Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNovember 15, 2005 C/C Minutes Meridian City Council November 15, 2005 Page 14 of 65 it for -- if any of those were to be funded, we would commit to the required match. Is that still the commitment of this Council? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: And, certainly, we would bring back those-- Mr. Bird: Didn't we carry that -- didn't we carry that over in the budget to do that? De Weerd: I don't recall. Bird: I think we did. Anyway, I'm for-- Rountree: I can support that. Bird: I support it. De Weerd: Okay. Well, thank you. I will go ahead and get a response to them. Item 7: Items Moved from Consent Agenda: De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. There were no items removed from the Consent Agenda. Item 8: Item 9: Item 10: Public Hearing: AZ. 05-038 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 38.5 acres from RUT to R-8 zone for Irvine Subdivision by Dyver Development, LLC - southeast corner of Ten Mile Road and Chinden Boulevard: Public Hearing: PP 05-037 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 200 building lots and 21 common lots on 38.5 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Irvine Subdivision by Dyver Development, LLC - southeast corner of Ten Mile Road and Chinden Boulevard: Public Hearing: CUP 05-039 Request for Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development for single family detached residential units and single family attached residential units in a proposed R-8 zone for Irvine Subdivision by Dyver Development, LLC - southeast corner of Ten Mile Road and Chinden Boulevard: De Weerd: And so I will go ahead and move to Items 8, 9, and 10, public hearings on AZ 05-038, PP 05-037, and CUP 05-039. I will open these public hearings with staff comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Irvine project. It's located at the southeast corner of Ten Mile and Chinden. It is comprised of an annexation and Meridian City Council November 15, 2005 Page 15 of65 zoning, preliminary plat, and, then, a Conditional Use Permit for a planned development. The applicant is requesting annexation and zoning of 38.5 acres. Currently undeveloped. And they are seeking an R-8 zone for the entire parcel. The applicant has submitted a preliminary plat for the subject property and it shows 200 single family lots. There are 41 single family attached units, 97 single family detached, and 62 detached units that take access from an alley and front on a MEW. And this was that new term for lots -- it's not, actually, an alley, it's a private street. Excuse me. They take access from a private street, but, then, the houses look on -- out onto an open space area. And this is one of the MEWs with parking -- you can see the guest parking provided. And this is the other MEW with guest parking provided. There are also 21 common lots. The Conditional Use Permit includes requests for reductions to minimum lot size, minimum street frontage, side setbacks, front setbacks, and maximum block lengths in the R-8 zone. And those are primarily for those MEW units. A little squished. This one is a little easier to read and to see the open space. The gross residential density is 5.19 dwelling units per acre. We do have some road sections and I believe Sue Sullivan from ITD is going to have some comments related to these road sections for Chinden. I wanted to show you these elevations. These are as proposed for attached units and I believe the MEW unit. Everything's looking dark on my projector today. Those are the elevations. As part of this project staff is recommending a development agreement and the Planning and Zoning Commission concurred. That development agreement we are suggesting should have language regarding the community center and the clubhouse. They have not submitted elevations at this time. The way the recommendations read to you is that it include a provision that requires all buildings and common areas to contain architectural features and bulk building concepts that are similar to the residential buildings and, then, it has a last phrase, it says as determined by the Commission at each CUP Public Hearing. That last part of the sentence probably needs to come off. I just noticed this as I was prep'ing for Council. A clubhouse or community center for a project would not normally require a Conditional Use Permit. So, the development agreement would just state that it should be similar in appearance to the residential structures. The second item in the development agreement would be that the elevations for the single family attached buildings be similar to the renderings and the photos provided with this application. And that for Chinden Boulevard that the applicant enter into an agreement with ITD to place a pathway on their landscape buffer lot. The applicant wouldn't construct the pathway, but they give a public easement so that ITD could construct that pathway when they are constructing the Chinden or -- yes. When they are constructing Chinden to their future configuration. The Planning and Zoning Commission did recommend approval. They heard the item on October 20th. Kevin Amar, the applicant, and Shawn Nickle spoke in favor of it and Mr. Jerry Stevensen of 6050 North Ten Mile did speak in opposition. The key issues of discussion were fencing adjacent to open areas, highways, streets, micropaths, and canals. Future design and layout of Chinden Boulevard. Getting sewer to the project through Silver Leaf, which is to the east, rather than waiting for a future trunk line. And design of the subdivision in relation to Chinden Boulevard. And, then, traffic and upcoming roadway projects in the area. As a result of those, staff -- of those discussions they did modify the original staff report to include the condition that the applicant grant the pedestrian easement for the pathway that's in the landscape lot Meridian City Council November 15, 2005 Page 16 of 65 along Chinden that I mentioned before. And with that I will answer any questions the Council may have. De Weerd: Okay. Council, before I ask if you have any questions, Councilman Rountree will be recusing himself. Any questions for staff at this time? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I'm being lazy, Anna, but what's the width of the roads on the inside? Canning: I believe they are standard alignments. I don't think they have requested any red uced road width. Bird: Thirty-three. Thirty. Thirty-four. Canning: Thirty-four back of curb to back of curb. Bird: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Any further questions? Okay. Any other comments from staff? Canning: No, ma'am. De Weerd: Okay. Would the applicant like to provide testimony? If you will, please, state our name and address for the record. Amar: I will. Thank you, Madam Mayor, Councilmembers. My name is Kevin Amar. Address is 36 East Pine in Meridian. I'm here tonight for the Irvine Subdivision. Anna did a marvelous job presenting the project and we are in complete agreement with the staff report, as well as any conditions of approval -- also the added condition of approval that was placed on it at the Planning and Zoning meeting. This project is at the corner of Chinden and Ten Mile. This is one of the last large pieces in this square mile to develop or to even be proposed for development. With this project to the -- there is one eight acre parcel here that Mr. Meyers owns and we have met with and talked to extensively. And other than that, this project is the -- will complete this mile length of development or proposed development, preliminary plats along -- along Chinden. We did work -- and I was working with Ms. Sullivan. When we wanted