at having this development come before -- or
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 32 of 67
next to our subdivision. So, the best that we are hoping for at this point is throw
ourselves at you guys' mercy and ask for some help in some buffering and some
compatibility issues. We learned about this very late in the process. They didn't feel
like there needed to be homeowners association meeting or meeting with the neighbors
until we went to Planning and Zoning and forced that to happen. When we did get to
that meeting, it's interesting, we have this Milliron Subdivision issues here that you guys
were given -- normally that would be something that's handed out after a meeting
occurs. That was handed to us at the start of the meeting. So, those were things that
they had already decided to do when we got to that meeting. The main issue is we
would like to see the homes on north and on the east side be a little bit larger in square
footage to be compatible with our subdivision.
De Weerd: Mr. Anderson?
Anderson: Yes, ma'am.
De Weerd: Your time is up.
Anderson: Thank you. Did you think that was going to stop me, though?
De Weerd: No. That's why I said, Mr. Anderson, your time is up.
Anderson: Okay. I would like to address a couple of issues that we really think would
help, though, in the compatibility and the buffering.
De Weerd: Council, would you like him to address those issues?
Bird: I have no problem with that. I would like to make one thing clear, I think I stated
that Hubble Homes was the developer and it is Corey Barton Homes, as I understand.
Anderson: Excuse me.
Bird: Let's get that straight. Yeah. I have no problem with it, if the rest of the people
don't.
De Weerd: Okay.
Anderson: Anyhow, we talked about the size of the homes. You guys have heard
already that most of the homes in our subdivision are around the 2,500 to 3,000 square
foot range. When we met with the developer we asked that the homes be a minimum of
1,800 square foot to match our subdivision, at least on the perimeter there. The other, I
guess, big issue to me is the fact that we talked about those amenities. Our subdivision
has the walking paths and those types of things. We know that there is absolutely no
way that you're to keep people from the next door subdivision off those walking paths
and we pay homeowners dues to maintain all those things. What we would like to see
is that this developer work with us and we have a walking path that surrounds this
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 33 of 67
subdivision on the north and the east, that they work with us to enhance that amenity
and that we share that with their subdivision and work for that compatibility issue that
we talked about in the Comp Plan so much for and also to create a buffering, if you will,
between these two subdivisions. And our thought and our concept is -- we already had
a paved path, most of the people have put shrubbery and landscaping up to that where
it goes up to their backyard there, is that we would like to see maybe less area in this
common space in the triangle area that you see there and that they put some
landscaping requirements and some space along the pathway adjacent to Golf View, so
that we create something that's nice that both of our subdivisions can share. One of the
concerns I have is if you go directly south across Black Cat Road there is a paved path
that was put along the drainage ditch and I don't know if you guys have had the
opportunity to walk down that, but it's nothing but weeds and thistles and trash and it
looks horrible. That's what's really proposed here. We say we are going to keep it
weed free. Well, it's going to be weed free, because we are going to go down there and
we are going to spray Roundup on it and that's going to be the weed free part. That's
going to be done by the homeowners association. We would love to have you guys
assist us and help us with trying to put some requirements in there and let's put some
landscaping along that pathway and let's improve it. We have already talked to the
irrigation district, they have no problem with that path being landscaped and done up
nice and those are my comments and, again, we just plead for some help and let's try to
bring some of the things that we talk about in our Comp Plan to fruition. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. I have one last person signed. Robert Patchin against. Okay.
Okay. Is there anyone else who would like to provide testimony on this application?
Council, do you need any further information? Thank you. Okay. If there is no further
public testimony, the applicant can come up and provide his rebuttal.
Amar: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Council Members. Again, for the record, Kevin Amar
and my new address -- I'll have to remember it again. 36 East Pine here in Meridian.
We appreciate your time and we appreciate the neighbors' comments and we agree
with the neighbors completely, Golf View is a very nice subdivision. I have lived in
Meridian for many years, I saw it when it was started being developed and I have seen
it as early as today and it's still a nice subdivision and it will continue to be a nice
subdivision. As far as compatibility and the issues of the Comp Plan, I believe we are
compatible. I believe the Comp Plan does speak to it. I know we are asking for what is
allowed out here and we are not trying to change what is compatible when you look at
lot size and we could speak to that issue quite a bit, but our compatibility and the
number of lots we have on our north and east boundary and the number that they have
is -- the difference is one lot. We have one more lot on their -- on our boundary than
they do. So, compatibility is significant. I do have pictures -- I would like to address the
pathway and I have got some pictures that I'll use on the overhead. As we look at the
pathway, this first picture will be on the northern boundary. The top picture will be. If
you look at -- the pathway is here and you can see the fencing at this location. The
property line for these lots is actually on the other side of the pathway. This is a buried -
- and I presume it was buried by Settlers at some time in the past, but a buried irrigation
lateral there is a pipe there. We have also talked to Settlers and other irrigation districts
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 34 of 67
and they will allow us to landscape, so long as it does not interfere with their access.
Down at this far corner is, actually, a box of head gates and different things that they do
drive up and down that road. What we would propose -- you can see a concrete ditch
here. We propose putting that -- and we proposed a four foot fence. If they want a six
foot fence, that's fine. I was just trying to keep in -- consistent with what they had on
their side. But we proposed a fence here -- or it's actually on the other side of the
concrete ditch and that distance would range from 27 to 33 feet of separation between
their fencing and our fence. So, there would be some distance there. But to actually
landscape this, it's driven on often, it's used often, it will be maintained. It's currently
done by the Settlers Irrigation District, they maintain the weeds, as I was told by some
of the neighbors and the property owner, Rick Milliron, who lives out here. If that falls
down for some reason, we made it a separate common lot, so it would be maintained,
rather than each individual homeowner needing to spray his weeds or whatever the
case may be. It will be maintained by the homeowners association. On the next picture
-- Anna, if you could help me, please. This is on the eastern boundary and this is the
existing stub road that comes into the property looking to the north. Again, these lots --
the property line actually comes out here and, as you can see, the lot is here. So we
propose putting a fence at that location where our property meets their property and we
had proposed a four -foot fence. I'm not sure -- apparently the homeowners are allowed
to fence or not fence, as they desire. I'm not real familiar with their covenants. But,
again, we will put up a six foot fence, if that's -- I'll let the Council make that
determination. I just have seen in Meridian that four foot is the typical size adjacent to
pathways, but I'll go either way, if that's the desire of Council and the neighbors. And
we can look at the last picture -- it's just harder to see. This is actually looking from --
Cherry Lane is here, so you're looking from Cherry Lane back to that stub road, which is
here. Just to give you an idea of what that pathway does look like. We understand that
that pathway is private. We did put that in the CC&Rs for a reason. We also
understand that we -- we found that the open space and a place for kids and adults and
anyone to go play has been used more than pathways in subdivisions that we have put
in. The proposal did come up at the neighborhood meeting to do a joint pathway
homeowners association. We feel that, unfortunately, the neighbors will use that
pathway, ours, but I also know for a fact that the neighbors from Golf View will come
and use our park and I'm happy with that, I hope they do, the kids are going to play and
all that will happen together. So, I think there is equitable distribution in maintenance of
the different amenities within the subdivision. I'll talk about the neighborhood meeting in
a moment. Mr. Becker had indicated he was not notified of the neighborhood meeting.
I'm not sure where he lives, but we received our mailing list from the city and mailed out
to those people. So, I'm not sure if he received notice from the city or not, but we used
that same mailing list. At the neighborhood meeting -- at the neighborhood meeting I
met with Heather Lanehart prior to the neighborhood meeting after our October P&Z
meeting Mrs. Lanehart and also Mr. Woodruff. We spoke after the meeting and we
came up with some ideas of how to make this more compatible. The reason I handed
out that paper at that neighborhood meeting is that paper came from conversations with
both Mr. Woodruff and Mrs. Lanehart. I took that to the neighborhood meeting to give
them, so they could give to P&Z requesting that those be a part of the conditions and
they have done that. So, it was not done as a, here, this is what you're going to get, it
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 35 of 67
was actually done with the meeting that happened at Mrs. Lanehart's house and
conversations with Mr. Woodruff after the Planning and Zoning -- the first Planning and
Zoning meeting. I know the two projects will be compatible. I know this has changed. I
know that normal -- what they have seen out there for as long as they have lived out
there is an onion field or a beet field or maybe corn or whatever has been grown out
there. Change is difficult for everybody, but we have been very successful with other
subdivisions in creating a compatible environment with the existing neighbors and we
are doing that with this project also. With that, I appreciate your time and I would hope
to answer any other questions if you have any.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I have got a couple. We are talking about approximately 16 lots, Mr. Amar, along
the north and east boundary. You have said you would go to a minimum 1,600 square
feet where Golf View's minimum is 1,800. 1 don't -- I think that compatibility would be
much nicer if we went along with 1,600 with a minimum of 1,800 to at least match theirs.
