April 4, 2006 C/C Minutes
Meridian City Council
April 4, 2006
Page 47 of 78
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Council -- is there any testimony on this application?
Seeing none --
Rountree: Madam Mayor, hearing no further testimony, I move that we close the Public
Hearing on Item 19.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. Motion to close the Public Hearing on Item 19. All those in favor say
aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Again, I thank you, the applicant, for their effort and patience. I'm convinced
by their presentation that we have the quality that we would want and anticipate in an
entryway corridor. And with that I move that we approve Item 19 with a development
agreement that's consistent with the explanation made by City Attorney Baird.
Borton: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve and a second by Mr. Borton. Any
comment?
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Borton: Yeah. Just to the applicant to let him know that I also agree with and echo
Councilman Rountree's comments. Delays are frustrating, I understand, and I
appreciate the additional effort and additional information and additional commitments
to provide a quality product at this location. Appreciate it.
De Weerd: Thank you. Mr. Berg.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea: Rountree, yea: Wardle, absent: Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 20:
Continued Public Hearing from March 21, 2006: AZ 05-064 Request
for Annexation and Zoning of 116.81 acres from RUT to R-8 zone for Bear
Creek West Subdivision by Tuscany Development, Inc. - south of West
Overland Road and west of South Stoddard Road:
~
Meridian City Council
April 4, 2006
Page 48 of 78
Item 21 :
Continued Public Hearing from March 21, 2006: PP 05-064 Request
for Preliminary Plat approval of 321 building lots and 34 common lots on
116.81 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Bear Creek West Subdivision
by Tuscany Development, Inc. - south of West Overland Road and west
of South Stoddard Road:
Item 22:
Public Hearing: VAR 05-026 Request for a Variance to exceed
maximum block lengths in a proposed R-8 zone for Bear Creek West
Subdivision by Tuscany Development, Inc. - south of Overland Road,
east of Linder Road and west of Stoddard Road:
De Weerd: Okay. Items 20, 21, and 22 are AZ 05-064, PP 05-064, and VAR 05-036.
These are continued public hearings from March 21 st. Those public hearings were only
opened and continued, so there was no presentation at the time.
Canning: Thank you, Madam Mayor. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is
the Bear Creek West project. It's located west of Stoddard Road. Here is Stoddard
Road. And south of Overland Road. And you can see the blue outline extends for
almost the full half mile.
De Weerd: Anna, I'm sorry to interrupt you. Just -- if there is anyone here for Items 24,
25, and 26, they have been continued, so -- to 4/18. Just another announcement, just
in case anyone is here for that. Okay. There you go, Anna.
Canning: This project includes annexation and zoning, preliminary plat, and a variance
application. You can see it's largely vacant at this time. A couple of existing houses.
The highlights of the proposed development are that it's 116.81 acres and they are
asking for R-8 zoning. The preliminary plat approval would be for 320 single family
residential lots and 34 common lots. The gross density is 2.74. The net density is 3.52.
And it is designated as medium density residential on the Comprehensive Plan. There
is -- this covers so many pages, it's such a large plat, that it's -- I wanted to point out a
couple important features. There is a collector road coming into it. As you can see
here, comes right through this -- about the middle of the western end of the property.
You will see a large vacant lot here and also here. This was -- or this is a future middle
school site. And they did a property boundary adjustment in the county to create that
parcel. So, it's not included with this application. But the collector road does come
along the boundary of the middle school site almost the entire southwesterly portion of
the property. You will see the Ridenbaugh Canal, how this nestles up into that. And I'll
let Mrs. McKay go over the design of the development for you. But I did want to point
out that there was that middle school site adjoining the project. And that would lead to
the other kind of unusual issue is that in the past when we have talked about schools
and particularly middle schools and elementary schools in proximity to developments,
the concern about sidewalks and how kids will get to that school, becomes an important
issue. So, there is an unusual development agreement provision included with your
recommendation today and that's that there be five foot sidewalks and street buffers be
Meridian City Council
April 4, 2006
Page 49 of 78
installed along South Stoddard Road and Kodiak Drive with each phase prior to
occupancy of new dwelling units, so that they would get all those -- they would get those
improvements to the school site. Okay. The Commission has recommended approval.
They heard the item on January 19th and February 16th, 2006. Mrs. McKay spoke in
favor of the application. No one spoke in opposition, although there were several folks
commenting. Those included Don Webber, Neil Bowl, Chuck Rough, I'm guessing.
James Prather. Alan Bradshaw. And Jan Young. The key issues of the discussion by
the Commission were the lot sizes on the perimeter of the subdivision. The impact of
the subdivision on the existing church to the north. And that's right here. That is within
the city. And vice-versa, the impact of the church on those properties. The key
Commission changes to staffs initial recommendation -- I see here that they deleted
condition 3.2. I'm sorry, I did not catch that and I didn't look up what that talked about.
They modified condition 1.3.6 to reference the Ridenbaugh Canal. They also
incorporated changes from the January 19th e-mail from Becky McKay to Don Webber
and, then, those were incorporated into the conditions of approval, but also the
applicant submitted a revised plat that incorporated all those changes into the plat as
well. And those changes included moving Elias Drive south ten feet and increased the
depth of the lots adjoining the church facility to 150 and 155 feet in depth, adjusting the
lot lines, reduced the number of lots that adjoin the church parcel from three to two.
This still shows three, so I'm wondering if this is the old plat. The two lots adjoining the
church property will be restricted to single story homes. The two foot berm with a six
foot high obscuring fence will be installed along the north boundary of the Bear Creek
West property. The developer will install a landscape buffer on the north side of the two
lots which adjoin the church facility. The developer shall disclose purchase agreements
for lots which adjoin the church, just so they know that outdoor activities take place at
the church. These activities are approved, are preexisting, and should in no way be
considered a nuisance. This language shall also be included in the covenants of the
subdivision. The church does sit way at the south side of the property, so it would be
fairly close to the adjoining properties. I did want to point out -- I'm sorry, this is not the
most recent version of the plat. It does -- the correct date should be -- we have
received it March 10th, 2006. So, I apologize, that there are just two lots shown in this
area. I did contact Mrs. McKay today and asked her why it was that we didn't have a
stub street along this northern property boundary. She indicated that it was at the
request of ACHD. ACHD, even though our Comprehensive Plan called for -- calls for a
residential development in this whole area north of this property, felt that there were
likely to not be residential uses up there and, therefore, did not want a stub street and
that's why we are not seeing a stub street here. I talked to Becky, she is -- she said the
applicant would not be opposed to extending that street. She felt that the neighbors
may still have some concerns about putting that stub street in, but given that our
Comprehensive Plan does show the entire area as residential, it does not seem wise to
include a stub street, because we are not going to get one from the school property,
which is just to the east. So, is this really our only opportunity to have any
interconnectivity with those properties north of here. Mrs. McKay also told me that to
her knowledge the church has optioned the properties to the west. So, a stub street
may not be desired going in that direction, because if the church does expand in that
direction, then, there would be no need for a stub street. So, I apologized to Mrs.