to do this project initially, this quarter mile stretch, we took our right of way and determined what was required or granted for the balance of the property, which was 70 feet, and matched that right of way. In discussions with Ms. Sullivan after that, it was determined, because they were doing an analysis that they may need additional width and especially at the intersection. So we, then, redesigned that intersection to provide additional width for turn bays and for various things. Ms. Sullivan is here and can certainly address the ITD issues better than I can, but we are aware of the traffic volumes on Chinden. We are Meridian City Council November 15, 2005 Page 17 of 65 aware of the need to provide -- to provide thoroughfare for that traffic and are working with ITD to provide that, which is part of the easement that we required for this project on the pedestrian path within the -- within the landscape buffer and, Anna, correct me if I'm wrong, but this is -- this is to provide an actual ten foot easement, rather than just a five foot sidewalk. So, there is future bike paths and other things that it makes it easy. One of the discussions with -- with the Commission was the connection to the -- there are not road connections to this project onto Chinden. The one question that came up was a connection -- a pedestrian connection, but with this project we will be required to build a berm along the frontage of Chinden to minimize the noise and the other things. So, if we introduced a break in that berm, if you will, then, that creates more of a problem. And so that is why we look at it so as not to provide a pedestrian access. The project itself has 200 residential lots and it's new for us in the City of Meridian. In fact, we had some comments from Planning and Zoning that this is what they liked, the diversity of housing styles. This was -- I think one of the comments was it was an answer to things that they have been -- I have got it here. It appears to me to be an answer to the things we have asked for. And that was from Commissioner Zaremba. But let me go over -- if we can -- Anna, could I look at the marketing rendering or the colored rendering? So, on this project, if you look at the project in whole, this property on the outside is the standard detached single-family lots. As we get on the interior, these -- this block of lots, as well as this block -- well, there is a few of them. Are alley loaded, still detached single-family lots. But it's not a garage dominated street front, it has a variety of housing. And, then, you get into the project and these lots and these lots -- all of the lots that front on the common area, so the front of their house will actually be on the common area, our attached housing townhouses, but they are -- the draw to those -- and we have had great reception from the marketing side of this, is their front yard -- they may not have yards to take care of, but they have got three acres of front yard, because it's the entire area in front of them. And we had some pictures before that showed a concept that's been built like this in Eagle and in talking to those real estate agents and other people, it's a very -- a very active market, because people do like that -- that look. We do have -- the total project -- of the total project, there is about four acres -- 4.16 acres that is usable open space. Here we have a picture of. So, these are actually detached single family lots, but they -- this is their front yard. Now, they actually have a swale, but that's because it's in Eagle. We don't plan on using any of that for -- for storm drainage. Ours will be all underground or seepage beds, but you can see that it gives an attractive and a unique feature to those front yards. So, in this project we have four acres of it that is actually usable open space between interior pathways and parks. We do have and are proposing a clubhouse with a pool. We understand that that clubhouse will be required to have similar features of a residential structure. We do want it to blend in and have wood siding and cultured stone or stucco or things of that nature, so when you drive and look at it, it matches very well the existing -- existing or what will be out there, as well as the other projects. We have been working with the irrigation district. The Simpson Lateral currently bisects this property and it will be tiled, which will complete this -- I believe it completes the tiling of the Simpson Lateral, this last 1,400 feet from its head-gates. So, we are working with them and we will be completing that work this -- this winter yet. So, this project is exciting, it's got a diversity of housing, so it will be a variety of people and a variety of Meridian City Council November 15, 2005 Page 18 of 65 housing styles As you drive through it really will be a unique subdivision for us in Meridian. And I appreciate the staff's help and we have worked together on this and because it was new it was a little different on a couple of the items and we had to figure that out. So, with that I'd stand for any questions. De Weerd: Council, any questions? Bird: I have none at this time, Mayor. Amar: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Okay. We have a couple people that have signed up. When I read your name I will indicate whether you are for or against. If you would like to provide testimony, please, come forward at that time. Sue Sullivan. Sullivan: I'm Sue Sullivan with the Idaho Transportation Department and I just kind of wanted to give you some information on some of the things that were referenced about the highway typical section. In October of '03 a response to the Public Hearing notice referenced a desired 100-foot setback or 135 to the back lot line, which would include your landscape buffer. And without taking too much time, I -- what we are looking at -- and I guess noting that this is in advance of the corridor study being completed -- is a four lane divided highway. We are hoping to maintain speeds of 55, if possible. Probably over time, with signalization, this will drop. But the goal is to try and maintain the travel time that there is now. We are -- have begun the corridor study and we did a -- we have done our stakeholder interviews and we have really heard really a consensus on the importance of this route for mobility. There is some who say that it should be a freeway. You know, we have to compromise. I'm not sure we can get there. But, certainly, the importance of -- it is a highly mobile route -- seems pretty obvious to everyone. So, with that in mind, this divided highway allows for the margin of safety in the median for high speed opposing directions of traffic and it allows for a -- what we call a clear zone of 30 feet, which is the guidelines for a 55 mile an hour road to the outside road side. Donnell: Excuse me. Sue, could you use the pointer and that -- kind of red thing. Sullivan: Is it here somewhere? Donnell: Uh-huh. Attached there. Sullivan: Sure. That's your median. That's about 28 feet wide. As I said, the clear zone distance guidelines per AASHTO standards, which is what we follow on federally funded projects, is 30 feet. That also includes this little bit of shoulder here, too. So that would meet that standard. On the road size, this shows a relatively flat -- what we call traversable slope, if someone should leave the roadside they can recover from that potential accident without a roll over. So, that distance I think is about 24 feet there until you get to the ditch. And this section shows a roadside ditch, as opposed to what -- Meridian City Council November 15, 2005 Page 19 of 65 many consider this a -- that we should have urban treatment here, but I