It's only 200 more square feet and the cost isn't that much I don't believe that it would
make a difference. I think that your builders -- and I don't know if this is going to be a
one builder subdivision or if you're going to sell lots, I don't know how you're doing that.
I also think that we need to, if possible, look at making our backyard landscaping along
the east and north a little more compatible with what Golf View is. I don't think anybody
in Golf View ever thought that this was going to be developed, but in the same token, I
think they'd like to see it developed at least next to the existing one as close as possible
and I think that with those two little changes and some other stuff worked out, it can be
a very viable project. That's my view.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Mr. Amar, would you talk to me a little bit about the right of way that's used a
lot on the north and is that continued down the east side as well as the Settlers buried
there as well?
Amar: Anna, can you put up that first picture? No. There is, actually, a turnaround at
the eastern end of the project. The first photograph that I -- I guess we can use either
one. Is that -- no, the one on the -- this roadway continues to the northeast corner of
the project. At that location there is a turnaround, they come and -- come back out the
same way that they go in.
Rountree: So, at that point is the canal open through Golf View?
Amar: No. I believe it's tiled. I don't know where it comes from Golf View, but I haven't
seen any Golf View open.
Meddian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 36 of 67
Rountree: So what's the treatment from that point east?
Amar: I'm sure the neighbors in Golf View could answer that question better than I
Rountree: Would it be fair to say that the access on that particular piece of canal works
is done because the property is currently in agricultural use and if that use goes away,
the need to access that property on a frequent basis is minimized to nonexistent?
Amar: No. It still provides headgates for users downstream, for other users
downstream, not just this property, so it will not go away, it will also provide the -- the
irrigation system will be owned by Settlers also and it will provide the location -- or the
access to the water for the pressure irrigation systems. So, Settlers will have to visit
that regularly and I live next to a Settlers irrigation system now and they are out there
two or three times a week, so they do visit it often.
Rountree: Could those headworks be moved to Black Cat?
Amar: I know we talked about -- Anna, can you put up the colored map, so we can look
at an overview? The headworks currently are here. We have talked to Settlers about
moving those, but there are still other boxes and things at this location that are -- do not
pertain to this property that need to remain for irrigation purposes.
De Weerd: Okay. Any further questions, Council?
Donnell: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mrs. Donnell.
Donnell: Anna, could you put the picture -- not the first one, but one of those other two
that show the east side. I believe it's the east side. It is. Either one of those is fine.
Okay.
Canning: Just not tonight, by the way.
Donnell: Just so that I can get it straight in my mind, the walking path is next to -- let's
just say the walking path is next to the fence that you see there, that four -foot current
fence.
Amar: Correct. Yes, ma'am.
Donnell: And where are you suggesting that the fence for Milliron would go?
Amar: Anna, can you put up the other picture? Sorry. If she had a better
photographer. Okay. This is probably better for illustration purposes. The property line
is generally in this location and so that is where the fence would go on the property line.
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 37 of 67
Donnell: Follow up, Madam Mayor. Then, where -- so that isn't where Settlers is driving
right now, that is for the -- whoever is farming the property, the road that we can see
right there? Okay.
Amar: That's for the existing house back in the --
Donnell: How will that house access itself -- that will be once the streets are in?
Amar: Correct. It will be -- I can show you, but I'd have to make Anna change the
pictures again.
Donnell: No. I can follow that. We are good. Okay.
Amar: You can see on this one the house, so this road will go right in front of it and
there will be a typical driveway.
Donnell: Okay. So, can we go back to the picture again? Now that I got the pointer.
So these houses are not fenced. They have made the decision not to fence them and
just to leave it open to the walking path. The houses on -- further south have the fence,
so if you put a six-foot fence along this walking path, then, what you're creating there is
a tunnel.
Amar: Yes, ma'am.
Donnell: I don't like tunnels.
Amar: I will do either, but I will leave that in your hands. I like the four -foot fence. We
put four -foot fences along pathways, but I know what the neighbors have requested this
evening. If that's something you want to do, that's fine, if you want the four -foot fence or
the six-foot fence.
Donnell: And follow up, Madam Mayor. Okay. These homes are currently part of Golf
View?
Amar: Yes, ma'am.
Donnell: And there are 15 shrubs in the back of those homes?
Amar: I think the CC&Rs that Mrs. Lane -- I'm sorry?
De Weerd: Lanehart.
Amar: Oh, I'm sorry. There were 14 shrubs, I believe, and seven -- and I haven't -- I
apologize, I haven't seen that. I did get a copy of the CC&Rs from the company and it is
a little different than what they have. And these CC&Rs that I have actually don't
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 38 of 67
require any rear yard landscaping, so I can give you a copy if you want to look at it, but -
Donnell: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Any further questions for the applicant? Okay. Thank you, sir. Did
you need any clarification from the president of the homeowners association on any of
these items?
Rountree: I guess before Mr. Amar leaves, Madam Mayor, I'd just clarify on the east
side, essentially, you would fence the property on it and it appears that the pathway,
until it swerves away from the property on the south end, is bordered on both sides by
property that is owned by the Golf View residents.
Amar: The pathway -- I'm not sure how it's set up, but these lots, each house owns the
lots. The pathway apparently is just an easement within those lots, so it's not a
separate lot. And those lot lines actually extend out to the property line.
Rountree: Which is on the other --
Amar: It's on the west side.
Rountree: West side.
Amar: Exactly.
Rountree: Okay.
Amar: I have got other pictures, but if you look on this side, it appears that some of
those houses sit closer than allowed to the rear setback. That's not the case, because
the setback is actually on the other side of their -- or the property line is on the other
side of the fence in this other pathway.
De Weerd: On that north side your property line starts where that concrete ditch was; is
that correct?
Amar: No. Our property line starts just adjacent to their pathway on the south side of
their pathway.
De Weerd: So, you include the easement where --
Amar: Our property includes the easement within it.
De Weerd: Okay.
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 39 of 67
Amar: Their property line is generally here and -- which, I guess, it's our common line.
So, all this easement is actually on our property.
De Weerd: Council, any further questions? Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Madam Mayor, I don't have any further questions for the applicant.
De Weerd: Okay.
Wardle: I certainly would like to ask him to respond to my next question. I would like
further clarification of Councilman Rountree's question from the president of the
homeowners association as to the treatment of the canal easements to the east of this
property through their subdivision, so if we could have that.
De Weerd: If you will restate your name.
Woodruff: Harry Woodruff, 4386 West White Birch Court.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Woodruff: Now, I'm not quite sure or clear on which area you're talking about on the
canal easement.
Wardle: The applicant stated that we have a set of headwork's here and this path exists
to service the headwork's there. What extends through your subdivision along the
same line? Is there a canal easement?
Woodruff: Well -- the question that I have -- and I don't think it's been addressed
properly in these proceedings, that head gate at that corner has to get its water from
some place and I don't know if the developer is aware of where that water comes from.
I was told that head gate that is on Cherry Lane feeds that directly to the north in an
underground tile ditch. That's where that head gate in the northeast corner gets its
water. That ditch is going to be inside of his development, because it is west of our
pathway there. I don't know how he can build over that with a fence and put that
underground -- now that's what Settler's told me, that that's what -- where they told me
where the ditch was. I don't know. I haven't seen it on the plats even. But I'm not -- our
other big concern is if Settler's needs continued access down that easement area that
you see right there in that center picture, which is probably the best shot of it, that's on
the north side, we have no problem with sharing that access or helping develop that
access or even widening that walkway path to where they can drive to it on a paved
path. Now, at one time it was suggested that maybe the whole ditch be moved to the
perimeter of the subdivision west on Cherry Lane and, then, north on Black Cat, which
Settlers told me would tickle them to death, they got their ditches clear out of the interior
of the subdivision. It's our understanding that the only area that that head gate is
serving in this area in question is the open area there where you see the open ditch. It
feeds that ditch and, then, they siphon tube irrigate it out of that ditch. So, other than
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 40 of 67
continuing on with the buried tiled ditch to the west, the concrete ditch can be removed,
that area could be landscaped or whatever, but I think there are probably some
irrigation easements here that either I'm being led astray or they haven't been
addressed properly. But, you know, we are amenable to developing either of those
areas. This one on the left-hand picture is the eastern border and that's where I was
told that the tiled ditch is probably buried. There is a head gate just south of where that
picture ends and that tile ditch runs right straight north up our pathway there just to the
west of it where he's telling you the property line is. So, that ditch would be totally inside
where he plans on fencing the backyards off. I didn't know you could do that. If you
can't fence it there, why couldn't you fence it on the center picture on the north side and
I'm confused about where that head gate gets its water, I guess.