Meridian City Council
April 4, 2006
Page 50 of 78
McKay a couple different times about presenting that at the last minute. We did have
pretty good and positive discussion about it. She said I hadn't done that to her in
awhile, so she wasn't too upset with me, but I apologize to Council that that discussion
was not included in the staff report. I would like you to consider it tonight, though. You
do have findings for approval of all the applications. One does include a variance for
this block length that is in question. If this street were extended as a stub street, they
would still require a variance to block length, because there is no break in that block.
With that I will answer any questions.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions for staff at this time? Okay.
McKay: Becky McKay, Engineering Solutions, Suite -- or 150 East Aikens, Suite B -- I
don't know where I'm from -- Eagle. 83616. I'm representing the applicant on this
particular application. If I could, I'd like to set my boards up there. Bear with me. It's
been a long and brutal day at my office, so I feel a little weathered. I'd like to kind of go
through a little bit of the design of this particular project for the Council. As you're
aware, this is -- and my little thing is not working right. This particular piece of property
is approximately 116 acres in size. On the east side of Stoddard Road is Bear Creek
Subdivision and your Bear Creek community park that's approximately 18.23 acres is
located just adjoining Stoddard Road in this location here. This particular piece of
property was made up of multiple parcels. The Meridian School District approached my
clients and asked if they would be willing to sell 40 acres of this site for a future school
site. They anticipate, according to Wendell Bigham, that the school would be
constructed within five to seven years. They determine what they needed from a site
plan perspective and, then, we kind of fit the subdivision around them, keeping in mind
that they would be generating a substantial amount of traffic with the middle school and
we needed to accommodate that with some type of a collector system. Stoddard Road
is a collector and we intersected here, which is at Kodiak Drive, which is directly across
from the existing Bear Creek Subdivision. The collector roadway will run along the
middle school boundary and, then, exit out here and intersect here at Linder Road. The
school district's architect kind of gave me a -- just a hand schematic to work with when
we came up with our collector layout, kind of delineating what their access would be and
as you can kind of see, this is a representation. As you can see, the collector roadway
kind of angling and looping in there and, then, the school would set there and take its
access entirely on the collector road.
De Weerd: Becky, can you give that to Anna to put up on the screen?
McKay: I sure can. The school district did go through the county, as Anna indicated, for
a one time division, so it was a legal division of the property. I do believe it's their intent
to get it annexed, from what Wendell told me. From there we -- we were left with what
you see here, with the Ridenbaugh Canal on our southern boundary, Eggers
Subdivision and another county sub located here. Ariel Estates is directly across Linder
from us, which was a county five acre subdivision. What we wanted to create here was
something that took advantage of the topography. When we had a colored drawing it
really doesn't show it, but when we put up the preliminary plat, this particular parcel has
Meridian City Council
April 4, 2006
Page 51 of 78
a substantial amount of elevation. From this location here down to the collector
roadway, there is a drop of 35 feet and it's like about a five to six percent slope. From
the north boundary down to the collector there is a drop of approximately 15 feet. So,
we do have quite a bit of elevation. The highest point is, obviously, up here along the
Ridenbaugh Canal. We -- in our design, when we are dealing with elevation, we have
to intersect that elevation perpendicular, so that we don't have lots on one side that are
high and lots on the other side of the street that are low. So, that kind of was one of the
driving forces of this design. So, I came up with an idea that we would centralize the
pool, restroom changing facility right here, this is about 2.8 acres, and that would be our
focal point and try to focus as much of the traffic to that location. So, we kind of have a
collector roadway here within a collector. And this would, therefore, gather and
disseminate this traffic throughout the project. We have a parking facility. This is a
pool. This would be changing rooms. And, then, we have play equipment and gazebo,
picnic area, located right here. One of the other things that we tried to accomplish was
getting some type of linkage and good pedestrian interconnectivity. You show on your -
- on your parks plan a multi-use pathway running along the Ridenbaugh Canal. So, we
have, obviously, shown that pathway. It would come in here and, then, would extend.
We have got pedestrian micropath interconnectivity here and, then, back over here.
Now, one thing that the neighbors were concerned about is at this point the pathway
would stop, because it goes off of our property. Our boundary is right here. So, what I
did is I turned the pathway and brought it internally. We also wanted to connect some
of these pocket parks. We will have playground equipment here, here, and here. We
have tried to give it nice even spacing and, then, all of these pathways would
interconnect all the way through the project and lead from one green space to the other.
This here is an existing home that will remain on the property. It does front on Linder.
One change that the Planning and Zoning Commission and the staff had us make is we
took this cul-de-sac and we bent it down, so that their access on Linder Road could be
eliminated and they could take access internally. This colored drawing does not reflect
that, but what's of record does. We tried to make sure that we had differing lot sizes. I
kind of like to go through those, because I think that's important to this project. We--
our smallest lot is 5,100 square feet and so 5,100 to 6,999 square feet are located -- oh,
oh, Will, I think I -- the smallest lots are located right at this area. These are 5,100
square feet to 6,999 square feet. So, our distribution -- I know the Council has been
asking questions, you know, what percentage of the differing lot sizes do you propose.