think the challenge we have to try and drain this water and find a place to both treat it and outlet this, using this -- what's considered somewhat of a rural approach, is more of a sustainable drainage design. You know, we can meet the needs of the drainage in the roadway section. Here is the multi-use pathway. It's ten foot wide, a little bit on each side. And this kind of shows the landscape buffer, so when you're in a residential area, because this needed to be ten feet above the center line of the highway to provide the noise abatement that will be needed, it sits up a little higher. This right of way line out to the back of this pathway is out at 100 feet. This section here shows in between intersections and this shows the full intersection at major section line routes. Let's see. I guess, you know, kind of coincidentally, this matches what our standard divided highway in a rural area, the right of way would be 200 feet and I guess this -- the issue that came up on the development was trying to -- there had been a history of some of these developments -- the response from ITD was a setback of 70 feet for the future right of way. When we started the corridor project and I started looking at this and this development was really starting to ramp up, you know, I started working on this typical and realized 70 foot really means that we are constrained to have this urban storm sewer section and it would allow us just enough room for -- we'd have to have a rolled curb, because with the high speeds a curb treatment is really not desirable, so it has to be a very flat curb. And, then, a clear zone behind that curb and your pathway could be in there somewhere. So, I guess for this particular development it's a bit of a decision on -- you know, there is some areas that already have this. Where do we draw the line and how do we move forward. What's the most effective way to do that. And, you know, one of the things I heard from the scoping interviews was the idea of, you know, don't -- on this corridor it's particularly important to have, really, a long-term vision. Maybe not just even the 20 years that we are looking at, but we are not going to go back in this corridor for quite sometime and let's make sure that we accommodate the future needs on this corridor. We are probably looking on the east end here in Meridian at 52,000 vehicles a day in 2030. So, that is Eagle Road, south end. It's very high volumes of traffic. So, I guess this is a very strategic arterial. I just wanted to kind of give you an idea of where we were coming at with this 200 foot right of way, because I realize it's very wide and it impacts the developments that come in significantly. I did have a -- back in October one of my comments -- and this is not necessarily particular to this subdivision, but in general this -- the idea of, you know, ITD wanting the frontage- backage road all the way parallel and, you know, maybe compromising with the needs of the residential developments at the end of these frontage-backage roads and I suppose -- I think we have come a long way. We have got a lot of connectivity in most of them, including this one. Sometimes it is pretty circuitous and I think when you get 52,000 vehicles a day on the highway, I think there is -- people are going to need to go to some kind of collector road to avoid getting out on the highway if possible. I think that covers the main things. I just really wanted to let you know what was behind some of this right of way setbacks. De Weerd: Thank you. Any other questions from Council? Nary: I have none, Mayor. Meridian City Council November 15, 2005 Page 20 of 65 Donnell: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mrs. Donnell. Donnell: Not a question, but since I drive that almost everyday, Chinden, was part of the stakeholder interview, one of them, on both Highway 44 and Highway 20-26, that's very good information to have. So, I appreciate you coming and sharing that. De Weerd: Thank you. We also have Chad -- okay. Thank you. Signed up for. Jerry Stevenson. Signed up against. Stevenson: First of all, l'd like to clarify how much -- De Weerd: If you will first state your name and address. Stevenson: Excuse me. Jerry Stevenson at 6040 North Ten Mile Road. De Weerd: Thank you. Stevenson: And before I start I'd like to request more than three minutes, no longer than ten minutes, to allow a little more fair access to time on this project. I was cut short during the Planning and Zoning committee and the applicant was able to come up here and make several comments that I never had a chance to comment on. So, I feel like I was really disadvantaged in that whole process and I'd just ask for a little more access to fair time. De Weerd: Sir, do you represent a group of people? Stevenson: Well, a group -- I represent my family and a group of livestock at our place there, so -- De Weerd: I have never had that constituency represented. Council? Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Certainly we have someone requesting it before his testimony has run long, so I would be amenable to that. De Weerd: Thank you. In light of your livestock I think that's very fair. So, we will set you at ten minutes. Stevenson: And also I want to ask did you -- I sent a letter or dropped a letter off personally. Did you receive that by any chance? Last week. Meridian City Council November 15, 2005 Page 21 of 65 De Weerd: It's in our public record. Yes. Stevenson: Okay. Basically, I have several issues and, first of all, I want to respond to some of the things the applicant said at the Planning and Zoning meeting I think persuaded some of the votes to go through and, first of all, was the -- let me go to a shot here -- could we go to a different plan that actually shows the Ten Mile Road and where the sewer lines might be coming in and -- let me see if I can find a pointer here. Canning: Madam Mayor, this is the most bird's eye view we have. Stevenson: Okay. Typically -- my place is this right here. There is a larger picture that we have of the development there. Okay. Thank you. That's the one I was looking for. Basically, one of the things that's stated right here -- there is a lift station that's put in right here and my property is this right here and there is a lift station approximately right there and now -- as far as sewer access, Kevin Amar made it sound like it would be real easy for me to just shoot right down there and tie right into that. It's not as easy as what it sounds, because, for one thing, I would have to be granted an easement. I would have to I guess settle a fee with him or something as far as getting easement to that and I'm not sure that that's really feasible to have any access to that sewer station right there. Okay. The other thing is is the water access, should I ever need to get access to any sewer or water to be annexed into the city, I'd have to go even another additional feet down here. So, I have measured that off and we are looking at about 300 feet or a hundred yards length, because my house actually sits on the north side over here, so it would not be that easy. If I have to go out to the street, come back down, and around to that, it would even be additional feet as well, versus going -- it would be approximately 90 feet out to the middle of the street from where my sewer is. The other thing that when I actually -- the sewer access is being accessed right here and over here is where the water -- two accesses are. I talked to the Public Works, they said that I -- they would be coming down here, but when I actually looked at the plot plan, I find out that they are actually coming in through over here and over here. Basically, I don't have any