Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005 07-12 Meridian City Council MeetinQ July 12. 2005. The regular meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:10 P.M., Tuesday, July 12, 2005, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd. Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, Keith Bird, Shaun Wardle, Charlie Rountree, and Christine Donnell. Others Present: Bill Nary, Will Berg, Ann Canning, Bill Musser, Ron Anderson, Len Grady, Brad Watson, and Dean Willis. Item 1: Roll-call Attendance: Roll call. X Shaun Wardle X Charlie Rountree X X Christine Donnell X Keith Bird Mayor Tammy de Weerd De Weerd: Okay. I will go ahead and call the regular meeting for City Council to order. It is Tuesday, July 12th. If I could see the clock, I could tell you what time it was. Ten after 7:00. And welcome. We will start with roll call attendance. Mr. Berg. Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance: De Weerd: Thank you. And I would like to take a moment and just congratulate Council and staff and our community for the recognition that Meridian just received from CNN Money Magazine of being listed as a finalist in the top 100 communities or best places to live in 2005. We listed number 74 and I think that's quite a significant recognition. Our community is -- is a complete community. It's not just residences, it's - - this is very symbolic of what we all are in our schools and our neighborhoods and our businesses and our community events and so I'd just like to congratulate our community and our staff and Council for receiving this recognition. Okay. With that said, if you will, please, all rise and join us in the pledge. (Pledge of Allegiance recited.) Item 3: Community Invocation by Pastor Steve Moore, with Cherry Lane Christian Church: De Weerd: Thank you. Item No.3 is our community invocation. Tonight we will be led by Pastor Steve Moore with the Cherry Lane Christian Church. If you will, please, all take this moment of silence or join us in the community invocation. Moore: Our Father God in heaven, we thank you for the fact that we do live in such a great place, that we have received this national recognition, and we are rejoicing in that today and we already really knew it, how much you have blessed our lives for the kind Meridian City Council July 12, 2005 Page 2 of 68 of city and community that we live in, as others are finding out with this publicity. And we have you to thank most of all for this in your creative order. But we also, God, ask you to bless our Mayor and our Council and the other public servants that are in this room, that are in this city, that serve us and make this community in part what it is. We ask you to bless their lives as they have served faithfully and well, whether they are paid or unpaid, we just ask you to honor them and bless them for what they give to us and to our families and to our neighbors, to our children. Father, we pray for tonight's meeting, that the decisions that are made will be to improve and continue to improve the quality of life and the standard of this community. We seek to honor you with our very life and with the law and the order and all that there is in our everyday life. God, I thank you especially for our police force and our fire department. Your word calls them ministers and, indeed, they are, putting their lives at risk for us and I pause tonight to give special gratitude to you for them. Father; we have pledged allegiance to our American flag tonight and in this month of July when we celebrate our freedom, we thank you for that. We thank you for where we live and when we live. We thank you for the people that have given their lives and put their lives on the line for what we do hold dear here in Meridian, Idaho. And we ask that you would bless and protect our Armed Forces that are in harm's way even tonight as we meet in this peaceful air-conditioned place, they, God, are in horrible circumstances. We pray for your protection. We pray for peace in our world and we dedicate ourselves to do what we can one by one wherever we are at, to make this a better world, in the name of Jesus, amen. Item 4: Adoption of the Agenda: De Weerd: Thank you, Pastor Moore. Okay. Item No.4 is adoption of the agenda. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I would move that we adopt the agenda this evening with the following changes: On Consent Agenda Item J, the resolution number is 05-479. On Item 6, add C, Mayor's report, appointment of the city engineer and proclamation for parks and recreation month. Item 23 becomes 16A. Item 24 becomes 16B. Item 26 becomes 8A. And with those changes my motion is made. De Weerd: Can you, please, repeat that? Rountree: Sure. De Weerd: No. That's all right. Okay. Wardle: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion to approve as amended and a second. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. Meridian City Council July 12, 2005 Page 3 of 68 MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 5: Consent Agenda: A. B. C. Sanitary Sewer and Water Main Easement Agreement with Touchmark of the Treasure Valley, LLC for Touchmark Plaza: Sanitary Sewer and Water Main Easement Aqreement with Touchmark of the Treasure Valley, LLC for Touchmark Grand LodQe: StreetliQht Aqreement with Initial Pointe. LLC for Cobblefield Crossina No.2: D. Development Agreement: AZ 05-009 Annexation and Zoning of 1.06 acres from RUT to L-O zone for Mike and Gloria Urwin by Mike and Gloria Urwin - 2560 South Meridian Road: E. Water Main Easement AQreement with Cherry Crossinq, LLC for Cherry Crossina BuildinQ: F. Contract with JUS Engineers for the Ten Mile Sewer Project: G. Aqreement for Water Operator Disinfection TraininQ with Brown Environmental. Inc.: H. Temporary License and Maintenance Aqreement with Central Street Joint Venture for Jabil Soccer Fields: I. Approve Liquor and Beer Licenses for Tony Romas - 970 Progress: J. Resolution No. Ratifying the City of Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Decision to Approve a Street Name ChanQe from Fireweed Drive to Orso Drive: K. Agreemen~S Architects for Water Department BuildinQ Study: De Weerd: Okay. Item No.5. Rountree: Madam Mayor, I move that we approve the Consent Agenda as published, with the resolution number as indicated previously. Meridian City Council July 12, 2005 Page 4 of 68 Donnell: Second. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve the Consent Agenda. Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, absent; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 6: Department Reports: A. Fire Department - Ron Anderson 1. Update on Results of Fire Station # 4 Bids with the Meridian Rural Fire Protection District: De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Berg. Okay. Item 6. Department Reports. We will start with our fire chief, Chief Anderson. Anderson: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Council Members. I'd like to report tonight on the progress of Fire Station Four. As you know, our city has expanded greatly south of the interstate with a number of residential subdivisions and commercial businesses that are springing up along Overland and Eagle Road. The fire department has been challenged with increased response times due to heavy traffic volume on Meridian Road and Eagle Road to service those areas, so the plan that was put in place several years ago now is starting to come to fruition and as a result of that a piece of land was donated several years ago on Eagle Road to build a future fire station. Through a partnership with the Meridian Rural Fire District, the Meridian Rural District is going to fund and pay for a fire station down there and, then, jointly staff that station with a joint effort between the city and the rural to fund the staff. So, last Thursday we held a bid opening for the fire station, that we received five bids on the station. The lowest bid was substantially higher than what our architect had estimated the price to be. So, I have him in the audience tonight, so I'll let him defend himself and you can ask him all the questions about why that was, but I had to chuckle when I saw the parks and rec director talking about the architect's estimate of his projects, because I just went through that last week. But as a result of that, last night we held our meeting with the rural fire district commissioners. They reviewed their funding and it is a stretch for them, but due to the commitment that the city has made to hire the additional staffing that will be hired near the end of this budget year, they decided that they will go ahead and push through with the building of this fire station. It was also felt that with the construction market the way that it is, that it would be pointless to try to rebid it and expect lower prices to come in. So, they are going to go with the low bid in this case and I am pleased announce that the lowest responsive bid was a local Meridian company, RSCI, which is Record Steel Construction off East Lanark Lane here in Meridian. So, with that I guess I would turn it over to Mr. Tom Zabala from ZGA Architects to answer any questions that you might have on this station or the contract. Meridian City Council July 12, 2005 Page 5 of 68 Zabala: Madam Mayor, Mr. President, Members of the Council, my name is Tom Zabala with ZGA Architects. My address 565 West Myrtle Street in Boise and we are the architects for the Meridian Fire Station Number Four, as we have been for all your stations. I don't look good in tar and feather, but I guess that's part of my job responsibility. We did, as the chief had indicated, we did receive five responsive bids from five general contractors in the valley. The bids ranged from 1,117,000 to 1,058,000 dollars. So, there was about a four percent spread on five bids. So, we felt comfortable not necessarily with the numbers, but comfortable with the fact that they were all reading the same set of documents. In addition to that, as Doug Strong had indicated, we -- part of the development of this site was the former well site that the city of Meridian had and all five bidders responded on that, with the add-ons ranging from just at 30,000 dollars to the 33,000 dollars that Doug Strong had mentioned earlier. So, again, we felt pretty good that everybody was reading the same documents. Not that it is any excuse -- the project is similar to the station we did and bid approximately two years ago at Locust Grove, Fire Station Number Three. This building is a little bit different. We did add an additional bedroom to it. We do have a larger site considerably than what we had at Locust Grove. We are bidding at a time of the year not unlike what we bid a couple years ago, but I think in a marketplace that is pretty super heated in terms of the amount of construction that is going on, not only in this valley, but impacts peripherally from projects like Tamarack and other areas that have consumed a lot of the sub trades and have not really encouraged sharpening of pencils at bid time. We have seen that not only on this project, but other projects. In addition to that, I think if you are in and around the construction industry, you do know what the world marketplace has been for building materials. Last year we were talking steel. This year we are talking cement. They were correct that the price of concrete has gone up just yesterday four dollars a cubic yard. It is predicted now that the 75 dollar a yard concrete that we are getting on some projects will go to a hundred dollars a yard at the first of the year, with the present condition in the marketplace. This project is fairly dependent on concrete. All of our parking areas are concrete. We have a fair amount of concrete within the building. And beyond that, all these things add up incrementally. We did share this with them last night. We did offer the options of re-bidding it now or waiting, perhaps, until late winter or early spring of next year to put this out. I'm not sure that the circumstances or the world will change significantly in order to bring it down to where we had estimated in a range of between 725 and 933 thousand dollars was our estimate. I think the Meridian fire district took all this into -- as well as the rural fire department took this all into account last night at their meeting and with a commitment to the 12 new firefighters coming online, I believe they made a good choice in public safety in the south part of Meridian. And with that I will be happy to answer any questions. De Weerd: Council, do you have any questions? No. We appreciate your work on behalf of the fire department and the rural fire district and I -- you have always given us great buildings and so we look forward to number four coming on. We certainly need it. Zabala: Well, we will do our best and we thank you for your confidence in us. Meridian City Council July 12, 2005 Page 6 of 68 De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. We don't need any Council action on this. Anderson: No, Madam Mayor, that's correct. The rural district is going to move ahead in the next couple of days with signing a contract with RSCI and we will get moving on the project. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you so much. Mr. Nary. Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, just a follow up to that. I did talk with Mr. Zabala briefly before the Council meeting and we may be bringing Council action back with a contract in regards to the park property project that you have approved previously on the budget amendment for that, but you may be seeing that for Council action, but that's all you will need on that project. I just wanted you to be aware. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. B. City Attorney - Bill Nary 1. Bids for Office Remodel at Farmers & Merchants Old Branch Building: Bring Back Bids on July 12, 2005 Nary: The other one is -- this is a weekly occurrence now. I can give you an update again on the Farmers and Merchants Bank and the process. We did finally get a written bid from Ace Construction. It was about -- just barely under 6,000 dollars for the necessary remodeling that we would need. If you will recall, the previous bid we had was 18,000 dollars. So, it's a significant savings. Basically, it is just an enclosure of a few offices and some painting and some repair work on the wall. Some of the other things we decided that would be a cost savings to the city and still make it a workable office space is to purchase some movable partition walls, because we will be moving support staff desks in different locations and that's a much more practical way to do that and we can at least take the partition walls along with us at some point in the future when we move to a permanent facility. My only question tonight -- we did have one other person express interest. Mr. Morris's construction company was going to give us a bid. They did come last week. Mr. Morris did a walk through of the building with Mr. Baird to see what was needed, but he -- when Mr. Baird told him we were reporting to you tonight, that we had another bid pending, he said he couldn't meet this deadline, because he had subs that had to come forward to look at the site for what he wanted. He is proposing a different type of construction for the office enclosures, instead of simply enclosing the glass wall and steel office cubicles that existed, he is proposing simply tearing that out and actually just building sheetrock and walls and putting that in. I don't know that the cost will be significantly different or not, but I don't have a final bid from him tonight. So, I guess at next meeting in two weeks, if you want me to continue with that, with Mr. Morris if he's in the process, we can do that. I told them -- or we did make clear to him that we would be meeting again on the 26th and I'm hoping on the 26th to be able to bring to you a recommendation to go forward and, then, engage into Meridian City Council July 12,2005 Page 7 of 68 an agreement with one of these contractors in getting this process done. I'm assuming that this particular bid from Ace Construction has a deadline date, but it did, at least, give us some idea of what they could do, but I'm assuming it would be about 30 days to finish. So, if that's all right with you, Council, we will just wait an additional two weeks, unless you would like me to go forward with the bid that's on the table. De Weerd: Council, any questions or comments? Donnell: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mrs. Donnell. Donnell: It seems to me that we have waited this long in cramped conditions, that two more weeks is probably not going to make a difference, so let's -- I recommend that we see what other bid that we may get. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I don't disagree with that. I would suggest, however, that maybe we authorize the city attorney to -- is this for your office space or just -- who would administer this, the Mayor, the Clerk, the City Attorney? Nary: The city attorney, HR, IT department. Rountree: Authorize the city attorney to move forward with the remodel with a contract not to exceed 6,000 dollars. De Weerd: Okay. Was that recommendation a motion? Any comments? Donnell: Madam Mayor, I would agree with Councilman Rountree. De Weerd: Okay. Do I have a motion? Rountree: If you need a motion? I so move, then. Donnell: Second. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to authorize the city attorney to move forward, not to exceed 6,000 dollars on the work on Farmers and Merchants Bank. All those in favor say aye. Those opposed? Wardle: Nay. De Weerd: Okay. Two ayes and one nay. Motion approved. Meridian City Council July 12, 2005 Page 8 of 68 MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES. ONE NAY. ONE ABSENT. c. Mayor's Report - Appointment - City Engineer: De Weerd: Okay. Second item -- oh, Mayor's report. I'm sorry. I do have an appointment to make tonight. Len Grady will be our city attorney. We -- engineer. We wanted a new city attorney. Rountree: Sorry for the insult, Len. De Weerd: City something. I knew you recently got your credentials; it just wasn't that direction, was it? We just recently congratulated Len on achieving his PEP? PPE? Yeah. These acronyms and labels just escape me, but we appreciate your diligence in pursuing that, Len, and it would be my honor to recommend to Council tonight to appoint Len Grady as our city engineer and I will need a motion to approve that. Rountree: So moved. Wardle: Second. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve Len Grady as city engineer. Mr. Berg. Roll-Call: Bird, absent; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. D. Mayor - Proclamation: De Weerd: Thank you. Even though we have expected this kind of work from you for I don't know how long, but we appreciate your new title. Okay. My second item is a proclamation. The month of July is Parks and Recreation month and I do have a proclamation to read. And Mr. Strong is here tonight and I will present this to you, Mr. Strong, after I read it. Whereas Parks and Recreation activities and experiences provide opportunities for your people to live, grow, and develop into contributing members of their community and whereas Parks and Recreation creates lifelines and enrich life experiences for older members of our community and whereas Parks and Recreation agencies provide outlets for physical activities, socialization, and stress- reducing experiences, and whereas parks, playgrounds, nature trails, open spaces, community aquatics and cultural centers, state parks and historical sites, make our state an attractive and desirable place to live, work, play and visit, which contributes to our economic vitality and whereas parks, greenways, and open spaces provide a welcome respite from our fast paced lifestyles by protecting and preserving our national environment and whereas Parks and Recreation agencies touch the lives of individuals, families, groups, and entire communities, which positively impacts the social, economic, health, and environmental quality of our state and our city. Now, therefore, \, Tammy de Meridian City Council July 12, 2005 Page 9 of 68 Weerd, Mayor of the City of Meridian, proclaim July 2005 as Park and Recreation month and encourage all citizens to join me in participating and supporting the many recreational programs and facilities provided by public and private agencies. Doug, congratulations and this is your month. Thank you. I guess it was very fitting that we heard some of the reports that we had from our parks department, see how we can move those amenities forward for our amenities in our community and their use. Item 7: Request for Reconsideration: AZ 05-020 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 2.3 acres to L-O zone for Ashtyn Park by David Price - SWC of North Meridian Road and West Ustick Road: De Weerd: Okay. Item 7 is request for reconsideration on AZ 05-020. Anna, do you have comment on this or Mr. Nary? Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I guess, first, just -- there is a letter in your packet from the applicant here, Mr. Price. Mr. Price is in the audience. This request for annexation was turned down a couple of weeks ago. Mr. Price has requested reconsideration. It is totally in the discretion of the Council and the moving parties who were in support of the denial to bring forth this consideration. If you wish to do that, you can. What I would recommend, if you choose to do that, is simply reset this matter for a later date. There were public -- members of the public that testified in opposition. If the Council is of a mind set to allow another public hearing on this matter, the best way to do that would simply be to reset it and provide new notice to the folks and public notice, so that people could re-attend and provide comment a second time. We did speak earlier today, I think if the Council is interested, the Planning and Zoning director does have a comment, at least from her staff's perspective of the request, but, again, it is in your discretion on whether to grant this or not. De Weerd: Council, do you want to receive more information on this and hear from the director? Rountree: I'd like to hear from the Planning and Zoning director. De Weerd: Okay. Anna. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I think that the applicant has learned a lot more about the development review process in the last -- in the intervening couple weeks and I think there was a lot of confusion at the hearing on the part of what he was asking for versus what the Planning and Zoning Commission had recommended approval of. I think he understands now how that process works and he is comfortable with the Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation as stated in his letter. The concerns that were expressed by the neighbors that night I think could be dealt with through conditions of approval, if the Council so chooses. I think the main concern was developing without some sort of specific development plan. I think those concept plans that were provided were fairly detailed and if the Council wants to, we could -- we could certainly make those concept plans work for that piece of land. Meridian City Council July 12, 2005 Page 10 of 68 De Weerd: Okay. Council? Rountree: Madam Mayor, question for Mr. Nary. Would this go back to Planning and Zoning or it could have the potential of going back to Planning and Zoning, depending on any changes that might be made if we were to reconsider this? Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, it's within your discretion, you can direct it back to Planning and Zoning. The only thing that what I'm hearing Mrs. Canning say is I'm -- at least as presented, what the applicant is now indicating is that he understands and is more in line with what the recommendations have been from staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission, so it may not be -- it may not be very valuable to send it back for them to look at it again to send you back the same recommendation. But you can certainly do that. You can hear it again and if you feel there are significant changes, you could also remand it to Planning and Zoning at that time as well or, again, you can approve it if you wish. The only other thing I neglected to say -- at the time the question was posed, Mr. Baird was here that night. There is no legal requirement for you to actually issue an order or anything not to grant an annexation. In the past we have done it and my recommendation would be that we -- if your desire is not to grant this, that we at least have an order stating that, that this is a final action that you have taken, because, otherwise, in the future to basically track through Ashtyn Park application to determine what the final decision of this Council was, there wouldn't be any documents or any way for the record to reflect what your decision was in not forwarding the application forward for annexation. So, if that's your choice, we would bring an order back in your next meeting in two weeks, just to reflect that fact. Again, if you want to remand it or if you want to reset it and grant this reconsideration request, you can set that off at any date in the future and, then, again, re-notice the hearing. De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Nary. Does that answer your question? Rountree: Certainly. De Weerd: Any other questions or comments? Okay. What is the desire of Council? Donnell: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mrs. Donnell. Donnell: I'd like to make a motion that we reconsider this application and have it noticed properly and that we bring it back at a future date. Rountree: Can we get a date certain? Donnell: And that could be August 9th. Meridian City Council July 12, 2005 Page 11 of 68 De Weerd: Mr. Berg, is that enough time for noticing? Yes. Okay. The motion is to approve reconsideration and put this on August 9th's agenda. Do I have a second? Rountree: I will second. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to reconsider Item No.7 as requested. All those in favor say aye. Those opposed? Okay. All ayes. Motion carries. This will be -- it will be noticed and reheard on August 9th. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 8: Continued Discussion from June 7, 2005: Discussion of Black Rock Subdivision by Brad Watson, Public Works Director: De Weerd: Okay. Item No.8 is a continued discussion from June 7th. Mr. Watson. Watson: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Council Members. As you will recall, we discussed this several times over the last few months. At the last meeting this was discussed, which was in early June. We were directed to meet with the proposed developer to see if some arrangement could be made regarding the provision of water to the site. Len Grady met with the developer at least once, several times, maybe, while I was out for awhile and we did have a meeting I think last week and I think we have reached an agreement where they will run city water to their site. We determined that we can serve it. Part of the arrangement is that we would be granted a well site on that property for future development. There we go. Just to reorient ourselves, this is Amity Road. This is Eagle. Lake Hazel to the south. And Locust Grove to the west Their project that is already approved through Ada County includes these 44 lots up on the ridge. This map depicts what they are proposing for a wastewater treatment land application system. The entrance road would come off of Eagle through here up onto the hill. They would be running water down Eagle Road to approximately mid section and, then, into the site. The one thing that they would need to install is a pressure reducing valve, which is, actually, a little more complicated than just saying that. One of the things the city would do is utilize some pumps that have been salvaged from the well 14 booster pump station and use those here in their installation. Those aren't being used right now. So, it would be better to get them used, than to have them seized up in the future, I guess. Mr. Wood is here, if you would like to question him on any of this. The only other thing I do want to mention is that we have also had some preliminary discussions regarding wastewater and there is nothing finalized yet, but I guess we would like concurrence from the Council to allow us to pursue those options. It involves some off peak pumping, that they would own and operate and simply discharge into our system. We have only discussed those for a couple days now, but if Council would allow us to continue those discussions, we will. That's alii have, unless you have any questions for me. De Weerd: Any questions for Brad? Brad, with this agreement have we discussed the annexation when we are contiguous? Meridian City Council July 12, 2005 Page 12 of 68 Watson: Madam Mayor, Council Members, yes, we discussed that at length last week. There would be the normal consent to annexation agreement that we have done on past county developments. We also discussed with Mr. Wood and one of his partners Dave Turner, the necessity for individual non-build agreements on occupancy agreements on each and every lot that is platted, so that the improvements are all done and final before we will release -- before the county will release building permits on each of these lots. So, Dan had some good ideas about how to notify those home buyers that they will be future residents of the City of Meridian. But, yes, we have discussed that at length. That agreement would come back to Council for approval. De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Wood, do you have anything to add? Council, do you have any questions? Rountree: Madam Mayor, just for the record, I'd like hear from Dan and make sure that we are hearing the same thing he's thinking and willing to do. Wood: Sure. De Weerd: Please state your name and address. Wood: Okay. Dan Wood. 2025 East Chateau, Meridian, Idaho. The staff has been great to work with. We have, you know, had a couple of meetings with Len and, you know, we want to work it out, too. And so we are more than happy to -- we would love to work sewer out, too, but we also are willing to -- the water issue helps us and the issue of -- we are concerned, too, with future homeowners with annexation, but we are almost to the point where we would have at time of closing, you know, attached to the deed that they are aware that this property will be annexed. And along with the CC&Rs. Because we don't want to have the problems either, because, inevitably, you know, somebody is going to say they didn't know and the best way to do that is to have it part of the documents when they record it, so We have proof that they did know it. De Weerd: Okay. Now, was this approved as a non-farm? Wood: Yes. De Weerd: So, you had set aside open space? Wood: Yes. I mean a majority of the ground. De Weerd: And that is -- can be developed in one time frame? Wood: My understanding of it is -- is potentially when you are contiguous to the city limits where you could be annexed and taken in by the city, that you could -- they use to be 15 years. Now, they have taken away that 15 years and it's come to the point Meridian City Council July 12, 2005 Page 13 of 68 whenever you are close to a city entity that would annex, then, you could rezone or re- plat. De Weerd: This isn't in the front of the property; right? So, that any redevelopment would have to travel through there. Wood: No. This is -- I mean the ground is pretty much all fronted -- I mean this is all the -- pretty much all the ground is in front of it. I think I'm answering your question. Here is where all the open space, actually, is all this ground out here. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. We have had that situation and it's very contentious when the open space comes to develop. Wood: That's why we did it this way and it works out good. De Weerd: Well, thank you. Any other questions, Council? Rountree: No. Thank you. Wood: Thank you. De Weerd: And thanks to our staff for working this through and I imagine that we will have something in front of them to approve, then. Rountree: Madam Mayor, I think Brad is asking for guidance on continuing the discussion as it relates to the pumping of their treatment facility into our facility and if that needs to be a motion, I move that we allow staff to continue that conversation. Wardle: Second. De Weerd: Okay. All those in favor say aye. Okay. All ayes. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Thank you, Brad. Do you need anything further? Watson: I don't believe so, Madam Mayor. Thank you. Item 8A(26): Discussion of Proposed Morninq Dove Subdivision located north of Columbia Road and west of South Cloverdale Road: De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Okay. Okay. So, Item 26 was moved as 8A. Okay. So, Item 26 will be considered right now. It's discussion of the proposed Morning Dove Subdivision and, Brad, I assume this one is yours as well. Meridian City Council July 12, 2005 Page 14 of 68 Watson: Yes, Madam Mayor. Thank you. This is not a totally different area of the world that we are talking about on this one and you have seen this property before. Scaled a little bit different on this one. Cloverdale Road is to the east of the frame. Columbia is along the bottom here, which is the southern most extent of our referral area. This is what was formerly known as the Bradford and Camile Shaw parcel, I believe. I'm sorry. This pointer keeps coming in and out. This is, again, a request to be released from the Meridian area of -- referral area and be allowed to sewer into Boise city and receive United Water service. Topographically, this is a very steep bench here where it flows northeasterly. This is a little bit flatter to the southeast -- or southwest. According to our master plan it looks like this could some day flow northwesterly into our gravity sewer system, but the part that is down here below this bench is really -- it would have to be pumped up over the hill to get into Meridian's system. That's the background information. If you have any other questions I will answer those. The developer representative from the Land Group is here to answer any questions if you have some of him, too. De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions for Brad or the representative? Donnell: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mrs. Donnell. Donnell: Let me just see if I understand what you're saying, Brad, since this is new to me. And this may have been before the Council before, but perhaps before my time. So, the request is to release them from the area of -- you called it the area of referral or referral area, meaning what? Watson: Madam Mayor, Council member Donnell, that may be a misstatement. What-- it's in the area of referral, there is no formal release, but in meetings with Boise city that have taken place over the last couple years, they are not entertaining sewering anything that is in this area of referral, unless they get something in writing from me. So, every one of these that has come to me I have brought in front of Council for direction. De Weerd: And, Brad, essentially, they are in our referral area, because we do have a master plan that accommodates it at some point, but this one you were saying is kind of different. Watson: Yes, Madam Mayor. Admittedly, I haven't studied this in great detail, but our sewer master plan extends to a quarter mile, which is, actually, this line here -- a quarter mile west of Cloverdale Road, all the way down to Columbia. Those master plans, as I have often said, are conceptual in nature and there are little jigs and jogs up and down this east line that we have with Boise city, where it makes more sense for some of it to go to Boise and some of it come back to Meridian. This appears definitely right here to be one of those pockets that, just looking at the sewer, should be going to Boise city. And all I'm really saying is that according to our master plan it looks like this would eventually some day go to our collection system by gravity. The one hitch in all of this is Meridian City Council July 12,2005 Page 15 of 68 that this appears to be a county subdivision that's already been platted, so getting sewer through here may be a little troublesome, but -- Canning: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Anna. Canning: If the Council would like, I can give a little more background on what the referral area is, because I think that some of you might not have been too involved at that time. on the Comprehensive Plan prior to this it extended in a couple different areas that -- that were included on the sewer master plan. This is one of those areas. When the City of Meridian took it to Ada County for adoption as part of their area of city impact agreement, the county said there is no way you're ever going to grow fast enough to reach those limits within the next 20 or 30 years and so they trimmed back a couple of areas and this is one of them and as a concession they put it in something called a referral area. It's been kind of a big question as to what that means. All it really means is that Ada County let's us know what's going on in that area, but the city of Boise has kind of agreed to not extend services there, unless the -- unless they talk to Brad first and there is a little more history on this particular piece of property. The Shaws actually owned all of this going out to Cloverdale. It was in one ownership for a long time. They were able to, through the area of city impact agreement negotiations, include this portion, because it allows them to go within 300 feet. So, they were able to bump it out and include this as part of -- this is in the Boise area of city impact. So, this was all developed in Ada County, with Boise city sewer. So, a part of this has been developed down here and, then, there is just -- there really is this question of this area that would have to go up the hill. And, then, they -- you see they don't have a full street access out here. It's an odd flag shaped lot at the top of the hill there. That's just a little more history on the property in the area. Donnell: Thank you. De Weerd: Brad, I guess the question I have is by doing this, it seems to make sense in the sewer aspect as you stated. What are the water implications? Watson: Madam Mayor, Council Members, we -- the situation is really not too dissimilar from the Black Rock situation, other than it's another at least mile south, and I really -- we haven't modeled this, but I really don't think there is any way without more supply in that area we could serve this with water today. United Water is in that currently developed subdivision immediately east. De Weerd: This is just an extension of that subdivision? Watson: Madam Mayor, I think the applicant would be better suited to answer that. I'm not sure it's even -- I'm not sure what the continuity between the two projects is. Meridian City Council July 12,2005 Page 160f68 De Weerd: Would the representative like to make comment? Please state your name and address for the record. Kirkham: My name is Kirby Kirkham. Our office is at 462 East Shore Drive in Eagle. Madam Mayor and Members of the Council, in regards to this project, our -- the developer has, actually, not purchased only that, but the two pieces south of the Imqua Subdivision -- excuse me, the one in Boise. He's purchased those two and it's kind of his plan to develop it together, one to provide another access to the site -- De Weerd: Can you use the pointer there in front of you and maybe show us? Kirkham: He recently just purchased these two pieces of property, which are within the Boise city area of impact, as well as this -- there is, basically, two parcels up here that he's purchased. So, based upon that and the proximity to the -- we have not done anything with this, this is an existing subdivision. I'm not sure if it's all under -- all done yet. I know at least half has been -- the top half has been constructed. It has a stub out to our -- to our site right here. So, his desire, because there is sewer and water availability right down below, in accordance with looking at developing this site, it just makes the most sense for the developer as far as time frame and -- I mean we'd love to keep this in Meridian, but with the sewer as far out as it is, with no real -- with no real option of doing any sort of septic system and the sewer available, it is his desire to be released and use the United Water and Boise sewer, just because of the site constraints. The other impact is is there is a community church right here that he is in discussion with, because we are looking at -- this access right now I think is only I think 30 feet and we need 60 feet of right of way to get access through there to Columbia. The church owns the land right here. The church is right now looking at having to put in a new septic system in, which they are not able to afford right now and so they are very interested in us bringing -- kind of an agreement bringing sewer service up there to be able to serve them as well. So, we have their full support in that, trying to get that, so they don't have to dig a -- install a full new septic system, is some of the other negotiations have been going on. Again, this is probably preliminary and we want to -- we heard some of the discussion on the Black Rock and we wanted to present this before you, so we don't get too far into the design, so we can actually know what we are looking at and knowing what we can and can't do before we fully proceed. De Weerd: Brad, I guess I have a question. When we met with the city of Boise and we looked at their western boundaries and our eastern, we tried to work through all these sewer issues on who can serve what and tried to establish a more definitive line. This is starting to kind of take on the story of what happened in our northeast borders and where we keep chipping away at that area of impact and keep -- because Boise has sewer out there and we are not out there yet. Where does that stop? Is this one last cleanup area and all the other portions that are currently reflected in our area of impact we can sewer and it's the most logical choice or are we going to see this often? Watson: Madam Mayor, that's a bit of a loaded question, but-- Meridian City Council July 12, 2005 Page 17 of 68 De Weerd: Yeah, it was. Watson: When the city master plans -- and I presume when Boise city master plans, we are using either -- back in the old days USGS quad maps and now aerial mapping to do our contours and, again, they are conceptual and we do the best we can, but it's more of a macro scale. When a developer has a piece of property, they hire a surveyor to get out there on the ground and shoot inverts and manholes that are existing and do a very detailed topo on a piece of ground and they find out, yeah, it can go back to Boise or it should go back to Meridian. I guess I'm saying the level detail, when an individual landowner and his engineer study a piece of property, I think we could find more of these little pockets, but I don't think a lot. We, at least down to our area of impact, a quarter mile south of Amity, I think that is pretty well set and, then, this is another mile and three quarters. There can't be too many more of these in that mile and three quarters. De Weerd: I'll ask Dean to type that out separately, so I can stick it in my drawer and pull it out for reference. Thank you, Brad. I didn't mean to beat you up on that, but, you know, I guess we can get our facilities out there within reasonable time frames, it's just how much do we continue to get chipped away and losing, because of -- this is not a good way to plan, is who can get there first, and I guess that's my only point. And these pockets are -- and your explanation is appreciated. This is a different situation I hope. Okay. Council, I guess staff is looking for some direction on this one. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I agree with your foray into this. I think that it's not a good way to plan just to make this a decision that would relate to the change in our referral area and ultimately our impact area. I would not give up on the idea that this might be the right thing to do, but I think it requires significant more analysis on the part of staff and I at this point am not willing to be favorable to relinquish whatever agreement we have with the county as it relates to this piece of Meridian's ultimate or potentially ultimate city limits. De Weerd: And so your directions are to-- Rountree: I would say staff will probably be asked to continue to look at this, but I don't -- have not heard nor seen a reason why we should honor the request. De Weerd: So, you're requesting further analysis or-- Rountree: I'm not asking staff to do additional analysis. I'm sure the staff is going to have more conversations with the applicant. I suspect that they will be there. The direction from this councilman is I'm not interested at this point in time. De Weerd: Okay. Okay. Any additional comments? Okay. Meridian City Council July 12,2005 Page 180f68 Watson: Madam Mayor, the only thing I will mention is that JUB Engineers is actively involved in modifying our sewer master plan. We can have them pay particular attention to this boundary, so that we identify any of these pockets on that update. De Weerd: And they are on the ground right now with that study? Watson: Yes. De Weerd: Okay. And they could perhaps work with this representative as well? Watson: Through us. Yes. Item 9: FP 05-039 Request for Final Plat approval of 34 residential building lots and 5 common lots on 9.8 acres in a R-8 zone for Alexandria Subdivision by Lonnie Johnson - 4205 North Locust Grove Road: De Weerd: Uh-huh. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Item No.9 is FP 05-039 and I believe that Brad is making comment on this item. Watson: Thank you, Madam Mayor. I have never had three in a row before, so -- this is a final plat application for Alexandria Subdivision. It's located on the west side of Locust Grove south of McMillan Road. This is a re-subdivision of Lot 11 of Crestwood Estates Subdivision. The highlights of this were -- of this proposed development, 34 single- family residences, five common lots, on 9.8 acres in an R-8 zone. This planned development was approved, including reduced lot sizes, lot frontage, setbacks -- setbacks for a street side -- reduced setbacks for alley rear setbacks and street side setbacks. The amenities on this planned development are ten percent open space with two gazebos and the staff is recommending approval. No outstanding issues before Council. Oh, there are, too. Thank you. Rountree: New trainee. Watson: All right. Site-specific condition number 18, the applicant has suggested revised language that would -- it would revise condition number 18 to state perimeter fencing six-foot tall solid material is required. There is justification here, if you'd really like to hear that and I will read that, but, otherwise, I will go on. General requirement number seven, that the following phrase be added to the end of this condition, quote, unquote, or other street light approved by the City of Meridian. And those are the only two requested changes and staff did concur with those. De Weerd: Thank you, Brad. Council, do you have any questions for Brad? Okay. Do I have a motion? Wardle: Madam Mayor? Meridian City Council July 12,2005 Page 19 of 68 De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Wardle. Wardle: I move that we approve Item No.9, FP 05-039, with the requested changes. Donnell: Second. De Weerd: Okay. Motion to approve Item 9 with the requested changes. Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, absent; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 1 0: Item 12: Item 13: Item 14: FP 05-038 Request for Final Plat approval of 9 commercial building lots and 1 other lot on 4.98 acres in a C-G zone for Bonito Subdivision No.3 by Travis Burrows for Dave Evans Construction - 2967 East Copperpoint Drive: FP 05-041 Request for Final Plat approval of 43 single-family residential building lots and 1 common lot on 9.88 acres in a R-8 zone for Sienna Creek Subdivision No.3 by Sagewood Development, Inc. - north of Ustick Road and North Linder Road: FP 05-042 Request for Final Plat approval for 33 single-family residential building lots and 4 common lots on 6.12 acres in a R-8 zone for Settlement BridQe Subdivision No.3 by Capital Development, Inc. - SEC of North Locust Grove Road and East McMillan Road: TE 05-006 Request for approval of a one-year time extension to record the final plat for Mussell Corner Subdivision by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc. - northeast corner of South Meridian Road and West Victory Road: De Weerd: Thank you. Anna, I'll go ahead -- I understand that Items 10, 12, 13 and 14 have agreement by the applicants. Do you have comments on those items? Canning: No, ma'am, I do not. De Weerd: Eleven we need to visit separately. Donnell: So, 10, 12, 13-- De Weerd: And 14. Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Meridian City Council July 12, 2005 Page 20 of 68 Wardle: Anna, just for clarification, they agree with all of staff's recommendations? Canning: Yes. Wardle: With that, Madam Mayor, I move the approval of Items No.1 0, 12, 13 and 14. Donnell: Second. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve Items 10,12, 13 and 14. Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, absent; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 11: FP 05-040 Request for Final Plat approval of 55 single-family residential building lots and 9 common lots on 11.36 acres in a R-8 zone for Sienna Creek Subdivision No.2 by Sagewood Development, Inc. - north of Ustick Road and North Linder Road: De Weerd: Thank you. Item 11 is FP 05-040. I will ask for staff comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, we had to pull this one off the usual agenda, not just -- not because the staff -- or not because the applicant is in disagreement with the conditions of approval, it was with regard to some confusion as to what was approved. Shortly before the preliminary plat hearing I noticed that there were attached units referenced in the staff report, but I had never seen any attached units and elevations for them and we generally require that of a planned development. So, I quickly got with the applicant, Mrs. Wanner, and discussed that with her -- Wanner-Sisler. Sorry. And we -- at the Council hearing on the preliminary plat, we discussed that issue, that we hadn't seen anything for attached. So, this -- this subdivision was only approved for detached units. We thought we had addressed it at that time. When the final plat came up, we realized that there was still some confusion that -- that hadn't gotten resolved at that hearing. What it is is these -- there is two lots as alley loaded product, as you see in the circle here. Those were designed with a longer, narrower lot, as typically seen, but the staff report was treating those as the attached product. It was never the intent of the applicant, although that is the way that their letter was written, but it -- so staff was just going by the applicant's request -- initial request. This gets very confusing and I'm sorry, but that's why I had to bring it to you, because it got very confusing. Basically, what happened is you approved only detached units, approved this layout, this is the layout they want, but it doesn't meet the dimensional standards that were approved with the planned development. The alley loaded lots meet the dimensional standards of the attached units. They don't meet the dimensional standards of the detached units. We have tried to think of a number of ways of cleaning this up. Ultimately, it needed to come back to you for clarification. So, Meridian City Council July 12,2005 Page 21 of 68 we figured that we would just do it with the final plat, seemed the most expedient manner. So, I believe that when you approved it, you intended to approve detached product on those alley loaded lots in this configuration and that's exactly what the applicant is asking is for with this final plat. So, the approved -- the final plat is in substantial compliance with the approved preliminary plat, it just doesn't match up with the planned development. So, the applicant is in agreement with all the conditions of approval, except -- De Weerd: Okay. Rountree: Clear it up, Shaun. Wardle: Just one question before we move forward. Mr. City Attorney, do we need to amend the development agreement to allow this subdivision to become built as is shown on this plat? Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I guess in all the discussion I don't know that we have a development agreement on this -- Canning: I don't think so. Nary: -- parcel and that was part of the development agreement. What I understood from the preparation we had today is you approved that map, that plat. You just approved it based on comments that don't match up with the plat, but you approved it already. So, unless there was a development agreement that specifically said there was detached homes that were required, I don't think we will have to amend it. And Mrs. Canning is shaking her head no. So I think we are okay. Wardle: With that, Madam Mayor, I move that we approve Item No. 11, FP 05-040, as brought forward. De Weerd: Do I have a second? Rountree: I will second that. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve Item 11 and staffs recommendations. Mr. Berg, will you make comment? Berg: No. I'm waiting for the motion. De Weerd: Okay. You have no comment. Berg: No. De Weerd: Okay. Will you call roll. Meridian City Council July 12, 2005 Page 22 of 68 Roll-Call: Bird, absent; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 15: MI 05-007 Request to connect to the city water system as the primary source of irrigation water for Troy Place Subdivision by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc. - 1236 East 2 % Street: De Weerd: Okay. Item 15 is MI 05-007. Anna. Oh. Brad. Watson: Thank you, again, Madam Mayor. This is simply a miscellaneous application to request a waiver of the pressurized irrigation system on Troy Place Subdivision. It's a very small little parcel with, I think, two lots. There is only one site-specific condition of approval involving the payment of well development fees in lieu of using surface water for pressurized irrigation. I don't believe I have a letter from the applicant and I'm not sure if the applicant is here tonight, but -- oh, the applicant is indicating they are in agreement with the one site specific condition on this, so unless there are any questions, I have nothing further. De Weerd: So-- Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: I'm sorry. Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Madam Mayor. Brad, is there any activity with the irrigation district for that part of two to ultimately look at some kind of a system? Watson: Madam Mayor, Councilmember Rountree, I would really doubt it. We do hear of activity and regional plans in some of the places that are growing, but this older part of town I have not heard anything. Rountree: I know they are delivering water to parts of it, so I just wondered if they were thinking about maybe putting it in a line. Watson: I do not know. Rountree: You haven't heard? Okay. Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Any other questions for staff? Okay. Do I have a motion? Donnell: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mrs. Donnell. Meridian City Council July 12.2005 Page 23 of 68 Donnell: I'd like to make a motion that we approve Item No. 15, MI 05-007, and its request to connect to the city water system for Troy Place Subdivision. Wardle: Second. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve Item 15. Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, absent; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 16: Continued Public Hearing from June 28, 2005: AZ 05-022 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 1.3 acres from RUT to L-O zone for Touchmark Subdivision by Touchmark of the Treasure Valley - south of East Franklin Road and east of South Eagle Road: De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Item 16 is a continued Public Hearing from June 28th on AZ 05-022. I will start with staff comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this was a continued Public Hearing, because they had failed to properly post, so you have not heard discussion on this item. It is a request to annex the missing link. It's hard to spot the -- there it is. That's the portion that's being requested for annexation and zoning to L-O to match the rest of the Touchmark properties that have previously been annexed. So, this was just a hold out piece. It is 1.3 acres in area. The Planning and Zoning Commission did recommend approval of this application at their June 2nd hearing. The key issues of discussion were the existing access to Franklin Road for the home that's currently there. Staff recommended that that access should eliminated upon development of the property and the Planning and Zoning Commission changed the conditions of approval to reflect that concern. To our knowledge there are no outstanding issue before Council. Hopefully, that was less confusing than the last one. De Weerd: So, Anna, when that house -- when that's developed, then, access would be eliminated? Canning: Yes, ma'am De Weerd: Okay. Council, do you have any questions on this for staff? Rountree: I have none. De Weerd: The applicant -- would you like to make comment? Okay. This is a Public Hearing. Is there anyone in the audience who would like to make comment on this application? Okay. And the applicant has indicated that they are in agreement with all staff recommendations. Meridian City Council July 12, 2005 Page 24 of 68 Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: If there is no further testimony, I move that we close the Public Hearing for Item No. 16. Wardle: Second. De Weerd: Motion to close Item 16. All in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I move that we approved the request for annexation for Touchmark Subdivision, subject to staff comments. Wardle: Second. De Weerd: Okay. Motion to approve Item 16. Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, absent; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Okay. In our agenda -- adoption of the agenda, Items 23 and 24 were moved to this spot. So, I will go ahead open up Public Hearing on Items 23 and 24, AZ 05-021 and PP 05-021, with staff comments. Canning: Just a moment, Mayor. Sorry. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is Redfish project and it is on the east side of Linder Road, south of McMillan Road. It is surrounded by -- De Weerd: Baldwin Park. Canning: Baldwin Park. Thank you. All I could come up with was Bellingham. And, then, the Sawtooth Middle School is directly south of it. It is less than three acres in area and so similar to last week, we are seeing a request to have this property rezoned to a light office designation and they have brought forth a preliminary plat with their application as well. We have got a shift in -- actually, here we have got Linder Road, so north is now going in this direction. They have proposed a fairly simply layout with five buildings. The five buildings have a total of about 21,000 square feet of office uses. The Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended approval of this application. Meridian City CounCil July 12, 2005 Page 25 of 68 They heard it on June 2nd, 2005. The key issues of discussion at that hearing were allowing a day care as conditional use and the hours of operation on the property. The conditions were changed to reflect those discussions. There was no one that spoke in opposition or commenting. There was a letter sent in that -- from a neighbor on -- in Lochsa Subdivision commenting on additional traffic in the area. So, to our knowledge, there are no outstanding issues before City Council. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Questions for staff at this time, Council? Okay. Is the applicant here? Hobbs: Chris Hobbs, Pinnacle Engineers, 12552 West Executive. De Weerd: Thank you. Hobbs: We are in agreement with staff's comments and the conditions of approval. The only thing -- I would address any questions you may have and the only other comment I would make is that changes that were made for the hours of operation and the day care with the CUP, that was because of a previous application that night at P&Z where somebody else requested that had a very similar size project and so the Commission decided we could have the same option and that was all that was. De Weerd: Okay. Hobbs: If you have some questions? De Weerd: Council, any questions? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Do you have any elevations of the proposed buildings? Hobbs: No, we don't at this time, but there is a requirement that they are to be somehow close to the surrounding in size and bulk. There is a condition of approval in there. De Weerd: Okay. Any further questions, Council? Okay. Thank you. Is there anyone wishing to provide testimony on this application? Okay. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, just to clarify the record, the other application that was heard that night was Ashtyn Park, so -- De Weerd: That was my assumption. Canning: Yeah. Meridian City Council July 12,2005 Page 26 of 68 De Weerd: Council, do you need any further information from staff or the applicant? Okay. I would entertain a motion to close. Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Hearing no further testimony, I move that we close the Public Hearing on Items 23 and 24. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to close the Public Hearing on Items 23 and 24. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Any discussion? Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: I move that we approve Item No. 23, AZ 05-021, subject to staff comments. Donnell: Second. De Weerd: Okay. Motion to approve Item 23. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll. Berg: Thank you, Madam Mayor. And I'm just making sure that we are approving the findings also. Thank you. De Weerd: See, that's what I thought you were going to add on that last one. Berg: I couldn't find it quick enough to ask that. De Weerd: Thank you for the clarification. Roll-Call: Bird, absent; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Thank you. Item 24. Meridian City Council July 12, 2005 Page 27 of 68 Wardle: Madam Mayor, I move that we approve Item No. 24, PP 05-021, preliminary plat for Redfish Subdivision. Donnell: Second. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve Item 24. Mr. Berg, will you call roll. With the Findings. Roll-Call: Bird, absent; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 17: Item 18: Item 19: Public Hearing: AZ 05-007 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 43.18 acres from RUT to R-8 zone for BellinQham Park Subdivision by Gemstar Development, LLC - north of Amity Road and east of South Locust Grove Road: Public Hearing: PP 05-009 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 166 building lots and 37 common lots on 43.18 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for BellinQham Park Subdivision by Gemstar Development, LLC - north of Amity Road and east of South Locust Grove Road: Public Hearing: CUP 05-008 Request for a Planned Development consisting of 166 residential units with reductions to the minimum requirements for lot size, street frontage and yard setbacks for Bellingham Park Subdivision by Gemstar Development, LLC - north of Amity Road and east of South Locust Grove Road: De Weerd: Thank you. Items 17,18 and 19 are public hearings on AZ 05-007, PP 05- 009, and CUP 05-008. We will open these public hearings with staff comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, I need to scroll up for a bit. Okay. Thank you for waiting. This is Bellingham Park. It is located south of Victory Road and east of Locust Grove Road. That's Locust Grove there. It is a request for annexation and zoning, preliminary plat and Conditional Use Permit for a planned development. This project is 166 single- family residents and 22 common lots on 43.18 acres and they have proposed an R-8 zone. The planned development is requested for a reduction in minimum lot size and that would be from 6,500 square feet to 4,140 square feet minimum and for street frontage from 65 feet to 31 feet minimum. And also yard setbacks. The initial request was for a side yard of zero feet and, then, five feet for rear side entry garages. Amenities are a 2.6 acre park -- 2.67. Sorry. And, then, other open spaces, the 1.21 acres, .77 acres, and .67 acres. The existing home is to be remodeled as a clubhouse and that's in this area and I had a picture of that existing home, albeit from a distance later. And multi-use pathways are also proposed and I'd like to let the applicant show those pathways. The gross residential density is 2.84 dwelling units per acre. There are a couple other issues. One is that the Ten Mile Creek, as shown here, does have a .. --- " Meridian City Council July 12,2005 Page 28 of 68 designated flood plane and that was on the original one I showed you. It comes pretty much parallel to the creek and, then, goes in at this feature here. There is weir here where a drainage facility goes across the Ten Mile. I also have pictures of that that I will get to in a moment. The applicant intends to address that flood plane through a letter of map revision. They have not completed that yet, but that is addressed in the conditions of approval and we will get into those details as well. Okay. Here is another picture of the flood plane. You can see it in the blue. You can see how it backs up on that -- at that intersection where the weir feature is. This is -- on the property this is the Ridenbaugh Canal, so that was the other major feature. This where the future park would be at the entrance of the facility. I believe this is Locust Grove over there. This is that weir structure with Ten Mile below. There is water in this structure going this way and, then, Ten Mile is coming this way. This is looking into the site. So, this is actually- - this would be on the Bellingham Park site and we will see those later in the -- one of the other pictures. This was that specific condition related to the LOMAR and, basically, what it says is that if they don't get that changed, then, they need to come back with a new preliminary plat or they need to not develop in those flood plane areas. The Planning and Zoning Commission did hold a hearing on June 2nd, 2005, and they have recommended approval with conditions. The key issues of discussion -- there was about eight, so I will go through those. The first was connectivity of Bellingham Park to Messina Meadows, which is the next project, and they connect along their eastern property line and, then, looking up the open -- open space and pathway systems in those two projects, as well as the connecting road system. The location of the multi-use pathway for the Ten Mile Creek and the Ridenbaugh were discussed. The impact of groundwater on the site, the number of monitoring wells and the consistency of the soil to maintain building sites with high groundwater and compacted soils was discussed as well. That comes up in the soils report. The Ten Mile Creek flood plane, as I have described, the mixed medium and low-density housing products and lot sizes, especially south of the project. Conversion of the existing home site on the proposed Lot 15, Block 5, to an amenity, and the addition or relocation of open space lots to facilitate maintenance and protection of the Ridenbaugh Canal and the Ten Mile Creek waterways. And, then, also the Commission discussed having no zero lot line products included within the development. Those that testified in favor were Dave Bailey with Bailey Engineering, Susan Wildwood, Steve Glasgow and Gem Star Development. No one spoke in opposition, although there were several people commenting, including Michael Gray, who lives on South Locust Grove, Jason Wolf, also who lives on South Locust Grove. Kara Dalton. She is south of the property on Ten Mile Creek. And Kent Brown with Briggs Engineering, who was testifying on behalf of Messina Meadows, I believe. The key Commission changes to staff's initial recommendation -- the Commission asked the applicant to submit the amended and revised preliminary plat to staff prior to the City Council hearing. Staff received a revised drawing on June 16th. All references or approvals should be from the final drawing dated June 12th, 2005. The Commission also asked to add a condition number five to the planned development regarding no zero lot line properties. With regard to outstanding issues, although staff was able to develop conditions of approval that would enable staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission to make the findings for approval, staff wants to be clear that there are severe -- at least significant constraints on this property. This particular property I Meridian City Council July 12, 2005 Page 29 of 68 think has some of the highest groundwater levels we have seen, coupled with some of the most poor soils in those areas that we have seen. And the flood plan issue is still a little bit outstanding, even though staff has come up with conditions of approval related to that. So, we just want the Council to be aware of these concerns. It does, however, come forward with a recommendation for approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission. With that I can let you ask if you have more specific questions on some of the soils or high groundwater issues. I think Mr. Watson is better equipped to handle those questions. De Weerd: Anna, with those concerns, are you requiring or while requiring individual each lot has some kind of a system -- a pumping system -- and for the life of me I can't remember what it's called right now. French drain or the sump pumps that -- Canning: I don't believe we are. I can look through the conditions of approval while Brad -- Watson: Madam Mayor, Council Members, condition number 17 in the preliminary plat requires that all residential construction that falls into certain soils groups, comply with the residential code and the site specific number pertaining to drains around concrete foundations and drainage systems and that sort of thing. So, there is a site-specific comment in there that refers to the building code. De Weerd: Okay. As long as people understand that that is what it means. Maybe that needs to be clarified or a little bit stronger language. I don't know. I know when you have this kind of situation and, then, you have any poor grading on any of those lots, it's just a mess and it pits neighbor against neighbor -- it's really an ugly situation. We have had it happen before. If this is already a concern, it probably needs to be looked as a requirement in that entire area, but I would ask the developer to make comment on that. Council, do you have any specific questions for staff at this time? Okay. Would the applicant like to comment. Wildwood: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. For the record, my name is Susan Wildwood, I'm an attorney with offices in Boise and I'm here on behalf of Gem Star Properties and I'll leap right into the breech on the Mayor's question. With regard to those areas that are within the flood plane, Mr. Dave Bailey is here and he can answer all the technical issues. there has been a lot of work on this project, but in areas where -- that are within the flood area, the other option is -- and we have actually suggested this to staff -- that we would proceed also with slab on grade, so it would avoid the crawl space kinds of issues. So, that is something that will have been resolved before we come back to you with the final plat. So, we will be looking at the FEMA letter revision, we will be looking at slab on grade, so that we don't run into the crawl space issues that have occurred in other areas. I would like to also thank staff. We have had a significant amount of work, a number of meetings with your staff, Chief Musser, I haven't exactly talked to Chief Anderson, but we have had a lot of work on this particular project trying to resolve a lot of issues. We went through a redesign with regard to the roads, so that we changed the road sections, which is what resulted in the Meridian City Council July 12, 2005 Page 30 of 68 reduction from 37 common lots down to 22. And if I can just go through those very quickly. It may be a bit easier to see. I mean those blue lines are a little bit tougher, so we will show you the pretty one here. De Weerd: Could you put that up on the stand or up by the screen? Yeah. Rountree: Should be one right there on the podium. De Weerd: You can either do that or use the microphone and point at it. Wildwood: Actually, that might be a bit better, if you don't mind, Mayor. With regard to this project -- now, can everybody see? Am lout of the way enough? The large area that Anna has referred to, we have a park in this area. There will be a gazebo. This is an open space area that's designed for recreation. We have moved the more formal recreation, if you will, away from the -- the road, so that we have a basketball court over in this direction in this park area. We have the existing residences here. We had planned on remodeling that residence. I just received information today from the architect that what we are going to have to do is not remodel it, but tear it down and I have some elevations showing you what that clubhouse will be. So, this will be an amenity with a parking lot, a pool, a clubhouse, this large park amenity in this direction, pocket parks in these areas. We have this park area and this park area. This connects in with Messina park. The pathway comes up along the Ten Mile, it comes in, goes into Messina park in this area to connect with their pathway system. The pathway, then, comes on over toward Locust Grove, providing connection to the properties to the west and, then, goes up again and connects to the north, again, with the Messina parkway. I worked with Chief Musser, I spent some time talking to staff. Also Tammy Anderson at the Nampa.Meridian Irrigation District. This facility Anna has mentioned up here on the Ridenbaugh and Ten Mile is -- they have actually completely revamped that spillway. It's now all-electronic. They were very adamant that we keep all traffic away from both the Ridenbaugh and the Ten Mile in this area, one, because of the extreme danger in this spillway, it can blowout in about five seconds and change the water direction, velocity, et cetera. Plus all of the electronics. Nampa-Meridian actually has a facility across the road here, so they would not allow any connectivity onto their property in any event, have wanted to pull all the traffic away. So, I met with Doug Strong of parks, we looked at the Comprehensive Plan, where could we pull it away and still achieve the city's desire to have a location for the regional pathway system still connecting into Messina and accomplish Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District's desire to pull the public away from that. So, we have all of our common area down away from waterways and the dangers that they provide. I also have -- on the photo board that's leaning up against there, the product for the alley-loaded lots. Those will not be attached housing, but that gives you a sample of the housing that we expect to see here on the alley- loaded lots in this particular area. And, again, we connect to the Messina park on the top and so that it matches right in and provides connectivity clear through both of those projects from Locust Grove and there are bridges -- you will be seeing some information from Mr. Brown after you consider this particular case, showing where the bridges connect north and south. There is a requirement that we have secondary access before Meridian City Council July 12, 2005 Page 31 of 68 developing more than 50 lots. We concur with all the recommendations of staff and Mr. Bailey, who is here to answer all of those other technical questions that I cannot, will provide you that additional information on FEMA and any of the engineering questions that you might have. Without belaboring the point, we certainly concur with staff's recommendations, the conditions for specific approval, and request that you give us a favorable nod and with that I would be happy to stand for any questions, Madam Mayor. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Susan. Council, any questions for the applicant? Do you have any questions for the engineer? Rountree: Yes. De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Bailey. Thank you, Susan. Bailey: Madam Mayor, Councilmembers, my name is David Bailey, Bailey Engineering. My office address is 1500 East Iron Eagle Drive in Eagle, representing Gem Star Development for the Bellingham project. I can go ahead and answer questions or I can talk a little bit about what we talked about so far and kind of give you an overview of the work we have done on the project. So, either way you want to go. I guess I'll just answer questions, if that's what you'd like me to do. Rountree: Madam Mayor, if you want to give a information that would helpful. Bailey: Okay. I guess the -- in one, I feel like I have been a failure throughout this with your staff and with some folks in explaining what the groundwater problem is here and what we are going to do about it and have it done and, hopefully, we can get through that, but we have done extensive groundwater monitoring on the site, have done -- and, in fact, since the planning and zoning meeting we have actually added five more piezometers to measure the groundwater level out there and the thing I'm -- have been earlier in talking about it, is that the flood plane does not equal the high groundwater and the flood plane is not the cause of the high groundwater, the actual highest groundwater closest to the surface level is, actually, in the northwest corner of the site and that's -- and that's part of the reason that we chose not to have any houses in that area, because we can keep that dry, but we don't want to be filling that area and we know that's where the highest groundwater level is. The groundwater on the site is definitely caused by irrigation and although there is a regional groundwater problem and a lot of the projects we deal with we have perched water table, we have water sitting on top, and there is not necessarily water underneath that, but there is definitely -- from the groundwater that we hit here, the groundwater continues down below that we certainly understand that -- that area. The drainage for this property is -- is the Ten Mile Creek. The property, unfortunately, drains on the surface from the southeast to the northwest and so the grading on the site goes to northwest here. So, our highest groundwater level problems are not near the creek where the flood plane is, but, actually, in the northwest corner and there was no water outlet from that corner for the surface irrigation to go through there. And we do have some water in that area that's approximately 1.3 feet is the measured level. When the field is actually being irrigated there is standing Meridian City Council July 12,2005 Page 32 of 68 water in that northwest corner, but the groundwater measurements we have made when active irrigation is not going on, is showing us that, actually, within the week that we are about 1.3 feet below surface level in the northwest corner of the site. As to the flood plane on this project, we have actually completed all the study and all of the calculations and hired Paul Coons as our engineer to do the flood plane study on this, completed all that, and he said, well, okay, as soon as you remove the culverts from the Ten Mile Drain and do the grading in there, I can submit the letter to FEMA. So, it's not that we failed to submit the letter, it's that we can't until we actually do the work that's in there and provide him the information to submit that letter. So, we are ready to do that, but we are not going to go dig those pipes out of there until we think we can move forward with the project. So, that's the condition we are in there. We are definitely in agreement with the staff conditions and I know your staff has put a lot of effort into this in helping coming up with conditions that the city could feel comfortable with on this end and we can meet those conditions. They include contours that show the actual high groundwater levels throughout the site. So, groundwater level contours that are showing where we are, and it also will show the finished floor elevation of all the houses to be built on the project. And while that may seem onerous, it's something that we do quite often for a lot of subdivisions. In fact, the city -- excuse me -- Ada County has been requiring that on all their subdivisions for quite some time, even when there is not groundwater, that we provide these plans that your building department keeps and can make sure that the builder is following those recommendations. We have a geotechnical engineer involved. Any fill we do on the site will certainly be compacted and tested and all documented and that will be done during the construction process and, then, they are requiring an individual compaction test on each lot and, then, that grading plan will also specify that you're building permit will also specify that all of the houses must be built using slab on grade construction and not with crawl spaces. The last item I have on there is that we have met with the Ada County Highway District on several occasions and in the most recent occasion confirmed with them that they were comfortable with the roadside swale, which is an approved road section that they have, so we are not going to have retention ponds or storm drain ponds on the site that could contain water over a long period of time and there will be roadside swales that are constructed in accordance with the Ada County Highway District standards and their staff in our meetings have indicated that we meet all of their requirements to construct that alternate road section. So, I think we have -- and it is a difficult site. There is certainly a lot of things to go on here and I think the additional conditions of approval that are placed on it are appropriate and necessary to make sure that we don't have the problems that the Mayor was discussing with the neighbors in the future and we have safely and effective, in a helping manner, build homes on the property. So, given that, I would be glad to answer any other questions you might have. De Weerd: Any questions from Council? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. -..- Meridian City Council July 12, 2005 Page 33 of 68 Rountree: You indicated that your resolution of the flood plane issue is installation of new culverts on Ten Mile; correct? Bailey: There is, actually, three 36-inch culverts that's in Ten Mile Creek at this point Our proposal is to remove all three of those, because they are the ones that are causing the water to flow outside of the channel during a flood -- a hundred year flood event per the calculations in any case. So, we will remove all three of those 36-inch culverts and we will actually place an 84-inch culvert at the road crossing location, that we are showing going across the Ten Mile Creek here. That is, actually, Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District's property and we have had discussions with them and we will submit our application -- all the construction plans to them to remove those culverts and to place a new one and, of course, there is Army Corps of Engineer permits and EPA permits that are required to do that and license agreements associated with that. So, we are working all those actually right now. We have started working on them already. Rountree: Do you have a willing participant in the form of the irrigation district? Bailey: With Nampa -- yes. Yes. I actually talked with John Anderson of the irrigation district way early on about this project and about the Ten Mile Creek and what would be appropriate to do and these conditions are on here with the flood plane and this issue actually was in Tuscany to the north of this project and they had the same conditions in Messina to the southeast of this project And, actually, Messina Meadows needs us to pull those three culverts to get rid of this flood plane that's on their project. They have got the same study -- or an additional portion of that study completed for their project. They need these culverts removed in order for them to get the LOMAR done on their project as well. So, they kind of work together. Rountree: You mentioned that the water table or first water or whatever the situation is in northwest portion of your project is where -- it's closest to the surface. Has the site been evaluated for wetlands and does the Corps claim any jurisdiction over any portion or all of this area? Bailey: We have walked the site with our geotechnical engineer in that end, we have dealt with quite a few of the wetlands issues. In fact, we had about I think six applications before the Corps right now and we don't feel that we have a wetlands issue that needs to be handled on this site at this point. Rountree: You talked about the roadside swale typical section on road or roads. Would that be typical section on all of the collectors in the subdivision or is that primarily going to be in the main access -- Bailey: All of the streets -- the public streets within the subdivision are proposed to be -- and it's shown on the preliminary plat that we submitted -- a 36-foot edge-to-edge -- actually, it's 32 feet of asphalt and, then, two foot ribbon curb on either side, and eight foot wide swale, and a detached sidewalk outside of that. So, all of interior streets are proposed to be built to that standard. We are discussing Ada County Highway District -- Meridian City Council July 12,2005 Page 34 of 68 we have an alternate, instead of the ribbon curb, to do a vertical curb and have specific points where the water could discharge. So, along the north side of the main entry road that runs along the south of the western part of the project, doing a vertical curb on the north side there, because we don't have lots accessing from that north side. And we are going to do vertical curb for Locust Grove to the first intersection on the entrance road. But the roadside would be all the rest of the interior roads would be the roadside swales type construction. Rountree: And whose jurisdiction would be the swale and -- be ACHD's or the property owners? Bailey: Yes. And what we have actually done is the right of way that we are proposing is 62 feet wide, as opposed to your standard 50 feet wide. We have seen some applications where they place the sidewalk in an easement outside of the right of way. Our section includes all of the road, swale, and sidewalk within the right of way section. So, our setbacks would be measured from the property line and wouldn't have to be pushed back for the -- for the sidewalk to make sure you got 20 feet in front of the building. Rountree: And who takes care of that no man's land? Bailey: Ada County Highway District and there is a licensed agreement for maintenance of that swale in front of the house by the