About 13.75 percent would be between 5,100 and 6,999 square feet. Between 7,000
and 8,999 we have about 26.875 percent. Between 9,000 and 10,999 we have 28.75
percent. From 11,000 and up we have 30 percent. So, if you look at what our lot
distribution is, almost 60 percent is 9,000 square foot and up. So, I think we have done
a really good job of trying to get a good even break in lot sizes and trying to supply
different types of homes and lots for different people. Are density in this -- as Anna
indicated, we are asking for a step down. This is a medium density designated area,
three to eight. We are at 2.74 dwelling units per acre gross, 3.52 net. So, you know,
this is on the low end. One of the things that drove our density down is, obviously, the
collector. And, then, trying to keep larger lots in this area here, because of the Eggers
Subdivision and our other larger lots are located here along Stoddard. This is
anticipated to be approximately a four phase project. The first phase would be this pod
Meridian City Council
April 4, 2006
Page 52 of 78
here and the collector, clubhouse pool area here, and this collector here, all the way out
to Linder and, then, a portion of this. Then, the second, the third, this would be the
fourth phase. We did provide a traffic study. It was reviewed by Ada County Highway
District. The Commission did approve it and they indicated that we will have to add a
right turn and decel lane in here -- or left turn and right turn lane here and at the
Stoddard Road. One of the things that was brought up was the change of
classifications of Linder. It was designated a collector, I guess a couple weeks ago
went to an arterial. They had originally asked us for only 35 feet from center line. After
talking with Andrea, it was determined that we probably ought to anticipate the change.
I show 48 feet from center line. Mr. Johnson has agreed to donate that to Ada County
Highway District and that will, obviously, help facilitate the upgrade of that arterial. As
far as transportation improvements in this area, 75 percent of the traffic will go
northbound up to Overland Road via Stoddard and, then, probably eastbound from
there. The section from Meridian Road all the way to Linder is supposed to take place
in 2007. The Overland Road, Meridian Road intersection is going to be seven lanes.
Linder and Overland will be five. Stoddard will be three. And Stoddard will also be
signalized. And that is all targeted for 2007. So, we are seeing a substantial amount of
system upgrade out in this vicinity. There is also a light I believe they are installing this
spring at Victory and Meridian Road to also help get that traffic moving out there. As far
as our buffers, your ordinance only required 25 feet along Linder. We have allocated 35
feet in width. Stoddard you required 20, we have allocated 30. So, we went beyond.
We have approximately 16.38 acres of open space within this project, which is roughly
around 14 percent. If we take out our roadway buffers, we are sitting at roughly 12
percent, I believe. We are asking for an R-8 zone, but yet not, obviously, taking
advantage of that density. It was necessary in order to get that type of lot distribution.
We do meet all of the requirements under the R-8 zoning designation. We have
reviewed the staff report. We are in agreement with all of staffs conditions. The only
thing that I think came about that I question was we did have a comment from the police
department on traffic calming for the collector. When we have these continuous
collectors they are circuitous, I think the response was about cut-through traffic.
Collectors typically don't -- you know, we have cut-through traffic on local streets
through neighborhoods, but not on collectors. I don't think it's the desire of the highway
district or the city to put speed bumps or something on collectors that are carrying
higher volumes of traffic at a little bit higher speed. So, I wanted to bring that to your
attention. Secondly, we do show pedestrian friendly crossings that would -- should slow
the traffic down, something like the colored pavers to facilitate getting those kids across
the collector roadway safety to the middle school. One of the things that was brought
up at the Planning and Zoning Commission was the Christian Family Matters Church
facility is located up here on our north boundary. They have an enclosed facility, but
they also have outdoor activities. They were concerned about the noise and impact on
the development. I came up with -- I think Anna listed all those items and they are in
your staff report. I think I came up with I believe six different things to try to mitigate the
impact on the church and to protect them from anyone in the future who purchases a
home here or a lot or whatever, so that people could not consider them a nuisance.
Let's see. I will be working with the neighbors. I need to go on the record -- we do have
a ditch that is a service ditch that goes beyond our boundaries, heads up to the north. I
Meridian City Council
April 4, 2006
Page 53 of 78
will have to be working with those neighbors on that fence -- or that ditch and the fence
and berm combination that we will be proposing there. Since that is our last phase, I
told them that we do have some time. I have walked the ditch with the church
members, Mr. Webber. There is also Mr. Johnson, who lives here. He has asked that
we coordinate with him also. So, I'm not sure exactly how we are going to pipe that as
far as what location, but we will have to coordinate with them. Anna brought up the
issue of the stub street. I brought that up with the highway district in our pre-application
conferences. I always meet with them before we solidify a plan with just a rough
concept to get their input. It was their belief that this stub street was not necessary.
They thought that the uses up here would probably lean more towards a commercial
nature and didn't want to see that go through. Mr. Johnson --
De Weerd: Becky, will you, please, summarize.
McKay: Yes, ma'am. Mr. Johnson is here tonight and I'd like him to speak about the
stub street, because it impacts him probably the most. Do you have any questions?
De Weerd: Thank you. Any questions for Becky at this time?
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Becky. Okay. I have several people who have signed
up. When I read your name and indicate the box you noted, if you would like to provide
testimony, please, come up at that time. Susan Wildwood is neutral. If you will, please,
state your name and address for the record.
Wildwood: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. My name is Susan
Wildwood. I'm an attorney and I'm here on behalf of Christian Family Matters,
Incorporated. We would like to say thank you very much to the developer, to Becky, for
the memo that she sent in, for those matters going on the record. We have had some
discussions this evening for one additional request we have. When my clients talked to
me a couple of weeks ago about the project and the work that Becky had done, I listed
an additional concern and that would be that even though in the original sales
agreement there would be a disclosure with regard to Christian Family Matters Outdoor
Bible Fellowship. It's been my experience it's not the first purchaser, but it's subsequent
purchasers who come in that may not have notice with regard to the activities. The
developer has talked about putting a fence and a berm, so once the trees grow up it's
not necessarily the case that those neighbors -- the second or third purchasers, are
going to be able to see what's going on over the fence. We suggested, and Becky and
Mr. Johnson have agreed, to include a plat note on the final plat that would say that this
is Christian Family Matters Outdoor Bible Fellowship. Our only concern -- and it's jointly
shared -- is that we may not get Mr. Priester's approval of that note. So, we are going
to make our best run at -- and we are requesting that that be a condition as follows:
That we -- if we can get the plat note approved by Mr. Priester, that's going to be our
preference. Our fall back will be I will work with Becky and Mr. Johnson as far as CC&R
information goes, so that we could have those in the CC&Rs, but we did want to make
Meridian City Council
April 4, 2006
Page 54 of 78
that request and we had talked about it outside, we think that that's a way of
accomplishing everything they are talking about. We really appreciated the fact that
they are meeting with us, going to work as far as piping the ditch, walking those
property lines, and working through those issues. So, for -- on behalf of Christian
Family Matters that's alii have and I would be happy to stand for any questions.
