Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006 04-04 Meridian City Council Meetina April 4. 2006 The regular meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:10P.M., Tuesday, April 4, 2006, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd. Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, Shaun Wardle, Keith Bird, Charlie Rountree and Joe Borton. Others Present: Ted Baird, Will Berg, Anna Canning, Len Grady, Bill Musser, Joe Silva, and Dean Willis. Item 1: Roll-call Attendance: Roll call. X Shaun Wardle X Charlie Rountree X X Joe Borton X Keith Bird Mayor Tammy de Weerd De Weerd: Okay. Good evening. I will go ahead and call this meeting to order. I will have to apologize for our delay in starting. Our planning director locked all of her files and presentations in her trunk and, then, locked the keys in her car. So, right now we are trying to get her car unlocked. But, in the meantime, we will go ahead and get this started. Hopefully, we will get somewhere before she joins us. So, good evening. We will go ahead and start with roll call attendance. Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance: De Weerd: Item No.2 is our Pledge of Allegiance and we are going to be led today by Chase Olsen and he's with Troop -- and Zach Tyler. With Troop -- what number? 130. Whose is your sponsor? The LOS Church. So, if you will all rise and join our Boy Scouts in the pledge. (Pledge of allegiance recited.) Item 3: Community Invocation by Pastor Gordon Slyter, with Treasure Valley Worship Center: De Weerd: I would like to give both of you boys a pin, if you will come forward, for leading us tonight. There you go. Thank you so much. Good luck on earning those badges. Okay. Item No.3 is our community invocation. Tonight we will be led by Pastor Gordon Slyter. He's with the Treasure Valley Worship Center. We'd also like to thank Pastor Slyter. He is organizing the Mayor's prayer breakfast, which will be held at 6:45 tomorrow morning and so thank you, Pastor. We appreciate you being here tonight. If you will all join us in the community invocation or take this as an opportunity for a moment of silence. Pastor. Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 2 of 78 Slyter: So, for those attending the breakfast we want to pray for a brief meeting tonight: is that right? Let's pray. Dear God, we thank you for the opportunity of living in this great country and in this great community. Thank you for the public servants we have who serve us faithfully and loyally and we do pray that tonight you would grant them wisdom and your guidance as they deliberate with the -- over the matters and issues before them. We thank you for the people who are choosing to make Meridian their home and we ask that we might, with wisdom and with your provision, be able to provide for the services and the safety and security that they need. Now, we place all of these things in your hands and we give you thanks through Christ, our Lord, amen. Item 4: Adoption of the Agenda: De Weerd: Thank you, Pastor. We will see you bright and early. Okay. Item No.4 is adoption of the agenda. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: Items 24, 25, and 26 will be moved, becoming Items 8, 9, and 10, the first items taken up after the Consent Agenda. With that amendment, I move we adopt the agenda. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve the agenda as amended. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 5: Consent Agenda: A. Approve Minutes of February 21, 2006 Pre-Council Meeting: B. Approve Minutes of February 28, 2006 City Council & Kuna City Council Special Meeting: C. Approve Minutes of March 14, 2006 City Council Regular Meeting: Approve Minutes of March 21, 2006 City Council Regular Meeting: D. E. Approve Minutes of March 23, 2006 City Council Special Meeting: F. Approve New Beer and Wine license for ChicaQo Connection by Joy Kealey at 1935 S. Eagle Road: Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 3 of 78 G. Contract for Black Cat Trunk Sewer - Phase 4 Concept with JUB Engineers: H. AQreement for Consultant Services for Reaulatorv Floodwav Encroachment Assistance with CH2M Hill: I. Contract for StreetliQht Maintenance with Power Plus, Inc.: J. Contract for Removal of Pine Avenue Check Valve with Star Construction: K. Addendum to Development Agreement: MI 05-008 Request to modify the approved Development Agreement for Cedar Sprinas Professional Center by Lynn De Weerd: Okay. Item 5, Consent Agenda. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we approve the Consent Agenda as published and for the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest on all proper papers. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. Motion is to approve the Consent Agenda. If there is no discussion, Mr. Berg, will you call roll? Roll-Call: Bird, yea: Rountree, yea: Wardle, absent: Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 6: Department Reports: A. Mayor's Office 1. Proclamation for Fair Housina Month: De Weerd: Okay. Item No.6-A. I do have a proclamation to read. This month is Fair Housing Month. Whereas April 2006 marks the 38th anniversary of the passage of the Title 8 -- or Title 13 of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, commonly known as the Federal Fair Housing Act, and whereas the Idaho Human Rights Commission Act has prohibited discrimination in housing since 1969 and whereas equal opportunity for all, regardless of race, color, religion, sex, disability, family status, or national origin is the fundamental goal of our nation, state, and city and whereas equal access to housing is an important Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 4 of 78 component of this goal, as fundamental as the right to equal education and employment and whereas housing is a critical component of family and community health and stability, and whereas housing choice impacts our children's access to education, our ability to seek and retain employment options, the cultural benefits we enjoy, the extent of our exposure to crime and drugs and the quality of health care we receive in emergencies and whereas the law of this nation and our state seek to insure such equality of choice for all transactions involving housing and whereas ongoing education, outreach, and monitoring are key to raising awareness of fair housing principle, practices, rights, and responsibilities, and whereas only through continued cooperation, commitment and support of all Idahoans can barriers to fair housing be removed, thereafter, I, Tammy de Weerd, Mayor of the City of Meridian, do hereby proclaim April 2006 to be fair housing month in the City of Meridian, to promote awareness of equal housing opportunities. Dated this 4th day of April, 2006. 2. Criteria for Scholarship: De Weerd: Item No.2 is the criteria for the youth scholarship funds that we created during our budget process last month. You should have that on your department reports. Did you have any comments? Do those look satisfactory as far as the selection process to the Council? Any comments? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: What I read and stuff, I agree with wholeheartedly and, as I understand, one from Mountain View and one from Meridian will be selected. De Weerd: Yes. We will be bringing it to the youth council next Monday night and asking for a focus group to help us in selection and also getting the word out to the two high schools. Would any of our Council members like to serve also on this selection committee? Okay. Well, I will bear the burden myself, then. Okay. Okay. I will find three volunteers. B. Attorney I Legal Department 1. Report from SWAC on Letter from Cherry Lane Christian Church: De Weerd: I will go ahead and move onto the attorney legal department. Mr. Baird. Baird: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. The first item on the report in your packet is a letter from the Cherry Lane Christian Church requesting a certain exception to the solid waste advisory committees usual practice. Unfortunately, I don't have my computer up. For some reason it's not on line. I will work on that. But you Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 5 of 78 have got the letter and what we need is a motion to approve that expenditure of funds. And the total is 1,800 dollars. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: 3,600, not 1,800. That's the -- De Weerd: I believe that the original understanding from the church was that they could only request half of the amount and they would have to provide the other half. When they started accounting for all of it, they showed in kind and cash that exceeded that amount, so they were told that they could be eligible to request the whole amount and that would be 3,600 dollars. Baird: Madam Mayor, that's correct. Thank you for that additional information. The letter also outlines the number of in-kind hours that they are putting in and I think the additional consideration is that the facility, although it will remain on church property, will be open and available to the public for the public's use. So, it appears to be a win-win. Bird: So, it's 3,600? Baird: That's the total and that's the motion we would be looking for tonight. Bird: I move that we award the 3,600 dollars to the Cherry Lane Christian Church. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. Any discussion? Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll? Roll-Call: Bird, yea: Rountree, yea: Wardle, absent: Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. 2. Draft RFP I RFQ for New City Hall Building: Baird: Thank you. And the next item I do have more information on, thankfully. In printed form. And it pertains to the request for qualifications for a consultant for the construction of City Hall. There are, actually, two RFQs that we will be asking for your approval to release. The first one is for the construction manager and the form follows the form that was used for the police department. It's my understanding the police building was constructed and was a success in part to the fact that we did use a construction manager on that project. It's mainly technical. It's just to get the word out, so we can get the consultants to give us their qualifications. The idea is to have a review committee select at least three to come back for interviews. The law requires us to select the most qualified candidate and, then, enter into a contractual agreement for Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 6 of 78 their services at a fair price. The process -- the time line is the same for both of these, so I will mention it now. The idea is to do the statutory advertising beginning next Monday, April 10th, have the second on April 17th, with a reply date -- the earliest possible reply date would be Monday, April 24th. So, you have those back within the month. If there are no questions about the construction manager, I'll get into my explanation about how we put together the architectural request for qualification. It's a little bit more involved. De Weerd: Council, any questions on the construction manager? Okay. Baird: A hard copy of the RFQ for the architectural services was put in your boxes yesterday. It's been updated already and the item that's posted on the laser fiche contains today's version of it. The changes that were made from the original item includes additional background on the City of Meridian, additional background on the site, additional information on the city's preliminary plans for the site. The idea is that the more the architects know about our plans about the historic nature of the site, the better that they can do in coming forth and showing us what their credentials would be like. Again, the same selection process is envisioned where the selection committee would choose at least three to come back for interviews and, then, select the winning candidate and enter into a contract and move forward. A couple other items about what we put in. I do want to mention it's been requested that we ask for qualifications to include sustainable design, otherwise known as green building. There is a certification process known as the lead process. We did not specify the Lead process, but we did identify that we would be interested in hearing from the architects about what they can do to make the building more efficient, both for energy, more efficient for productivity, use of recycled material, those types of things. So, I think what we have done is we have raised the issue and we are inviting people to tell us what they could do to put those principles into the new the City Hall. Another item that was included, in addition to the site information, we have received an engineering analysis of the smoke stack, indicating that it is overstressed significantly for seismic activity and for wind activity. We thought it was important that the proposers know that that's going to be a challenge and so we have included that, just so that information is out in the public. Those are all the comments I have at this point. I'm continuing to take input on potential changes through Thursday of this week. We can have the final version to the clerk to send out publication. Any questions at this time? Rountree: I have none. Bird: I have none. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: Mr. Baird, on -- I think it's page four under -- when you're asking for information on the qualifications and experience, the staff side of the project, is it possible in that Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 7 of 78 provision to include a request to have them describe their experience with the Lead process on -- not necessarily requiring it to be part of this application, but if it's going to be a consideration, at least they can address whether or not they have got experience. Baird: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council member Borton, I did include the sentence; include details on level of experience utilizing sustainable design principles. Are you asking that I go one step further and ask specifically about their experience with the lead certification? Borton: I would think so, if there are sustainable design principles that are different than Lead certification. I mean it couldn't hurt. Baird: I will be happy to put that in there. Like you say, it wouldn't hurt. Because the process that -- you're not getting a proposal for your City Hall, you're getting a proposal for the people who are to construct it and if that's part of their credentials and if that's important to the selection committee, then, we should know about it. So, it's a point well taken. De Weerd: Okay. Anything else, Council? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: I would move that we proceed forward and give Ted the go ahead to get that -- those two proposals out on the street. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to move forward with the two RFP's -- or the RFP and RFQ. Baird: Madam Mayor, for clarification, they are both RFQs. De Weerd: Okay. Baird: The terms are sometimes used interchangeably, but they are distinct and it is important for the record that these are requests for qualifications. RFQ is your motion. De Weerd: Is there any further discussion? All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. c: Planning Department - Anna Canning: Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 8 of 78 De Weerd: Okay. We did add something for the planning department. Oh. No, we didn't. But I will ask Council -- the planning director did want to give you an update of the challenges of the month of May for scheduling public hearings with limited staff. Would you consider those comments at this time? Rountree: Madam Mayor, I would. De Weerd: Okay. Okay. Go ahead, Anna. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I did want to let you know that two of my associate staff have resigned effective the end of the month. One effective April 20th, the other April 27th. So, I will be, essentially, short three planners for some time. I anticipate I will be able to hire someone mid May. We are having a very hard time finding qualified applicants. The other person will likely come on mid June. So, for the two May hearings we went through and looked at all the applications that we received. Fortunately, the load is fairly light. But we tried to limit it to three new applications per hearing for the Planning and Zoning Commission and we prioritized them as follows: Any commercial project was given first priority. Especially commercial projects with available services. And, then, residential projects with available services. Commercial projects where there aren't services readily available. And, then, lastly, residential projects where they are either pumping sewage out of district or where there are not services available. So, with those criteria in mind, we did have to push off two applications until the June hearing. I spoke to one of them today. He understood the situation and I don't think was too concerned. They were the ones that were pumping out of district. The other one, again, as I said, they won't have services available for 18 months to at least two years. Or at least 18 months, probably two years. So, putting them off a month shouldn't be an issue. But I know that you all are the ones that get the calls. So, I wanted to let you know what was going on and why we did it and how we prioritized those decisions. And that's all. Do you have comments? De Weerd: She's telling you that primarily because we put your phone numbers on our answer machine. Rountree: Thank you. De Weerd: Any questions for Anna? Rountree: Madam Mayor, I have no questions, but I think it's important to let the folks know the situation we are in. I think they will understand. I hope they understand and minimize the calls. Canning: Yeah. And as I said, Justin Martin was one of them and it's a large project and I don't think -- he really didn't have too many concerns and not that he visibly showed or reacted to anyway, so -- Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page g of 78 De Weerd: I guess we will be getting a call if that's not the case. Okay. Any other questions or comments? Thank you, Anna. Nice to see you here. Canning: Yes, ma'am. Item 7: Item 24: Item 25: Item 26: Items Moved from Consent Agenda: Public Hearing: AZ 05-058 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 49.95 acres from RUT to an R-8 zone for Keeao Sprinas Subdivision by Todd Campbell- 5910 North Black Cat Road: Public Hearing: PP 05-060 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 201 building lots and 9 common lots on 49.95 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Keeao Scrinas Subdivision by Todd Campbell - 5910 North Black Cat Road: Public Hearing: VAR 05-024 Request for a Variance to reduce front garage setbacks to 15 feet from back of sidewalk in a proposed R-8 zone for Keeao Sprinas Subdivision by Todd Campbell - 5910 North Black Cat Road: De Weerd: Okay. Items 24,25, and 26 were added at this time and -- Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: Because of a conflict of interest with my representation of a client who has got a direct interest in this process, I need to recuse myself from consideration of these three items. De Weerd: Okay. Council -- or I guess I would address our citizens that are here for these items. We are going to continue them for two weeks when Councilman Borton will be -- or when Councilman Wardle will be here. And that is we can go ahead and hear this with just two Council members, but one of the reasons we have four elected officials is to bring the diversity of opinion to the table and to the discussion and so for that matter we would like to continue this for two weeks when Councilman Wardle is back and we will, then, have three Council members to hear this application. Any comment from Council? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I would agree wholeheartedly and I think just open up the public hearings and we can continue them. Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 10 of 78 De Weerd: Okay. Bird: That would be my favor. Rountree: I concur. De Weerd: Okay. I will go ahead, then and open 24, 25, and 26, public hearings AZ 05-058, PP 05-060, and VAR 05-024, for consideration of a motion to continue the Public Hearing to April 18th. Mr. Berg is April 18th -- it's not too much different than April 25th at this point? Okay. And to any citizens that are here for these three items, we do apologize and hope to see you again in two weeks and -- do you want it on the 18th or the 25th? Bird: Let's go to the 18th. De Weerd: Okay. We will go ahead and put it on the 18th. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move that we continue public hearings AZ 05-058, PP 05-060, and VAR 05-024, until April 18th, 2006. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to continue these items for Keego Springs Subdivision to the 18th of April. All those in favor say aye. Okay. All ayes. Motion carries. And that was excluding Mr. Borton on that. So, again, we appreciate you joining us tonight and we apologize. MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES. ONE ABSTAIN. ONE ABSENT. Item 8: FP 06-015 Request for Final Plat approval of 16 building lots and 1 common lot on 3.26 acres in C-G and R-40 zones for Devon Park Subdivision No.3 by Fairview Lakes, LLC - 1875 North Lakes Place: Item 9: FP 06-013 Request for Final Plat approval for 20 single-family residential building lots and 3 common lots on 3.57 acres in an R-8 zone for Breinholt Subdivision by Richard Breinholt - 2580 North Meridian Road: Item 1: FP 06-012 Request for Final Plat approval for 22 building lots and 1 other lot on 15.55 acres in an L-O zone for Touchmark Center Subdivision No.1 by Touchmark of the Treasure Valley - 3805 East Franklin Road: Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 11 of 78 Item 11: MFP 06-002 Request to modify the approved fencing for Hacienda Subdivision in an R-8 zone by Jayo Construction - 6000 North Meridian Road: Item 12: FP 06-016 Request for Final Plat approval for 103 residential lots and 7 common lots on 31.72 acres in an R-4 zone for Estancia Subdivision by Gem Star Development, LLC - east of South Locust Grove Road and north of Amity Road: De Weerd: Okay. Items -- Anna, on these final plats do we have any issues with Items 8 through 12? Canning: No, ma'am, we do not. De Weerd: Okay. We have final plats on FP 06-015, FP 06-013, FP 06-012, MFP 06- 002, and FP 06-016. Council? Okay. Anna. Canning: Yes, ma'am. De Weerd: On the -- on Item No. 12 there were no issues on off-peak pumping? Canning: Those issues, as I understand, were -- it was more of a question. The way it's worded is okay and I think that the applicant's concerns have been satisfied. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: We also have a letter from Leavitt and Associates on Item No.9, FP 06-013. Canning: Madam Mayor, we -- the issue was regarding the need for the common driveways to be capable of supporting fire department equipment and we contacted the fire department. They will not be driving on those common drives. They are not flag lot type common drives, so they will not need to use them. So, the applicant is okay with the condition as worded. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Council, if there is no further comments, I would entertain a motion. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I move that we approve the subdivision plats for Items 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12. Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 12 of 78 De Weerd: Okay. Do I have a second? Bird: Second. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve the final plat approvals of Items 8 through 12. If there is no discussion, Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea: Rountree, yea: Wardle, absent: Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Thank you. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, some of you looked concerned over those. Would you rather that we bring those two your attention, rather -- if we have worked them out? De Weerd: Anna, I guess if there is a Council -- or a letter in front of Council, they probably would need knowledge that those issues have been worked out. Canning: Okay. I will do that next time. I'm sorry. Item 13: Continued Public Hearing from March 7, 2006: ZOA 05-002 Request for a Zonina Ordinance Text Amendment with the areas to be amended include the Definitions of collector streets, adult entertainment, and net density. The standards for the Traditional Neighborhood Residential Districts, the fence standards, the table detailing the Decision-Making Authority by Application, changes to application requirements, how to measure block length, screening and chain link fencing, requirement for certificates of zoning compliance, off-street parking space standards and measurements, off-street loading space requirements, family day care standards, and sign standards for family day care by the City of Meridian Planning Department. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Okay. Item 13 is a continued Public Hearing from March 7th on ZOA 05-002 on the Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment. Anna. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I have provided a rather lengthy summary for you on this one. These are the text amendments for the Unified Development Code. The primary purpose was to go back and address the traditional neighborhood residential development standards that we were unable to come to consensus on when the UDC was drafted. So, it was to go back and fill in that table, as it were, and, then, I have also included a number of cleanup items. What I'm going to do is -- I debated long on how to best present this to you and I fear it's going to be lengthy, but I think it's important that you're aware of all the changes that we are Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 13 of 78 making. I'm first going to go through the Commission recommendation, summary of the Public Hearing, the issues discussed, the changes they made, those are the standard things we talk about. And, then, I'm going to talk about the items where we have come to consensus on the issue just briefly. I'm not going to go over them in detail. And, then, the outstanding issues before City Council. And I think we are just -- we are down to five outstanding issues. So, if on the consensus issues, if there is something that you want to know more about, please, ask me and I will go through that in more detail. Otherwise, I'm going to focus mostly on the outstanding issues before Council. The Planning and Zoning Commission heard this item on February 2nd and they have recommended approval to the City Council of the text amendments. At that hearing David Turnbull and Sherry McKibben spoke in favor. No one spoke in opposition and no one commented. I presented the application. And also Joe Silva presented -- made a presentation and he was generally opposed to street and alley standards. That was from the staff side. The key issues of discussion by the Commission were alleys and turn radii from the street onto the alley, making sure that the fire department can make that turn. Lighting fixtures along the alley, so that it was always lit. Loading spaces for commercial and industrial uses. That's just in general, not related to traditional neighborhoods. Wrought iron fences. And, then, concrete ribbons along the edge of the alley to provide a clean edge, rather than just asphalt paving where it sometimes gets weak and breaks. The key Commission changes were they did add a standard to the alleys that they have to have a concrete ribbon edge or be made of concrete. They added a standard that the alley will be designed with a 28 foot minimum inside curve radius and 48 foot outside curve radius. And that loading spaces for commercial and industrial uses shall be off street and that was paring down a table that we had, but still keeping that requirement. They removed a requirement for wrought iron fences in the traditional neighborhood residential district. They added a standard to provide gates in any wrought iron fences that are greater than three feet in height parallel to the street. The fire department can't knock down a wrought iron fence like they can a wood fence, so they wanted gates in those. And they added a standard that lighting fixtures that are required facing the alley be shielded on the top to prevent uplighting. So, those were the only changes that the Commission made. In the interim time between the Commission hearing in February and the hearing now, the staff -- the police department, the fire department, and the planning department and Ada County Highway District and public works department all got together to discuss some of the unresolved issues. And out of that have come some other changes and those were detailed in your staff report. It gets very confusing. There is double underlines and underlines and strike outs and regular strike outs and regular underlines and I know it's very confusing and I apologize. So, I'm just trying to really step through everything tonight, so that you understand what we have come to. I am going to go through the consensus items and these are consensus from Planning and Zoning Commission and from the staff group and the commenting public. So, everyone seems to agree on the following items: Definition for net density and adult entertainment. The TNR minimum density of eight and the maximum density of 15 units per acre net. That's eight gross. Sorry. And minimum of eight net and maximum of 15 net. I'm sorry. TNR minimum front setback of ten feet. TNR street landscape buffer standards. There is several of those. TNR lighting requirements. There was a clean-up provision to change chain link to open Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 14 of 78 vision fencing along irrigation ditches. Also a clean-up one for the decision making authority for vacation applications. Planning and Zoning Commission review of application forms as an agenda item, not as a -Public Hearing. Clarifications to how block length would be measured. We didn't really change any standard, we just wanted to make sure there was -- it clarified how that was measured. We removed code stating that sign fees would be paid to the building department. They are just lumped with all the other applications and paid directly to the planning department. Clarification that chain link with slats does not qualify as a screening material within the landscape ordinance. That was a provision in another part that was meant to apply to the landscape as well -- landscape provisions as well, so that's another clean up. Clarification that single family attached dwellings, single family detached dwellings, secondary dwellings, and two family or duplex dwellings do not require certificates of zoning compliance. A clarification on day cares, on clients versus children. We mistakenly put children instead of clients in one area. And we added a standard for day cares run as a home occupation to make them similar to the home occupation standards. Correction to the off-street parking requirements. Adding sign allowances for approved home occupation and family day cares. Off-street loading provisions. Fencing provisions. The alley construction materials seemed to be resolved. The alley approach turn radii and parking restrictions across the street from those approaches all seem to be resolved. And, then, the alley design with