development taking place along here, so I'm basically being discriminated against on having this little piece of property right here of having any feasible access to any city sewer and water and I would project that in that design, if it went up to the street as it has been planned for a number of years, it would have to come down here, wait for the Black Cat Trunk to come in and, then, it would be tied in. Furthermore -- and as the letter stated, Steve Glasgow, when I did sell this piece of property right here in which they do have access to sewer and water services from, he made it very clear to me that this property right here would not have access to the city sewer and water services and this whole development here would have to wait until the Black Cat Trunk was put in. So, I was misled on that feature right there. The other issue I want to make here is the irrigation. There is no access to any irrigation from my property. Right now the way this whole thing is designed there is no accommodation from this lateral right here to provide me with any access. There could be access, but it would be pressurized and wouldn't allow for the flood irrigation. So, there would be an expense there of putting in sprinklers to the, you know, remaining sections of my property there. Silver Leaf Meridian City Council November 15, 2005 Page 22 of 65 Subdivision was supposed to provide that. However, that was one of the things they have failed to do is provide any access from this side over there. One of the other things that -- basically, Kevin also stated that the -- that there was the neighborhood meeting that we had on this whole thing, really, has not been -- I mean it was basically along side the street, lasted 15 minutes. Kevin Amar was not even there to listen to any objections, complaints, or anything. When I started asking the tougher questions, Shawn Nickle, who was just a representative, wasn't able to answer a lot of the questions and basically referred me over to Kevin Amar. I did call his office a couple times and left a few messages, even on his cell phone as well. I never got any response. So, I haven't really seen any effort for this development to even work any of my concerns I did put in there. The other thing that I have right now is my work requires high speed internet, because I do online presentations, which requires a high speed broad band and currently I have -- and that's also in there as well, a site survey. That is the only tower I have and Kevin made it sound like, because he also has wireless, that - - and he doesn't have any problems with houses being around him. However, what he didn't indicate was very misleading, because he has a two-story house and most of the houses around him are only one story. My house is the opposite. It only has -- it's only one story and if you take a look at the size of these houses and the shortness of their lots, they are going to have to be two story houses, minimum 5/12 roof pitch by their design and my internet access is going to be blocked, which is going to be this area right here. I serve off of a tower that is separate from the one that Kevin has access to. He has access to Foxtail and so all these houses right in here would basically be blocking my reception of receiving any signals for high-speed broadband. There are no other options. There is no cable, no DSL, and that's -- part of the thing is there is no utilities coming down Ten Mile, I'm going to be discriminated against for that reason right there. So, that puts me at a disadvantage, too. We also have a livestock issue there, with several issues, with -- I mean there is several ways I'd like to maybe resolve some of this by going to larger lots in this area right here. Maybe going to a higher bermed six-foot fence. The other issue I have, too, is the plans only call for a five-foot fence. Kevin states that there is a six-foot vinyl fence, but it's not in the specs. And I also want to clarify, too, that this right here is supposed to be a fence right here, a solid vinyl fence right there, and I asked Kevin at the hearing, before it even started, if he -- what he's going to do there and he said he wasn't going to put a fence. Well, I went down to the P&Z and pulled the files and, sure enough, he does have a vinyl fence that's required there. So, there has been several things that have been promised that haven't been delivered on this particular Silver Leaf Subdivision. There is also a wood fence right here that borders them and it conflicts with all the other fences up here. Everything is vinyl fence. And, then, it goes to cut that down to a wood fence and also in his specification that was supposed to be a vinyl fence as well. And also these lots right here, that's supposed to be a solid vinyl fence, a five foot minimum, and that's a three foot minimum, so there is no privacy there, you know, from people coming in there, there is going to be kids playing in that particular drain field there and also the neighbors right here -- my whole -- excuse me, my mouth is really dry. My views are going to be completely shot. There is no views of the mountains with these particular size of houses on this particular size small lot. They are going to have to go up to two stories and if you take a look at some of those other elevations he showed, the other Meridian City Council November 15, 2005 Page 23 of 65 Planning and Zoning, they actually give the appearance of being a three story building and so extremely high and I'm going to be totally surrounded by two story homes, just overshadowing, looking over me, you know, everything I do. And I really have a problem with that. I'd like to see some kind of a buffer, if there is anything there, or remove the windows from the backside or space out these lots a little bit bigger. And there is a lot of concerns I have. I think there is a lot of things that could be resolved in this situation, but as is this whole -- I want to also point out that this is zoned for low density and not medium density at this particular time. I don't feel like this really has a good transition. There is also an issue right here of this guy over here, there is not -- the sidewalk stops there and it would be a little hazard. Same way with my particular piece of property. There is going to be a sidewalk there, a sidewalk down to this development, and there is a fence right there, goes right out to the road. So, transition- wise, at this particular point, I don't think this is a good transition with my particular property and this particular property as far as foot traffic, because, then, you will have to go out close to the road to get access to come back down and, then, you know, am I supposed to pick up the expense of putting a sidewalk in on my particular property, it puts me at a little more of a hardship on those particular issues as well. So, in summary, I don't feel like this particular proposal is the right proposal at this particular point. I would rather see this wait and force the public utilities down Ten Mile Road versus through these arterials -- these little arteries to allow me access when I -- when that is available, otherwise, there is not going to be any development -- on the other side of the road they are going to attach from the back side of the development and they have no reason to enter the road to access that. So, anyway, short on time. I apologize for taking so much time. Any questions? De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions? Bird: Madam Mayor, I do. De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Mr. Stevenson, you said you have no of way watering your property? Stevenson: Well-- Bird: How did you water before? Stevenson: I have