De Weerd: All right. Council, any questions?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you.
Wildwood: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Don Webber is neutral. Okay. Luke Lance against. If you will,
please, state your name and address for the record.
Lance: Absolutely. Luke Lance, speaking in cooperation with Alan Lance at 1370
Eggers Place. Madam Mayor, Council members, I would like to take this opportunity to
express my concern about the Bear Creek West Subdivision. We are firm believers that
you need to develop new subdivisions into their surroundings. With the exclusion of the
existing Bear Creek Subdivision, most of the surrounding area is built out to one or
fewer households per acre. The proposed development that passed Planning and
Zoning is scheduled to be a staggering eight houses per acre. The existing Bear Creek
is not even developed this dense. With proposed 321 homes, there is one outlet for the
over 642 estimated new vehicles. The Ten Mile interchange is still at least two years
away from completion and we are all aware that the interchange at Meridian and 84 is
badly in need of a redesign. I'm not here today in direct opposition of development,
that's not realistic. I'm here today in opposition of the density proposed for the new
development. While sitting in a Planning and Zoning meeting I listened to the
presentation given by Mr. Bigham of the Meridian School District and what he had to
say was frightening. Even more frightening was the fact that it was given no noticeable
consideration by the Commission. In our letter to the Commission I addressed several
issues, including the safety of the Ridenbaugh Canal, emergency response times,
sewer capacity, fresh water capacity, and other concerns. We received no response to
our letter, which is not acceptable. I have a copy of this letter available for Council's
review upon request. We also have never been contacted by the developer and this is
just embarrassing. In all the meetings I have been attending lately, in every other
instance the developer has worked with the neighboring property owners to make the
development as painless as possible. It is apparent that greed is driving this
development and the primary beneficiary will be the developer. The bottom line is there
are several issues that need to be addressed prior to granting these requests. The
failure to address these issues would be a great disservice to the long time residents
Meridian City Council
April 4, 2006
Page 55 of 78
and property owners in the area. I appreciate the opportunity to address this body and
hope that our concerns will be taken into consideration.
De Weerd: Thank you, sir. Any questions, Council?
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Denny Johnson. Signed up neutral.
Johnson: My name is Denny Johnson. I live at 1335 West Overland.
De Weerd: Thank you. You can pull that up if you would like. Thank you.
Johnson: I'm on the northeast corner of this development, this parcel here, and, then,
this one as well. My major concern has kind of shifted tonight, because of the
discussion with the cutout here coming in my property. I'm very much opposed to that
for several reasons. My buildings, my home and my outbuildings, are on the south end
of my property, originally set up pretty open back there with my shop and my -- my
equipment storage, tack room, et cetera, is open to the public if there is a cutout put in
there. It totally changes my property. Totally changes my privacy. I believe it also
greatly decreases the value of my property in the event that a road is required to
continue onto Overland Road. For those reasons I'd ask the Council to consider not
requiring a stub -- road stub onto that property. I do also feel that there is -- you know,
there is -- if it is required, there is other places that it can be stubbed out all the way to
the west, even to the church property there. So, in either location, you know, I would be
equally opposed to it. Other consideration and concerns that I have, you know, as has
been mentioned, the traffic situation is difficult and bad now in the mornings that traffic
is backed up to Linder and beyond most mornings. With the addition of -- the
gentleman said 650 vehicles every morning, it's hard to imagine what that would create
there. I was at a meeting -- Council meeting earlier in the year where an employee of
the fire department states that right now it's difficult getting their vehicles into these
properties at high traffic hours of the day. It would only add to that. There has been the
consideration for the church property there that allowed for a reduction in lot size behind
them, that R-8 property there, which had the effect of adding to the density to my
property there. I don't know exactly how all that happened. I was not here at that time
and didn't petition directly to the developer for that. The original plat, as you see it here,
shows three lots south of the church. The new plat, which I don't see anywhere here,
widens those parcels south of the church there to two lots and increases the lots behind
my property there by an additional lot. I guess I -- one of the considerations for that was
that their buildings and their church activity is on the south end of their property. The
same situation exists for me. My house and my outbuildings and all the activities that I
have around the place are on the south end of my property as well. I think that's about
all I have. I do have some concerns about the berm size and the fence that they will put
back there, but Becky McKay did indicate to us that that's down the road and we can
discuss that at a later date. So, thank you for the opportunity. Any questions?
Meridian City Council
April 4, 2006
Page 56 of 78
De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Johnson. Any questions, Council? Okay. Thank you.
Okay. I have RL. Riley.
Riley: Good evening. Dick Riley, 2707 South Linder Road. I guess the main thing I'd
like to talk about here is a little arrogance. As you look around the room and see the
consultants and the developers who are here, their heads are down, they are looking at
things, not paying attention, as if it's a foregone conclusion, and I feel like since this --
the very first notification came out; I have really been attentive to this. I have only
seen one. And the last few meetings there haven't been any notifications. I noticed that
there was a notification on the board out there. I went by today, looked at it, and one of
neighbors came up and, hey, do you know there is a meeting tonight to talk about this
some more? And that's the way I found out about it. Earlier in this meeting they were
talking about very small lots, people who are empty nesters want small places to live
and that's great. What we are talking about here is bumping up to homes that are
existing and people have purchased and invested in property that are very large lots
and I think what we need to look at here is expanding some of the perimeter lots in this
development to half acre, spreading it out, so that the transition -- not just a butt up
against Ridenbaugh Canal and having low density in there, what I would consider low
density. I moved out of low density. I knew where I was moving. I knew what was
going to happen with the roads. I'm not trying to stop the development, I'm just saying
that we really need to take consideration the fact that removing and bumping up against
five acre lots, ten acre lots -- and I can guarantee you that the taxes I'm paying on my
lots are a hell of a lot more than those people are going to be paying right there
individually. Traffic is going to increase. I understand that. In our very first meeting I
was assured by most means that all development was going to stay east and slowly
work its way to Linder. Linder is not going to have a light for a long time, as we talked
about. Overland Road is backed up clear to Linder in the mornings. I have lived there
at my present property for three years. When I first moved in there, before Bear Creek
One was done, you could drive right up about almost to the stop light. Now, in the
mornings we are backed clear down to Linder. They are going to take care of that when
they expand out to Linder, but until that light comes in I don't think that we should put
some -- well, I think we should put some restrictions on the development being to the
east of the subdivision. Interest rates are starting to go up. What happens when
interest rates rise, big houses, big developments, those houses fall, the pricing and
sales. So, what do you do, you go to smaller lots, the patio homes. And that was a big
shift. Today I was sitting back there and went, wow, when did this change? It's just not
been very consistent. And I just -- I just feel like I'm getting hoodwinked here a little bit,
that we need to really consider the people who have invested their time and effort and
want to live the rural lifestyle or as best we can and now we are going to put this
development in and not too long from now the property on the other side of the street is
going to be in the same situation and we are going to have a lot of houses, a lot of cars,
and I really think you should take a look at transitioning.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Riley: Any questions?