De Weerd: Okay. Well, it looks like the applicant has a representative that can answer
those questions, so --
Woodruff: Anyway, we are more than willing to work with them on either border to make
an attractive area there with extending the pathway or whatever or landscaping or
whatever needs to be done. We probably don't have the means that they do at this
point, because our developer is gone and the subdivision is developed, so we have to
dig into our homeowners association budgeting money to do this, obviously, and that is
somewhat limited, homeowners dues, but anything that's within our power we are -- you
know, would certainly bring before the board and the homeowners association and do
everything we could.
De Weerd: So, if the developer was amenable to extending the width of that path in
partnership with your subdivision, you would be amenable to that?
Woodruff: You know, without holding a total homeowners association meeting at this
point, I can't speak for everyone, but I don't think we would have a tremendous problem
with getting that through. I think people would much rather see that than seeing just a
bare area with a fence on the other side of it and, like we said, Roundup once or twice a
year to keep the weeds knocked down, which is kind of what we have got now, but if we
just put fences on it, then, we are really creating that corridor with nothing but the weed
area there or the gravel area that you presently see there right now.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Okay. Sir, were you sworn in?
Milliron: Yes, I was.
De Weerd: Okay. If you will state your --
Milliron: Rick Milliron and I live at 4450 West Cherry Lane. Where is the pointer?
You guys were questioning the ditch. The reason the path is there is for irrigation. The
tile ditch is right underneath there. That was not even proposed until the developer
didn't know what to do with it, so they made the pathway there, so they could cover the
tiled ditch and there is no easement on this side of the -- east of that -- west of that
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 41 of 67
property line right there, there is no easement for that ditch. The pathway was the
easement.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: If Mr. Milliron would explain what happens north and west on the irrigation
system.
Milliron: Okay. There is head gates -- irrigation head gates. There is head gates here,
here, and there is also several down in this area in here, which Golf View has put a
common area there, so that -- to accommodate those head gates right down here in this
area in here. If you will -- there is a picture in there of that north side that everybody
was flipping back and forth. Right here. The property line actually goes similar to what
Kevin said, Mr. Amar said in there, and Settler's required to get access back there to
that box, that they wanted drivable access back to that head gate there and so we've
had to allow that -- when they covered that there is an easement in there right along that
driveway, so they can have access to that. Does that answer your -- anybody have any
other questions?
De Weerd: Council, any other questions?
Rountree: Just you're more knowledgeable or probably the most knowledgeable.
What, in your estimation, is the need for Settler's to get to that head box?
Milliron: And I don't know what's required there to do that. There is a head gate there
and to my knowledge --
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Milliron: There is also along this -- excuse me. I'm sorry.
Bird: Go ahead. Yeah.
Milliron: Along this road right here there is actually access boxes where they are
covered, so they can get them cleaned out. Several.
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Mr. Milliron, that one -- the head gate back there where it comes north off of -- it
comes down there, it's the canal that comes down Cherry Lane there and, then, heads
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 42 of 67
up, that head gate property is for your property that's being irrigated now and if you put
in a system, it would go away, wouldn't it?
Milliron: Possibly. I'm not sure what's there. Yeah.
Bird: Okay. Thank you.
Milliron: Again, we still have several boxes, though. Well, no, down at that other end
this is Black Cat and there is several of them that takes a certain length. Yeah.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, do you need any further information?
Bird: I don't.
De Weerd: Okay. Anything -- any conclusion remarks? Do you need to make any
further comments?
Amar: Sorry. Looking behind me. No, I think this project has been addressed and
there has been, obviously, some numerous issues. The biggest thing that I would like
to remind everybody is there are minimums to everything, every subdivision has
minimums. It doesn't mean that's what it's going to be built at. We have got minimums
that are much smaller than this and the average home sizes are in the 2,000 plus
square foot range. This is a nice area, it's a nice subdivision, the neighbors have nice
homes. I anticipate this is going to be significantly greater than 1,400 square foot
homes built throughout. I haven't seen many subdivisions in Meridian in the R-4 zone
that people go in and build a 1,400 square foot home. That just isn't happening. Not
right now, not with the way the market is pushing and not the way with the consumers
demanding a nicer home. And I see that same thing happening here. We do
appreciate the neighbors' comments and I think we have -- it has helped the
subdivision. We have another access point onto Black Cat, we have some additional
requirements, so they have helped not only the subdivision, but also their situation and
we appreciate their comments and appreciate your decision this evening.
De Weerd: I did have a question. The president of the homeowners association said
that there would be an open -- they would be open to maybe widening those paths and
so there can be an opportunity to kind of clean up that area. Would you be agreeable to
that kind of partnership?
Amar: I do not want to go onto somebody else's property and make improvements on it.
I think it's going to be improved. I think it's going to look nice. But I don't want to be the
one that's required to go on and improve their pathway for their subdivision, because it
really will serve their subdivision.
De Weerd: You don't think your residents will use that path?
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 43 of 67
Amar: I think they will and I think their residents will use my park. I mean I think there is
an equal partnership out there and I think it will work out very well.
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Madam Mayor. Mr. Amar, I agree, most of it isn't going to be built to the
minimums, so I would like you to agree, which I know we can't force, but -- to 1,800
square foot lots on the north and the east, if at all possible.
Amar: Madam Mayor, Council -member Bird. And I agreed to what was in their CC&Rs
and I have a copy to that, which is 1,700 square foot single story or 1,900 square foot
two story. I will certainly agree to that. I can show that.
Bird: In their CC&Rs?
Amar: Yes, sir
Bird: Their homeowners has different CC&Rs or --
Amar: These are recorded with the title company. Minimum home size to be 1,700
square feet for a one story house and 1,900 square feet for a two story or tri -level
house.
Bird: You're publicly stating that you will agree to Golf View's minimum house size
along the east and north side?
Amar: Yes sir.
Bird: Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much, Kevin.
Amar: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, do you need any further information?
Donnell: No.
De Weerd: If not, I would entertain a motion to close the Public Hearing.
Donnell: So moved. Do I have to say it louder than --
De Weerd: No.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. All those in favor say aye. Okay. All ayes. Motion carries.
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 44 of 67
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Discussion?
Donnell: Madam Mayor, I'd like to approve -- I'd like to make a motion to approve Item
No. 14, PP 04-034 with a stipulation that -- that the developer has agreed to put 1,700
square feet one story homes and 1,900 square feet two story homes on those lots that
are adjacent on the north and the east side adjacent to Golf View or back up to that
subdivision and that's my motion.
Canning: Madam Mayor, would the maker of the motion like --
De Weerd: I'm sorry, you have to wait until it has a second.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I would make a second, but I'd like to ask the motion maker if she is including all
public testimony and staff testimony.
Donnell: Madam Mayor, I am -- I would include all testimony. I am not including the
requirement of a six foot fence or -- or the compatible landscaping requirements. I'm
not including that in my motion.
Bird: Okay. I'll second it for discussion.
De Weerd: Anna.
Canning: Madam Mayor, I was just going to question the six-foot fence issue, so that's
been addressed. Thank you.
Nary: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Nary.
Nary: There was also discussion by Mrs. Canning about the additional conditions that
were placed by the Planning and Zoning Commission that I think are on that document
that was handed to you and add that as an Attachment F I think is what Mrs. Canning
had suggested. Does that include all of those conditions that were to be added to the
CC&Rs?
Canning: Madam Mayor, for clarification, just to identify that as Attachment F. Those
don't become conditions of approval, those are just items in the CC&Rs.
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 45 of 67
Donnell: We are talking -- Madam Mayor. Mr. Nary, we are talking about those
conditions that the developer agreed to?
Rountree: Yes, Councilwoman Donnell. I just wanted to make sure that was all part of
it.