done a combination of different ways. There used to be another ditch down here. Actually, this -- this used to be farm ground. It's been even farmed this last year and they always allowed a side ditch to come down that had access to it. So, there always has been access to water. I have -- because on this -- on the south side of my house there is a driveway that I can, actually, partially, you know, pump the water from the ditch to -- Bird: Well, who do you pay water taxes to? Settler's? Meridian City Council November 15, 2005 Page 24 of 65 Stevenson: Settler's Irrigation District, yes. Bird: Okay. So, they have got to supply water to you. Stevenson: Correct. Bird: Nobody can stop that. No subdivision can. And did I understand you in saying that you sold the property that Silver Leaf Sub is on? Stevenson: Yes. Bird: Okay. And, then, I have also got a question, while you're standing here, for Len. Where does the North Slough take off there? Grady: The North Slough is quite a bit farther south. Bird: Where it takes off? Grady: Yeah. Bird: But does it lend to the flow south? Does the flow of the ground go south or do you have to have a lift station to take it down? He said there is a lift station out in the road. Grady: There is a lift station. In fact, it's in his property right there. Bird: So, you have to pick up and take it down to the North Slough? It doesn't drain naturally to the North Slough? Grady: Not until the North Slough is in. Bird: The North Slough isn't in? Grady: It's in the process. Bird: It's not through Paramount and Lochsa and that? Grady: Yeah. But it's still being pushed through to Locust Grove. Bird: Okay. Grady: But as far as capacity for that lift station, there is capacity for whatever development he would want and there is several opportunities for him to go ahead and sewer into that lift station, providing some sort of agreement can be worked out with the applicant, which I believe is the case. Bird: Madam Mayor, can I have a follow up, please? Meridian City Council November 15, 2005 Page 25 of 65 De Weerd: Uh-huh. Bird: Anna, this is probably for you while Mr. Stevenson is standing here. In Silver Leaf, if all these agreements are made that he was telling us, why aren't they being done? Are we giving out building permits -- are we giving out COs? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council member Bird, I can't answer that question. I didn't know there was an issue with the Silver Leaf one. I have not heard any research on it. Generally, we do not issue C of Os until they have met the conditions of approval. So, I don't -- Bird: That's what I thought. Canning: -- know if -- if this was expressed at the P&Z hearing for the Irvine Subdivision, it was not brought to my attention that it was an outstanding issue for Silver Leaf. So, I don't know how to answer your question. Bird: All the -- all he would have to do would be to call your office find out; right? Canning: Yes, sir. And, generally, our policy is if we started to issue building permits in error, we will put a hold on the number of C of Os or new -- we won't issue new permits if there is still some outstanding until we get those resolved or will only issue a certain number of certificates of occupancy. So, we generally try and work that out with the developer, but we do -- we make sure we have some stick. Bird: Thank you, Anna. Thanks. De Weerd: Any other questions? Okay. Thank you, sir. Okay. We have a Jerry de Weerd. That's all right. Are you signed up -- you are signed up against? Okay. Thank you. I like your last name. Okay. Is there anyone else who would like to provide testimony on this application? Okay. Would the applicant like to have your response? Amar: Yes. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Again, for the record, my name is Kevin Amar. Mr. Kinkela -- that's how you say his last name, by the way -- is here also to answer any technical questions with respect to the sewer or the irrigation pump station. With respect to Mr. Stevenson, the water -- with this project water will be constructed -- currently it ends at this point at the corner of the Silver Leaf project and it will be constructed up the entire western boundary of this project, which will mean that it also will be constructed in front of his property. I'm conferring with my design consultant to make sure that he has that in his design. But that will be, typically, something that we have had in our plan. With respect to sewer, the sewer lift station is here, which he has access to. In talking to Mr. Grady, we can provide a stub to the sewer also at this location and stub to the back of his property, but we are certainly not trying to preclude anybody from any sewer or water, irrigation, or anything else. When Mr. Stevenson sold this property -- we do have conditions of approval with Silver Leaf. I was the Meridian City Council November 15, 2005 Page 26 of 65 project manager or consultant for constructing Silver Leaf also and to my knowledge we have constructed Silver Leaf to the conditions of approval and met our obligations. Now, we will review that and verify that, but the current status of Silver Leaf is they have issued building permits, but no certificate of occupancies have been issued at this time. In fact, we just started -- or they just started pouring some foundations out there. So, we will review any of that and make sure we meet any of our conditions. But we did meet with staff at the time of issuing the building permits and had our fencing up. The items remaining were the completion of the sewer lift station or the witnessing of the testing, as well as some of the landscaping in order to get the occupancy permits. And, again, we will review that and make sure that all that is in order and make sure we not causing any further problems. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Can I make a statement? We are not -- we are not judging Silver Leaf. I would just -- Kevin, all I was doing was showing him that way to -- if he had problems with that, to do it. We are not talking about Silver Leaf today. Tonight. Amar: Okay. Madam Mayor and Councilmember Bird, I do appreciate that. I do understand it. I just -- tonight's the first time I have heard of it being an issue. So, I know it's an issue in your mind also. I'm just saying we will address it to the fullest. And with respect to this project, Irvine, we can provide him access or -- greater access to the sewer at this location and the water will be in Ten Mile. So, he will certainly have access to that water. Fencing for this project will be six-foot vinyl fencing. I know on the landscape plan it says five foot. We have talked to our landscape consultant and asked them to start requiring six foot everywhere, because I like six foot better than five foot. So, we will revise that landscape plan and you will see that when the final plat hearing comes through. With respect to irrigation water, I do know it's state law we cannot preclude anyone from irrigation water and we certainly do not wish to do that. I do not -- again, we will review this with Mr. Stevenson, but I do not believe that his delivery is across this property. But we will have to verify that with him, as well as Nathan Draper with Settler's Irrigation District. This project is -- on the current Comprehensive Plan it is low density residential, but on the future land use plan for the north Meridian plan, it is designated as medium density residential. Either way this certainly fits the Comprehensive Plan as -- whether it's current or otherwise. You can ask for a bump up or down one way or the other for the current designation. So, we are in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. In fact, have recommendation from staff for approval for this project. Again, I'll reiterate we appreciate working with the city and we will also work with Mr. Stevenson to resolve any of his questions and concerns. Shawn Nickle was at the neighborhood meeting, so if you'd like to speak with him. I was unable to make it that night, I had other obligations. But Mr. Nickle can certainly answer any questions. We have met with Mr. Meyers, which is the other neighbor. He is, actually, the -- he's on the board for the North Slough Lateral Association, so we meet with him often, because the Simpson Lateral that needs to be tiled, he gets to review those Meridian City Council November 15, 2005 Page 27 of 65 plans, so his concerns are addressed also. With that, I would stand for any further questions. De Weerd: Council? Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Madam Mayor, I have a couple questions. The first of my questions is -- Mr. Amar, it appears that some of these questions that were raised could have been answered very easily to the neighbor in person that raised them. Is there a reason that you didn't do that before this hearing? Amar: Madam Mayor, Councilmember Wardle, honestly, I -- I didn't hear any of these before this -- this night. I said hi to him this evening. We talked at the last Planning and Zoning meeting. So, I would be more than happy to answer these questions, but I -- I honestly didn't know that they were an issue. Wardle: Anna, I have a couple of questions and Mr. Amar raised a density issue. What are the -- if you can take just a minute and maybe tell me what the surrounding densities of the properties are. Did I hear that it was 5.6 for this particular application? Canning: It is 5.19 dwelling units per acre for this application. Oh, man. I think Lochsa probably came in at three and a half, something like that, dwelling units per acre. Silver Leaf, the applicant could give you a better feel for that one. Those are -- Lochsa takes up most of the section. So, that would be the -- the true indication. Wardle: And is Lochsa -- Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Uh-huh. Wardle: Is Lochsa Falls zoned R-8 as well? Okay. And maybe Mr. Amar can ask you. Silver Leaf is zoned R -- Amar: The majority -- both Silver Leaf and Lochsa are R-4 PUD. Both of them are a PUD. Kelly Creek and Verona -- I believe Verona is zoned R-8. Verona is also in this area. Kelly Creek, a portion of it is zoned R-4 PUD and a portion of it is zoned R-8. All of those are in this square mile. Wardle: And -- Madam Mayor? Mr. Amar, your variance for even the R-8 zone is specifically directed at this area -- did I hear correctly -- how do you pronounce it? Is it - Canning: MEW. Wardle: Could you spell that for me? Canning: M-E-W. Meridian City Council November 15, 2005 Page 28 of 65 Wardle: M-E-W. Okay. Can you describe this product for me? Amar: I certainly can. And you are correct. The variance is this interior section. So, if we have -- I'll designate the blocks. This block on the north. This block on the south. These entire blocks and this block are all single-family detached housing. I have got some pictures here. So, they are alley loaded lots -- make sure I get the right pictures. And I will try to pass them -- Canning: Mr. Amar, do I have the picture? Amar: I don't know. I just -- well, yes, that is a picture, but it's -- it's a side view, so you don't see it as well. I will pass these down and you can at least look at -- De Weerd: What about those? Amar: That's a better indication. I'm sorry. That's a better indication. They are all alley loaded, single family, detached lots. So, the garage is in the rear of the lot. And, again, that is interior to the project closest to the clubhouse and the open space. The other product -- Anna, could you go back to the -- that will work. The other product -- any of these areas. So, this area and this area both have attached town-homes. Still set up for single ownership. They will all be on individual lot lines, but they are attached housing and with this common area in the front yard. So, those are attached townhomes, which are basically -- they are the same size as the -- the dwelling, actually, is the same size as the detached -- detached alley loaded lots, it's just a different product type and a different type of house. It's for the people that still want yards, but want absolutely no maintenance, because there will really be no yard maintenance, other than a small area in their front yard. The exterior of this project is an R-8 zone and has the -- in fact, under the current R-8 zone, it exceeds the R-8 zone. The current R-8 standards are -- allow a smaller lot than what is here. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Isn't -- all those interior lots are smaller than an R-8 lot -- smaller than the 6,500? Amar: Madam Mayor -- Bird: Isn't that what you're asking for in the CUP? Amar: -- Councilmember Bird -- correct. There are -- in fact -- I guess the current standard is, actually, a 5,000 square foot lot for an R-8 standard. But they are smaller than that and that is for the variety of housing styles. Bird: Okay. Meridian City Council November 15, 2005 Page 29 of 65 Wardle: Madam Mayor, just a follow up on that comment. What percentage of the lots would you say are substandard from that, that are included in the variance? Not the acreage, the percentage of lots. Amar: I'm trying to give you the percentage. I'm going to do this in my mind, so we will see. The -- there is 20 percent that are the detached alley loaded lots. Twenty percent of the lots. And 31 percent that are -- I'm sorry. There is 20 percent that are the attached -- the town-home lots and 30 percent that are the detached alley loaded lots. So, 50 percent of it is -- is that style and, then, 50 percent of it is the standard R-8 style lots. Wardle: Okay. De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions, Council? Bird: I have none at this point, Mayor. De Weerd: Any questions -- any comments regarding the pathway or the berm per the testimony provide by ITD? Are you consistent with those standards? Amar: The right of way that they are requesting is actually 100 feet -- or that they are doing their current study at 100 feet and I think that is for this, as well as future projects. What we have come back with -- and this was after a number of meetings with Ms. Sullivan -- is providing 90 feet from 500 feet towards the intersection to provide the multiple turn bays that are needed and, then, matching the existing 70 feet that is the balance of this section. And I think it's almost all the way back to Boise at this point. I know she's requesting the 100 feet, but given the existing conditions out here and the project as it sits, we are meeting what she needs with ultimate build out in this area. I know she did mention the urban section versus the rural section and it has to do with drainage. We have done significant amounts of testing out here. All of our drainage will be underground or in seepage beds. So, the drainage in this area can be accommodated with an urban section, rather than a rural section. And we looked at that from a drainage standpoint. De Weerd: Yeah, but I thought the rural section was the same as the urban section in the needed right of way. Amar: The picture that she showed is only the urban section. So, this section in here, there is about -- I'm not a traffic engineer, so I'm sure I'm going to have some numbers that are wrong. But there is 50 feet from the edge of pavement over that is side slope and there is a borrow ditch area in here and other things that the urban section in that area is decreased, because you have -- you don't