Meridian City Council
April 4, 2006
Page 57 of 78
Rountree: I have none.
Bird: Mr. Riley, where do you live?
Riley: Linder Road up in Ariel Estates.
Bird: That's across from Linder?
Riley: Yeah.
Bird: Across from there.
Riley: I'm up here.
Bird: Yeah. Okay.
Riley: And did I hear her say that it's an arterial now? ACHD? This is now five lanes?
Linder is going to be five lanes? Is that correct? Did somebody say that?
De Weerd: Yes, I would believe so.
Riley: From Overland to Victory?
De Weerd: I'm sure probably at the ultimate, at build out, especially once they get an
overpass there.
Riley: Just maybe a small pet peeve and I don't know if it's here, but I heard there was
a representative from ACHD here, is that -- they are here? Great. You know, when
they do little cutouts for subdivisions and they take their 15 feet and put their new
pavement in and all that, you get a motorcycle rider going down those roads and they
put the pavement in, it's a horrible job. It really is. You guys really need to get some
guys out there to take a look at it. It sucks. It really does. Thanks.
De Weerd: Thank you. I don't think it's always ACHD's issue. We also have Ross
Nichols signed up against.
Nichols: Ross Nichols, 1520 West Victory Road down here. The last statement -- the
last statement just about took everything I had to say, but that -- it does bother me and I
know we can't stop it and I know you guys you want to suck in everything clear out to
lake Hazel and beyond, get a big entity here, if you will, but I think personally, with this
one here, if they don't have the roads done, this traffic situation is bad out there right
now. It is bad. And I truly believe -- I know we can't stop it, but somebody ought to stop
and say let's get the ACHD bit guy out there and get something done with the roads
before we do anymore. We are in a subdivision up above, we have covenants, we have
acreages, we have animals, and, you know, everybody wants to move out of town, be
Meridian City Council
April 4, 2006
Page 58 of 78
out in the country, and one thing that really upsets me the most about them, the first
thing they do is build a damn big box around the yard, I might just as well stayed in
town. I see all that great land going to waste and it's just confusing the situation with --
the situation and these types of things, it's a bummer and it's gotten bad with the Bear
Creek so far, and it looks to me like it's going to get a lot worse. I know you don't have
any questions for me, but thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. That is all that signed up to testify. Is there anyone else
that would like to testify?
J. Johnson: My name is Jeanette Johnson and I live at 1335 West Overland Road and
it is these two pieces of property. Ten acres. Our home is located on the south side of
the east five acres. South end. And I feel that there is need for appropriate transition
between property of that size acreage and moving into 320 some homes in a
subdivision. We have lived on that property for 17 years. We have raised four children
there. We are expecting our first grandchild in the fall. We want to live on that property
on our ten acres. I know that the plans say that it will probably be residential homes,
but for me it's our home that we plan to stay on for a long time and so I feel like there
are some important considerations to be made. I think one story homes that would
touch the property line of ours would be appropriate. I believe that lot size and number
is important and I believe that it's important not to put a stub street that would bring
traffic into the back of our property, our backyard. We were told tonight that -- excuse
me -- that if they put a stub street in, that they are not allowed to put a fence where that
stub street is, so it would be open right onto our property and it seems to me it would be
inviting people to come onto our property from that subdivision. So, again, I want to
request that appropriate decisions be made to transition from the idea of putting in the
subdivision to the properties and the homes that already exist.
De Weerd: Thank you. Any questions, Council? Thank you. Hello.
Prather: Good evening. James Prather. 2595 South Linder, Meridian.
De Weerd: Okay.
Prather: Good evening, Madam Mayor, Councilmen. Not to reiterate, but as a matter of
point, I live right -- just two up from this -- I live right here. I have been in the waiting
room and no one's talked to me. And this is my business. And I would have enjoyed
and appreciated just some dialogue, because my concern is -- I think this is a good
project. And we have some issues with density and we have issues with ingress-
egress, traffic, I understand that, as each development would. But what I am concerned
with -- and this is what I would like to say with emphasis, is with respect to transition
from one use to another has been -- has already been spoken several times by other --
Mr. Lance and Mr. Riley and others, is what consideration is being given from the
Council to those who are already in the neighborhood? We have spent a great deal of
time, energy, certainly money in making this our home. My thought is could there be a
little better transition coming up from the southern part as it reaches -- if I can just show
Meridian City Council
April 4, 2006
Page 59 of 78
you -- what is on the southerly border right in this -- right along here and, then, coming
up here, to preserve what we have put so much into. Now, I'm not asking like for like.
I'm not saying an acre for an acre or five acres to five acres, but I think along that
southerly border asking for half acre lots is not too much for the developer to give.
Especially in light of the few lots that he will give up, he can put inside -- inside
internally. It's already been spoken today and represented that they are on the low end
of the density. I think they can make up whatever they lost. This is what I have done in
the past. They can make up whatever they lose in the south and put it inside. But to
ask for 9,000 square foot lots, maybe up to -- I think there is a couple at 15, maybe one
at 17, all I'm asking for is 22,000 square foot lots. So, in consideration, I would ask the
board to give us as much consideration in the neighborhood as you're giving the
developer. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Bradshaw: Madam Mayor, Councilmen, my name is Alan Bradshaw. I live at 2730
South Linder Road and I live in Eggers Subdivision and I have a lot right there where
the elbow is and I live in a lot beside it and forgive me if I'm redundant, but the lot size is
an issue and I look at one subdivision that I don't think was mentioned by the young
lady that represents the developer, is Aspine Cove Subdivision. That subdivision was
well thought out, well planned. Most of us were -- probably weren't around when they
plotted that and set that up. Some of you may have been. But that was well done, well
thought out, and all of us have probably driven through that subdivision and thought,
wow, what a thing to be proud of, what a subdivision, what a community, an area to be
proud of that really enhances Meridian. And so just consider the lot sizes. They are all
one acre lots in Eggers and, then, five acres across the street. And my last point would
be that I just -- I'm not sure how they are going to fit 320 families in that swimming pool.