De Weerd: Just for discussion on the fence, you can allow it to be six foot with a see-
through top, a lattice top. So, we do make those kinds of considerations in our open
space along our pathways. So, just a point of information.
Donnell: Thank you very much.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: The maker of the motion talked about -- your motion did not include the
compatible landscape and I assume you're speaking to the comparison chart and not
the comments that were made about the entry in Cherry Lane and Black Cat.
Donnell: I am.
Rountree: Okay. Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I believe we need resolve on the fence if we are going to move forward with
this. I believe the developer should be putting a uniform fence around here and not
have a Hines mix all the way around the development. So, I believe they need
guidance on four foot or six foot or some way to reach what that's going to be. So, we
need to resolve that here and figure out some language to assist both the applicant and
homeowners adjacent to know what is going to go on there.
De Weerd: The motion was a four -foot fence along the pathway and you're asking --
Rountree: That's the clarification I need, if that's part of the motion, then.
Donnell: Actually, Madam Mayor, when I made the motion I did not include the height of
the fence in the motion, specifically because I assume that the motion -- that the
requirement is the four foot fence and that's what I would prefer. Since we are still in
discussion, I have seen a lot of subdivisions that have big six-foot fences that separate
homeowners from other homeowners that, in fact, do create a tunnel and those end up
being places where kids can hide and where the tumbleweeds build up. I mean I have
just -- I have seen too many of those and I guess that's my explanation of why I think
the fence ought to be compatible on both sides, if, in fact, the people choose to fence it
into Golf View Subdivision, since, obviously, some of them have not.
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 46 of 67
De Weerd: Okay. Any further discussion? No further discussion, the motion is to
approve Item 14 with the -- you had additions to it. To keep the fencing as required in
the staff conditions --
Donnell: And the square footage.
De Weerd: Square footage.
Donnell: Minimum square footage of the homes adjacent to Golf View Subdivision on
the north and east side.
De Weerd: And accepting Exhibit F?
Donnell: Yes.
De Weerd: Okay. So, that's the motion. If there is no further discussion, I will ask Ms
Green to call roll.
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, nay; Wardle, nay; Donnell, yea.
Green: Two ayes, two nays.
De Weerd: And I will vote nay.
Green: Two ayes, three nays.
MOTION DENIED: TWO AYES. THREE NAYS.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Just a comment. The thing that concerns me is that I think there has been
reasonable compromise, but I see this line of demarcation between two subdivisions
that's going to create the Hatfields and McCoys and I really and truly don't have a good
solution. We have heard the homeowners and their concern, we have heard the
homeowners president offer the willingness to work out some way to keep that pathway
and/or that boundary between the two subdivisions clean and presentable and really
and truly that's all I'm after and I think both parties are after that, that somehow we need
to get that down on paper. I would be willing to listen to staff if they had a comment or a
condition that, in fact, might be in the conditions of approval -- of a recommendation or
one that we might have dealt with previously or city attorney on how we might craft
some language to deal with that particular problem. Beyond that, I don't have any
particular difficulty.
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 47 of 67
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Madam Mayor, just to follow up on Councilman Rountree's comments and a
comment from the applicant about off-site improvements. I believe in my opinion the
easement falls within their portion of the property and I understand not wanting to make
off-site improvements and certainly there are requirements that cannot be made with off
site, but we have the homeowners group willing to work with the applicant and for me,
my nay vote was for a couple things, but that was one of the reasons, because we do
have an unresolved issue. I have heard a couple of good ideas, I am not an engineer
and I do not study irrigation easements and what you can and can't do and so the issue
is unresolved in my mind at this point.
De Weerd: I guess before I ask staff if they have any additional thoughts, it seems that
the issue hinges on this pathway and how we can best buffer or transition. If you go
through Golf View, the pathways are very wooded and treed on both sides and with the
backyard landscaping; compatibility can help with the four -foot fence, Mrs. Donnell, with
better landscaping to help transition. I understand the concerns of those that are on the
east side that they will be looking at a four foot fence and, then, the back of a house that
may or may not have more than one tree and you have a tree lined path on both sides.
On the north side they are younger trees, they are newer homes, so they haven't quite
matured either. So, it's the fencing, the landscaping, a combination. I think the pathway
is -- can be an amenity and we certainly have seen other off-site improvements or
partnerships that can utilize that amenity and so I would like to see more working
together. Its encouraging that Golf View had extended that offer as will.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Procedural question for the city attorney. Mr. Nary, we have closed the Public
Hearing. We have an item before us. Procedurally, could we table this motion to
another meeting and, then, reopen the Public Hearing for specific comments from both
the applicant and the neighbor addressing the issues that we have talked about?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council -member Wardle, a couple of
things. Certainly the Council can move to reopen the Public Hearing and if you're
wanting more information or you're wanting an opportunity to gather more information
and come back to you, that is probably the best way to do that, is to move to reopen the
Public Hearing and continue this matter. One comment you made that I was unsure of.
I think the discussion or the testimony that I heard was the easement itself is on the Golf
View property, that there isn't an easement on this Milliron property. The pathway that
they are talking about on the Milliron side of this property is all on their property and
they are going to make it into a common lot, but it's all Milliron's property, it's not -- and I
think Mr. Amar's testimony regarding off-site improvements was a concern of trying to
meld these two paths together. It doesn't mean that it can't be done, but the easement
itself was all on the Golf View Estates side. It was for the Settler's Irrigation District and
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 48 of 67
that's why there is an open pathway there. But the pathway for Milliron is all on their
own property; it's not an easement. So, they were going to create a lot for it.
De Weerd: But the pathway on the east side, the pathway covers the ditch or the piped
ditch.
Nary: That's what I understood.
De Weerd: And the property line would abut that and, then, the area to the north, the
right of way to -- for that easement for Settler's abuts their pathway property line.
Nary: Right. From what I saw of the picture, Madam Mayor, what they are stating is
the access for Settler's is all on the Milliron property; it isn't currently on the Golf View
property. It basically ends right at the edge of that dirt road and the path that's already
existing. But I think that was the discussion and concern Mr. Amar had was just in
trying to improve this to meld these two together would at least put them at a situation
of, essentially, creating some off-site improvement for their homeowners association,
but, certainly, if the Council wants to direct that they explore that opportunity, you
certainly have the authority to do that.
De Weerd: Okay. Does that answer your question, Mr. Wardle? That's easy. Yes
or no.
Wardle: Kind of. Thank you very much, Mr. Nary.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, what would you like to do?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: We need a motion of denial and why it's been denied is the majority.
De Weerd: If that is the desire of Council or the other option is you can open the Public
Hearing and open it up for specific reasons.
Bird: How much more can we beat it to death?
Nary: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Just to clarify, at this juncture all you have done is vote down a motion to
approve. It doesn't mean that a different motion to approve couldn't be formulated. If
you do want to deny, as Mr. Bird has stated, state law does require that you provide the
applicant with reasons as to what they could do to be approved.
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 49 of 67
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I would move to reopen the hearing for the purposes of hearing from staff
any additional guidance they might have.
De Weerd: Okay. Do I have a second? Okay. Well, that one dies. Let's try another.
Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Let's see if we can get a second here. Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Wardle: I move that we deny Item No. 14, PP 04-034, Milliron Subdivision, citing all
staff, applicant, and public comments and citing specifically the subjectivity of the
interpretation of the City Council as to the Comprehensive Plan's need for compatibility
of -- in this specific instance.
Nary: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: You can't do that. The Comprehensive Plan is not an ordinance, it is guidance
for this Council in making their decisions and there is an ordinance reference to it, but
you can't base a denial on the Comprehensive Plan, you have to base it on the
ordinance. There is a reference in design review 11-10-3 of the City Code that makes a
reference that all residential housing developments shall be subject to design review
and which includes the goals and objectives of the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, but it
doesn't give anymore specifics than that, so if you want to base a denial with a reason
of the Comprehensive Plan, you're going to have to have an ordinance more specific on
point, because the state law says that you have to give reasons of what the developer
could do to be approved. So, the lack of compliance isn't a valid reason. What they can
do to be approved you have to be more specific.
Donnell: So that died. So, Madam Mayor, let me make an attempt here.
De Weerd: Mrs. Donnell.