individual property owners. Rountree: Is there a standard identified in the CC&Rs? Bailey: I'm not familiar with the CC&Rs, but Susan Wildwood says there will be. Rountree: Thank you. De Weerd: I guess I just want some clarity. The high groundwater is caused by the culverts? Bailey: Madam Mayor, the high groundwater is caused by irrigation. The flood plane, which is a -- flood plane, as shown on these maps, is a calculated number and I guess to back up a little bit and maybe answer that a little better, is that the highest groundwater is in that northwest corner and that's where the irrigation water that currently irrigates the site and runs off the site to the south of this, collects in that area and it can't get to the Ten Mile Drain, because it's uphill that way. And so it does pond in that area. There is no drain to the west across Locust Grove on this property. So, that the flood plane is a different issue. It's actually a calculated number and, in fact, this is what is -- what we call an unnumbered -- currently it's an unnumbered A zone and in the production of the flood plane maps that FEMA does, they do actual detailed calculations on some areas and on other areas they look at them from an aerial map and say here is my flood, let's show a flood plane here. And so even if we were not going to get rid of the flood plane and we had proposed to build in there, we would have Meridian City Council July 12, 2005 Page 35 of 68 to go and do this detailed study just to show how high we would need to build the houses, because there are no elevations from FEMA associated with unnumbered A zones. So, we don't even know what that elevation is, all we have is this nondescript line on a map. So, every time we run into one of these unnumbered A zones in any project -- and, in fact, again, in Tuscany to the north it was an unnumbered A zone until Paul Coons did the study and provided that to -- to the developer of Tuscany, showing that, in fact, the calculated flow for the flood event, the hundred year flood event, really stays inside the channel. In our case it didn't stay inside the channel. In fact, in their case they made them pull out a -- I think a 72 inch culvert that was up to the north that was blocking that they pull. Then, they could show that it would stay in the channel. In our case, the three 36 inch culverts, once they were removed, the calculation shows that the flood would stay in the channel and not actually flood into those areas. But that's talking about a situation of a -- of a one hundred year storm event and the contributing area of this goes miles south of this project in this channel. And so there is a calculated volume of water that needs to flow through this area, should there be that flood event. So, it's kind of independent of the high groundwater issue. De Weerd: And those calculations are taking into account the different changes with bringing in fill and all of that, up and down whatever changes are being made. Bailey: Through all the projects. Yeah. And, actually, with this -- with this current site and the study we have there now, if we just took a trackhoe in there and removed those three culverts from that area, the calculations show that without any other grading, that it would maintain the flood within the channel. De Weerd: I guess I would just have -- do you have specific builders that would be building in this subdivision? Bailey: I do not know the answer to that. The developer usually develops lots and typically sells them to either a builder or a group of builders, but I don't know the names of them. De Weerd: Okay. Well, do they have experience building in these kind of situations? Bailey: Yes. De Weerd: And do you have design standards and are some of these dealt with -- the building specifications and requirements go through the CC&Rs? Okay. Wardle: Madam Mayor? Bailey: I'm sorry I'm not very good at that. I normally do dirt. De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Meridian City Council July 12.2005 Page 36 of 68 Wardle: If you could point out to me where we are talking about the slab-on-grade foundations. Is it within the flood zone or is it over here in this corner? Bailey: It is the entire project. The entire project we will require all houses to be built with slab-on-grade construction and we will specify in our plan what that finished floor elevation has to be to make sure that there is proper drainage away from the houses. And also show lot drainage pattern. So, we will actually grade all of the lot pads with the conception of the subdivision. They will be all graded. So, the grader needs to go in, dig the hole for his foundation, set the top of the slab at the elevation that we give them for the house and, then, do the find grading on the -- on the project. De Weerd: And who follows up with that? Is that one of our inspectors' responsibility or is that something monitored through your subdivision? Watson: Madam Mayor, Councilmembers, it would be something that will be checked through the building department. There will be a master grading and drainage plan. I didn't get a chance to really -- and Mr. Bailey did hit some of the highlights of the site- specific comments -- or condition number 16. It requires this master grading and drainage plan that will be reviewed by engineering and, then, transferred to the building department for a follow up. We will not be doing the survey to certify where those are, but we will be requiring that from the builders or their surveyor. De Weerd: Okay. Any further questions? Thank you. Bailey: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. This is a Public Hearing. Is there anyone in the audience who would like to provide testimony on this application? Please come forward. Please state your name and address for the record. Brown: For the record, Kent Brown, 1800 West Overland, Boise, Idaho. I guess I'll tell you a fable with regards to flood plane. A good story -- at least it's a story that was told when I was at Boise city and worked for the city with regards to flood plane. J.R. Simplot has a small house, or used to, that sits up at Bogus Basin Road area and he has gullies on either side of him. So, what Mr. Bailey was talking about with the gullies on either side, those are flood ways. So, someone smart from the map says, well, those are -- have to overlap, because they are so close and Mr. Simplot's house is in a flood way. Obviously, we have common sense to know that that's not the case, but that's kind of how those maps were originally done. And so the flood ways that are shown on here are just lines that there is -- there is streams here and there is a possible flood way. Mr. Coons has done a detail study and as soon as those three pipes are removed, that removes it down into the channel. As she stated, we have dealt with those same issues when we did Tuscany Lakes. Came into the same guidelines that we were looking at before. The roadside swales that they are talking about are the same roadside swales that we are using to the north. The highway district has standards that they want the CC&Rs to look about for the maintenance of those. We ..- - Meridian City Council July 12,2005 Page 37 of 68 are very grateful for Mr. Mills that's sitting here and what the highway district's done to come up with this alternative street section. And particularly in this area, some areas in Star, they are a great asset. We have already got one plat already done, Messina Hills Two, and I just took -- you know, different times when we've had those early spring rains and the ponds were all filled up in the development, but those roadside swales were dry. It's a great method, it just makes a lot of sense. I understand what the highway district's concerns are is the long-term getting them into shape and they had the guidelines and they had the set standards to assure that they are going to be taken care of. And from a development community standpoint, we want them to work and so we are very supportive that those happen, too. And I'll stand for any questions. De Weerd: Any questions for Mr. Brown? Okay. Thank you. Further testimony? Okay. Final comment? Wildwood: Just would, again, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, we really have appreciated the hard work of the staff and all the folks. This has had a really long hard look and there has been a lot of head scratching, but we think we have come up with a project that -- because it can be developed appropriately, offers some real advantages to the City of Meridian and a lot of wonderful amenities to the folks that we hope to have building in there and the slab on grade is going to avoid a lot of those problems that, as Mr. Brown pointed out, the CC&Rs are reviewed by the building department, the slab on grade and the planning ought to bring this project forward and be something the city can be proud of and thank you very much for your time. De Weerd: Can you tell me who the builders are in this -- Wildwood: On this particular project I cannot. I know there is a variety of builders that we will be looking at. I'm not -- I don't have any information that says it's going to be anyone particular builder. I think there is a group of them, but I'm not sure exactly who they are. And Mr. Glasgow was not able to be with us tonight, so he could have probably specified that better than I. So, I'm sorry, I don't have that information. De Weerd: And I guess I asked it just because of the conditions that we want to assure -- I would like to be assured that the people that will be building in there know what they are doing. Wildwood: Correct. And that's -- by working with the staff and having the level of detail that we are looking at by requiring the slab on grade, the inspections, the CC&Rs, the kind of work that Mr. Bailey has done, those kinds of things will go a long way. We are not going to run into the kind of water in the crawl space that's occurred in some of the area that have caused problems, not only in Meridian, but also in Boise. By doing all of these, the compaction on each one of the lots, by having to have the survey for where the exact locations are of the elevations that Dave was talking about, each one of those are an extra effort, so that the product itself is really going to be a quality one. We are not going to have those kinds of problems, simply because of all of the different elements that have to be in, simply a requirement in the CC&Rs, which, as we all know, Meridian City Council July 12,2005 Page 38 of 68 can be changed. These are the grading plans, the building permits; all of those go in place. So, before a certificate of occupancy is issued, each one of those technical requirements are met. Same thing as the LOMAR on the FEMA with the flood plane. Each one of those items have to be met before development can occur in any of those areas, particularly in those two phases. De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Though not shown or presented to the Council, you have a board up here with some product. Is that the project that will be delivered on this project or just a pretty picture? Wildwood: Well, they are pretty pictures. What these represent are the alley-loaded homes. They do not show garages at the back. Most people have a question as to what the alley loads are going to look like, which is why we put this photo board together. So, this represents alley-loaded properties that are in the area. Some are in Boise. Some are in some of the other areas. But that's generally the question that we run into. The CC&Rs will, of course, have that minimum square footage. They will have the -- shoot, I always forget what it's called. The hard surface that has to be wrapped on the front, whether it's stone or brick or whatever that sort of thing is specified there. But this gives you an idea of the alley loads. Because of the different -- different size that -- and if I can just refer to the drawings again. We put it on this like quadruple heavy foam board, so if I drop it, I apologize. You will notice that there is a significant difference in lot sizes. These were negotiated out with the landowners to the west who have large properties. So, we have got larger properties against them. You have got the alley loads. So, we have got a significant variety as far as lot sizes and home sizes in the area. We will see fairly widespread product in just this project alone. And, then, you have got the differences again in Messina Park and Tuscany to the north. Rountree: Thank you. De Weerd: Any further questions? Okay. Wildwood: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. De Weerd: Okay. If there is no further testimony-- Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, just because there has been a lot of discussion about this slab on grade, I did want to point out that staff has not made it a requirement for the slab on grade construction. It talks about this slab on grade construction is used in conjunction with typical footings. Builders of each lot shall comply with all recommendations contained in applicant's geo-technical engineering Meridian City Council July 12, 2005 Page 39 of 68 report dated 6/10/04. So, it allows for slab on grade and gives them specific conditions as to what should happen, but it does not currently require slab-on-grade construction. Rountree: Madam Mayor? Do you have a question? Wardle: Well, I was just going to-- De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Madam Mayor, I was just going to ask for clarification, because I believe my question to the applicant and the response was that all of the lots will be slab on grade. So, would planning staff like to add that as a condition of approval? Canning: Certainly. If the City Council would like to add that as a condition of approval, that's fine. We just didn't make it a requirement -- I guess we would just leave the option open. If, for some reason, that slab on grade wasn't appropriate for one lot, it left it open, but I think -- we don't have any concerns about making it a condition of approval. Wardle: Okay. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I have a question for Anna. Would you put this development in context with what's around it? Anna: Certainly, sir. And you're going to stump me a little bit, because I'm not sure where Tuscany begins and Messina begins and Tuscany ends, but I believe that these are the Tuscany projects and, then, these are the Messina projects over here. And, then, it -- they come through off of Eagle Road, it connects in, this is the school site, I believe, and, then, these have gone through final plat through you. I don't think they have been signed yet. They are not showing up on our -- as platted lots. And if you had more questions, this man might be able to help me. They are recorded, they are just not showing up. So, these are all recorded and, then, you have approved final plats on all of those over here. So, this does connect over through the next application and, then, back up into Messina and Tuscany. Rountree: I know that the key along side of that tells me something, but at this point I can't read it clearly and I have trouble with colors anyway, so -- I think they are all yellow, but I think they are different shades of yellow. Canning: R-4 zoning in these areas. This is an R~8 zoning. A little darker. And they are proposing R-8 zoning. And Messina Meadow is also proposing R-8 zoning. Meridian City Council July 12, 2005 Page 40 of 68 Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Another question. What number or percentage of the lots that we are talking about that would require reduced frontage and/or lot sizes. Canning: If you can give me a moment, I could see if it's in the staff report. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, 144 of the 166 lots are below the 64 foot minimum frontage requirement and 135 of the 166 lots are below the 6,500 square foot minimum. De Weerd: And what's the net density? Canning: You will have to ask the applicant. I did not find it in -- Rountree: 3.8. Canning: That's the gross density. De Weerd: Oh. Yeah. There is no net density. Canning: I was not able to find a net density either. De Weerd: I wouldn't have accepted this application. Now, as I understand it, the number of other lots was reduced. Is that right, Susan? Isn't that what you said? But the number of building lots were not. Were they increased? Okay. The answer was no, Dean. You couldn't hear that, could you. Okay. Council, any further information? Mr. Watson, you have a comment? Watson: I'm sorry, Madam Mayor. Just one point of information that should reflect either positively or negatively on this, but we are just getting to that point in the south area where I need to bring this to your attention with each application. Based on our sewer modeling and considering the pre-plats that have been approved by Council, we have an estimated 1,079 ERUs left. With this application it would be reduced to approximately 900 and I could give it later, but we will consider it here in a few minutes, if Messina Meadows proceeds forward, that would reduce the available capacity in the Ten Mile Trunk to 424 units. I just wanted to point that out as we start getting to that point. De Weerd: And those calculations, Brad, are those considering -- that's all preliminary platted lots? That wouldn't be the final platted or considering phasing? Watson: Madam Mayor, we consider those ERUs consumed as soon as the preliminary plat is approved. De Weerd: Okay. Meridian City Council July 12,2005 Page 41 of 68 Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Before I guess I give my personal opinion on slab on grade construction, Brad, do you have any professional opinions about that type of housing construction? Watson: Madam Mayor, Councilmember Wardle, no, I don't, other than I have been told it's more expensive and that long-term access -- future access to some of your utilities is a little bit difficult. Wardle: Thank you. De Weerd: And considering the price of concrete -- okay. Mr. Wardle, please, share your opinion. Wardle: And, Madam Mayor, just to make my comment on slab-on-grade construction for housing and that I don't see it as a deterrent to having a quality housing development. In some ways it is more beneficial. I personally being one of those individuals that doesn't like to get down and crawl around underneath my home. Certainly it has some advantages in a situation like this, having an applicant ask that it be -- or at least offer to make it a requirement to relieve some groundwater issues that may potentially in the future become an issue is certainly something to consider. So, that was my personal opinion. De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Wardle. Is there any further comment? I would entertain a motion. Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Hearing no further comment, I move that we close the public hearings on Items 17,18and19. Donnell: Second. De Weerd: Okay. Motion to close Items 17 through 19. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Wardle: Madam Mayor, question for legal counsel. Where would that additional requirement fit in, Mr. Nary? Meridian City Council July 12, 2005 Page 42 of 68 Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilman Wardle, I think the discussion we had was probably putting it in the development agreement, would be appropriate and probably in the conditions of approval as well for the planned development would make the most sense. So, in Items 17 and 19. Wardle: Seventeen and nineteen? And would we need to bring back the Findings for that or -- Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council member Wardle, since it was just a recommendation at the Planning and Zoning level and was not included in the Findings that are before you, yes, I would recommend that we bring them back in two weeks with that addition. Wardle: All right. Madam Mayor, with that I move that we approve Item 17, AZ 05-007, request for annexation and zoning for Bellingham Park Subdivision and to include all staff and applicant comments and to include the condition as stated by the applicant that each of the foundations for the homes be required to be slab-on-grade construction and to bring back those amended Findings. Donnell: Second. De Weerd: Okay. The motion to approve Item 17. If there is no further discussion -- Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I just need to make a comment. I'm really torn with this particular application. There is a lot of issues with the site and appreciate the amount of time and energy that's gone into trying to make it work. I'm not sure it does. I'm concerned about if we annex this into the city, we are annexing into the city a subdivision that's taken full advantage of a planned unit development and pretty much -- pretty nearly, entirely, is an exception to what we would consider an R-8 lot as a minimum and not necessarily consistent with its neighbor to the north. I see wide streets and shallower lots and long streets with every house being 20 feet off the road and looking exactly like the neighbors. And I don't see amenities in this particular subdivision that shout out to compensate or add to the value of having to this kind of development to Meridian. For those reasons I probably will not vote in favor of that motion. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you for your comments. Is there any further discussion? Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, absent; Rountree, nay; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea. MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES. ONE NAY. ONE ABSENT. Meridian City Council July 12,2005 Page 43 of 68 De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Item 18. Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: I move that we approve Item 18, PP 05-009, to include all staff, applicant and public comments, including the comments of the addition to the CC&Rs in regard to maintenance of the road swales. Donnell: Second. De Weerd: Okay. Motion to approve Item 18. Is there any discussion? Mr. Berg. Berg: Thank you, Madam Mayor. Are the Findings okay to approve or-- Nary: Madam Mayor. De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Nary. Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I think since we are going to have the other ones, I would -- you can certainly approve them tonight, but I have them follow it on the 26th, as well, with the other, so that way they stay together as one project. Roll-Call: Bird, absent; Rountree, nay; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea. MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES. ONE NAY. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Okay. Item 19. Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Madam Mayor, I move that we approve Item No. 19, CUP 05-008, planned development for Bellingham Park Subdivision and to include all staff and applicant comments, in addition to the two previous conditions in regard to slab on grade construction and roadways. Donnell: Second. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve Item 19. Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, absent; Rountree, nay; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea. MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES. ONE NAY. ONE ABSENT. Item 20: Public Hearing: AZ 05-017 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 137.96 acres from RUT to R-8 zone for Messina Meadows Subdivision Meridian City Council July 12,2005 Page 44 of 68 by Tuscany Development, Inc. - on South Eagle Road between East Victory Road and East Amity Road: Item 21: Public Hearing: PP 05-019 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 491 building lots and 67 other lots on 136.72 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Messina Meadows Subdivision by Tuscany Development, Inc. - on South Eagle Road between East Victory Road and East Amity Road: Item 22: Public Hearing: CUP 05-026 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development for single-family detached residential building units and single-family attached patio homes in a proposed R-8 zone for Messina Meadows Subdivision by Tuscany Development, Inc. - on South Eagle Road between East Victory Road and East Amity Road: De Weerd: Okay. Items 20,21 and 22 are public hearings on AZ 05-017, PP 05-019, and CUP 05-026. I will open these three public hearings with staff comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is Messina Meadows, which, as you know by now, is right immediately east of Bellingham Park. It's located south of Victory and west of Eagle Road. The applications before you tonight are annexation and zoning, preliminary plat, and Conditional Use Permit for a planned development. There are 491 single-family residential lots proposed and 67 other lots on 136.72 acres. That's a gross density of 3.5 units per acre. Point five eight. Excuse me. And it is a proposed R-8 zone. They have requested a planned development to facilitate patio homes and for reductions to the minimum dimensional standards for their standard lots as well. The standard lots are requesting a reduction from -- sorry. Just a moment. The PD is requesting reduction from 6,500 square foot standard, down to 3,600 square foot minimum. And from street frontage from 65 feet down to 40 feet. There are 65 single-family residences and 103 townhouse lots that are below those minimums -- the standard minimums. So, in this case it's about one fifth of the -- or one fourth of the units. On the standard lots, they are requesting a five-foot rear side entry garage as a reduced minimum. On the park side lots, which I will zero in on, these are -- these are the park side lots. And let me explain how these work. I have called them park side. I don't know what the -- that's their name, but -- these are the roads that circles them and, then, a private road that comes on the east boundary and, then, you will see the alley connection between the streets and the second alley connection there. These wide connections here are an open space lot. They are not a street. These are open space lots. So, the houses front onto an open space lot and you will see an open space lot down here as well. I may have some pictures of those I will go to briefly. That is the elevation from the alley and these are the elevations from the front on the open space lot. De Weerd: Anna, how wide are those roads? Canning: It's the same road section that Bellingham was proposing. I'm not sure whether they are -- the sidewalks are in an easement or if they are in the right of way on Meridian City Council July 12, 2005 Page 45 of 68 this one, so the applicant -- I can look it up after I finish, if you'd like me to, or the applicant can answer that question. De Weerd: Okay. Canning: The amenities include an eight and a half acre park and also a .3-acre clubhouse with pool, which I can't locate anymore. Okay. And those are located in this area right there. There we go. De Weerd: That's a road. I need to put my glasses on. Canning: Some of the significant features -- this is the Ridenbaugh that dips into the corner of the property. And, then, we have a drain that traverses the north side of the property. We have the Ten Mile Creek on the west end of the property in the flood plane designation as depicted is -- currently follows these blue lines. You also have the Eight Mile Drain -- no? Oops. I'm going to give up now. I'll have the applicant explain where the Eight Mile Drain is. There are a number of small drains, as you see them. Most of those are just to serve the site, but the Eight Mile Drain is on the property as well. Oh, he's shaking his head again. I think he's pulling my leg, but we will -- the same issue regarding the Ten Mile Creek applies here as was discussed before. They do intend to do a LOMAR. We have added that same condition of approval, just with regard to the -- if that is not accomplished, then, they will need to come back or not develop in those areas. The Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended approval at their June 2nd hearing. The key issues of discussion were the impact of the development on the Stark's property. And they are located down in this corner. The landscape buffer on the north and east side of the Stark's property, that property line dispute between submitted survey and legal description of the Stark's property, so that I think you're seeing that the conversation focused almost entirely on the Stark's property. They did also talk about the Ten Mile Creek sub plan. the mixed medium and low density housing products and lot sizes and allowing the Starks and Tuscany development to reach an understanding. It does appear that they have met. I noticed that there is a letter from Steven and Kathy Stark regarding two conditions of approval that they are requesting be added that were the result of the negotiation or -- and, then, those testifying in favor at that Public Hearing were Kent Brown and Craig Groves. No one spoke in opposition. And commenting were Steven and Kathy Stark. The key changes to staff's initial recommendation by the Commission were that they added several conditions of approval regarding the Stark's property. And they also added five -- or those are detailed. There is five of them in your summary document. You got a revised cover sheet today and if you will notice on the second page of that -- I believe it's the second page. Let me double-check. On the second page of item number one, you will see some add underlined text, that was accidentally omitted from the first one, so that -- that was part of the minutes, but it was on a second page. Staff originally missed it. So, that's the only change. That's why we got an amended cover sheet to those, just to add that remainder of that sentence. So, those five conditions that the Commission added are shown there. They also added the following comment: The applicant shall work with the Starks to resolve property line dispute and provide legal Meridian City Council July 12,2005 Page 46 of 68 descriptions as agreed and to amend the Starks property to reflect the current fence lines on the north and east of the Stark's property. There do seem to be some outstanding issues before Council. The first one is requiring an amended survey to reflect the property line amendments, as we agree upon by the applicant, as I just noted above. The second one, the Council should consider the earlier conversation during -- about the parks department's ability to get these parks up and running. The Council should decide whether that is an appropriate location or desired location for the park. Staff does want to point out that it's not on the arterial road, you do have to come into the development a fair ways before you reach that park. And the third one is that, again, similar to the previous, although not as constrained a site, there are a number of issues related to the development of this property. Those include the flood plane and not the -- and it isn't an associated issue, but also their high groundwater and poor soils. Again, this site is quite a bit higher relative to Bellingham, but there are still concerns related to the property. I have some other pictures. This is the blow up of that park site area. There you have the flood plane. I was told this is the Eight Mile Lateral looking west. And this is the one where -- apparently I'm incorrect. This is the future park site looking south. It was raining that day. The groundwater issues aren't quite that high. And this is the -- towards the north end of the property where the multi-use pathways would be looking east. The trees you see are the -- all along Eagle Road. And, then, you can see part of the Messina development underway, with the unfinished -- there we go. You can see the building that's in the Messina property. And, then, as I mentioned, these are some of the elevations. This is what they would look like from the alley side and, then, this is what they would look like from that lineal open space park side. That style of development is -- this is the first time it's come before Council. They ran it by the planning department a couple different times and ways before they submitted it. It's -- it's an appealing concept, in all honesty. It provides a real different product for anything you have seen before and they were able to address the fire department concerns with the alleys and with the -- some private roads, so they seemed to have met those. They also have little parking areas, I believe, where these open up. There is linear open space going north-south as well. And they have little parking areas there for guest parking. I think with that I will end staff's application -- or staff's presentation, so that we can find out where the Eight Mile Lateral is on the property. De Weerd: Any questions for Anna? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Anna, you indicated that that had been resolved with the fire department on the alley access to that park side area. Canning: That was my understanding. Rountree: What was that? And maybe Chief Anderson can address that. Meridian City Council July 12, 2005 Page 47 of 68 Anderson: Thank you. Councilman Rountree, to my recollection I think what we finally resolved was that there would be a blocked out no parking space where the fire department could pull a pumper in to access and, then, stretch our hose lines down the length of that. Is that correct, Kent? I guess I'm incorrect, too. So, we will find out where the Eight Mile Lateral and where the fire departments going to access these buildings, I guess, from the applicant. But that was our concern is being able to reach the length of these buildings, because of the closeness and fences are built in between these buildings, whether we would be able to get to the front and the rear of the building. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Rountree: I'm sure we will get an answer. De Weerd: You can count on it. Right, Kent? Okay. If you will, please, state your name and address. Brown: For the record, Kent Brown, 1800 West Overland, Boise, Idaho. I am excited about this project. There is a number of things that we have been working on for like a year and a half on it. The comment about the parks department, we started with the parks department, because the Comprehensive Plan says that the city wants a park out here. So, we worked with them initially. One of the things that might interest you is this point right here is the center -- this point right here is the center of the section. So, even though it's inside the development, the other part that -- and I'll try not to shake, but that's not going to happen. You have a collector level road. This is Eagle Road right here. The collector level road comes right in right to the park right here. This is Montique. It goes straight up to the elementary school to the north and has a connection to Locust Grove. I believe this is de Vinci. de Vinci is right near the Ridenbaugh Canal and there is a canal crossing there. So, this area over in here can also access it. Bellingham that you just approved, comes in right at this location with their street location. You come right in and we have a pedestrian pathway taking this right into the park at that location. You also have a collector level road coming from the south from Amity Road going north up to the park. And so everything kind of funnels one way or another to the park. We have a single sided street, so we have all of this side that can be parked on for park activities. Anna, let's talk about that other map I gave you. The other one. Can we put it on the screen? I think if you will look at this one, we are going to look on the screen with this one. What we did with Joe Silva at the fire department, we initially talked about blocking out some areas in the center of the block, so that they could go north-south in these block areas and what we did is widened the street sections to 24 feet, which, then, the fire department said that they had total access. The houses are set back 20 feet from the street. And, then, if you look in between the units, if you look at what's on the screen, the park -- that eight acre park sits right here on the top part of the screen. You have the ability to come out the front of any of these houses as they are built and walk to the park here. You can come back around and go north-south down to the collector level road -- okay. Where did it go? To go to the collector road here. So, everybody that is there has the ability to Meridian City Council July 12, 2005 Page 48 of 68 come out onto a green space. Basically, the users of these are different than my wife. They don't mow lawns, for the most part. My wife really gets a charge out of mowing the lawn, so I tease her about that. Rountree: Send her over. Brown: Give me your address and I'll tell her. One of the things that's kind of unique about the way that we have done these is we don't have any zero lot lines, we don't have any attached housing or, if you will, a patio home. We are setting these houses on the center of the lot with the building setbacks on either side and, then, through CC&Rs what we are doing is we are making it so that this unit here has, right up to building side there, use of that side yard line. So, even though five feet of it is theirs and five feet of it's their neighbor's, they are using that ten feet between the two buildings. So, the only place that you have a gate or a fence is right here at the building line and, then, you have a gate here and we told the fire department that if they pulled up here and they wanted to come in the front, there is gates this way, there is no fence between the buildings. In a standard development you have a house five feet off with a fence there. We have got ten feet in between those buildings and you can go down the side. The other part that's really nice about that is that we are secure in this area -- they have a private space. They might have windows, but they will be up high, so that it is a nice private space. And that's part of what we are excited about. We are asking for a five foot setback off of what would probably typically be viewed as the rear of the house. But, realistically, as you look at those elevations, we have a door to the private street that Anna called alleys in this space and we have a door out the front. So, there is -- realistically you have -- and if you look at those elevations, both sides of them look very nice. I mean it's porches and so forth on the park side and, yet, the back side of those houses where the garages were were still very very nice and we are working with about three different builders that -- my clients are here, the developer, and they can -- I mean if you need names -- I know that Eaglewood is one of the ones that they are planning on taking down 60 of those lots. There is a hundred in all. A little bit more than 100 by 108 or something like that overall. But we are real excited about these. These are also located next to the biggest open space in the development. So, even though these people have the least amount of lawn, they can go have the Meridian parks department mow the lawn that they want to go play on, if you will. So, that's very nice of you guys to do that. And we want to make sure that there is a lawn. My clients want to green this park up, they want to make sure that it's usable when we come in and so we have talked to Doug Strong and we want to green it up. We have also agreed that -- that we would do the restrooms and any of those other tot lot type things in a parking lot, if we could get reimbursed for those other items. We are willing to green it up, get it so that it's a usable park, but if we could work out a deal to being reimbursed for the -- a tot playground area and a restroom. One of the thoughts that we had is that you might have perpendicular parking, because we have this one whole side. Doug liked that idea. I think we need to work with Anna if we do that. I don't know that that's necessarily what your planning department likes. But you just have it to the south of this particular building with Meridian Chamber of Commerce and you have similar type parking. You have that same type of parking that we would be proposing also with your Meridian City Council July 12, 2005 Page 49 of 68 Boys and Girls Club and the park area that you have to the east of it. That's what we were thinking could be done in this particular area. One of the discussions is is that -- and we had discussed this with my client prior to it being a condition, but every single lot in this subdivision will have an elevation as to where the house is going to be built. My client had already asked us to do that and what you get out of that -- and that's the same condition that you had on Bellingham, to do a master drainage and grading plan, and what you get by that is that you don't have one builder stick the house out of the ground too high and slope it so that he floods his neighbor or one stick it down too low. And as Mr. Bailey spoke, it is a standard requirement of Ada County that engineers provide those kind of plans, so that the builders put the houses at their right elevation, thereby -- by doing that, then, you're getting the water away from the foundation a little better. I mean you're still going to have people that maybe are going to overwater, but at least the grading is there to make that happen and happen so that it -- you know, unless it goes for days, you don't have as many problems. And that's why Ada County has kind of put that as a standard condition. And you have that as a condition of us on this particular development. I don't know if I -- unless I want to just answer your questions that you might have, that's alii can say at this point. De Weerd: Okay. Council, do you have questions? No? Okay. Thank you. Okay. Is there anyone who would like to provide testimony on this application? Outside of the developer. Please state your name and address. Johnson: I'm Greg Johnson at 2432 Can Ada Road. De Weerd: Thank you. Johnson: First of all, I think it would be very appropriate this day that there was a nice article written in the paper about the City of Meridian and its selection as the 74th most livable city in the United States of America. I remember very clearly 1989 when we presented our first plat in Meridian and I'm very glad to be a part of that and I think everyone here has been a great influence in that happening in the City of Meridian. The proposal that we propose on the park is very similar to what we achieved in Bear Creek. It was a larger park. It was 19 acres, instead of eight acres, but it's a very similar arrangement. We are very happy with the Bear Creek Park and how the Bear Creek Subdivision has marketed and how the city has maintained a beautiful park. We have never had an issue of poor maintenance or anything in that. I really appreciate the parks department for that and everyone here for supporting us in that. We are asking to be reimbursed for the restrooms. They are a fairly expensive construction item to a park. We are asking to be reimbursed for that construction out of park fees. We will be glad to construct those facilities during our construction, because I think they are much more easy to put in initially and have them as part of the park to start with, instead of the way we did it at Bear Creek. But it will be a beautiful park and I know it's a little smaller. It will be very functional. I think the fingers that go through the park site product really make them all part of a total park setting and we are really excited about this product. Similar things have been built in San Francisco and other markets. We think we have corrected some of the things that make them a little more difficult and with our