De Weerd: Thank you. Any further testimony? Okay. Would the developer's
representative like to come up for wrap-up remarks? If you will, please, restate your
name for the record.
McKay: Becky McKay. Engineering Solutions. I will just kind of go through these as
quickly as possible and I have new batteries now. Mrs. Wildwood asked us to include
that note stating -- recognizing the existence of the church facility with the outdoor
activities and so forth. We did agree to that, obviously, subject to the Ada County
engineer's approval, because he's very particular on what is allowed on a plat and what
is not and it is governed by state law and so I just don't want to get crossways with him.
Mr. Lance talked about the density in this particular subdivision. As the Council well
knows, the densities continue to go up, up, and up as land prices, lot prices, home
prices, escalate, improvement costs escalate. This particular subdivision is on the really
low end with the 2.74 dwelling units per acre. The traffic impact. Obviously, this will
impact traffic. Luckily there are improvements that are planned in this vicinity that will
add additional capacity and help alleviate some of the problems. And, hopefully, ITD
will support the Council and the Mayor in getting the Ten Mile interchange and that
Locust Grove overpass installed as soon as possible. As far as the schools are
Meridian City Council
April 4, 2006
Page 60 of 78
concerned, we were sensitive concerning the schools. Obviously, we worked with the
school district to provide them a middle school site that they desperately needed south
of the interstate. They will also benefit from us extending the sewer and the water to
this area and building the collector. It was brought up about sewer and water capacity.
Your Black Cat Trunk is coming across the freeway this fall is the plan. It's going to be
a 36 inch trunk. It will go through the property to the west. I believe JUB Engineers,
your staff, and that particular developer are looking at a particular route. When it comes
to Overland Road, it will be picked up, pulled through, all the way down this collector
here and, then, that will allow that lift station that was very contentious a few years ago,
to come off line and, then, that sewer will extend in a southeasterly fashion to help
alleviate some of the sewer capacity issues that have plagued the area south of the
freeway and to the east. As far as the Ridenbaugh Canal, we will have to fence along
the Ridenbaugh. Mr. Johnson indicated that he would be consistent with what he did
at Bear Creek and go with like a wrought iron fencing. The pathway would, obviously,
be on the inside of that fence, so that we would not have any ditch hazard. The issue
was brought up with me with the neighbors. We did have a neighborhood meeting, as
required. We held it here at the Council chambers. We had quite a few people. We do
only notify those that are within 300 feet and those that, obviously, sometime the
neighbors will tell their adjoining neighbor about the meeting, but we did have a good
turnout and I think we were here for about two and a half hours taking into consideration
comments and concerns. Mr. Johnson on this stub street. You know, we try to guess
these stub streets. Sometimes uses and designations change and we are wrong.
Sometimes we look back and wish that we would have put them in. You just never
know. Obviously, Denny Johnson is opposed to the stub street at that location. His
home, his shop, is located to the rear of his lot. So, the impact of that stub street would,
obviously, be upon him. I gave him the pros and the cons of the stub street. The
reduction in number of lots. We reduced the number of lots next to the church from
three to two. We did do some shifting around this way and around that way to minimize
the number of lots next to the church. We did go from I think five next to Denny
Johnson to six. I will be glad to look at that and try to shift further around that bend and
minimize the lots that we back up to him as much as possible. I did shift this street
south another ten feet to get 145 and 150 depth right here. I can also try to shift this
corner a little bit more to try to get better separation. The developer's agreed that he will
build a berm between two and three feet, plus six foot vinyl fence and the neighbors
want the vinyl fencing. So, we are trying to work with them on those issues and the
ditch. Concerning Mr. Riley and the transition along this southern boundary. We have
the Ridenbaugh Canal here. We didn't just accept that -- can I just finish? Oh, I'm
sorry. We didn't just accept that the Ridenbaugh would be a natural buffer, we did look
at trying to place our largest lots along this southern boundary. And if I could, just to
kind of demonstrate -- just to demonstrate the sizes of these particular parcels, this is
13.3, 11.8, 12.4, 14.2, 13.2. This one is 11,720. This is 143 foot depth. This is 164 feet
in depth. This is 134,161. I have got 17,000,16,13,12,17,16,14,13,19,12,13, and
19 and 16 here. All of my largest lots and my deepest lots are located there. I did look
at where their homes were located. I looked at those distances. I brought an aerial
photo I can submit for the record in trying to figure out what our distances would be.
Some of these homes are 225 feet from the rear of their home to the rear of our lot line.
Meridian City Council
April 4, 2006
Page 61 of 78
Some are 170, 170, 180. This particular home located across Linder is 235 feet. The
closest home to us is the one located right here in this little triangular area next to Linder
and the Ridenbaugh Canal where we are 130 feet. I made great effort, but, obviously,
you know, we can't match acre for acre. And when we are bringing sewer that type of
distance, we have to bring water from Overland all the way down Linder to loop this
system; we have to have a density that will support central services, as you well know.
I think that this is a good project. We have spent about over a year looking at this
project, meeting with the neighborhood -- I have walked the ditches with the church. I
have talked to Mr. Webber on the phone. I spent all the previous time of this -- or the
earlier time in this meeting talking to the neighbors, discussing issues, seeing where we
could find some middle ground. Anytime we are changing the character of an area we
are going to get resistance. This particular project is a good project. It is low density
when we look at the scheme of things and what we are seeing out there in this urban
residential type development. We have got good open space and good amenities. And
I think this is a project that Council should be able to support. It's phased in. Everybody
always thinks that you're going to have 320 homes in here immediately. It takes a few
years for projects to build out, as you well know. This is a good project. Thank you.
De Weerd: Council, questions for the applicant?
Bird: I have none, Mayor.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Assuming you get the affirmative, what's the phasing? I know you can't give
a specific time line and have indicated which ones would be in sequence, but, you
know, about when, based on the current market situation?