Donnell: One more time here and, then, I'm through. I would like to make a motion to
approve Item No. 14, preliminary plat approval for Milliron -- is it Milliron -- it's not
Millrun. Millron. It's Milliron; right? Milliron Subdivision with the requirement of the
17,000 square feet -- 17,000 -- 1,700 square feet one story, the 1,900 square feet two
story on that property adjacent to Golf View. Also to -- with all testimony and staff
recommendations and entering into, as an exhibit, the require -- the agreement by the
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 50 of 67
developer that was shared with the homeowners and, then, I would ask that the
developer -- and maybe I can't do this, too. Mr. Nary's probably going to tell I couldn't
do this -- that he increase his requirements for landscaping in the backyards of those
homes that are adjacent to Golf view. Can I do that?
Nary: Yes, you can do that.
Donnell: That's it.
De Weerd: Do you want to state increased to what?
Donnell: I do not want to state to what, but, obviously, if tree lined will help the looks of
that path along there, then, I think with -- if the developer and the homeowners
association representative could get together and determine what that might be, that's --
we might have a resolution.
Nary: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council -member Donnell, the City Code
11-10-2 does use the term compatibility with adjacent, existing, and a proposed
development, so existing developments -- if you want the staff directive to be that the
order indicates that it would be consistent with the existing landscaping, not the
proposed -- not the one that was presented to you tonight, that was tabled of what is
exactly there, and that would be consistent if there is an issue or concern between four
trees or three trees, I guess they can bring that back to you, but it can be consistent and
you have the authority to direct that, so they can see what's already there and not just
propose of what was in some other document that may not actually be on the ground.
So, you could do that.
Donnell: That's what I'll do.
Bird: I'll second that for discussion.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a second. Discussion? Did you have a question, Mr.
• Rountree?
Rountree: Do I have a question? I don't have a question now.
Canning: May I ask a clarification question? And it regards not the maker of the
motion; it regards a statement by the attorney. Did you mean the existing -- meaning
the existing CC&Rs or the existing as to what is planted physically in the ground?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, what is planted on the ground. There
seemed to be a discrepancy in what was presented tonight as to what -- one
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 51 of 67
presentation was a document doing a comparison of what -- of what type of plantings
have been put there. Mr. Amar said in the current -- the CC&Rs he had there were no
requirements for rear yard landscaping. So, it talks about compatibility in the code and
so I believe that Council has the ability to say compatibility as to what -- adjacent to
what the other property looks like. So, rather than trying to base it on a document that
may or may not be what in reality is there, they can base it on what is actually there.
Canning: Okay. And, then, further clarification from the maker of the motion. Did you
mean to be consistent with trees and shrubs or just trees?
Donnell: I just meant trees.
Canning: Okay.
De Weerd: She said landscaping.
Donnell: Tree lined.
De Weerd: Okay. And the second agrees?
Bird: Yes.
De Weerd: Is there any further discussion?
Rountree: Madam Mayor, I'm still -- I'm not there yet, but that doesn't help me
understand either for the applicant or the homeowners. I mean --
De Weerd: Well, I can see how this is going and I will break another tie, but we can
always try. I guess it gets back to Councilman Rountree's motion to reopen and allow
the applicant to comment and tell us what he's thinking on the discussion that Council
has had and that might be the point where we are at, but since we have an active
motion on the floor, do you have any further comment or --
Rountree: I will call the question and get a vote.
De Weerd: Okay. Mrs. Green.
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, nay; Wardle, nay; Donnell, yea.
De Weerd: Okay. Nay.
Green: Three nays, two ayes.
MOTION DENIED: TWO AYES. THREE NAYS.
De Weerd: Okay.
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 52 of 67
Nary: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Nary.
Nary: Just a suggestion, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. It might be an
opportunity to take a five minute break and give Mr. Amar an opportunity to talk to staff
about what his concerns are and maybe to the -- the homeowners president is here as
well and, then, after that maybe Mrs. Canning could advise you on whether or not
reopening the open Public Hearing and continuing this matter for more information
might be more beneficial.
Rountree: That's the most rational thing I have heard in 15 minutes.
De Weerd: Okay. I will recall a recess for ten minutes and we will reconvene at -- I
think 9:40.
(Recess.)
De Weerd: Okay. What we are going to do is open up this meeting and ask the
discussion to continue in the hall, so we can get on with some additional agenda items.
And we will come back to these items. Okay. Mr. Nary, we can do that; right?
Nary: Yes.
De Weerd: Okay.
Rountree: Madam Mayor, I move such, so we can --
De Weerd: Okay. All those in favor of moving this behind Items 15, 16 and 17, all
those in favor say aye. Okay. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 15: Public Hearing: AZ 04-028 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 43.83
acres from RUT to R-4 & L-0 zones for Strada Bellissima Subdivision
by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc. — NWC of Victory Road and State Highway
69:
Item 16: Public Hearing: PP 04-038 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 90
single-family residential building lots, 14 commercial office lots and 12
common lots of 42.46 acres in a proposed R-4 & L-0 zones for Strada
Bellissima Subdivision by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc. - NWC of Victory
Road and State Highway 69:
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 53 of 67
Item 17: Public Hearing: CUP 04-047 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a
Planned Development consisting of a single family residential and office
uses with a request for reduction to the minimum requirements for street
frontage from 80 -feet to 79 -feet for the residential portion for Strada
Bellissima Subdivision by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc. - NWC of Victory
Road and State Highway 69:
De Weerd: I will go ahead and open the Public Hearing on AZ 04-028, PP 04-038 and
CUP 04-047 and I will open this with staff comments.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council this is the request for Strada
Bellissima Subdivision and it is a request for annexation and zoning for 39 +/- acres
from RUT to R-4 and L -O. There are a few existing homes on the property. As you can
see here, there is -- there is one in the northwest comer of the property that will remain.
This is Bear Creek Subdivision. There is one in this center property, which I believe
does not remain. And, then, there is a little building down here, it's not part of the
subdivision application and it looks like there is more houses here that will not remain. I
believe the only one that stays is the one in the northwest corner.
De Weerd: So, Anna, before you move on, that little house that is not part of the
application will be an enclave, it's not part of the application?
Canning: Correct. It's under separate ownership, so it did not come in as part of this
request.
De Weerd: Okay.
Canning: My understanding, Mayor, is that that's been a separate parcel for some time.
Sometimes we ask -- if it looks to have been a recent illegal subdivision, we have a little
more weight, but this looks to have occurred quite some time ago. This is the
Comprehensive Plan. As you can see, it's shown as low density residential on the
Comp Plan. The applicant has asked for L -O zoning along the Meridian Road frontage
or State Highway 69 frontage, but he's done that through the planned unit ordinance.
Okay. This application was submitted twice. Just to explain what the -- the primary
change in the second application was that this enclave property did come in and
develop. Staff had a lot of concerns about that chunk being missing and they did go out
and acquire that and have included it as part of this subdivision. The small enclave that
I was discussing with the Mayor previously is in this area right here. The subdivision
consists of 90 residential building lots, 14 office commercial building lots and 12
common lots. The gross density is 2.7 dwelling units per acre and the net density is
about 3.5 dwelling units per acre. The minimum lot size for the subdivision is 8,916
square feet and the required minimum is 8,000 square feet for the R-4 zone. The
average residential lot size in the subdivision is around 11,000 square feet. As I
mentioned before, the applicant is requesting a use exception for the proposed office
commercial lots located over here and, then, wrapping around to here. And that area
does comprise 17 percent of the property. They are allowed up to 20 percent with
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 54 of 67
Council approval. For the planned development, the only request for reduction in
requirements was on the frontage. The original application was for a 75 foot -- or, I'm
sorry, 79 -foot minimum frontage, instead of the 80. The P&Z -- at the P&Z they asked
for a 76 -foot minimum, so that's where it stands now. Proposed as planned
development amenities include a micro -path and future bus stop along Victory Road
and an open space plaza and a tot lot and detached sidewalks with street trees. And I
believe that's internal to the development. At the Planning and Zoning Commission --
Planning and Zoning Commission heard this item on November 18th. They have
recommended approval with conditions. Dave McKinnon spoke in favor of the
application. There was no one to speak in opposition. The key issues of discussion by
the Commission included the fire department water supply, potential cut -through traffic
to Bear Creek through Strada Bellissima. You see there is one connecting stub street
into Bear Creek. Future traffic light at Victory and State Highway 69. And cross -access
to the out parcel in the southeast corner. And the outstanding conditions coming into
the City Council were that one -- for the parking area design, one of the conditions was
for the applicant to meet with staff to define the parking area design regarding planters
and drive aisles and trash enclosures and various things and they have done that. The
applicant got it to staff quite some time ago, we just got the final drawings the other day,
but we did get a draft well in advance to review it and they have made those changes.