need the borrow ditch, you don't have the side slope, because you don't have the area to get into the borrow ditch. So, that section is reduced. Hopefully that answers your question. De Weerd: No, but -- Anna. Meridian City Council November 15, 2005 Page 30 of 65 Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, it might help to give you -- just back up a little bit and -- De Weerd: Thank you. Canning: -- give you a little bit of history on this project. It did come in under the old code and in case any of you were confused with the discussion versus -- this project versus the current R-8 standard, that's what was going on. The conversation was this came under the old code. The R-8 standards probably changed the most of any in the existing zoning or -- from the old zoning ordinance to the new zoning ordinance. So, Mr. Amar submitted under the old ordinance. He came in with a PUD. The property surrounding this all had contributed a 70-foot right of way for Chinden. Seventy feet from center-line. So, we anticipated that that would be the same. His drawings -- his first set of drawings indicated the 70-foot right of way. After discussions with Ms. Sullivan, she felt she needed more at the intersection and Mr. Amar redrew his plan to have the 90 feet at the intersection. Subsequent to him designing for that one, meanwhile, we have been holding this up at the Planning and Zoning Commission trying to get an application that we could take forward, even though it had been submitted for several months at this point. Several months before the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing. Ms. Sullivan came back and had the opportunity to do additional study and that's when she realized she needed the 100 feet. Mr. Amar said, no, I'm not going to redraw it. I need to go forward is basically what happened. And staff supported it in that we had held it up for a number of re-drawings and a number of months trying to resolve this issue. We felt that given that there was only 70 feet of right of way on the -- basically the rest of the section, that we would go ahead and put it forward. So, although we have tried to support ITD in their acquisition needs, this just had kind of come a little bit too late to go back to accommodate the 100-foot. Now, the 100-foot is a rural section. If they took it -- if they did the urban section, from the testimony tonight, my understanding is that they can save about 20 feet and that's where that 70-foot section comes from. So, hopefully, that provides a little detail on processing. De Weerd: Thank you. I'm sorry. Canning: Hopefully that explains a little bit why there is the discrepancy between what ITD is hoping to achieve and the way the applicant has drawn it. De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Madam Mayor, a question for Anna. You mentioned that this application is under the old code, coming forward with a PUD. What portion of the project would need variance under our current code? Would it all fit? Canning: I was trying to look at that. I think everything on the perimeter pretty much would fit. The current code requires I think a 4,000 square foot minimum for the alley Meridian City Council November 15, 2005 Page 31 of 65 loaded or attached lots and they are at about 3,880. So, they are a little bit shy on those interior lots. They would have to request -- these townhouse lots are only 33 something. So, really, the ones that most need it are the attached unit lots that are in the 3,300. So, it's primarily these areas. These are very close, but they are still a little bit shy. And the ones on the perimeter would meet the current R-8 standards. Wardle: Thank you. De Weerd: Anything you would like to add? Amar: Not unless you have further questions. Grady: Madam Mayor, I'm looking for some clarification on the water. You said you are taking that up Ten Mile? Because it's not shown on your preliminary plat. Amar: We will get Mr. Stevenson water. My engineer just said we don't have to take it across his frontage. But somehow, one way or the other, he will get water stubbed to his property. I think that's the ultimate desire, at least on my part, to get Mr. Stevenson water. I guess we can make that a condition of approval, that we will work with the engineering department to provide a water stub for Mr. Stevenson and that may be through a rear lot line. I know I looked at that with Mr. Grady -- or it may be along Ten Mile. So, the purpose is to get Mr. Stevenson the utilities to his property so he's not precluded from them, we will make it a condition of approval that we will have sewer and water to his property. De Weerd: Does that satisfy your concern, Len? Grady: Well, I'm still not clear. Your plat doesn't show the 12 inch water line in Ten Mile, so I'm not sure whether that was required for your pre-plat or not. Amar: No. I think I misspoke. That's what happens when I speak and engineers don't. What my engineer is telling me is there is -- the 12-inch line is not required in that section in front of Mr. Stevenson, but for the balance along the front it is required. Would you like Chad Kinkela to address this? Grady: Yes. De Weerd: Yes, please. Kinkela: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, my name is Chad Kinkela, Bailey Engineering, 1500 East Iron Eagle Drive. Standard condition of approval from the City of Meridian is all utilities -- in this case it would just be a water main, would be required in Ten Mile. So, the out parcel would have water stubs on both the north and the south end, so water would be available and he definitely -- he has access to the sewer lift station right now, because that sewer lift station sits on a common lot that has a utility Meridian City Council November 15, 2005 Page 32 of 65 easement that is recorded on it for -- for the sewer lift station. So, I'll stand for any questions you have about that. De Weerd: Okay. Len, does that-- Grady: That clears it up. Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Council, any questions? Amar: Just to clarify one thing that -- that Chad stated. The sewer lift station does sit on an easement, although I'll commit to providing an actual sewer stub to his property, so there is no question. He brought up the question of access and various things of that nature. We will provide a stub to his property, an actual sewer stub to his property through this development. So, there is no question as to access or the rights of that use. Now, I think he will still have to annex in the future to Meridian, but that's not something that I'll require or contest. De Weerd: Okay. Anna. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, from Mr. Stevenson's testimony it sounds as if he's looking toward the future -- planning toward the future to perhaps -- the opportunities for redeveloping in that site and given that, Mr. Amar has agreed to stub sewer and water and perhaps it's best to stub those in the form of stubbing this street to the rear of the property. At that time if Mr. Stevenson did want to redevelop, he could gain a few lots and take access within this subdivision and not have to access Ten Mile directly. Just something for Council to consider. De Weerd: Well, that's like putting the applicant on the spot. Canning: I thought -- I had kind of whispered to him, but I think he thought I just mean sewer and water stubs, but I meant a street stub, so -- Amar: I heard the whisper for sewer and water. We can certainly provide that access. I don't -- yeah. That's fine. We will provide a stub to that -- to that rear property line. So, for pointer purposes. Extend this street, which is called on the plat Stone Pine Street, the additional 90 feet to rear property line for Mr. Stevenson, which, obviously, would have sewer and water both stubbed in that street. That should certainly answer any questions with respect to access. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: In doing that, you would be taking 34 foot out -- 17 out of each lot or taking the 34 out of all of one lot? If you took 34 out of the one lot, would you just take the line off and make it -- make that one lot a nice size lot? Make it one lot, instead of two? Meridian City Council November 15, 2005 Page 33 of 65 Amar: Anna, is the overhead working? I'll do a quick drawing, then, we can have an idea. Okay. This isn't to scale. When it gets to scale it will be more -- I'm sure more accurate than this. But this will give the general concept and the general idea. I think that will probably -- at least for discussion purposes. So, this is Stone Pine. It would extend in this location here. This area would, then, be divided into lots and, then, this area would also be reconfigured in order to accommodate that. So, some of the area -- depending on the extension of Stone Pine, the majority of the area will come out of this lot -- it looks like 15. Some small area would come out of -- Bird: Fourteen. Amar: -- Lot 14 and, then, the lot configuration would be redistributed accordingly. Bird: But you keep in the five lots in that area? Amar: Yes, sir. Bird: And they would just have to shrink down? Amar: They will shrink some, but without drawing -- Bird: I was going to say, they got to shrink if you're taking 34 feet out. Amar: Certainly. Well, we are actually taking 50 feet out, because the right of way is actually 50 feet. Bird: That's right. Excuse me. Fifty feet. Amar: It will take this area -- these -- both of these lots are rather large, so they have room to do that. Bird: Well, they are large in the back-side, but they are not up in the front. Amar: Correct. But the result for his bordering property would be the same number of lots adjacent to his property. Bird: Okay. Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Anything else from Council? Okay. Any other comments? Amar: No. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Staff? Okay. I'm sorry. Okay. Council, what would you like to do? Meridian City Council November 15, 2005 Page 34 of 65 Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Just my comments. And certainly the offers made by the applicant are certainly fair. My concern was not with services to adjacent property owners. I will say - - and for the record that in the past the applicant's been -- done developments that have honored their word and, certainly, that wasn't really even my consideration. I have a concern with the density of the current project and the number -- the percentage of lots that fall below what would even be our standard today. So, that's one of the issues that I'm wrestling with. De Weerd: Okay. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Does any of the Council need anymore public -- if not, I move that we close 8, 9 and 10. Donnell: Second. De Weerd: Okay. Motion to close the public hearings for 8, 9 and 10. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSTAIN. De Weerd: Okay. Any discussion or do I have a motion? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I'll give a little discussion and, then, see how it goes for the deal. I, too, am quite concerned on the size of the lots. If this was in a downtown area where we had public transit coming through and stuff that would be great. I don't like it out in the urban deal. It's -- the lots are ridiculously small. That's my opinion. And I cannot support this application as it is drawn, as the preliminary plat is right now. De Weerd: Okay. Any other comments? Okay. Council, I'll look to you for a motion. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Meridian City Council November 15, 2005 Page 35 of 65 Bird: I move for denial of AZ 05-038, including the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law on the annexation and zoning of 38.5 acres from RUT to R-8 zone for Irvine Subdivision by Dyver Development, LLC -- and may I ask the attorney a question? De Weerd: Uh-huh. Bird: Do I need to give a reason on the annexation and zoning? Nary: Not in the city's interest is enough. Bird: Okay. That's my motion. Wardle: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion to deny Item No.8. Is there any discussion? Okay. Mr. Berg. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, abstain; Wardle, yea; Donnell, nay. MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES. ONE ANY. ONE ABSTAIN. De Weerd: Okay. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: We have denied, but I will make a motion and I will give a reason for the applicant, because I -- you know, I don't want him to think that it's a hundred percent -- I'm a hundred percent against it, but I just can't buy off on those small -- anyway, I move that we deny PP 05-037, for the reason of lots being too small, too many. Too small. Wardle: Second. De Weerd: Okay. It sounds like there is some discussion. Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Well, Madam Mayor, further discussion, I agree with comments from Mr. Bird that the specific lot size and density is my major concern and the percentage of those smaller lots within the application, the plat itself. De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Bird, any further discussion? Bird: Just that I would like to add that that is because of also the denial of the annexation is part of the denial of the preliminary plat. Donnell: And Madam Mayor? Meridian City Council November 15, 2005 Page 36 of 65 De Weerd: Mrs. Donnell. Donnell: Just as a comment and the reason that I would vote against the denial, is that I believe that the staff recommended that this should be approved, that they have worked through these issues, and whether it, you know, meets the standard now under this code, it certainly did when it was first submitted and so I would have -- I support staff's recommendation. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. If there is no further discussion, Mr. Berg. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, abstain; Wardle, yea; Donnell, nay. MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES. ONE NAY. ONE ABSTAIN. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we deny CUP 05-039 for the reason of not passing the annexation and zoning. Wardle: Second. De Weerd: Okay. Motion to deny Item No.1 O. If there is no discussion, Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, abstain; Wardle, yea; Donnell, nay. MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES. ONE ANY. ONE ABSTAIN. Item 11: Public Hearing: FPM 05-001 Request for a Final Plat Modification to remove Final Plat condition to construct a six foot fence inside Nampa Meridian Irrigation District easement for Southern Sprinas Subdivision No.2 by Roger Michener and Lawrence Ross - southeast corner of Meridian Road and Overland Road: De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Okay. Item No. 11 is Public Hearing FPM 05-011. I will -- yes. Mr. Rountree. I will go ahead and open this Public Hearing with staff comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Southern Springs project and as you know it's located on the southeast corner of Meridian and Overland. It's a miscellaneous application to modify a final plat condition, which, of course, has its genesis in the preliminary plat, but we are only dealing with the final plat tonight. The request -- the specific request is to remove Condition H-3, which states that a six-foot vinyl fence -- that there will be a six foot vinyl fence between Southern Springs, which is