McKay: Based on the current market situation, my understanding is we would go into
design and the first phase would be constructed this year. Based on how long it's taking
for plans to process through agencies and so forth, I would say the subdivision would
start construction early fall, would be the best case. Then, we would be going up
against the winter trying to pave. If we got paved in this 2006 year, then, they would
find home start -- would start going up in -- sometime in 2007. It usually takes us nine
months to a year to have homes going up. And the reason that we are extending that
collector all the way through was that sewer is going to have to go down that roadway
and that's what made the most sense. Plus, we get the road in there, then, if the school
accelerates their schedule, that roadway is there. It will also provide another
interconnection between Stoddard and Linder.
Rountree: Okay. Thank you.
De Weerd: Any other questions?
Meridian City Council
April 4, 2006
Page 62 of 78
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton.
Borton: Becky, your comments about the concerns and issues with providing water and
sewer and some of the transition issues have been discussed, at least on the southern
portion and eastern portion. Are the concerns from your perspective of an engineering
nature or economic, meaning, you know, if lot sizes and densities decreased on the
southern portion or eastern portion, is it an economic issue as to whether or not those
are changed or an engineering issue, meaning you need this specific density?
McKay: Madam Mayor, Councilman Borton, it's an economic issue. Density is always
considered an economic issue, because you have to have a certain amount of density
to support bringing the central facilities, building continuous collectors and recreational
facilities and, obviously, making it pencil. If you're talking about enlarging these and,
then, decreasing the size within -- I think is what you're trying to get to. When we laid
this out we had a specific target of a percentage distribution of lots and from what has
been successful at Bear Creek, the -- that's what they wanted to try to mirror here, the
mixture. We have -- the smallest lots are located here and, then, they get larger as we
go this way, as we go south and as we go east. And this particular distribution of lots
has not changed, sir. I think there was talk about things have changed and this is
identical to what we have always shown everyone from the very beginning when it was
a hand sketch at the neighborhood meeting. In fact, I even dropped lots in here and
made these bigger. If we were talking a 17,000 square foot lot or a 22,000 square foot
lot, it's going to have a very large expensive home on it. I mean, you know, you're kind
of cutting hairs. If I had 5,000 or 6,000 or 7,000 or even eight or nine right through here,
I would think that the Council would have a concern. You know, Becky, these are acre
lots and, you know, these lots you have got here are 100 feet deep or 110, you know,
we think you need a transition. We felt that we had done a good transition here. It's not
that often that we do lots that are 17,16, 15, 14 thousand square foot with central sewer
and, you know, central water in today's market. They are just so expensive. Your 8,000
square foot lots are going for over 100,000 apiece. So, we are having, you know, a
tough time trying to keep that market affordable.
Borton: Okay.
De Weerd: I guess, Becky, we have had these transition areas and, you know, I agree
that you can have a mixture, but there is nothing wrong with a half acre lot in the city
limits and I know staff gets sick of me saying that, but as a transition -- and we have
seen it along other city densities, excuse me, backing up to our county rural areas. That
is how they start transitioning and building the higher densities towards the center of the
subdivisions. So, it isn't unheard of and it's becoming more common, because we are
growing out to some of those county subdivisions and they do want to see transitions
and I think we have seen some successful transitioning going on, so --
Meridian City Council
April 4, 2006
Page 63 of 78
McKay: Yes, Madam Mayor, I don't disagree with you that transitioning is important. I
have always been a proponent of that. I think it -- the thing we have to be careful is that
these lots aren't priced completely out of the marketplace. A half acre lot with central
sewer and water, I mean you don't see very much of them. The price on that, a couple
hundred thousand dollars. I mean acre lots are going for almost 400,000 dollars. We
are seeing some of that in different areas. So, you know, if you got stuck with a bunch
of half acre lots here, you know, can the market absorb those, is there a market there
that can pay 200, 250? I guess that's -- that's my question. I just want to make sure
that we have got something that's economically feasible for the marketplace, because
it's just gone -- you know; it's skyrocketed further than we have ever thought it would be.
So, that's -- I just want to keep that in mind.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Becky, I, too, feel along the lines of the Mayor, that I -- I have some real concerns
up on the north end with the gentleman and his wife that have the ground up there. I
wish -- I hope you can give him some larger lots. When you get up in the 18, 19
thousand square foot -- 22,000 is a half acre. You know, I never have figured out how
R-4 a quarter acre is an 8,000 square foot lot. It isn't a quarter. I would like to see
maybe a couple of those lots get eliminated and get in a little larger along there, getting
in the 18 to 20 thousand range. And I know it has to pencil out, but, you know, I'm not
the one that went out there and paid the farmer millions of dollars. When you buy
ground you got to consider that. And I will tell you that in my opinion Meridian don't
have a lot of locations where you're going to see million dollar -- million and a half
homes. We don't have the location. Anyway, I -- and I understand the transition for the
people to -- you know, they have been out there on their one acre to five acre lots and
enjoying it. But in the reverse of that, some developer is going to come to them and
they are going to have like we had come back to us today, people that complained all
the time on R-4 wanting to put an R-8 on their existing property when a developer went
to it, so -- but I'd like to see if you couldn't get those lots along the south end and
definitely up on the north end a little larger.
McKay: Okay. Madam Mayor, Councilman Bird, I will be glad to try to shift those
around and work with Mr. Johnson. He was correct that it was to his detriment that we
reduced the number next to the church. It did add one additional lot. I had those wider.
I think I have got the room that I can shift around a little further. I would be glad to do
that and try to reduce the number of lots backing up to him. I guess what the Council
needs to tell me is -- you know, we have talked about 22,000, 17,000, 18,000,20,000.
If the Council is wanting to set some type of a minimum here, that just, you know, keep
it within reason. I feel that 22 is way too big. That's a big -- big lot. That's a big yard.
But what you feel comfortable with, if you ask us to adjust around and set a minimum
there along that perimeter, then, obviously, that's your prerogative and we will abide by
it.
Meridian City Council
April 4, 2006
Page 64 of 78
Bird: Madam Mayor, follow up?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: You know, Becky, you have always -- you have always been very fair about
transitions. What do you think's fair?
McKay: I think anytime --
Bird: I don't think 11, 12 thousand square foot is fair.
McKay: No, sir. Absolutely not. I think when -- you know, when we are getting up into
that 16, 17 thousand square feet, that's a pretty big lot. Pretty deep. Pretty wide. Can
accommodate a very large home. You know, they, obviously, want to have something,
you know, that's comparable in value, so I would say, you know, that 16, 17 thousand is
a big lot.