wider Meridian City Council July 12,2005 Page 50 of 68 street section and setting our garages back from the alley, it gives a nice street appearance on that side and, yet, we have a wonderful livable park area and it really becomes and community playground and for young children to go out of their home and play with neighborhood kids in an area where mom can see them out of the kitchen window and other things, I think will be a very fun neighborhood to live in. This determination of the elevations of each lot I think is important for us as a developer. We have tried to monitor that and other methods, but where we sell to multiple builders, it's very difficult and we would rather have it on the plat and monitor it that way from the start and if somebody messes up, they dig out a foundation. And it will help resolve a lot of issues. It usually ends up, as Kent described, it's usually one house is set too high and one a little too low and you just can't resolved the issue if that happens. So, they each will have a specific foundation height to meet and that will have to be done. Again, we appreciate all your support and thank you for this opportunity to present this application. Any questions? De Weerd: Any questions, Council? Okay. Thank you. Any further testimony? Stark: My name is Steve Stark. I live at 2630 East Amity Road and is it possible to put up the development map up there? We live on the three acres surrounded by the development right down there and as you can see, we are being really -- our life is changing dramatically by this development. The night of the Planning and Zoning meeting my wife and I met with Mr. Craig Groves and we came to some agreements that were mostly included in the Conditional Use Permit, Exhibit F, but two of the most important things that we agreed to that night were not included in the permit and so I wrote a letter, it was delivered today, and what we are asking the Meridian City Council to do is, please, include the two conditions that in our letter in the specific -- in the site specific conditions as a condition of approval before approving the Messina Meadows Subdivision, so -- and I heard during the opening comments that there was an addendum added to it that I didn't get a copy of and I'm not sure what that was, an addendum, and I talked to Joe Guenther from Planning and Zoning and he said he was going to have an addendum on there, but this is what we agreed to. In our letter, the first thing is addressing the garage. Oh, thank you. Oh. Okay. What we added to this is that the garage will be constructed on the same setback as the driveway, five feet to the north property line on Lot 6, Block 9. What we agreed to at the night of the Planning and Zoning meeting is we agreed to have the garage of the house on lot directly to the east of our property, Lot 6, Block 9. It would be placed so that it would be attached to the house and stand directly between our property and the driveway, so the automobile would head directly down the driveway straight into the garage to minimize headlight glare and also agreed to restriction on the windows on the west side of the house built there and the reason why we are asking for that on this driveway -- it's not a conventional driveway off of the street like normal where you head directly into a garage, it goes down and passed this lot into this lot and our house sits right here and so Mr. Groves agreed to place the garage so it would directly block the light coming into our property. Also, we agreed to the second and third lots on the east side of our property, which on the plat we looked at was Lot 8 and 9 of Block 9, be limited to single story homes, with the exception of bonus rooms over the garage, dormers facing east, Meridian City Council July 12,2005 Page 51 of 68 and that's this lot and this lot. And these items were really important to us. We agreed upon -- Mr. Groves was at our house on July 5th and we talked about those specific things. I don't think there would be any controversy. So, that's all I would ask. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions. Thank you, sir. Okay. Any further testimony? Okay. If you'd like to make final comments. Brown: I guess, just in summary, what we did is we took the successful parts of what we learned in Tuscany Lakes and Messina Hills and Messina Village that are to the north and those have been very successful for us and have brought those down in Messina Meadows. We had learned about this alternative street section up there, we had never done those before, and have brought those down into this portion, too. If you will, what's kind of different in this is that we have added to what we have already previously been successful with, we have added a city park and we have these park side lots and we are excited about both, we are excited to have the city park located in this development and to gift this to the city and to do these things to make this happen. And we think that we have addressed all those issues. This did not have the water problems that we had in some of the portions of the development to the north and so we are confident that we can go forward and address the city's concerns. De Weerd: Kent, what is your open space in this? I have been looking through this application and I -- I'm sure it's there, I just can't find it. Brown: There is a whole series of different open spaces. We have the Ten Mile pathway that is along this portion here. We have an open space that walks over into what the Bellingham park is. We have the parkways that we are providing with these lots that are also in that open space. We have the pool and clubhouse that is located here. I really haven't even talked about that, but we have provided a means from different portions of the development to go through open spaces here to get to the pool. There is connections this way, so that other portions of the development can get there. One of the things that this alternative street section is that you gain this green space and we are putting trees on every lot line throughout the development that you have what appears to be bigger spaces. I remember sitting on the Planning and Zoning Commission when Woodbridge came in and they offered to have sidewalk on one side of the street and, then, have more landscaping. Basically, with this alternative street section you end up having a lot of that take place and you have more landscaping and, then, get to where the lots are at. So, specifically when we have these collector level roads and, then, have landscaping, you have lots of -- lots of landscaping before you get to those. And so I hope that answered that question. De Weerd: Well, it didn't. What percentage of open space do you have in there? Brown: According to the plat we have 25 acres of open space. Percentagewise -- I'd have to look at my application, but I believe it was like 13 or 14 percent open space overall. Meridian City Council July 12, 2005 Page 52 of 68 De Weerd: Wow. Twenty-five acres. Amazing. Okay. Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Kent, if you could just -- I'm sure you answered this. If you would walk me through the -- how you addressed the fire department's concerns. De Weerd: When we had the fire department discussion, we had a narrower street section. We had a 20-foot section. And so what they were asking for is in -- where we had the parking stalls here, that we provide an asphalt area to go north and south, basically making those every 250 feet, a means that they could go that way. By widening it to 24-foot, which is what they have used in other private roads, then, they have that access and, then, I think on top of that is that we have that ten foot of room, instead of five foot on either side of that property line that the fire department can easily run down between the units, because there is no internal fence in that area and so that's how we addressed it with Joe Silva. Wardle: Okay. Madam Mayor, an additional question. And seeing the staff report and hearing testimony from Mr. Stark, do you believe that addresses the concerns that he -- the addition to the recommendation -- do you believe it addresses those concerns and you are in agreement with it? Brown: Yes, we are. Wardle: Okay. Brown: We have provided them with a letter, an agreement to comply with those. Anna did make a good suggestion, as other discussion was going on, that in between these units that we grant easements to specific lots, instead of trying to cover it in the CC&Rs. And I think that that is a great idea. Then, it's on the plat, there is no question about that and it would just be an easement granted to the particular adjacent landowner for the use of that area and they are going to maintain -- operate and maintain it. De Weerd: Anything further? Okay. Kent, you mentioned that you have different housing choices when you have the park neighborhood or what -- what are you calling that? That unique space. Canning: Park side. De Weerd: Park center. Brown: The park side lots? Meridian City Council July 12,2005 Page 53 of 68 De Weerd: Uh-huh. Brown: Okay. De Weerd: What are your different lot sizes? Do you have -- you have those types there, but do you have other kinds of housing choices? Brown: If you look down towards the Ten Mile in the greenbelt area, those lots are among our largest. The ones that back up to the Starks are some of our very largest and they ~- I could give you some dimensions or square footing, if you like, if that's what you want me to do. De Weerd: Then, in the front of your development you have -- are those patio home sizes or -- Brown: We have 50 and 60 foot wide lots in some of those, but the lot square footage is somewhere around 7,000, 6,600, in that area. Basically, I guess what -- in my summary, those lot sizes that were successful for us in Tuscany, we tried to bring those down into this same area and some of the lots you have in Tuscany Lakes that were a little bigger, you're going to find those more along the south and west side of our development. Some of the houses that have been very successful within Tuscany Village are over closer to Eagle Road and, then, you have kind of a transition in the middle there between the two. De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Madam Mayor, what happens on Lot 7 in Block 11, the one just west of the Starks? Brown: Just west of the Starks? Rountree: Yes. The one on the~- Brown: There is an existing house on that lot. Rountree: Okay. Brown: And-- Rountree: So, that stays in place? Brown: That stays in place. Rountree: And you will access through the subdivision? Meridian City Council July 12, 2005 Page 54 of 68 Brown: It has a private drive and it has a full access on the internal part of the subdivision, yes. Rountree: Thank you. De Weerd: And I guess I have a final -- I won't say it's a final question. I have another question. Brown: That particular lot -- if I can -- that particular lot is almost an acre in size. I mean and that kind of shows you some of our diversity. I'm sorry. De Weerd: And you will keep the house on there. That house is-- Brown: Yes. De Weerd: How are you phasing this, Kent? Brown: It looks like two or three phases. De Weerd: And will the park side neighborhood and park and the clubhouse be in the first phase? Brown: Yes. And I'm glad you brought that up, because that -- I forgot about that when -- our initial phase -- we are going to come in with the main road here and come in and include the clubhouse and pool and, then, come all the way over to this point and come down and stay out of the flood way area and include all the way over to Bellingham. So, our park, parkway lots, and basically everything north of that Mona Lisa Drive, the main road in, is in one phase. For us it's about the largest phase we have ever done. I think it's 308 lots is what we are hoping to do. De Weerd: And so just to get an idea on the park, you will do what you would need to do typically for your green space, the additional amenity of the restroom and a tot lot would be asked of the city. Brown: And any parking lot that you would want for that. I mean we need to work out how that's done, but, yeah, the parking lot also. For reimbursement. De Weerd: Okay. Any last questions, Council? Okay. Brown: We would like to also -- like we discussed in Messina Hills, we want to build this clubhouse with our development. So, we would like that approval to do so. You granted us that approval in Messina Hills Three. De Weerd: Are you saying you won't come with change orders every other week? Meridian City Council July 12,2005 Page 55 of 68 Brown: The pool, as Grady just kind of corrected me, doesn't have a clubhouse, it has a changing room with it. It doesn't have like at Two Rivers type of clubhouse, but it does have a changing room and a pool area. We also in our proposal wanted to have parallel parking, instead of having a parking lot. We have a lot of frontage right there for that pool versus running in and having a parking area and that was in our initial application also. De Weerd: Kent, if this is going to be a city park -- and I understand you will probably put city park on your plat, but just so the neighbors know that that will be a public park -- and there will be traffic going in there, how will you provide adequate notice so that the neighbors are aware? Brown: What we did in Messina Hills No. One, we had school lot, we called it out of a school lot. On this particular preliminary plat we called this out as a park lot, not as a common area lot. So, that's, I guess, how we get to that. De Weerd: Will you allow signs -- directional signs to the city park or-- Brown: I can't see why not. It's a city park; right? De Weerd: We've never had directional signs to our parks, so-- Brown: Isn't there one to -- it's Chateau. That's where I was thinking that there was. De Weerd: I don't think I have ever seen one. Boy, they break down every day. Brown: Slow down and you can see them. De Weerd: If there is no further questions, Council -- okay. Thank you, Kent -- Brown: No. Thank you. De Weerd: -- for final comment. Brown: No, I don't want -- Canning: Madam Mayor, I do need to clarify a couple of issues that -- I don't know that the applicant needs to stay up there, but the staff report notes 10.4 percent open space and that does not include the parkway. So, if they have included the area in the parkways, that could very well bring it up. Those long stretches of roadway add up. The other thing we need to clarify is the alley versus private lanes on the parkway. The provision that allows for private streets in our code is in the planned development section, but it has very specific minimum widths and they, basically -- or ACHD reduced street section standard. These would not qualify as private streets under our ordinance and that's why I called them alleys, because, really, they are functioning like an alley, it just happens that this property has no street in front of it, it has an open space in front of Meridian City Council July 12, 2005 Page 56 of 68 it, but they are functioning much more like alleys. The applicant is constrained on a portion of the sight in that an alley needs to connect from a public street to a public street and they are unable to do that. They can do it in this -- this pod, for lack of a better word, but on the one immediately west -- east, they are unable to do it, because they do have a private street that it connects to. So, these would likely end up being either public alleys on one side and private alleys on the other, which may be confusing. The police department has an issue with the private alleys, they won't -- will not enforce speed limits in a private alley. They may do it in a public alley or they are allowed to do it in a public alley. So, there is an issue there and the enforcement of speed limits within those alleys. So, that was one of the issues I needed to bring up. The other one was with regard to the parking. It was mentioned early in the presentation that they had been considering parallel parking off the street. To my knowledge, ACHD has only allowed that in our Old Town area. I'm not sure if -- I wouldn't mind having the discussion in this location, although it concerns me that it's a fairly well traveled road and a long block. I'm particularly concerned that the applicant just mentioned that they wanted to do parallel parking for the swimming pool. I don't think that that was addressed in the staff report. I don't remember ever having that discussion. It seems inappropriate there on a collector road to have parallel parking directly coming off of that, so I did want to point that out also. So, sorry to continue the discussion on the matter, but thought it important to address those issues. De Weerd: Well, I just want a point of clarification. You said they had over ten percent is open space? Canning: The staff report indicates that 10.4 percent without including the parkways. The parkways would be the long green strips along the roads. De Weerd: Okay. And of that how -- will they still meet their requirement without the city park? I guess we always have a question if you dedicate it to the public, it's -- is it still considered part of their open space. Canning: I would certainly consider it still part of it. It's part of the development as a whole. Regardless of who has ownership of that property, it's still part of the development, the planned development. Without that they -- given that it's over half of the large open space, they probably wouldn't meet their five percent minimum, although they might with the parkways. If they come up with 13 and so three of it's the parkways, so they only need two percent, the numbers may work. I'm not sure. De Weerd: Okay. Any-- Brown: I didn't mean for it to be confusing here where the pool and the changing room - - we did put that in our narrative, that that was one of the things that we were asking for, parking there -- at least -- I mean it's been like four months or whatever since I submitted, but I believe that that's what I remembered. This is a local street right here that this fronts on. You have one whole side that is that clubhouse and that's where we figured that we could get those two or three parking stalls. The collector road is on this Meridian City Council July 12, 2005 Page 57 of 68 other side over here and so the clubhouse sits behind that landscaping. That's the way we -- De Weerd: It's not a clubhouse; it's a changing room. Brown: That's -- changing room. You got to, you know, smack me later, but -- I think that that was it. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you for that clarification. Nary Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Nary. Nary: Just on your other point, because I don't know when it would be a better time to bring it up, but on the park issue, if there is a concern from the Council about making sure it's clear that at the city park you might want to direct the parks department, since Mr. Strong isn't here tonight, but the parks department to begin the process of naming the park, putting up a sign to the park. One of the things that I have heard a number of times since I have been here is that we have a beautiful park at Bear Creek, as Mr. Johnson said, but there is still a number of residents that believe it's a homeowners park and not a city park and it has a sign on it that says City of Meridian park, but I think if you're going to imprint on the folks as they build and move into those homes, if a sign already exists there that says future Meridian park or even a name was selected for it or whatever, then, that might be a way to address the concern that was raised to make sure people understand that it is a public park, not a private subdivision park. De Weerd: Good point. Thank you. You have already had your final word. It's okay, Craig. Go ahead and state your name and address Groves: Craig Groves, 3920 East Shady Glen court. I just wanted to kind of clarify. I was going through my calculations on this total common area and Kent didn't have a calculator with him when he mentioned 13 percent. It's actually 19 percent, which would include all the parkway land, all the land along the Ten Mile. It would include the park dedication. So, I just wanted to make that clarification. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. He upstaged you, Kent. He got the final word. Okay. Council, would you like to close this public hearing? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I have a question for Anna. Anna, what's the language in the staff's recommendation and/or do we have proposed Findings on this, as it relates to this Meridian City Council July 12, 2005 Page 58 of 68 park? Is there a commitment on the part of the city that it will become part of the city park system or is it at the city's option? Canning: Give me just a moment and I will look it up. De Weerd: I guess we could ask the developer or his representative. Has there been a commitment from our parks department? Johnson: We met with the parks department when we first started laying out the plat and they said that they would like a five to a ten acre park in this area to serve not this subdivision, but -- and neighborhood, but the surrounding neighborhood that is made up of small developments that may not have any open space in them and that there was a need, from the city's standpoint, to have something in this section and all of our discussions from then on were to establish something large enough that it would be a city park. De Weerd: Has our parks commission looked at this? So, only the parks director? Johnson: That's correct. De Weerd: Okay. Canning: Madam Mayor, Council member Rountree, I have the answer to that. The development agreement states the following: The applicant agrees to dedicate the public park to the City of Meridian. The park shall be constructed in cooperation with the parks department and clear title must be provided to the city attorney for review prior to final plat for that being submitted. Also, the Meridian parks department has added a standard -- if this is all of their standard conditions, one of them does relate to minimum acreage standards for city parks. It says the city is willing to develop and maintain community parks and neighborhood parks. Neighborhood parks will be reviewed as a case by case basis. The city may choose to maintain neighborhood parks -- this wouldn't be a neighborhood park, so the rest of it pertains to that, but it's one of their standard conditions, so it's just referencing the acreage minimums. And those were the two that I found regarding the parks. So, the development agreement does state it as a city park, though. De Weerd: Thank you. Any further questions? Rountree: I have a question for the developer on the park. It appears to me that a portion of this park, if -- and I don't know how many acres of it is the entryway to this subdivision. It probably wouldn't function well as a city park, other than a maintenance operation for the City of Meridian. I can understand why you would want the city to maintain that for you, but I, for one, would not be in agreement that the city get title and have the long-term maintenance requirement of the entrance to the subdivision. I'm further concerned about the parking. Meridian City Council July 12, 2005 Page 59 of 68 Johnson: I'm not sure I understand the question. The collector road is all maintained by the association. Canning: I think he means the -- Rountree: That strip across the northern part and that's -- that's an entry and on the piece that I have in front of me it shows an entryway and a green space on both sides of the entryway and -- talk to me about that. Johnson: The property to the north of that is existing phase two of Messina Hills and has homes backing up to that. It was included as part of the park to allow the -- we are relocating the Ten Mile feeder in a straight line across the north boundary and so that will be an open pathway that has a ditch about eight feet wide and a foot and a half deep that is very pleasant to walk along and that's an open pathway. We felt it would be good to open up as much of that and allow it to be walked along and enjoyed by everyone and ties into the whole path system. It is the middle of the section that's not another section line road or anything up there. It's the middle of a section. Canning: Madam Mayor, Councilmember Rountree, it appears to be about 110 feet wide. De Weerd: Is that -- is that path area part of what the city would be asked to -- Johnson: Yes. Yeah. And the canal company has an easement through there for that Ten Mile feeder to pass, but we will have the right to maintain the path and for our people to walk there and it's being designed so that the sides are sloped and grassed, so that it's not dangerous, but it's -- it will be gravel bottom with a foot and a half of water flowing in it. It would be dangerous to a toddler and they are going to have to be supervised, but for normal children in the park, they could wade in it or whatever and not be in danger. We do plan on developing this park first phase, so that when our homes start under construction in there, the park is being greened up and by the time people occupy, the park has been deeded to the city and is being maintained as a park at that time. So, it will be very usable. We are also greening up all of the park areas in our park side housing. All of that will be installed before the builder starts building on the lot. They will have a pad to build on, but their -- everything outside of that boundary will be maintained by the association and will be already planted and the trees in place and the sidewalks and everything. That will be done as part of the development. We also plan on building this swimming pool while we are building the streets, so that that's open to the day the people move in also. Rountree: Follow up, Madam Mayor. Then, you also are planning to have the city maintain the east side of that entryway as well? Johnson: No. Rountree: Okay. Meridian City Council July 12,2005 Page 60 of 68 Johnson: Any other questions? De Weerd: Any other questions? No? Thank you. Okay. Council, what's your desire here? If there is no further testimony, I would entertain a motion to close the hearing. Donnell: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mrs. Donnell. Donnell: I'd like to make a motion that we close the public hearing on Items 20,21 and 22. Can we do them all at once? De Weerd: Yes. Donnell: Good. Wardle: Second. De Weerd: Okay. Motion to close the Public Hearing on Items 20 through 22. All those in favor say aye. Okay. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Discussion or do I have a motion? Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: During the discussion phase Mr. Rountree had begun a process about the park. Did that address your concerns or do you still have additional -- Rountree: Sure. Madam Mayor. To address Councilman's Wardle's concerns, from experience these kind of neighborhood parks tend to be not good neighbors for the city. There is significant ownership on the part of the folks that live around there. That being the case, it seems to me the value to the city ought to be a park that's fully utilized and usable. This is -- I really like the innovation of this subdivision. I think they have done a good job there. But I think the park site itself has not been well thought out. We have a lot of adjacent neighbors and I can tell you every one of them thinks they own that park and will tell the park superintendent exactly how they want their park maintained. There is also a commitment or a requirement or -- not a requirement, but an expectation on the part of the developer that the city will take this and will develop parking and will develop facilities and, then, it will be used by some smaller subdivisions that mayor may not be of the like of this subdivision and create yet again additional friction for the city to deal with. I guess the concept is good, I like the idea of a park in that area, I don't Meridian City Council July 12,2005 Page 61 of 68 like the -- how this plays out particularly well and I think that it probably ought to be looked at. So, that's kind of where I am. But the park side dwellings, I think that's a neat concept. I think the innovative and creativity of the rest of the site, it's not just long streets and that sort of thing. So, that part's good. If that's that a homeowners park and green space, I have no problem with it, but if there is an expectation that that will be the city's, I have a great amount of concern. So, if the conditions of approval were such that that could be negotiated with the city and that the expectation would not necessarily be that the city would take that on, if the maker of a motion were to include a statement like that. I probably could support that. Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Just to follow up on that and having spent some time on the parks commission and having had discussions about those additional parks, I think that that type of forum would allow more citizen input into the city's ownership of that property and the ability for them to maintain it and what ~- you know, we have the parks commission in place to talk about what sorts of amenities, whether it is a tot lot. Certainly, I think a restroom is critical. But would certainly be supportive of that if those sorts of details were to go before one of the -- one of the public bodies that we have and, then, be recommended back to this body for additional action. De Weerd: Well -- and it is unfortunate that it didn't go through that process and the developer didn't know about this. We have -- we have Chateau Park that is along a collector. It's probably pretty similar, although it's laid out with a road abutting one side, a ditch on another -- it's very similar. I just wonder the depth and the dimensions and I don't think there has been issues in that subdivision and part of that park was -- did belong to a subdivision at one time. It has been accepted, I think, as a city park. It's all in some of the suggestions that have been made and signing it. As people move in they have the understanding it's a city park, but it does need to go through our commission for input and priority of when those improvements can be done. But greening it up and getting it in service is certainly very desirable as we look in bringing green space into our community, so -- .. Donnell: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mrs. Donnell. Donnell: I sat through a lot of time and followed this discussion and I think what I would want to say is that we seem always to be talking out of two sides of our mouths. We talk about wanting green space and open space and we talk about needing parks and we continue to talk about the need for parks and, then, when we have a developer that comes to us with a park -- and I would agree with you, Councilman Rountree, that it -- when it's set in the middle of that, it becomes a park that the homeowners think is theirs and I think that that does cause some problems, but I'm not sure that -- that we -- that Meridian City Council July 12,2005 Page 62 of 68 we are giving the right message. We seem to be giving mixed messages to our community. And so I just say that and I'm not sure what -- for whatever good that is, maybe it's because it's 10:30. And so with that, I'm not sure where we are going, I guess I'll wait until someone makes a motion and, then, I can determine how I would like to vote on it. Wardle: I'll take that upon myself. Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Wardle. Wardle: If I could just get a clarification from -- from either legal staff or planning staff, how we would work the conditions to make sure that the process that we just talked about went through and how to incorporate the developers generous gesture to not only at the time that the city would like to take that park, to bring that into the fold, as well as to green it up. How -- Mr. Nary, would you give me some -- Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I guess a couple of different things that you're talking about. I think what you're going to want -- and you can probably include them in the development agreement and probably in the preliminary -- or in the CUP conditions, that prior to final plat the developer will contact the parks department and the parks -- and get on the parks commission agenda for consideration for it become a dedicated city park. If I'm understanding the discussion, your concern today is the location of the park may be okay, it may not be appropriate for a city park, but you'd like the parks commission to at least have the opportunity to have that conversation first and make a recommendation to you. It would appear that prior to final plat would make the most sense, but Mrs. Canning could probably correct me if that's not the best timing to do that. The other issue of greening up the park, if I understand the testimony from the developer, the intent to make it a park of the city at no cost and the reimbursement to the city -- or the reimbursement for impact fees was simply for the greening up of the park. De Weerd: No. It was for the restrooms, the tot lot, and the parking. Nary: And those you would probably want in the development agreement that if it becomes a dedicated city park, that there could be an offset from impact fees for the tot lot, the greening up, and all the improvements to the park. So, it's clear there is a separation between the value of the land and that the park itself was as a donation, but that the improvements would be offset. That also would benefit the developer, because in the naming policy, if you recall, that was approved by this Council, that's a consideration on how they name that and how they go through that process of deciding if that's appropriate or not for a city park. So, making that clear at the outset in the development agreement would probably be the best way to do that. Again, Mrs. Canning is probably better at the timing than I am on that, so -- Canning: Madam Mayor, Council member Wardle, the timing just depends on if you want to see it. You can make it prior to signature on the final plat and, then, there is the Meridian City Council July 12, 2005 Page 63 of 68 possibility when it comes before you for final plat approval that they mayor may not have it worked out. If you want to do it before they submit for their final plat hearing or meeting before you all, then, that's at your option. I would -- Mr. Watson just pointed out that we are using some older language in that development agreement condition, that it creates an unattainable condition of approval, because you have to have clear title before the final plat's approved and that you really can't do that. So, we need to, with your permission, we'd go back and amend that to our new wording, which I don't remember off the top of my head, unfortunately, but we spent some time devising something that worked. So, I would suggest completely removing the development agreement condition as it stands now and replacing it with what Mr. Nary's discussed. Wardle: Thank you, Anna and Mr. Nary. The preliminary plat and, then, conditional use? Nary: Yes. No. No. On the annexation and zoning, so part of the development agreement, and, then, on the conditional use. I don't know that it needs to be on the plat, because we try to stay away from a lot of these things on the plats that are really nothing to do with the survey, so -- Wardle: I'll give it the non-jurist doctorate try. Nary: If Mr. Grady can do it, I think that you -- Wardle: Mr. Clerk, for the record, we are going to amend these findings and bring them back to the Council for approval. All right. Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle, before you make a motion, you know, I guess we need to get a procedure here, you know, and I apologize to the developer. When we recommend the development community to go to our parks department, I think it's important that we also remind them we have a parks commission that it has to go through and that should be part of a written process or -- for this kind of situation. When Chateau Park kind of went through this process, it wasn't considered the merging of the parks and that we would have this particular thing and at Chateau I don't think we have had the neighborhood feeling like it's their park, because half of it -- Rountree: They were glad to get rid of their park. De Weerd: Very much so. And Bear Creek we have had some of that and so I think it is in the signage and it's how you prepare your public in addition. But we do need to make it clear that there is a parks commission step in this process that -- Canning: And, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I would have directed them had I been -- De Weerd: I'm sure you would. Meridian City Council July 12, 2005 Page 64 of 68 Canning: -- familiar with that process and it just occurred to me during the hearing tonight that it would probably benefit me to understand that process a little more in what they do, so -- De Weerd: And we have a -- Donnell: You tried. You tried to get on the commission? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Madam Mayor, I move that we approve Item No. 20, AZ 05-017, annexation and zoning for Messina Meadows Subdivision, to include all staff, applicant, and public comments, including additions to staff recommendations for approval. In addition to that, prior to the signature on final plat to have that the property owner, the developer, work with the parks commission and to change the language in the agreement to allow - - to read that the park property will be dedicated and deeded to the City of Meridian in such a manner that is approved by ultimately the City Council. De Weerd: What? Donnell: Second. Nary: I know exactly everything Councilman Wardle said. I'll take care of it. De Weerd: I'll wait until we read it. Nary: I'm totally on -- Wardle: Any questions on -- Nary: No. Wardle: Okay. Rountree: I'm not sure what you said, but I like it. Nary: It may not be verbatim; Council member Wardle, but we will get the gist of that in the development agreement. Wardle: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. There has been a motion and a second. Is there any discussion? And the motion was to approve. Wardle: Yes. Meridian City Council July 12, 2005 Page 65 of 68 De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, absent; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Rountree: And, Madam Mayor, if I might -- not necessarily for the record, but I did not intend to speak out of both sides of my mouth, I intended to speak that the city shouldn't jump at these things without thinking them through and going through the processes that we have in place. And to me that's not an option in our Findings. De Weerd: Thank you. Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Madam Mayor, I move that we approve Item 21, PP 05-019, preliminary plat for Messina Meadows Subdivision, to include all staff, applicant, and public comments. Donnell: Second. De Weerd: Motion to approve Item 21. Mr. Berg, roll call. Roll-Call: Bird, absent; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: And Item 22. Wardle: Madam Mayor, I move that we approve Item 22, CUP 05-026, Conditional Use Permit for Messina Meadows Subdivision, to include all staff, applicant, and public comments and, in addition, to include language included in the annexation and zoning approval in regard to dedication -- to possible dedication of park land to the City of Meridian. Donnell: Second. Wardle: Is that better? Donnell: Yes. That was good. De Weerd: You're getting better. Mr. Berg, call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, absent; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: We appreciate you doing something different and it's exciting to see. When I first saw it up there it was kind of scary. Meridian City Council July 12,2005 Page 66 of 68 Brown: I would like to make a comment that, you know, I appreciate doing business in Meridian. I think that as a former employee of, Bill and I, both in Boise city, and working, you know, kind of really opened my eyes when I came out and started working in different cities, I haven't always had the best experience at Meridian and things have gotten lots lots better. You have hired good people, you have good competent people that really try to help us through the process, and return calls and do those things and are professional and that is not the case in the rest of the valley. You would think that there are certain things that are considered professional, even by cities much bigger than you, and they don't do them. They know that they should, but they don't, and I would like to just appreciate that and let you know that, that I do appreciate it and I know my clients do, too. So, thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. We appreciate that. Wardle: That's why we are one of the top 75 places -- Nary: Number one in the state of Idaho. Rountree: Careful what you wish for. Item 25: Ordinance No. 05-1166 : AZ 05-009 Request for an Annexation and Zoning of 1.06 acres from RUT to L-O zone for Mike and Gloria Urwin by Mike and Gloria Urwin - 2560 South Meridian Road: De Weerd: Okay. Item 25 is Ordinance 05-1165. Mr. Berg, will you, please, read this ordinance by title only. Berg: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Ordinance No. 05-1166, an Ordinance AZ 05-009, Mike and Gloria Urwin, for annexation of property located at 2560 South Meridian Road, Lot 1, subdivision, city of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, as described in Attachment A and annexing certain lands and territory situated in Ada County, Idaho, and adjacent and contiguous to the corporate limits of the City of Meridian, as requested by the City of Meridian, establishing and determining the land use zoning classification of said lands from RUT, Ada County, to L-O, limited office in the Meridian City Code, providing a copy of this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County assessor, the Ada County recorder, the Idaho State Tax Commission, as required by law, and providing for a summary of the ordinance and providing for a waiver of the reading rules and providing an effective date. De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Berg. You have heard this ordinance read by title only. Is there anyone who would like to hear it read in its entirety? Seeing nothing, I would entertain a motion to approve. Donnell: So moved. Meridian City Council July 12, 2005 Page 67 of 68 Wardle: Second. De Weerd: Okay. It's been -- motion to approve Item 25. Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, absent; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 27: Executive Session per Idaho State Code 67-2345 (1) (1): De Weerd: Thank you. We have already considered Item 26. Item 27 is an Executive Session per Idaho Code 67-2345(1 )(f). May I, please, have a motion to go into Executive Session? Donnell: So moved. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. To also go into Executive Session with us would be Brad Watson and Anna Canning. Okay. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, absent; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea. De Weerd: Do I have a motion to come out of Executive Session? Rountree: So moved. Wardle: Second. De Weerd: All those in favor say aye. Motion to adjourn? Rountree: So Moved. Wardle: Second. De Weerd: All those in favor? ALL AYES. MOTION CARRIED Meridian City Council July 12, 2005 Page 68 of 68 MEETING ADJOURNED AT 11 :27 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) ~ ATTESTED' g / r / £,5-"""", DATE APPRO~ of, ME1t{D/~">",. " A ""fA. // J \J /;~OR.4"1; 'V % - ~ (::,., - f-- l ~ ~