And regarding this enclave, it is so small that staff was concerned once you do the
setbacks, that there would be no ability to develop that as a stand-alone property. So, if
you -- we redesigned -- have the applicant redesign the parking aisles so that that could
be extended into this property and access taken from their -- it takes away the need for
this property to actually have an access on Victory Road that close to the intersection.
They will be able to access the parking drive aisle for this property and get through that
way, assuming that that goes to a nonresidential use. Central District Health did not
provide comments on this application, so we have attached their general standard
conditions of approval for a residential subdivision. The revised plans, they did, as
mentioned, submit revised plans well in advance. We just got the landscape plans the
other day, just need to go on the record, we can catch this during final plat, but their
landscape plans were on the old base, so we have got trees showing up in the middle of
the street and we understand that that just needs to be changed before the final plat.
Easements. Site specific condition number five on the preliminary plat requires
easements for the street buffers and the buffers between land uses. The applicant has
agreed to plat the easements for the street buffer, but would prefer not to plat an
easement for the buffers between land uses. That would be in this area primarily. Staff
is okay as long as the buffer is built. So, if the Council concurs with the applicant's
request, the last sentence of condition number five should be modified to read: Also
construct a 20 foot landscape buffer between land uses around the out parcel and
behind the lots along Alfone Street and that's, I believe, Alfone Street. Getting a nod
from the applicant. That's good. Regarding ITD, staff just received a copy of ITD's
updated conditions of approval. The Council should reference that letter as additional
conditions of approval for the project and that letter is attached as Exhibit G. And one
last issue. There is a fire department issue regarding the cul-de-sacs. If I can find one.
Here is one. Regarding the cul-de-sacs with the parking and they had wanted to
increase the distance -- from the Planning and Zoning Commission the requirement was
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 55 of 67
to increase the distance around that parking aisle. The applicant met with -- met with
Joe Silva and he increased that distance, but he took out the parking within the aisles
and, then, he resubmitted that to -- we got kind of a last minute comment from Chief
Silva saying that they would need, instead of 33 feet, they would, actually, need 47 feet
on either side of the island, which, obviously, is going to have a huge impact on this
property and this occurred at 4:00 o'clock today. So, what staff is recommending is that
we can address that issue in the future on another application, but that this applicant
has already gone through the process, they had already been reviewed once and told
what to do, so we felt uncomfortable just abandoning that standard that we had kind of
gone by in the past. We have seen these in the past, there are a number of
subdivisions. Bear Creek has them. We feel they are a nice amenity. The fire marshal
did give the applicant the option of doing a standard cul-de-sac and, again, I think staff
would prefer that the applicant be allowed to construct them as he's proposed and, then,
we can deal with this issue at a latter date. The one thing that I might have the
applicant comment on is given this recent discussion I'm not sure if they are planning
parking in those landscaping islands or not. There is no landscaping shown in them, so
-- where the parking was, so we were unclear as to what their intent was there. And I
believe that's it for staffs presentation.
De Weerd: Thank you, Anna. Any questions for staff at this time? Okay. Would the
applicant like to come forward? And I assume that you were sworn in? Okay. If you
would, please, state your name and address.
McKinnon: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Dave McKinnon, 735
South Crosstimber representing Strada Bellissima tonight. We have read the staff
report and the report from the Planning and Zoning Commission. We are in agreement
with it. We have received approval from ITD for our access. The enclave issue that she
touched on there and that Anna addressed, we have tried to purchase that piece of
property, the little half acre, almost. I guess a little more than a third acre. We tried to
purchase it. It's got a singlewide mobile home on it. Jim Fehriman owns it right now.
He tried to sell it to Tim Mussell and the sale didn't take place, so Jim Fehriman still
owns that and he said he didn't want to participate with us and we are kind of stuck with
that. However, at the P&Z Commission they asked us to put this access in, so that in
the future he won't be able to access -- or need to access off Victory and so we have
agreed to go ahead and revise this layout to have the access into the mobile home site
right there. ACHD went ahead and they took that a step further and they said if he's not
willing to participate right now, if we would build the ten foot asphalt pathway to this
point, ACHD would actually go ahead and condemn this right of way and continue the
pathway across. There wouldn't be a break in that pathway. And ACHD said they
would be willing to work with us on that. So, we tried and we tried, but we can't get it,
they are not willing to sell it to us and so -- he thinks it will be worth something -- a lot
more in the future and so we have done what we can to accommodate it and, hopefully,
that works. Its not really often that you have where the client agrees with the staff and
the Commission and we agree with all the regulatory agencies, we have met with ACHD
numerous times and they are in agreement with the street layout. ITD is in agreement
with it. Anna, if you can go to the overall site plan. One of the things that's interesting
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 56 of 67
about this site has been -- that's great. One of the things that we have had that has
been really nice on this project is -- as you are well aware, that the Nazarene Church
owns this piece of property to the north of this site and they have been in discussions
for a number of years to build their church on this site. As you know, Idaho
Transportation Department wants to limit the number of accesses onto the state
highways and one of the requirements for a type four roadway like this is to have the
intersections at the half mile and so we got together with the church and we went down
with the members of the church and their building committee and met with ITD and ITD
sat down and said as long as we can do a joint access here, they would be happy to
work with us and they have followed through with that and they have given us approval
for that. I talked with the church again today, Keith Ricketts said he had some other
issues to attend to tonight, but he wanted to pass along that the church has been
working with us and they are going to continue to work with us in the future on the decel
lane that's on the church's property coming into this to be built by us and so they are
happy with this. I talked with Bear Creek. You may have seen on a previous map this
street name here was Fireweed and nobody was really happy with the name Fireweed
and so we got together with the developer of Bear Creek and he's agreed to rename
Firewood to Orso, which is Italian for Bear. So, we have Bear Creek and the Italian
theme for Strada Bellissima, we are working together on the street that goes through.
There was no working -- or nobody testified against this project, so I can end my
testimony really quick by saying that -- that was only five minutes. I did it in five. Just
one thing. Keep in mind this property has been purchased already by the developer,
but the resident of Meridian that lives right here is going through cancer treatment right
now, he wasn't able to be here tonight, and he's -- I just bring that up, just because he's
in our thoughts and minds this holiday season, hopefully that's something you guys can
think on as well. So, if you have any questions at this time, I think we have got a project
that works for everybody and makes pretty much everybody happy and ask if you have
any questions.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I believe Anna asked a question about parking in the cul-de-sac islands.
McKinnon: Oh. Okay. Yeah. I'm sorry about that, Mr. Rountree, Madam Mayor. After
meeting with Joe Silva initially, he said that he was uncomfortable with the parking in
these locations. He said that they have approved them in the past and he's felt
uncomfortable with the parking. So, what we have done is taken out the parking,
widened the landscaping, so it's actually a wider landscape island now. It's not as wide
as initially shown here. We have actually shortened it by several feet, but we have
made it all landscaping. The concern was is we were given 33 feet -- at this point 33
feet of road width right here, but only 29 feet on this side and this side and so in order to
make that 33 feet, we said let's get rid of the parking, rather than making it wider and
adding more asphalt, we said let's get rid of the parking in the middle and let's add more
landscaping and make it more attractive, rather than just going with more asphalt. So,
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 57 of 67
on the revised landscape plan that's taken out and on the plat that you have in front of
you it's just a wider landscape island with no parking.
De Weerd: Can you tell me what your open space is?
McKinnon: The open space is around eight percent. There is a common lot right here
and this is the landscaping. It's not a drainage lot. All the drainage is going to be
subsurface in the subdivision. Groundwater is over 14 feet deep in this location. In the
subdivision this small open space lot here -- Anna, if you can jump back one now.
Canning: Sorry about that.
McKinnon: Plus the landscaping in the islands. There is the pathway that runs through
here and there is some common lots that people can actually get from the subdivision
into the office service area. There is a plaza here and a plaza here. It's open space,
common. It's open space down in this area here. This is where the pathway aligns to
Bear Creek. Bear Creek didn't have the regional pathway constructed in this area, as
you know, on the Comp Plan down here. The regional pathway that's along Victory, we
are building a ten foot asphalt path and we have had to bring it off the right of way and
we have actually brought it further north than where it's at throughout the rest of this
project. And this open space also would align with the sidewalk in Bear Creek. Bear
Creek continues on with their sidewalk to the bridge. There is no crossing of the bridge
and so on the north side of the canal they have brought their pathway that comes up
and connects with Stafford Street.