Bird: It is a big lot.
McKay: But, like I said -- I mean that's to be determined by the Council.
Bird: I could live with a minimum like that myself.
De Weerd: Any other questions for Becky?
Rountree: I have none.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Council?
Rountree: Another comment?
De Weerd: I'm sorry, sir. Okay.
Bird: I don't -- just wanted you to recognize him, that he put his hand up.
De Weerd: Okay. Anna, did you have something?
Canning: Just one quick comment. The comment was made that you can't put a solid
fence across a stub road. I'm not sure that that's completely correct. We have done it
in the past. The trick is just in the setback of the fence. The fence needs to be rebuilt,
so that it's staggered back once the road is put through. So, I just wanted to make sure
that that was correct information to you.
De Weerd: I'm sorry that once the wrap up is done -- unless Council would like to take
additional testimony. Okay.
Meridian City Council
April 4, 2006
Page 65 of 78
Rountree: Madam Mayor, if there is no further questions, I move that we close the
Public Hearing for Items 21, 22 and 23.
Bird: Second.
Rountree: Excuse me. 20, 21, and 22.
De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to close the public hearings on Items 20 through 22.
All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Discussion?
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: My concerns really haven't changed and I understand the economics of it,
trying to make this thing pencil out, but I still have the concerns raised by many of the
neighbors here, recognized by Mrs. McKay and by staff and Council about the transition
issues and I agree with Councilman Bird about issues on the north. My particular
concern addresses the south and the east. Those lots to the south are an acre -- it was
my understanding are about an acre, so south of the Ridenbaugh and to the east I think
some portions are five acres. I just -- I just have a problem with that type of transition as
presently presented with this existing plat. I don't think it's adequate. I think there was
some -- some requests for specifics. Perhaps, for what it's worth, I -- those are full acre
lots to the south, perhaps a 22,000 or maybe 20,000 square feet on the southern border
properties -- close to a half an acre and creating some transition as you move north. I
understand it's difficult for the developer to perhaps make that adjustment. It's difficult
for the homeowners to the south to see anything probably less than an acre or less than
a few acres north of the Ridenbaugh Canal, but there is some compromise done as we
develop and everyone knows it and perhaps when everyone's equally unhappy maybe
that's when you know you got the right result. For what it's worth that's my concern with
the existing conditions. I don't know if -- it sounds like the applicant might be willing to
come back with some amendments at least to the north in light of Councilman Bird's
discussion. Those property lines might be shifted. So, I don't know if this is something
that might come back with some changes. Those are my thoughts.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Certainly this whole idea and concept of transition is not new. We have dealt
with it numerous times and usually, probably, as Councilman Borton îndicates, to no
one's necessary satisfaction, other than we think we have done a good job. I detect a
Meridian City Council
April 4, 2006
Page 66 of 78
willingness on the part of the applicant to take a look at a minimum size lot requirement
on the south side and a willingness to do some lot line movement on the north side as
parcel abuts larger subdivision or acreages, however you want to describe them, in the
county. I don't know what that magic number is. I think a half an acre is probably
higher than we have required in the past. I'm trying to recall what we did off of Locust
Grove not too many months ago, but probably prior to Joe being on the Council, but it
was a very similar situation.
De Weerd: Off of Eagle or Locust Grove?
Rountree: Eagle or Locust Grove. I can't remember.
Bird: It was Locust Grove.
Rountree: In Locust Grove. I'm willing to consider a reasonable recommendation that
Council might have in terms of the square footage for the lots on the south and I don't
know that we necessarily need to establish that minimum size on the north, but just take
a look at possibly reducing a lot or two.
Canning: Are you looking for square footages for Kingsbridge? Is that the one that you
were thinking of?
Rountree: That's the one. Yeah.
De Weerd: That's the one I thought of.
Canning: That one started off with I think 12,000 square foot lots and they went up to
17 and, then, I think they had two one acre parcels eventually. But those -- those did
come in at a much higher -- they were shown as low density on the Comp Plan and they
started off with an R-3 zoning designation.
Rountree: Right. Having said that, if we can come to some number and direction that
we can provide the applicant, I would rescind my motion to close the hearing and move
to reopen the hearings and continuing the hearings until such time as the applicant can
provide that information to us, so --
Bird: Is that a motion?
Rountree: No. But I can make it such if somebody can come up with a magic number.
The one I wrote down was 17,000 as a minimum. I have got everything from five to 21,
so --
Bird: A minimum of 17?
Rountree: Minimum of --
Meridian City Council
April 4, 2006
Page 67 of 78
Bird: On the south and east or just the south?
Rountree: Just the south.
Bird: I would agree with that, Councilman Rountree. And I know that -- I'm sure that
Becky can work out with Mr. Thompson or -- what we need there and I surely think we
need to have something done that way. I would second a motion, if you want to make
it, to reopen this and let's let them have a shot and we can set a parameter of what we
want for a minimum.
De Weerd: Okay. So, do I have a motion to reopen the Public Hearing?
Rountree: Madam Mayor, I move that we reopen the public hearings for Items 20, 21
and 22 and continue those hearings with the direction to the applicant that the Council
would like to see a redesign of the southern portion of the preliminary plat to indicate a
minimum 17,000 square foot per lot, again, on the south side and on the north side that
the applicant would work with Mr. Johnson to reduce back to a minimum of five lots that
border that homeowner and that property owner's ten acres and to reschedule the
hearing for the 18th or 25th? 25th? April 25th. April 25th.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Just remember you guys are doing it to yourself. Okay. So, I do have a
motion to continue this to 4/25. Any -- no. No discussion. All those in favor say aye.
All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, just to make an obvious point even
more clear, though, so that is -- the applicant is not to include a stub street on the
northern property, is --
Rountree: Correct.
Canning: Okay.
Item 23:
Public Hearing: VAC 06-003 Request for a Vacation of a drainage
easement between Lots 2 and 3, Block 18, Champion Park Subdivision
No.3 by Creekside, Inc. - 2484 East Garber Drive:
De Weerd: No. Okay. Okay. Item 23 is Public Hearing VAC 06-003. I will open this
Public Hearing with staff comments.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council -- as soon as my PowerPoint catches
up with my page down. This is a vacation request for Champion Park Subdivision No.
3. It's Lots 2 and 3, Block 18. They had to do a property boundary adjustment to