De Weerd: So, how big is that middle lot?
McKinnon: This one right here?
De Weerd: No.
McKinnon: This one right here?
De Weerd: The one you said is your green space. Usable.
McKinnon: This one right here?
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
McKinnon: This one I believe -- Anna, if you can flip to that. I think it's about 11,000
square feet. Yeah. It's close to 11,000 square feet, if my memory serves me correct.
De Weerd: That will serve 90 homes?
McKinnon: All these lots are in -- like Anna said, the average -- the smallest lot is 8,900
square feet and so we will have adequate backyards and it's a large area. We also
Merldian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 58 of 67
have detached sidewalks and there is the pathway in addition to that. So, it's an awful
lot of green space in the subdivision right now. It's not part of yards. This is the central
location for that green space, plus the one that's further down in this area. You have got
the little small one right there and that's just going back up to Bear Creek Subdivision
and, then, further down to the south was the open space.
De Weerd: But this is a planned development, a planned --
McKinnon: With a planned development. The requirements of the planned
development is that you have ten percent open space if you're planning on using that as
one of your amenities. It's not a requirement. You have the option of having a number
of amenities, one of those amenities can be ten percent open space or you can have
the other amenities, which would be the tot lots, the pathways, we have the regional
pathway and the tot lot and the bus area and the plazas within the office park. Those
would be amenities that we requested for approval. The standard subdivision requires
five percent open space and we are pushing -- it's closer to eight percent than it is
seven percent, something like 7.65.
De Weerd: And you went to a PD for a reason
McKinnon: We did. And the reason for the PD is two fold. One is for the office uses
and, two, is to get a 76 -foot street frontage, instead of an 80 foot street frontage. The
way this laid out, there is a couple of lots on the -- Anna, if you can go back to the
overall site plan. There we go. A couple of these lots -- actually, I think it's the one right
here, 68 feet of frontage and -- or 76 feet of frontage, instead of 80 feet of frontage.
That was the one request and the other request was to allow the office uses adjacent to
State Highway 69. And there was a couple of reasons. One is meeting with ITD they
said how are you going to buffer your residential and said we prefer to see some mixed
commercial out there, instead of just backing up more fence to the subdivision -- more
fence to State Highway 69. In meeting with the Planning and Zoning Commission,
Commissioner Zaremba, who attended the meeting, in concurrence with the members
of the Commission, said, you know, we think that maybe there should be more office
here. We felt we had plenty.
De Weerd: They asked you to put in --
McKinnon: ITD said, you know, there needs to be a buffer. Their policy is to have a
buffer for this and they said that this would be a fine buffer for the noise from that.
De Weerd: Okay. But for this exception of the office you have that tot lot as your
amenity.
McKinnon: That's one of the amenities. The regional pathway is a ten -foot wide
regional pathway, that's a requirement from the Comprehensive Plan. That's one of the
listed amenities that you can have. It's not a five-foot sidewalk, but -- a concrete
sidewalk, it's a ten -foot multi -use pathway that runs along the full front of this project.
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 59 of 67
As you know, I think I have spoken out before about how Victory Road, there is three
crossings of Victory Road in less than a quarter mile of that regional pathway. If you
look on the Comprehensive Plan it comes across here, then, runs back across once
again and back before it crosses State Highway 69 at an angle and so you have to
provide that regional pathway in someplace that you're not crossing a major arterial or a
section line street three times, so we placed the entire pathway on our property on the
south side of the subdivision. That's a ten -foot regional pathway located outside of the
right of way within the property of Strada Bellissima.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions?
Canning: Madam Mayor, may I ask a quick question of the applicant? This is the
revised landscape plan and did you not plan on -- I mean when we go to give the final
plat I want to know what we are getting for landscaping. Did you not plan on distributing
that a bit?
McKinnon: We were going to do that a little bit.
Canning: Okay.
McKinnon: I can promise you that, A, it will be distributed throughout and it won't be so
tight and make it work. If you look at the plat -- you guys will have a big copy of it,
Madam Mayor, we were looking at it earlier. If you're taking out the parking, there is just
a landscape island in there now and we will make that appropriate for the size and use
that we have there.
De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions, Council? Okay. Thank you. Is there anyone
who would like to provide testimony on this application? Okay. Are you done?
Council?
Bird: Well, hearing none, Mayor, I would move that we close the Public Hearing on 15,
16 and 17.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to close the Public Hearing. All those in favor say aye.
All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Discussion? Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move that we approve AZ 04-028, with a recommendation of the testimony from
staff and applicant.
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 60 of 67
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve Item 15. Is there any discussion? We
have a different clerk again. I guess I'll just -- just for what it's worth, my comments.
The intersection of Overland and Highway 69 is over capacity. We are adding value to
this piece of property by adding the office in the front for a PD. I think that the open
space -- the pathway is nice, but that little tot lot doesn't really provide too much in terms
of green space for the residents that will be living there. With the value added, I guess I
would expect a little bit more in terms of amenities to the neighbors. And, yes, the office
buffers it and it does provide some options of connectivity to the parcel to the north, but
I guess I always have to do my open space pitch.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I don't disagree with you, but I think that in the annexation and zoning it -- that isn't
where we would cover it. We'd probably get in the preliminary plat to make the
stipulation.
De Weerd: Okay. Well, I just -- those were my comments for what they were worth.
Okay. If there is no discussion, I will ask Mr. Berg to call roll.
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Okay. Item 16.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I would move that we approve PP 04-038, the preliminary plat, with the condition
that the applicant and staff work to get more green space. I, too, agree with your
comments, I believe that for a -- for a development this size that eight percent, one little
tot lot, isn't exactly enough green space. So, with that I would move that we approve it
with that condition.
Rountree: Second.
Canning: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Anna.
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 61 of 67
Canning: If that is -- if that condition is related to the planned development, then, it,
actually, probably needs to go on that one -- yeah. I believe if we do it on both we are
probably okay.
Bird: Okay. We will do it on both, then, so we cover it.
De Weerd: Okay. Okay. Council, any further discussion? Mr. Berg, will you call roll.
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Okay. Item 17.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move that we approve CUP 04-047, with the added condition of more green
space to be worked out between the applicant and staff. The green space requirement
to be enlarged from what it is now.
Rountree: Second.
Canning: Madam Mayor, I'm sorry. Can you give staff a little bit more direction on what
kind of increase you might want to see there?
Bird: I believe in a planned development it's ten percent, isn't it? It isn't required to
be ten percent. You have traditional -- most of the time you see at least ten percent.
Would you like to make that a --
Bird: Well, in my motion I'll put ten percent. Okay?
Canning: Okay.
De Weerd: Okay. Does second agree?
Rountree: Yes.
De Weerd: Okay. If there is no further discussion, Mr. Berg, will you call roll.
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 62 of 67
De Weerd: Thank you. Staff, I guess I would have a question, now that this piece is
annexed almost, until we get the final paperwork. What does this do to the properties
across the street?
Canning: Across the street on Victory or across --
De Weerd: Yes. On Victory. Do we now have to annex them in and provide them
sewer?
Canning: We don't have to.
De Weerd: I thought that was a condition once we were contiguous.
Canning: Oh.
De Weerd: To Kentucky Ridge and that other thing.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council?
De Weerd: Yes.
Canning: As I look at the map, the plat boundaries for -- now I just looked at the name
and I have forgotten it. Meridian -- what's the name of this one? This is Kentucky
Ridge. It doesn't start until here. Meridian Heights. It's boundary is here, so that does
not bring us contiguous to either of those subdivisions.
Item 18: Amendment to Ordinance No. 04-1109 AZ 04-013 Request for
Annexation and Zoning of 13.5 acres from RUT to C -G zones for Stow -It
Storage Facility by Lyons Development, LLC — southwest corner of
Stoddard Road and West Overland Road:
Item 20: Ordinance No. 04-1120 : AZ 04-005 Request for Annexation
and Zoning of 5.27 acres from RUT to R-4 zone for Packard Acres
Subdivision No. 3 by Packard Estates Development, LLC — east of North
Locust Grove Road and south of East Ustick Road:
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. That's good news. Okay. Are we ready to go back to
the -- well, why don't we just go ahead and open up Item 18 and 20 to ask the city clerk
to please read the ordinances by title only on 18 and 20.
Berg: Thank you, Madam Mayor. Sorry. Item 18 amendment to the ordinance 04-
1109, an amendment to the ordinance finding that Idaho Power Company, the owner of
real -- certain real property generally located on the southwest corner of property
corner of the intersection of Overland Road and Stoddard Road, within Township 24 --
excuse me -- Section 24, Township 3 North, Range, on the west -- Range 1 west,
Meridian, Idaho, to be known as Spell -It Self Storage within Township 24 -- excuse me,
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 63 of 67
Section 24, Township 3-N, Range 1 west, Meridian City Limits, to be known as Spell -it
Storage and which lies contiguous or adjacent to the city limits of the City of Meridian,
county of Ada, state of Idaho, has made a request for annexation in writing to this
Council, that said land be annexed to the City of Meridian, zoning designated General
Retail and Service Commercial District, C -G and declaring that said land by property
legal descriptions as described below, be a part of the City of Meridian, County of Ada,
State of Idaho, repealing all ordinances, resolutions, orders, or parts thereof, in conflict
herewith and directing the city engineer to add said property to the official maps of the
City of Meridian, Idaho, and directing the clerk of the City of Meridian to file a certified
copy of the ordinance and map of the areas to be annexed with the Ada County
recorder, auditor, treasurer, and assessor and the State Tax Commission of the State of
Idaho, pursuant to Idaho Code Section 50-223 and Section 63-2215. And just a
comment. This is the one where the legal description did not close, so we have to
amend that description.
De Weerd: Okay. So, Mr. Berg, what does that mean? I thought we needed to -- oh
Okay. Thank you.
Berg: That's why this is the amendment and we were trying to get it done before the
end of the year. And, then, the next one is Item 20, which is Ordinance No. 04-1120.
De Weerd: 1120?
Bird: Yep.
Berg: Yes, Ma'am.
De Weerd: Okay.
Berg: Ordinance No. 04-1120, an ordinance for Packard Acres Subdivision for property
located -- and an attachment for this ordinance and annexation of certain lands and
territory situated in Ada County, Idaho, and adjacent and contiguous to the corporate
city limits -- corporate limits of the City of Meridian and described by the City of
Meridian, establishing and determining the land use zoning classification of lands as R-
8, Medium Density, in Meridian City Code, providing that copies of the ordinance shall
be filed with the Ada County Assessor, and the Ada County recorder and the Idaho
State Tax Commission, as required by law, and providing a summary of the ordinance
in providing a waiver of reading of the rules, and providing an effective date.
De Weerd: You have heard Item 18 and 20 — read by title only. Is there anyone in the
audience that would like to hear it read in its entirety? Thank you for not saying yes.
Okay. I would entertain a motion, Council, to approve these ordinances.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 64 of 67
Bird: I move we approve the amendment of 04-1109 and also Ordinance No. 04-1120,
with suspension of rules.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve Items 18 and 20. If there is no further
discussion, Mr. Berg, will you call roll.
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Nary, do you know where we at in the hall?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, that's what I went outside for. I asked
them if they were done and they said they weren't quite done, but they thought they
were really close and I don't know how long -- we have an Executive Session
scheduled, I guess it's up to you if you want to bring them back in and see if they are
done or set it over or if you want to go to your Executive Session, try to do that, and,
then, come back.
De Weerd: If they are not quite ready, if Council is ready to move into Executive
Session, I would entertain a motion.
Nary: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Nary.
Nary: Before we do that, I was remiss in not introducing our new deputy city attorney,
who is sitting over there on the side with the rest of the staff. Ted Baird started with us
yesterday. So, this is his second day with us. I should have introduced him earlier and
I neglected to do that.
De Weerd: Thank you. And welcome. And I kept thinking about reminding you to.
Nary: I didn't have a department report, so I forgot to do that. So, Ted is here now and
so we have got -- we have doubled our attorney staff in the last couple of months, so --
De Weerd: Welcome, Ted. It's nice to have you.
Bird: I don't know. Two lawyers instead of one?
De Weerd: And I'm sure Bill is very happy to have you. And, Len, it's nice having you
here as well.
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 65 of 67
Canning: Len even said, hey, this is cool.
Rountree: Sheltered engineering life.
Item 22: Executive Session per Idaho State Code 67-2345(1)(b):
De Weerd: Okay. Council?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we go into Executive Session as per Idaho Code 67-2345(1)(b).
Donnell: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to adjourn into Executive Session. Mr. Berg, will you
call roll.
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Thank you.
EXECUTIVE SESSION:
Rountree: Madam Mayor, I move we come out of Executive Session.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 14: Public Hearing: PP 04-034 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 83
single-family residential building lots and 5 common lots on 25.86 acres in
an R-4 zone for Milliron Subdivision by Dyver Development, LLC —
northeast corner of North Black Cat Road and West Cherry Lane:
De Weerd: For the record, we'd note that no decisions were made while in Executive
Session. We will get back to Item 14. 1 do need a motion to open the Public Hearing.
Or was staff going to give us a -- okay.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I believe I can give the summation.
The developer and the neighbors have agreed to a number of things. There is still one
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 66 of 67
outstanding issue that they would like for -- they have agreed to disagree and would like
for City Council to take an action one way or the other and I will try and present both
those sides. But on the compromise area, let me start with those. The applicant and
neighbors have agreed that on the north boundary there would be a six-foot vinyl fence,
solid, and there would be desert landscaping or and landscaping in the easement. They
would not provide irrigation water up there, but it would be landscaped. On the east
boundary there would be a four foot vinyl solid fence and, then, the CC&Rs would
contain a condition for four trees, seven five gallon shrubs and seven one gallon shrubs.
Then, the applicant has also agreed to the 1,900 square foot upstairs along the north
and east boundaries and, then, if it's a single story, 1,700 square feet, if it's a two story,
1,900 feet. And the issue that they have not agreed upon is regards the eastern
property boundary. The neighbors to the east would like the fence setback five feet
from the property line and, then, they would like the applicant to do the same kind of
desert or and landscaping within that five feet. The applicant has agreed to a zero
setback and they want a five-foot setback, so therein lies the rub. So, that would apply
to Lots 1, 2, and 3 on Block 5 and, then, 17, 18, 19 and 20 on Block 1, so it excludes the
-- this lot here. Otherwise, it's along that eastern boundary there.
De Weerd: Thank you, Anna. Thank you all. Council, what would you like to do?
Rountree: Madam Mayor, I would defer to Councilwoman Donnell to try to re -craft her
two previous motions.
Donnell: Thanks a lot
Rountree: If she doesn't wish to do that, I will attempt --
Donnell: No. I can try to do that. But I need some clarification, Anna. So, can -- show
me, again, the area that has not been resolved.
Canning: It's on the east property boundary. It would be these four lots here and, then,
these three lots. It does not need to include that one -- and maybe I can show you why,
if I get up here. You can just barely see it there. See that little sliver right there? The
bike path pulls away -- or the path pulls away at that point from that lot, so they didn't
see the need to have the setback on this lot.
Donnell: All right. So, tell me again the neighbors would like to have --
Canning: The neighbors would like to have five feet. Their concern is that the path
comes within a foot of the property line, so their concern that it is -- that the fence would
be too close.
Donnell: Okay. Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mrs. Donnell.
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 67 of 67
Donnell: Never having been one to back away from much of anything, I would like to
make a motion to approve preliminary plat Item No. 14, 04-034 -- am I on the right one?
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
Donnell: Oh, good. With those issues that have been resolved between the neighbors
in regard to the fencing and the landscaping and — and that there be no required
setback of the fence. Now, where I'm going with that is with the developer, so did I say
that right?
Canning: Yes, ma'am.
Donnell: Okay. That's my motion.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve Item 14 with the agreed upon items from
the neighbors and the developer.
Canning: Madam Mayor, before you take the vote, would the motion -- does that
include marking all those applicant's commitments as Exhibit F as previously presented
Donnell: Absolutely.
Canning: --before? Thank you.
Donnell: Absolutely.
De Weerd: Discussion? Mr. Berg, will you call roll.
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Well, thank you. Thank you for working together. We
appreciate that. And, Council, I would entertain a motion to adjourn.
Rountree: So moved.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: All those in favor say aye. Merry Christmas.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Meridian City Council
December 21, 2004
Page 68 of 67
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:58 P.M.
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
MAYOR T EERD
// le / aS
DATE APPROVEQO�*- _'
ATTEST: 1J%'l"�1--' /a
WILLIAM G. BERG,
vvv
�A
114'