regard to visibility of the alley from the public street seems to be resolved. So, that leaves a few outstanding issues. I have received phone calls from Mr. Turnbull and Ms. Suggs and from those comments - - oh, and also from Joe Silva with the fire department. There seems to be five outstanding issues. The first is with regard to street sections. And on your staff report, which I don't have a copy of, because all my files are locked in my trunk. On page 12 of the staff report were -- you will find there what the Planning and Zoning Commission approved. The alternative proposal is on page seven of the staff report and that's figure one and figure two. Figure one represents a chicane idea and figure two is kind of an offset parking idea. ACHD was with us when we came up with the offset parking, so those meet their standards. I have not had a chance to run the first chicane idea by ACHD, so I do need to get with them and that's another outstanding issue, I suppose. Side yard setbacks. The Planning and Zoning Commission approved four feet. The alternative proposal -- this alternative proposal being the one that the combined staff came up with after the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing. It would have four feet for eaves up to 20 feet -- five feet -- a five-foot setback for eaves 21 to 25 and a six foot setback for eaves greater than 25 feet. Regarding alleys, the Planning and Zoning Commission approval was for a five foot garage build to setbacks. So, that would mean you would have to build up to five feet or the next standard would be a 20-foot setback. So, you wouldn't ever build anything in between five and 20 feet. You would either have five feet, so that no one would park there or be encouraged to park there or you would have 20 feet, so that there would be adequate room for them to park there. And, then, the setbacks for the living area on the Planning and Zoning Commission approval was five feet. The alternative proposal eliminated the garage build to setback. It changed the garage setback to 20 or 18 feet, depending on the width of the alley. And, then, a ten foot setback to the living area. Block length. The Planning and Zoning Commission approved 500 to 700 feet. The alternative proposal has 500 to 600 feet. The alley right Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 15 of 78 of way restrictions. At the Planning and Zoning Commission approval there were none discussed. Since that time we added a proposal -- or added a standard to alleys that reads like this, "All alleys shall serve as fire lanes. Where the paved alley width is less than 20 feet, the remainder of the alley right of way shall be designed to insure that the area will remain free of shrubs, trees, or other obstructions within the fire lane." The fire department has concerns that this isn't specific enough. When we were talking in the meeting we specifically mentioned something like grass creet on those two feet. I wanted to leave it open for some other ideas, since we hadn't really taken this to the general public yet and I think that there are some other options than grass creet, which can be very expensive. I wanted to leave it a little more open. So, that would be the fire department's outstanding issue is the wording on that last one. Are there any of the consensus issues that you would like explained further or are there any other outstanding issues that you would like explained in more detail? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Council? Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: Anna, on the side yard setbacks, four feet, explain to me four feet, I take it, for eaves up to 20 feet, is that in height or is that in length? Canning: Height to the eave. Bird: Is that one side of the roof or both sides? Canning: I think it was to the nearest height of the eave. The fire department wanted to be able to get a ladder up to the nearest eave portion, was my understanding. Bird: That is the height, then? Canning: Yes, sir. Bird: Okay. Thank you, Anna. De Weerd: Any other questions for Anna? Any other comments? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I do have a comment. Who is going to make sure these no parking is adhered to and stuff? Signs don't do it. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, that was -- that is certainly one of the discussion items. I think there may be an opportunity to do something other than grass creet or gravel. There may be an opportunity if you put a ribbon curb or some Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 16 of 78 demarcation of this is still right of way. I couldn't come up with all the answers, but I think that there may be opportunities for something other than grass creet. And I hate to use that name repeatedly, but there is no generic term for it that I know of, so -- Bird: Drivable surface with grass -- Canning: Growing on top of it. Bird: Grass growing on top of it. I'm like you, grass creet is a brand name, not a -- that's all we have ever called it. De Weerd: Okay. Anything further? Okay. This is a continued Public Hearing. Is there anyone would who like to provide comment on this item? If you will, please, state your name and address for the record. Suggs: Good evening, Council members. My name is Jane Suggs, 200 Louisa Street in Boise. I only would like to encourage you to consider the alley setback at the five to build to line or for an 18-foot setback or 20-foot setback, depending on the width of the alley. I see from the information presented to you that that five foot build to line has been eliminated and I would encourage you to do that. You know that we will be discussing that later tonight, hopefully, so I won't belabor the point now, but I'd like to see that. I believe that that's in keeping with the new urbanism designs which you are trying to accomplish through the traditional neighborhood residential zone and I'm seeing it used very successfully in other jurisdictions. De Weerd: Thank you, Jane. Any questions, Council? Okay. Thank you. Turnbull: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, David Turnbull. Explorer Drive. 12601 West De Weerd: Thank you. Turnbull: I'm speaking today as a member of the Process Improvement Group that spent a lot of time on the whole UDC, but we spent many many hours on just the TNR, TNC districts. I'm also speaking as a developer who is kind of familiar with this type of product and we have done a couple of these projects here in the valley. When we embarked on this type of development we -- I traveled this country coast to coast looking at these types of developments. I took my measuring tape. I measured everything from alley widths to parkway strip widths, to street back-to-back curb widths, to all sorts of dimension standards. Front setbacks. Side setbacks. The whole works. And, you know, I have to tell you that there are various standards throughout the country. I will say in regard to this five-foot build to line that has been eliminated in this draft, in all of the projects I saw none of them actually had parking pads on the alleys. Almost all of them were three to eight foot setbacks from the garage. I don't -- and in discussing this during the Process Improvement Group, we decided to make that a build to line at five feet, so that you don't have room to even parallel park in front of your Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 17 of 78 garage. So, that's where that came from. This hasn't been a real hot button issue for me, because the developments that we have done, we came back and we decided we have done all of ours in single family detached and so all of them we have provided that parking pad in the rear. But I can see a scenario -- and what we may do in the future -- if you're building an attached town home or brown stone or row house type of developments, that if you were requiring a parking pad behind all of those, you would have a 20-foot parking pad, a 20-foot alley, a 20-foot parking pad -- essentially, you would have a 60-foot ribbon of concrete going all the way down the alley, which would be cost prohibitive, number one, and, esthetically, I think a disaster, number two. And I don't know where you'd put all the storm drainage that would come off that kind of a section. So, I want to just go through a little bit of the process we went through. And we did meet with the fire department and listen to their concerns and made some compromises. Like I said, on alleys I have seen standards anywhere from nine feet wide to -- I don't think I saw one that I have visited around the country that was 20 feet wide. I think 16 feet wide was the widest one that I have reviewed. The Process Improvement Group compromised on a 16-foot wide alley section. I will back up and say that if you were doing an attached town home type -- or even if you were doing probably the build to five foot line, you might want to go to a 20-foot wide paved alley, just to give you the backing out room that you would be missing if you had the parking pad. When Anna sent out this draft just -- was it yesterday, Anna? I don't know. I just - - you know, we are all coming back from vacations or spring break or whatever and trying to -- trying to get back up to top speed on this. I had a couple of concerns that I voiced to Anna and as I have read through it a little bit more this afternoon, I think I boiled it down to just a couple. One was the addition of a six foot side setback for any structure with eaves greater than 25 feet. And I guess my point there is that in the R-8 zone currently you can go to 35 feet with a five foot setback. I don't know why we would make this one more restrictive. So, I would suggest and ask that that be revised to anything greater than 35 feet being consistent with the R-8 zone at least as a minimum. The deletion of the five foot build to setback for garages on alleys without parking, I think that covered a lot of the points on that and this -- you know, the thought that struck me as I was listening to Anna's presentation -- I don't know if this will help Joe out, but if that was available with the 20-foot paved alley, maybe that would be an accommodation that helps out the fire department concerns. The suggestion that we put in -- if we put in 16 foot alleys that, then, we put in two feet of grass creet on either side I think is a non- starter. It's cost prohibitive. Nobody would choose to take that option. We have built our alleys to date with 12-foot width. That's adequate for all almost any occurrence that we have experienced. So, I would suggest that with the 16-foot alley that be maintained as a 16-foot alley. If you want to put restrictions so that, you know, the -- you're restricted from putting fencing and shrubs and so forth in that additional two feet, I think that's entirely appropriate. But to put in grass creet, I just -- it just won't happen. Like a lot of these things, you can put the restrictions in, but I -- if they don't make esthetic or economic sense, people aren't going to be encouraged to take advantage of this zone. And I really think that these -- this zone is important to the city. I think this is an important and a viable development option that needs to be promoted in the city. We are really proud of the ones that we have done and we encourage you to adopt these standards and just consider the comments that I have made here tonight. If we could Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 18 of 78 get those standards implemented, I would be wholeheartedly in support of this proposal. Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Any questions, Council? Thank you. Wilson: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Council members. I'm Dave Wilson. It's 104 Elk Horn Road, Sun Valley. And don't hold that against me, please. I'm one of the owners of the property that's coming up in the future and I -- just to kind of give you my qualifications, this last year I served as president of the National Association of Home Builders, representing some 235,000 home builders in this country, and I, like the previous gentleman, have seen a lot of the new urbanism that we are talking about here and one of the things we are trying to do in this country is provide work force housing, affordable housing, for all Americans to have a fair and decent home and one of the ways you accomplish that is with lot sizes and when we shrink these lot sizes down to create affordability to house policemen, firemen, school teachers in this country, we end up getting smaller lots and that's what you're going to see here coming down the road and the thing I want to speak to is the five foot setback on the alley. We think that's most appropriate, the build to five foot setback and what we are trying to accomplish there is we are trying to get people out of their cars in these traditional neighborhoods. We are trying to get -- not have -- if they want to have a trailer with snow machines or a boat or four cars, they need to go out into the rural areas, that the urban areas are people that have bicycles that want to walk to town or bike to town, walk to their coffee shop, and I think our development that you'll hear about is going to speak to that, but we really need that five-foot setback with an alley, so that we eliminate parking in the back and I know one of the Council members had a question about how to keep people from parking there. Well, what we have seen traditionally throughout this country is you stripe that alley as a fire lane. You just put big stripes across it, you write in big red letters fire lane, no parking, and it seems to work. And particularly if you bring those garages within even three feet of that alley, it does keep people from parking back there that people know that's an access. And, then, you provide a warm and favorable street on the front, so your guests park on the front of your units and so you don't see those garages and provide that opportunity. So, the one point of this ordinance I would request that you do consider is that five foot -- minimum five foot build to setback. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you, sir. Any questions, Council? Bird: Yeah, Madam Mayor. De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: Mr. Wilson, five foot setback with a garage? Wilson: Yes. Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 1 g of 78 Bird: I don't care how much you striped it, if I -- if that's my garage and I've got to run for about five minutes and I pull up there with my pickup that's 22-foot long and I'm not going to open the garage and drive in just to get back and we have a fire coming down there, how is the engine going to get through there? I don't care how many times you stripe it or put fire lane on it or anything else. I can take you throughout the city or any -- Boise city and show you fire lanes are drove on all the time. Wilson: Yeah. I think it's a careful consideration. I think the depth of these lots, if they are less than 150 feet -- I think the requirement for the fire department is 150 feet from access. So, if you have got 150 feet -- or less than from the front of a building -- and even from the back if an engine is ten feet wide and it's a 16 or 18 or 20 foot alley with a five foot -- a fire apparatus should be able to get by. I mean, you know, we can't stop people from speeding on the streets and you can't stop people from parking in handicapped spots and all those sort of things, but I think if you create the neighborhood, the neighborhood is going to -- I think, you know, if you had a strong neighbor that says, look, you're really not supposed to be parking back there, that somebody is going to -- you're probably not going to do it to make your neighbors mad. We can't solve all those problems. But I think what we can do is create a neighborhood that people want to live in and get them out of their cars. And, you're right; I mean we are trying to develop a neighborhood that doesn't have five cars per family. We are trying to get people out of their cars, so -- how you keep them out of there I don't have the answer. But I think stripping it helps. Bird: Well, I don't doubt it don't help. Keeps the honest people honest. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree. Rountree: You have mentioned a couple times you want to keep people out of their cars. I'm not sure how a development like this in Meridian, even though we have more jobs than we have ever in the past, you're going to keep people out of their cars. It doesn't make sense to me. Wilson: Well, I think -- and, again, I guess you will see our development coming down, but it's got commercial in the front with restaurants and other businesses, banking, we hope, so that people can walk in their neighborhood to those local businesses. They can walk downtown. It's about two miles. They can ride their bike downtown. So, if you create less -- if I only -- if I was able to sell you a house and you only had a two car garage, you're probably not going to buy there if you have three cars. You're probably not going to buy there if you want to keep your boat and your snow machines and whatever else -- your motorhome. You may keep that someplace else, but we are trying to provide a product and I think the one that's shown up here is very successful in Eagle to that and we are trying to attract a different sort of person. I guess it's -- we are an aging society. It's certainly people my age that want less. We don't want bigger homes, we want smaller homes, we want less stuff to take care of and less stuff to pay Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 20 of 78 for, and on that Saturday or Friday -- I know my wife and I walk to town every Saturday and every Sunday for breakfast, so -- on our bike path. So, if you have got those types of amenities in a community neighborhood like this, I think people are going to use it. Now, if they want to be in their cars, they are going to be in their cars and they will probably live someplace else. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Rountree: What kind of trip capture do you anticipate in that kind of community? Wilson: I don't know. I think Jane Suggs can talk to that when we come forward. De Weerd: Anything further? Thank you. Wilson: Thank you, Madam Mayor. De Weerd: Okay. Any further testimony? Thank you. Yes. Anna. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Mr. Turnbull asked me to clarify something, because he forgot something in his presentation. That was on the street sections with the -- just a second. This figure here where we have the chicanes -- and, again, I do need to run this by ACHD. But, basically, what you're doing is taking a 29- foot street section and, then, necking down a 50-foot length of it, so that the fire department could set up a staging area to fight a fire. Right now as proposed those chicanes are 100 feet on center and I believe that Mr. Turnbull wanted to recommend a larger spacing; I think 150 feet on center, basically, so that you would have two within a 500-foot block. It may be a little less than 150 feet. I would have to figure that out. So, that would be -- that would coincide with the 500-foot block length, so you would have two within that block. It would stretch out the available parking area a little bit. Also there was a discussion raised about the questions of maybe townhouses should be treated differently and I think that will come up in the next hearing item as well. Not just related to the TNR standards, but related to the Unified Development Code in total and in concert with all the discussions we have had with Blueprint for Good Growth in trying to get compact development at -- to the arterials to facilitate bus development. I think that we need to take a look at our townhouses and how we treat them. Right now we treat them more like a single family house and if we want to get areas of density, without having to have multi-family apartments, I think we do need to revisit some of the townhouse things. So, in the next text amendment I may pull together a group and try to work on some of those townhouse issues, in concert with whatever Blueprint for Good Growth is coming out with. So, I will bring that forward to the next one. For now I think that -- I'm not trying to backtrack and include it in this one, I'm just saying that that is an issue that I'm looking at that I think needs a little clarification for the city. Bird: Madam Mayor? Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 21 of 78 De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Anna, Mr. Turnbull brought up about the six-foot setback for eaves of 25 feet, then, our R-8 zones don't have to be that. Was there a reason that we wanted to put the six-foot in here or there is a reason we don't have it in the R-8? Canning: Well, the building heights for the TNC is five feet taller. So, the total maximum building height is 40 feet, instead of 35 feet for the R-8 zone. So, it is a little taller. We got to discussing through the whole issue as part of the staff alternative group -- whatever we are calling that one, that one where the staffs met, the combined staffs met, and we knew there was concern about the four foot. We looked at some of the geometries of getting a ladder in there and that's where the six foot came from. But Mr. Turnbull is correct; it's more onerous than almost all the other districts that we have got. The R-4 only has a five-foot setback regardless of eave height, so -- Bird: Follow up, Madam Mayor. De Weerd: Yes. Bird: And I think you all know how I feel about the four foot setbacks anyway, because most of the eaves are two foot, so by the time you get out there, one of these days I have a feeling we are going to find out how a bunch of urbanized homes can go down real fast with a fire. Those vinyl windows and glass isn't going to stop very much flames. On that, I -- I don't know where the -- why we are -- you know, if we allow that other than the fact that maybe in TNR we are allowing narrower lots than we do in the R-8s -- Canning: Essentially, yes, because there is no minimum lot width requirement. Bird: That's what I thought. Thank you. Canning: And if Council would like to give some clarification to staff on what they'd like to do about the R-8 four foot setback, but ten foot easement requirement, I will take your direction and do whatever we need to do. Right now we do have a four foot setback in the R-8, but we have a ten foot easement required along the side lot line, so the ten foot kind of overrides the four foot right now. Essentially, it's five and five, so -- the five foot overrides the four foot right now. But we do need to get that cleaned up one of these days. De Weerd: Any other questions, Council? Bird: Madam Mayor, I have just got a statement -- and I have to agree with Mr. Turnbull that I don't see why we need a six foot setback. If you're doing it with four and fives every place else, I don't -- five foot isn't going to make a difference. In fact, the fire department don't have a ladder that's going to get 40 foot anyway. Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 22 of 78 Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I just had a question on my recollection on setbacks. At one point in time the setback was five foot per story. Has that been eliminated? Canning: Yes. Rountree: Okay. Canning: It's seven and a half for the R-2 district, but, otherwise, the R-4 district it's five feet. In the R-8 it's four feet. Sort of -- De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Anything else, Council? Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: Anna, one of the things I also agree with Mr. Turnbull's comments, but I have seen myself is back to the alley issue, is the room to maneuver. The 20 foot alley provides enough room for cars to at least get in and get out of the garages without running over garbage cans or shrubbery or whatnot across the way, so -- but my comment -- that makes sense, a 20 foot alley with regards to that makes sense, in addition to some of the fire department concerns. Canning: Sir, just to clarify, you mean the 20 foot if there is a build to line? Borton: Correct. Correct. Canning: Okay. Borton: And I have seen problems with -- with that particular issue. One of the things that I hear and Mr. Wilson brought up and I wanted to ask your thoughts on it, is the discussion of back to the five foot build to in this type of new urbanism is creating affordable housing. I, for one, am not -- I don't buy it. There is too many other variables that go into what creates affordable housing and market demand and demand for community, et cetera, that impacts housing prices. I just wanted to hear your thoughts on whether or not this type of -- these changes, the TNR changes, the five foot build to, has some affordable housing benefits or whether or not that's just kind of a red herring issue with regards to whether or not it's good planning. Canning: My understanding of most traditional neighborhood residential or neo- traditional neighborhood developments is that they are geared toward a move-up class. Meridian City Council April 4. 2006 Page 23 of 78 They are not entry level homes and typically are not affordable housing, unless the developer subsidizes a portion of the development. But I haven't heard of any affordable -- kind of what you would classically consider affordable homes. De Weerd: It all depends on your point of reference. Sun Valley prices, Meridian prices, I don't know. Borton: It came to my mind when I saw the wonderful picture of some of those in Eagle. I walked by and made the mistake of looking at the price on a couple of them and was shocked, so -- De Weerd: Okay. Sun Valley. Eagle. Versus Meridian. Okay. Any other questions, Council? Bird: I have none, Mayor. De Weerd: Okay. Is there any further public testimony? Okay. Council? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: In our summary from the staff, Anna, the staff had asked if we -- if we would continue this to May 2nd. I'd like to -- I think I know why and I'd like the explanation publicly. Canning: Yes, sir. I would like you to talk about all the issues tonight, if possible, so that I know exactly what I need to change. I was having a very difficult time keeping track of all the changes from the Planning and Zoning Commission through the group of staff and other changes, so I want to get all the issues resolved, go back and make a clean underline and single underline, single strikeout version, that can be adopted with the Findings for the actual resolution or actual ordinance that you adopt to enact these changes. I had not prepared that yet. So, that was the reason, primarily, that I wanted you to keep the Public Hearing open. I think that I have got some overlap there that I don't need, but I haven't had a chance to figure it out yet, because I haven't created a clean underline and strike out version. I think the fence stuff is really redundant between the TNR district and the general code. So, it's -- that's why I asked you to leave the Public Hearing open, is just in case I find some mistakes I made, in all honesty. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 24 of 78 Bird: Anna, my -- my main concern on this whole thing was life safety, fire, police safety. I think you have addressed that, evidently, between the staff and your group and everything. I don't know, has the fire deputy chief got any -- Canning: Yes, he does. He has a suggestion for the alley issue. Bird: Let's hear it. Silva: Mayor, Members of the Council, the police chief may be aware of, you know, if we have an issue in terms of enforcement when we are dealing with private streets and what he suggested is that perhaps we can work with the homeowners association to incorporate into their CC&Rs that those are private streets and any vehicles that are public -- excuse me, public alleys, that any vehicles that are parked illegally within that fire way could be impounded and removed at the owner's expense and we would -- we stand with the police department as a way to -- we realize that signage is always an issue that seems to be overlooked and ignored in most instances, but this would allow us some sort of enforcement -- a form of enforcement to have vehicles removed when they are illegally parked in that alley. And if you have any other questions, probably the police chief is probably better informed on that issue, but it would be one way we could - - we could certainly try to keep the vehicles out of the alley. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Can Mr. Turnbull -- can we bring him back to answer this? I think that's a good idea, but I don't think it's practical. Maybe he can -- I don't think a homeowners association is going to -- De Weerd: Mr. Turnbull. Turnbull: Well, I don't know if -- what I think I heard Joe say was if these -- we are talking about public right of ways here, public alleys, and that you can, through your, I don't know, ordinances, make those so they are enforceable by the police department, rather than a homeowners association. So, I think that gives them more teeth, to where if they are public, instead of private, the fire department can cite them, tow them, and get them out of there. I must say that in all my travels where I have been to these developments that have the build to lines, I haven't seen any cars parked in the alleys. I'm sure it happens once in a blue moon, but I haven't seen it yet. De Weerd: We have pictures. Chief. Musser: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, apparently we have got a little bit of some confusion here, because initially when we looked at these, my understanding was the traditional neighborhood alleyways, the alley access loadings were to be private. And, essentially, running down, as opposed to being public alleyways, they are a private Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 25 of 78 access for those residents that are using it, that they take the access off the public roadways. Part of the reason why I -- when I was just talking with Assistant Fire Chief Silva on it, is in most of our commercial areas that we have, those are open public access, but it's private property for those fire lanes. The businesses have every access to be able to impound and remove vehicles blocking their fire lanes, as long as they are clearly posted. In this instance we are looking at homeowners being clearly warned that if they have a vehicle that's parked illegally out there via their CC&Rs, then, they are on notice that way or with additional postings as may be required, the homeowners association acting on behalf of the general property owners can have an impoundment take place, so long as it's properly noticed to them. We can still enforce on those fire lanes, both private and public as well, as can the fire department, either department can issue a citation and have the vehicles impounded as well with where we are at right now. But the question was is, well, how are we going to be able to enforce it. I don't look at it as just being police or fire, I also look at the homeowners in those type of developments also having some responsibility to help maintain, that's why the suggestion was made for the -- for the additional on the CC&Rs. But I guess part of the crux here is whether or not these are private or public alleys at this point. De Weerd: Thank you, chief. Any other questions? Rountree: Madam Mayor, I don't have any questions, just a comment in terms keeping the hearing open. I believe that we need to do that. We have some outstanding in terms of issues that aren't resolved, amongst our staff, let alone with the Council. I, for one, want to see that resolved and questions that the chief just raised, the fire safety issues, the issues that Anna has with trying to maintain the new urbanism and some of the issues that are starting to crop up across the country with new urbanism and I'm not so sure that we might not want to visit that whole arena here in the near future, but definitely as it relates on our ordinances. We need to get them resolved, but we need to get them resolved to the satisfaction of life safety, the enforcement, the Planning and Zoning, as well as the development community. I don't know if we can reach consensus, but that's where I would like to go. De Weerd: Yes, Anna. Canning: If the Council could provide a little more information on what direction you would like staff to go. I mean I -- we have been trying to reach consensus and it's -- this is. as close as we can come to consensus. The confusion over private versus public alleys -- alleys can be either. They can be privately owned. Now, most people come in with public alleys, but they can be privately owned. They are not private streets, but they can be privately owned, if they are -- so, I'm not -- we need some help and some guidance on where Council wants to go, because we are never going to come to a complete consensus on this. De Weerd: You have come a long way, though. Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 26 of 78 Canning: I have got it down to five issues and from what I heard tonight, there is really only three left, so I think -- I think I have heard what I need to hear on the side yard setbacks. The alley setbacks I'm not quite sure which way you want to go. The street sections, the offset on those chicanes, if ACHD -- if they are okay with them. I haven't heard anything on that. Block length issue seems to have been resolved. And the alley right of way restrictions, I need some guidance on what you would like there, too. You can direct us to still go to work on it, but if you could give us some push as to which direction to go, that would be very helpful. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: What would help me is -- I have before me your outline of the five issues, as well as all of the other consensus issues. I have a recommendation from P&Z and I have an alternative proposal. I don't have before me a real clear statement that, in fact, the fire department is in agreement or disagreement with a particular item. I think they might be, but I'm not sure. So, I'm a little unclear as to what direction you have provided to Council. So, what do these alternative proposals mean? Are there still outstanding differences between police, fire, and Planning and Zoning? Are there differences between what staff is recommending and what the development community is asking, just to be clear as to what these mean? And you can tell me tonight, but I'm going to forget by the 2nd, so if you could get it in writing, so we would all have at least a record of it. Canning: Well, the only one that staff hasn't agreed to is the alley right of way restrictions. That's the only one where the fire department would like to see the word -- or grass creet added as an example there. So, that's the only one where staff isn't in agreement. The other issues were brought up by the development community, although it appears that block length is resolved. De Weerd: Okay. So, Council, at this point staff needs to bring this back anyway. If, Anna, you could take the items that have been resolved tonight off of the list and just -- on the two remaining, just state what the planning staff position is and what public safety's position is, so that's clear to Council. Canning: Okay. Bird: Madam Mayor, can I ask one question? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: Anna, you say the rear setback has been settled? Canning: Yes, sir. Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 27 of 78 Bird: What is it? Canning: Well, the 18 feet and 20 feet has been settled, but the build to question has not been settled. So, that's what I need. Bird: That's what I was going to say. I didn't realize that had been settled. Canning: The 18 and 20 seems to have been settled, yes. Bird: Yeah. But the build to has not, the five foot. Canning: The staff recommendation removed -- the combined staff recommendation removed it. The development community is still raising that as an outstanding issue. Bird: If-- Canning: I will add a third component to this matrix that includes the development community. I understand now where I have to go, thank you, and I have got my direction I needed, so -- Bird: Well, just a clarification for me on the rear setback. If we go to the wide alleys -- I have got two questions. I don't see -- I don't see the five foot as being a real hazardous deal. And so, you know, that's something I think we need to work out, too, and have it down in writing what is recommended by who and how it will be taken care of. The grass creet is very very expensive to put in and -- if you went down the whole alleyway. But I think if we keep the -- and, then, we also need to know if it's public or private. And if it's public, then, ACHD has control of it and they go -- they build to their standards, am I not right? I'm getting a positive shake from the ACHD rep. Canning: And what -- yeah. We will address those issues. De Weerd: Yeah. Dean, note the shakes for the record. Rountree: Heard Gary's head rattle. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton. Borton: I like what Assistant Chief Silva brought up and I guess for my two bits I'd like to hear a little bit more about the viability of -- if you go with that 18-foot alleyway, the ability to impound vehicles, impact on law enforcement and enforcing that. I know that homeowners can be notified through their CC&Rs, but that's an additional burden. Could be a great one. You got to try and get the message out by impounding a lot of cars real early and make everybody upset to the point of making them realize that they are not supposed to park there. I'd like to hear more about that. Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 28 of 78 Rountree: Madam Mayor, on that particular item I guess I have a question for Ted. If, in fact, there is an emergency situation and there is fire equipment in an alley and there is a car parked there, is the city liable for any damages that might be incurred to that vehicle because when they are moving hoses and ladders and everything else they rock and roll within an emergency situation, even if it's a medical emergency they are moving a lot of stuff and a lot of people, are we indemnified against that as a city? Baird: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, and Councilmember Rountree, I would be hesitant to comment on a potential liability situation, because it's limited only by the creativity of the lawyer filing the tort claim. But with that said, it's likely that the fire crews are going to do what's necessary to protect life and if that includes moving a vehicle out of the way and if there is damage, it will be addressed by our carrier. De Weerd: Nice avoiding. Bird: Typical lawyer. De Weerd: Is there any other information needed that staff needs to come back with? Bird: Madam Mayor, I think what Mr. Rountree stated is perfect. If we can just get the stuff in writing. Anna, I think we have got it down to about three issues now and you get with the staff and with the development community and let's get it solved once and for all and make it right for the majority. Canning: Will do. And I will come back with a clean ordinance version without all that other stuff we have right now. Bird: Thank you. De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Borton: Anna, in your notes you make reference to a May 2nd date. I know you have got -- you have to meet with ACHD to talk about the chicane -- chicanery. Does that give you enough time, do you think, to provide this information that we have discussed, meet with ACHD, get it to us in time for us to-- Canning: I think it does. If it doesn't, I could request continuance and the only repeat person that shows up to discuss these I can let him know that we are going to continue it, if that's the case. Borton: Okay. Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 29 of 78 De Weerd: Okay. Yes, Mr. Borton. Borton: I'd also add, for what it's worth, that I appreciate sometimes the slow grinding process, at least from what I have seen, and I, for one, appreciate disagreement and sometimes even within staff you can agree to disagree on certain items and if you can provide better results and a healthier product for the city, I have no problem with it. In fact, enjoy seeing disagreement in certain areas. So, I appreciate you and staff, everyone slugging through it. De Weerd: Yeah. And that's not -- just literally. Okay. I would go ahead and entertain a motion, then, on this item. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I move that we continue the Public Hearing on Item 13 until May 2nd. Borton: Second. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to continue Item 13 to May 2nd. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 14: Item 15: Item 16: Continued Public Hearing from March 7, 2006: AZ 05-056 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 6.08 acres from RUT to TN-R and 4.07 acres from RUT to C-C zone for Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision by JBS Enterprises, LLC - 1845 West Franklin Road: Continued Public Hearing from March 7, 2006: PP 05-058 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 29 residential lots, 7 commercial lots and 7 common lots on 10.15 acres in proposed TN-R and C-C zones for Harks Canvon Creek Subdivision JBS Enterprises, LLC - 1845 West Franklin Road: Continued Public Hearing from March 7, 2006: CUP 05-051 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a mixed-use development within 300' of a residence for Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision JBS Enterprises, LLC - 1845 West Franklin Road: De Weerd: Okay. Item 14 -- oh, if there is anyone here for Item 24, 25 and 26, Keego Springs Subdivision, it has been continued to April 18th and we would apologize for any inconvenience. Okay. I will go ahead and open the continued public hearings from March 7th of AZ 05-056. Item 15, PP 05-058. And Item 16, CUP 05-015. Anna. Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 30 of 78 Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Harks Canyon Creek project. This item was continued from February 7th, largely at the request of the applicant. They wanted you to be able to hear the traditional neighborhood residential standards and to have some discussion about what way you wanted to go on those before hearing this project. The project does include annexation and zoning, preliminary plat, and conditional use approval. The site is located along Franklin Road, west of Linder Road, and just west of the existing Harks Corner that you are all familiar with. It's a continuation of that project. The proposed development includes a C-C zone, community business district, for six acres of the site and TNR, traditional neighborhood residential, for 4.07 acres. The commercial properties are at the front and, then, the residential properties would be toward the back. The existing Unified Development Code now says that development standards for the TNR district will be approved as -- as approved by Council. So, you don't have to have resolved all the TNR standards that we talked about before to resolve this -- or to consider this issue. It's just there is a lot of flexibility right now in the way the zone is and so you are given that. Okay. The TNR district is for 4.07 acres of the site. And they have submitted a preliminary plat for the subject property, requesting 29 single family residential lots, seven commercial lots, and eight common lots. Those single family residential lots are for townhouse development. So, they'd have, basically, two attached walls, except on the ends. The applicant has also submitted a Conditional Use Permit for a mixed use development within 300 feet of a residential district. The gross residential density is 9.84 units per acre. And at the Planning and Zoning Commission -- I think this has been resolved, but the applicant has had some concerns over the requirement for a private street on the southern portion of the property. Let me go -- explain what's going on here a little bit. These are the commercial properties. These are the townhouse properties. See if it looks easier to identify here. So, these are the townhomes. These are public streets coming in here and, essentially, ending here. And, then, another public street coming this way and this is a public street as well. There is a requirement for a private street application for this southern portion, because this is, essentially, a condo project or a multi-family project, similar to an apartment complex, just in the style in massing of the buildings. They are only requesting approval for the northern portion of this property at this time. They have submitted the conceptual site plan for the whole property. And you will see here on their plat that they haven't platted this southern portion yet. They are just leaving it open for further future development. I do have some elevations for the townhouses. The Planning and Zoning Commission heard this item on January 5th. At that Public Hearing they moved unanimously to recommend approval. Jane Suggs spoke in favor of the application. No one opposed it. No one commented. And the key issues of discussion by the Commission were the location of the site in relation to industrial uses on Franklin Road. I can show you that vicinity map again. You can see that there is an industrial development on the north side of Franklin. The Lot 19, Block 1, the open space lot south of the site, which will be used for future development -- and I already discussed that with you. And Lot 5, Block 1 will be reconfigured from one lot to approximately five lots with -- the east-west portions will be service drives and north-south portions will be either public or private streets for future connection. And those are these little lots throughout here, so -- again, it was that Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 31 of 78 private street connection versus having an alley coming off of a private street or a public street. So, the public street needs to extend to -- to at least the alley and, then, a private street from that -- at a minimum from that point forward. The key Commission changes to staff's recommendation -- there was a Public Works condition 2.15 was changed, that all development improvements for each phase of this development, including, but not limited to sewer, fencing, micropaths, pressurized irrigation, and landscaping shall be installed and approved prior to obtaining certificates of occupancy. And, then, just a correction to the planning condition 1.11 that said Lot 22. It should read Lot 21. As I mentioned before, they did ask that this be continued, so that you could consider it having been informed of what the TNR standards -- where they were headed and as you heard, in that testimony the applicant does have some outstanding concerns with the setback issue from the alley and would like to see a build to line, instead of a setback line. You do have findings for approval before you tonight. And with that I will answer any questions. De Weerd: Anna, wasn't there also an issue on the developments that are on the west side, the dead end of those alleys and how services would be provided with garbage with that dead end? Canning: Yes, there was, and I -- the applicant -- I had forgotten how that was resolved, because it's not showing up. That's right. You have heard this before. I'm sorry. I missed that. Sorry about that. De Weerd: Sorry. I have a foggy memory. I couldn't remember if it-- Canning: You're dealing with someone who locked their purse in the trunk of their car today, so -- De Weerd: I know. I did announce that before you got here. Canning: I got that feeling, because they all looked at me with pity in their eyes as I walked through the door, so -- De Weerd: Okay. Any questions for staff at this time, Council? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: Would the applicant's representative like to come forward? Suggs: Good evening again. Jane Suggs, 200 Louisa Street in Boise. I'm representing Harks Canyon Creek and you have already heard from one of the partners in the development of this particular project, David Wilson, and the other partner is here also, Larry Van Hees, who developed the Harks Corner property next door. Anna did a great job, of course, going over the project and so I'm not going to review the entire project again with you, but I'm just going to explain, as she did, why we are here. We do have a recommendation of approval from the staff and from the Planning and Zoning Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 32 of 78 Commission. We were in the process of going through the approvals with you at our last meeting and there were some conditions being added and one of those conditions was that the alley of 20 feet behind properties, which will be a private alley, would be paved completely and we agreed to that condition. Also, the ACHD had already conditioned us to provide for the public streets -- a full width public street, 36 foot crawl section, that we had shown in a couple of locations -- if I can get this to work. We had shown in a couple of locations necking this down to a 29 foot section, but we have agreed to go to the 36 foot section. We will be doing the bulb outs here where we can, but a little bulb out. We have agreed to that. That was a condition I think everyone agreed to. We got called up on the discussion we had tonight, which is on the five foot setback versus a larger setback for the garages and the alley. Since that time and just today -- yesterday and today we have had some discussions with the fire department and I believe we have reached some consensus I think that's part of we take our chances here tonight to talk about this, because I believe in this particular situation you might see how we can make you comfortable with a 20 foot paved alley and a five foot build to on the garages and a lot of that has to do with the specifics of the property and that is that this block length is 300 feet, so that if -- even if the fire truck parked here, their hoses could go 150 feet into the alley. Also, we have breaks between here, so we have a ten foot break between these buildings, even though they are townhouse buildings, so those will be open. We can agree to make those open. And that those can be also used as access, so that there would be less than 150 feet to the backs of the units if you parked on the street even. I believe we have talked to the fire department and they feel like if we pave the 20 foot alley with the five foot build to for the apron for the garages, that in the circumstance where someone may park their truck or run inside and we think they might, hopefully, go inside the front door, but that there would still be room for a fire truck to get through and to find another location to park. We would be willing to stripe those alleys for a fire lane and put anything we need to in the CC&Rs to try to help the homeowners association, which would be professionally managed, to keep that from happening. We have also agreed, if the fire department agrees to this, too, but we have also agreed to sprinkle the buildings, provided -- I know. That's something we think -- I think we need to look at this, you know, again. I think you will start seeing that this is a possibility to provide the urban style of housing that we want to provide in Meridian. I do believe that -- I'm hearing from builders, because I work with builders and developers all over the valley, home prices are -- land prices used to be 20 percent of the price of the home. Now, they are 25 to 35 percent the price -- it's translated into the price of the home. So, even though you might not call the patty row project that I'm very proud of in Eagle to be affordable housing, building something larger and using more land would have been more expensive. So, yeah, I'm surprised at the price tag there. But I am seeing that land being what it is these days, that the more compact we can make these, the better. I own a small home with a one car garage. I use that garage and even store stuff in it and I think that's the market we are looking at, too. I love to walk to places. There are four, maybe five restaurants within walking distance here. Restaurants meaning there is a Subway, there is an Arctic Circle. There is a little bar on the corner right next door. There is a Mexican restaurant. I mean they are places that people can walk. We really can have people getting out of their cars in this particular community and actually going and using those Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 33 of 78 facilities and what's really a little village center now there at Harks Corner. This development will also afford an opportunity for people south of the canal and the creek, when this project is built put -- one of our commitments is to work with the irrigation district to improve access here. There is a little broken bridge here, but once we get some eyeballs back here, which means once we develop this area -- we don't want to do that now and that was part of our condition before is that with the neighbors is that we would improve that. That gives the whole neighborhood an opportunity to get out of their cars and walk through the neighborhood and even further south of that neighborhood, which Mr. Van Hees was involved in developing, is an elementary school. So, great opportunity to get the kids around. I think this is a great opportunity to kind of take a look at what we can do and the only hold up we see right now is that five foot build to. So, I'm hoping that you would see in your wisdom here to even try that on this project, given the opportunity to work with quality builders, people with proven reputations, and the added bonus of sprinkling. Any questions? De Weerd: Thank you, Jane. Any questions from Council? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Ms. Suggs, you brought up the issue -- or the idea or concept of sprinkling. Is that a commitment to do that or is that a consideration? Suggs: I'll leave it up to Joe to ask if he feels like that's a necessity for us to do that to get the five foot build to. My developers are willing to make that a condition. But only if it's something that we think that the fire department feels is necessary. I don't know that it is, but I -- De Weerd: I thought that was our ordinance. Silva: Yeah. Mayor and Council, that's the way we adopted the fire code when we adopted it, so that would have to be sprinkled. But they can -- if they separate them -- if they separate them as single family dwellings, which they could do under the residential code, then, they would not. Suggs: Okay. These are single family homes separated by fire walls, so they are not considered multi-family. They are a single family -- they will have lots. They will have. They are single family with common walls. De Weerd: I believe we suggested if they had shared walls that they needed to be sprinkled. Silva: Again, if they are separated per -- with a firewall per the residential code -- or per the building code, then, they are considered separate units. Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 34 of 78 De Weerd: I thought we discussed that. Unless that firewall goes clear up to the roof line. Bird: It does. It has to completely. De Weerd: Does it? Suggs: It will. That's the code. If you're going to put a firewall in and have it all the way to the roof line, it, then, is a separate unit and would not be typically required to be sprinkled, because we are seeing these all over the valley. But this is a negotiated thing. I think that these developers are willing to step out. I don't think it's necessary from the fire code. I think we have got lots of clear, but we want to do what we can to be the best we can be in the neighborhood and pave the way for those that will find this to be an alternative for design. De Weerd: Okay. So, Joe, what is the position of the fire department? Silva: Again, if they build them as -- with a firewall there, they are not required to be sprinklered. They can attach those units. This was something we debated at length and if that goes all the way to the roof deck, then, they can build them a separate units and they are not sprinklered. De Weerd: Okay. Suggs: Give you some safety feeling -- feeling of safety to feel like that that might be a place you can start going? I mean I don't want to open -- I have been informed there are others that don't want to open that door, because that is a cost, it's not something that adds to affordability. But we are -- we believe in the design. Silva: Mayor, Members of the Council, that was something that the -- that in exchange for that five foot setback off the alley, that the developer had offered to do in this particular circumstance, so I want Council to understand that. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: And I know it's a very -- it's not a real expensive addition, but it is -- it is an extra expense. But without us having the TNRs down and them wanting it, I would -- not that it has to be a standard, because I believe a firewalled four-plex is going to have less jumping from facility to facility than these four foot setbacks with two foot eaves on each one of them and vinyl windows to hold out the deal. So, I would -- I have no problem with their five foot setback to build, as long as they sprinkle this time. I don't think it's something -- something that I feel has to be in the TNRs, but without us having passed that permanently tonight, if these developers are willing to step forward, I think it's a Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 35 of 78 great addition and it's something that maybe we would look at, but I -- I believe that that would be a reason we could -- that I could pass on it tonight with the five foot setback. De Weerd: Actually, Anna, when you come back with the zoning ordinance, that might even be a suggestion if they want to make that concession that they do sprinkle. So, you know, that's certainly something that can be considered in your comments. Suggs: Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you, Jane. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Oh, I'm sorry. Mr. Borton. Borton: I do have one question. Ms. Suggs, in the February hearing there was a discussion on the stubbed alley on the western portion and Sanitary Service's ability to get in and out for garage pickup. Suggs: Right. We commented that that was less than 150 feet as far as going in and backing up or there would be a requirement for those units to push the garbage out to the side street, so that there could be a pad and we talked about a little pad -- putting a little pad here right at the corner, so they could bring the garbage out there. Borton: Is that the plan? Suggs: That could be the plan. We can make that a condition that those garbage cans be pushed to the public street and that the buildings be sprinkled, in addition to all the conditions that we have agreed to already. Borton: Okay. Suggs: We would agree to that. De Weerd: Thank you. Suggs: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. This is a Public Hearing. If there is anyone who would like to provide testimony on this application, please, come forward. Okay. Council, I don't see any public wanting to testify on this application. Is there anything further that you need from staff or the applicant? Okay. Bird: No. De Weerd: Okay. Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 36 of 78 Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: If we have no more further comment, I would move that we close AZ 05-056, PP 05-058, and CUP 05-051. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Motion to close the public hearings on Items 14 through 16. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Council, do you want to have discussion or do I have a motion? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I'll make a motion. I move that we approve AZ 05-056, the request for annexation and zoning of 6.08 acres from RUT to TNR. And 4.07 acres from RUT to C-C zone for Harks Canyon Creek Subdivision. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve Item 14. Is there any discussion? Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea: Rountree, yea: Wardle, absent: Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Thank you. Item 15. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I believe I'm right, but I want it clarified now. On the five foot setback, it's under the PP, how about -- what about the sprinkler, is that under the CUP? Baird: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Bird, definitely the five foot setback condition would be under the preliminary plat. The second question was with regard to -- Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 37 of 78 Bird: The sprinkling. Baird: The sprinkling. I'm wondering if we shouldn't put that in a development agreement. Am I getting a nod over there? Bird: Then we will have to change our -- our annexation, then. Baird: The best way to do it is to have that. So, let's go back and reconsider Item 14 to add that before moving on to something. It's a little unusual, because it's sort of a compromise that shouldn't be all wrapped into one, but I think it's best to enforce the development agreement. Anna, you're holding the mike. Maybe you might want to comment. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I do think that the sprinklers should go in the development agreement. I'm concerned that -- because the code is unique in that it says that any dimensional standards will be as set by Council, I don't -- I don't know where that one is best located. We might want to add that one to the development agreement as well. So, the five foot build to setback, just to be safe, we could add it and the development agreement. Baird: Madam Mayor and Members of the Council, I'd recommend we do it in both. In the development agreement you can establish, through the record you have made tonight, that this is specifically an accommodation you're making in the setback in exchange for the concession of putting in the fire sprinklers. You put that in the DA with the findings to support and, then, what would automatically flow from that would be allowing that five foot build to in the preliminary plat. Does that work? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Thank you. Yes. Bird: With your permission and the second's permission, I'd like to redo the motion on AZ 05-056. Rountree: Second seconds. Bird: Okay. To include my -- an addition to my original motion that we have a development agreement drawn up also that would include, for this one project, in exchange for the five foot setback at the alley for to build, setback, that five sprinkling systems will be installed within the residence. Rountree: And you got the five foot setback and -- Bird: I got the five foot setback and I got the -- oh. And also on the one unit with the short -- not drive-thru alleys -- would have pads for refuge pick up. Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 38 of 78 Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. And that would include to amend the findings? Bird: To amend the findings. Yes. We do not have findings -- you know, I mean we have findings, but not -- it's nothing like that. De Weerd: Okay. Okay. Thank you. I think you all understand the motion, since everyone participated. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll. Bird: Madam Mayor, can I make a statement before we have roll call? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: I don't want it in anyway for the public to take this that we have done the TNR with this kind of a setup. That is something that we will decide on the 2nd of May. Okay? Does the rest of the Council agree? Rountree: Oh, yeah. De Weerd: You're very clear, Mr. Bird. Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea: Rountree, yea: Wardle, absent: Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Let's try the PP. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we approve PP 05-058, with the addition of the to build at the alleyway a five foot setback. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve Item 15 with the clarification as stated. Would that -- do we need the garbage pad as well on street side? Okay. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea: Rountree, yea: Wardle, absent: Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 39 of 78 De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Bird, Item 16. Bird: Madam Mayor, I move we approve CUP 05-051 and we have not changed anything on that, so we probably should be able to approve the findings. Am I not right? Canning: Yes, sir. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. Motion is to approve Item 16. Mr. Berg. Roll-Call: Bird, yea: Rountree, yea: Wardle, absent: Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 17: Continued Public Hearing from March 7, 2006: AZ 05-062 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 5.11 acres from RUT to R-8 for Sharp Estates Subdivision by The Gables, LLC - 2445 North Wingate Lane: Item 18: Continued Public Hearing from March 7, 2006: PP 05-062 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 25 single-family residential lots and 2 common lots on 5.11 acres in the proposed R-8 zone for Sharp Estates Subdivision by The Gables, LLC - 2445 North Wingate Lane: De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Items 17 and 18 are a continued Public Hearing on AZ 05-062 and PP 05-062. Canning: That's me. That's my cue. Sorry. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Sharp Estates project. It was continued from your -- from your agenda, so I won't repeat everything like I did on Harks Corner. Sorry about that last one. You did continue it for -- in order to allow the applicant to hold another neighborhood meeting and to address transitional lot sizes along the northern boundary. And we do have a revised plat today and we can incorporate into the findings if the applicant could let us know what the date of that revised plat is, since my files are locked in the trunk of my car. So, again, that would help us. And, really, that was the major issue of discussion at the last one was from property owners along the north and the applicant has conducted that neighborhood meeting has presented this revised plat. And I'll answer any questions you may have. De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions for Anna at this time? Rountree: I have none. De Weerd: Is the applicant here? If you will, please, state your name and address for the record. Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 40 of 78 Sargent: Yes. Ron Sargent, 1883 North Wildwood Street in Boise. Madam Mayor, Council members, as Anna said, we did have a -- we sent out 87 notices. We only had three people show up to the neighborhood meeting, but two of the participants at the neighborhood meeting were the two that had testified at the last hearing that we had here, and based on our discussions with them and the other neighbors, we did modify the plat by eliminating two of the lots on the north side, which they had requested, which were these lots here. So, they were -- instead of being 50-foot wide, they are a minimum of 60-foot wide across there and they felt that matched up better with their lots that they have along the south side of the Packard Estates that's to the north of us. We also agree that even though there is some of these that are being built as two story homes, we did agree that on these homes here that the only -- if we did build a two story, we'd just do a bonus room over the garage with the windows facing south to the street, so they wouldn't be facing back to the Packard Estates. So, we agreed to those conditions as well with the -- with the two homeowners that were to the north of us. I guess -- and, then, the -- a couple other comments. The one thing there was some concern about, there is a playground up here at Packard Estates, but on the smaller lots that we are proposing, our experience is the majority of our buyers tend to be down- sizers or people that are looking to have smaller homes, not low income housing, and we anticipate the majority of them in this subdivision will be likewise down-sizers or empty nesters that probably for the most part will not have children. If somebody's looking -- has a group of kids, they are probably going to be looking for something that has a larger lot size to it for a place for the kids to play. So, that's our experience and that's where our expectations are for the subdivision. I guess I'd stand for any questions. De Weerd: Council, any questions? Bird: I have none, Mayor. Rountree: I have none at this point. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Sargent: Okay. Thanks. De Weerd: Is there any Public Hearing on this item? Okay. Seeing none, I see you have done your homework very well. Thank you for meeting again with the neighbors. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Seeing no further comments, I'd like to extend my thank you as well for working with the neighbors. That's the kind of thing we like to have accomplished in Meridian and appreciate the time -- extra time you took. With that I move to close the public hearings on Item 17 and 18. Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 41 of 78 Bird: Second. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to close the Public Hearing on 17 and 18. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I move that we approve Item 17, AZ 05-062. Canning: Sir, did you want to include the developer's commitment to those property owners in the development agreement or -- I just raise that, because this issue sometimes comes up, if they are not in our conditions of approval, but it's a commitment made at a Public Hearing. Rountree: Madam Mayor, Anna, yes. The record needs to reflect a commitment. If it's in a development agreement, that's probably the best vehicle. De Weerd: Okay. Bird: Second. De Weerd: So, the second agrees to include the DA. Bird: Yes. You bet. De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Berg. Roll-Call: Bird, yea: Rountree, yea: Wardle, absent: Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Item 18. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Oh, I'm sorry. Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Careful. I move that we approve the preliminary plat 05-062 for Item 18. Bird: Second. Get a date on that. What's the new updated date? Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 42 of 78 Rountree: With the updated preliminary plat as presented. Do you have a date? You got it, Will? Berg: We received it the 23rd. Rountree: As received by the city on the 23rd of -- Bird: Second agrees. De Weerd: Mr. Sargent, does 3/20 sound correct? Sargent: Yes. De Weerd: Okay. So, the plat date is 3/20. Rountree: Let my motion reflect the plat date of 3/20/06. De Weerd: Second agrees? Bird: Second agrees. De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Berg. Roll-Call: Bird, yea: Rountree, yea: Wardle, absent: Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 19: Continued Public Hearing from March 21, 2006: AZ 05-061 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 9.55 acres from RUT to C-G zone for Una Mas by Una Mas, LLC - 3475 East Ustick Road: De Weerd: Thank you. Item 19 is also a continued Public Hearing from March 21 st. AZ 05-061. Anna. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this item has been continued twice. The first time it was continued was to wait until the discussions were finalized about the Ada County Highway District property just west of this one. That has been delayed sometime further, so you did have a second hearing. The second -- at the second hearing you did request elevations from the applicant and he has provided those and as soon as I'm done talking to you I will put them on the overhead. So, with that I will answer any questions you may have. De Weerd: Any questions for Anna, other than just seeing the elevations? Okay. Canning: Okay. I will do it. This is kind of a close-up look of some of the entrance details and, then, I have one of the whole building. Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 43 of 78 De Weerd: Okay. Would the applicant like to make comment? Roseigh: John Roseigh, Hanson-Rice, representing Una Mas. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, last time we met you guys wanted to see elevations of what could possibly go there. What we have shown are other projects that we have done. These aren't necessarily representative of what we will put there, as we aren't -- the development group that we do, we don't do spec buildings, so they don't -- typically they don't just design a building, build a building, and, then, try and get somebody to come in. We try and do typically design build with a custom -- you know, we do a custom design for each client. So, this is one that's going up in Boise right now. The previous one was designed for a client who -- financing didn't go through, but I thought it still represented what the UDC -- you know, it fell with the -- you know, in and out of plain walls, it's -- you know, I think it represented what the UDC would like to, you know, put as far as stipulations on the project. We also did a color board just to show you kind of, you know, the quality of materials that we are going to put on there, you know, stone, brick, no efface, you know, stucco type of stuff. Tinted glass, you know, low E paint colors, whatever the client would like and what we can get approved. De Weerd: Okay. Council, do you have any questions? Rountree: Madam Mayor, my only comment to Mr. Roseigh is that he probably doesn't have enough glass for Councilman Bird, but -- Bird: No. It's fine. Rountree: No. I -- just a comment. Thank you. I appreciate your effort and you're bringing forward the kinds of things that we like to see and it helps us make our decision. Roseigh: Thank you. I appreciate that. Rountree: Thanks, again, for your patience. Roseigh: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Baird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Baird. Baird: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, as we are looking towards this, if you were inclined to approve it, I'm wondering that since we are not committing to a specific elevation, do you want the language in a development agreement that would commit them to the types of features that were just mentioned about the facade and the Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 44 of 78 articulation and the colors and the materials? Is that something that you'd like to see included in the DA? Rountree: Yes. Baird: So, legal would work with the planning department on that particular language based on the testimony here tonight. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Baird. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton. Borton: Maybe a comment or a question of the applicant again with regard to what Mr. Baird had said. You know, building -- not doing spec jobs, just custom builds, what type of parameters or restrictions can you commit to on materials and things not knowing who is going to go there? Roseigh: What kind of restrictions? Borton: Yeah. Like-- Roseigh: What would you like not to have on there? Borton: Well, don't open the door for us -- Roseigh: Well, I mean, you know, we -- I think our goal is always to -- as an architect and as also someone who designs it, I always like to see materials that are going to last for a long time that are low maintenance that are not -- you know, that are not eye sores. Again, we try and -- I think anything that we do we try and do at a high quality of builders. We -- I think we can -- the Unified Development Code, you know, specifies how much glass and what materials can't be used. We can live with -- I have stated that before, that, you know, we can abide by the Unified Development Code. If there is particular materials that, you know, you want us to minimize, you know, we can definitely look at that. Most of the time, again, our clients are -- you know, we are the builders, as developers, when we specify a price for a client, the price usually -- I mean if somebody comes in and we put marble on the outside of it, we are not going to have a lot of those clients. But, you know, if we -- you know, we don't want to -- we don't want to put up a -- we don't want to put up a metal building, you know, engineered metal building on that site either. I mean we want to do -- De Weerd: And you couldn't either. Roseigh: Well -- we can do an engineered building. Engineered metal building with a, you know, structural frame, of course, but -- Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 45 of 78 De Weerd: So, yes, we definitely want to tie it to the things that we have seen tonight. Roseigh: Well, yeah, we don't have a problem with tying it to the type of materials and the roof lines and -- I mean I think all of that is in the Unified Development Code as it is anyway. You know, we don't want to be stuck -- we don't want to be tied to that footprint, that building, either one that we have seen. I mean if -- if we have a client that comes in and wants something different than that, then, we'd like the option and the latitude to be able to design something through a development agreement to have, you know, staff look at it and approve it. We don't have a problem with that. We just don't want to be -- I don't want to have to build that building on that site. Maybe something similar to it, but, you know, if -- Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Bird: Would a statement like a class A office building that kind of gets you a parameter of what it could be. Roseigh: Well, this is -- that's what this particular project is. Bird: And I know that's what that is right there. Roseigh: But, you know, if -- some of the clients that we have been talking -- we are in discussions with clients and we have -- we have got some people who are looking at, you know, more of the, you know, out-patient doc -- you know, a doctor's and dentist office, it's going to be a little bit different than a class A office building. We are in discussions with, you know, other projects that are not -- who aren't going to be able to spend that much money as more, you know, services, day care type of deal. You know, we want to do a child day care on the site. It's a potential, so -- De Weerd: I guess, Mr. Baird, the question would be if they say something similar in style and materials as has been presented to us, if staff does not feel that that is the case, then, the applicant can certainly appeal it to Council at that time. Is that -- would that be the process? Baird: That's correct, Madam Mayor. We'd like to have it drafted such that that wouldn't be necessary and maybe we -- since Anna is the one who has to answer those questions and administer that, maybe I'd look to you. There has been some comments that this is already addressed in the UDC. Is it even necessary to go down this road that we are discussing? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the design guidelines in the UDC are very minimal. It talks about modulations, over 20 percent of the facade of the building, more than -- having at least two roof planes. I see one, two, three, four, five roof planes Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 46 of 78 one, two, three, four, five, six modulations. On the previous photo I saw where both of them I see a kind of a more vertical style construction, rather than some of the offices we see with the kind of more residential style. So, those are the kinds of things I would be looking for to be consistent. If it only had five instead of six modulations, I'd probably -- oh, yeah, that looks fine. You know, if it has -- if it's showing three different kinds of materials, I'd look for at least three different kinds of materials in whatever they submitted. So, the elevations do help just in the -- kind of the giving a vision for the complexity of the architecture. If they came in with a building that looked like Lowe's, I would say this isn't what Council bought into, and I wouldn't accept that one. So, I think that these representations -- we can use these and determine if it's consistent, without being exactly the same. I think we have been fairly successful if we have got something to work with. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you for that clarification. Does that work for you? Roseigh: That does work for me. I mean I do want to -- I do want to find -- I want to clarify, though, when you say that, you know, the residential style office building, are you saying that that would be okay? I have got one right there. Canning: It's not similar to what you have shown, so if you want to include that one -- if you want to show that to Council, then, you should. Roseigh: Well, that's what I'm going to do. Here is another one that we have done for a professional -- for a professional office. It's a little bit different. It was awhile ago, but it's along the same lines of -- I mean a lot of the residential style doctor's office, you know, dentist office that are going up in -- in the valley. Again, I'm not saying that this -- De Weerd: Turn around with that, just to show the audience. Bird: That at least don't look like a four bedroom house. Roseigh: Six. Bird: About right. Roseigh: Again, it's -- I mean I don't think we want to -- I mean we don't want to be tied to just those types. I mean we want to have the flexibility and the latitude to be able to service any client that comes to us that is willing -- that wants to put a building up there and be able to bring that to -- through a development agreement to staff for their review. We definitely want that flexibility and so -- De Weerd: Okay. Roseigh: -- we appreciate it. Thank you. 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 staff's 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 rîght 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 Subdivisîon 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 staff's 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 of78 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 indicates, 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 Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 68 of 78 accommodate some -- some -- it's getting late. Here we go. Sorry. Had to do a property boundary adjustment to accommodate a couple houses and, then, they need to now shift the side yard easement that was underneath the former lot line. Staff is recommending approval of the vacation, with the understanding that a new easement needs to be recorded in its place. And with that I will answer any questions. De Weerd: Council, do you have any questions? Bird: I have none, Mayor. De Weerd: Okay. Is the applicant here? Is Becky the applicant? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, there is only one condition of approval and that condition being that they record a new side yard easement. De Weerd: Okay. Bird: Did Gary Smith name these streets? De Weerd: No. Bird: That's Borah coaches. De Weerd: Don Hutt did and he is a graduate from Borah High. Bird: I knew who did. Rountree: No applicant, no testimony? Bird: I guess everything -- is she --? De Weerd: Okay. Canning: By Creekside, Inc. I don't know who that is. I suspect the applicant was probably a builder. Bird: There is no issues, is there, Anna? Canning: No. And there is only one condition and that's -- Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: You have asked for public testimony and nobody is -- I move we close AZ -- or VAC 06-003. Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 69 of 78 Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. Motion to approve Item 23. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we approve VAC 06-003 with staff report. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. Motion to approve Item 23. If there is no further discussion, roll call vote. Roll-Call: Bird, yea: Rountree, yea: Wardle, absent: Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 27: Public Hearing: AZ 06-002 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 0.43 acres from RUT to L-Q (Limited Office District) for Strada Bellissima Subdivision Outparcel by Strada Bellissima, LLC - 3015 South Meridian Road: De Weerd: Okay. Items 24 through 26 were moved to the beginning of our agenda, so I will open the Public Hearing on Item 27, AZ 06-002, with staff comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this project is called Strada Bellissima Subdivision Outparcel. Kind of hard to see the blue outline next to the purple, but that's -- the property in question is this one right here. It is located at 3015 South Meridian Road and this is just an annexation and zoning request. The site is surrounded on three sides by land zoned L-O as part of the Strada Bellissima application. And when this came through we asked the applicant specifically when they came through with the lot design and how the buildings would be placed in this southern property, we asked them specifically to accommodate this outparcel in their design. They did do that. It was probably about a year ago. And so we are confident this outparcel will be completely integrated into the Strada Bellissima project. I was thankful that the applicants at Pinnacle and Pinnacle were -- worked with us on this outparcel and it's very satisfying. This one little piece of property is very satisfying to see it come in and know that we have planned for it and that it will be completely integrated into the fabric of Strada Bellissima. The Commission did recommend approval. They heard the item on March 2nd, 2006. Chris Hobbs spoke in favor of the application. No one Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 70 of 78 opposed it or commented. There were no key issues of discussion or key changes to staff recommendation and to staff's knowledge there are no outstanding issues. You do have Findings for approval before you tonight. There is a development agreement recommendation and that's just that the lot not take direct access to Victory Road. And as I said before, the design of this little office project will accommodate internal access. De Weerd: Thank you. Canning: With that I will answer any questions De Weerd: Any questions, Council? Is the applicant here? It was a good guess. Hobbs: Good evening, Madam Mayor, Council members. My name is Chris Hobbs with Pinnacle Engineers, 12552 West Executive Drive, Boise. And we are in agreement with staff comments and the conditions as they exist and I'm just here to answer any questions that you might have. De Weerd: Okay. Any questions for the applicant? Bird: I have none, Mayor. Rountree: No. De Weerd: Okay. Hobbs: Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Is there anyone who would like to provide testimony on this application? Thank you. Council? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we close Public Hearing AZ 06-002. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. There is a motion to approve Item 27. Mr. Berg, roll call. Oh, I'm sorry. Closing the Public Hearing. I'm thinking of 6:45 a.m. Sorry about that. All those in favor of closing the Public Hearing on this item, please, say aye. Okay. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: I'm sorry. Mr. Bird. Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 71 of 78 Bird: I move we approve AZ 06-002, request for annexation for Strada Bellissima -- De Weerd: Bellissima. Bird: I'm not even going to -- Subdivision Outparcel and to include staff and applicant's comments and pass the Findings and Conclusions of Law. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Thank you. I have a motion to approve now, Item 27. Roll call. Roll-Call: Bird, yea: Rountree, yea: Wardle, absent: Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 28: Public Hearing: Amendments to the Pawnbroker Ordinance: De Weerd: Thank you. Item 28 is a Public Hearing for Pawnbroker Ordinance. Who is giving the introduction to this? Mr. Chief, is that you? Musser: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I guess this one falls to me, as, apparently, we had initiated this in conjunction with the Leads Online format that we brought before the Council at the start of the budget year. To make this short, sweet, and simple at this point, I've had a chance to review all the comments that were received in from our licensed pawnbrokers at this time, as well as the city clerk. I do agree that there are a number of revisions that we need to look at and start initiating at this time before we move much further on this. Four of those specifically would include the time of renewal, changing it to the calendar year, as opposed to the time of licensing. That was a request specifically by our clerk's office. Also, number two would be to provide an exemption for transactions of gold and silver bullion and coin, as those seem to be problematic for both of our licensed pawnbrokers at this time, considering that the old ordinance exempted those items out and we put additional times onto those at this point. Also, need to revisit our records section under 3-5-6, specifically subsection at A, C, and D, the written records, retention of records, and transmission of records, I think we need to clarify a little bit of language and work with them as well on that. And, then, number four, in order to help move this along, I was thinking we need to meet with them and come up with a better working method to -- to help them to be able to describe the music CDs, DVDs, videos, and records, that type of material on there so it's not so cumbersome. There seems to be a lot of confusion at this time. I have had a chance to talk with both of them this evening, they seem to be open to that. And at this point I would recommend, if we could, possibly continuing this Public Hearing for at least two weeks, so we could get this done. De Weerd: Thank you, chief. Bird: Madam Mayor? Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 72 of 78 De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: I would agree with everything the chief said. And is there any way, chief, that we'd continue this -- that we could have the ordinance prepared with the legal staff -- yourself and legal staff and the applicants and the clerk, so that we can bring the ordinance revision at that time forward, too? Musser: That's what I'm looking to do, Councilman Bird. I would like to have everything done -- if I need to go over and kidnap counsel and have him over there with us to work on it. I think we can get it done up. I've already spent some time looking at what we could possibly do with some rewording changes to get it in there and I hope I haven't added more to the plate of our counselor at this point, but there are a couple of items that I did find in reference to the comments that came in that were of concern to me, but perhaps Council has some additional comment as well on it. Baird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Baird. Baird: Members of the Council, as you know, we are all pretty swamped right now, but fortunately for this issue, our capable Assistant City Attorney Emily Cain has been working on this and we will do what we can to make her available and I think having her meet with you and the interested parties would be a very good idea. I think she's got a good grasp on it and can work with you, but I would advocate for at least three weeks before we bring back a new draft, just to allow the meetings to happen and the drafting and the letting the 25th. De Weerd: And since we don't want anything until May 2nd anyway. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Hearing from the experts, I would move -- De Weerd: Mr. Bird, there are people out here. Baird: They have waited patiently. Bird: Oh, I'm sorry. De Weerd: They certainly are not here because they enjoy listening to us talk. Rountree: Oh, they didn't? Bird: Aren't they here to -- Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 73 of 78 De Weerd: I don't think so. It's an assumption. Bird: Sorry. I apologize. De Weerd: This is a Public Hearing. Is there anyone who would like to provide testimony? I see several. Sir. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record. Stewart: Yes. My name is Terry Stewart. I live at 5867 West Columbia in Nampa, Idaho. De Weerd: Thank you. Stewart: My comment -- I agree with what Mr. Musser has said and -- he's taken away several of my comments on the deal. De Weerd: Good job, chief. Stewart: He diffused the situation before it got out. He must be doing his job. The only really thing I have is the time frame on how long it's going to take us to get to be proficient with these computers that he's going to force us to buy and that kind of stuff, because we are not particularly computer literate. The other thing is on CDs and DVDs, I require now that they be in the original cases. I don't take in singles and that kind of thing. I'd like to see some kind of provision in the ordinance that we do that. People in cars have a tendency to put them in folders that type of thing. If they are not in the original cases most people don't take them. Something may be addressed on that fact. Guns. The only thing I have there is that most guns have manufacturers, models, serial numbers and types of guns and the calibers. That's what I required for our logs in our FBI and A TF forms and I think they are wanting us to require a -- the finish of the guns, which, you know, that's just another item that has to be taken care of, but if that's what they require, that's what they require. That's all I have today. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Counsel, Mr. Baird, do you have the numbers of the people here so you can make sure Emily contacts them? Detective Taylor, do you have anything you would like to add? I know you're probably here for this item as well. Taylor: I do. My name is Mark Taylor, I'm with the Meridian Police Department. I have kind of headed up the Leads Online program. Madam Mayor, City Council Members. This is an important program from my standpoint. The majority of the crimes that I work are property crimes and this has been a very beneficial program for us to use. To date -- starting to use the program about last July -- we have been able to recover approximately 40,000 dollars worth of stolen merchandise through this program. I have been able to identify suspects and the property that's been pawned and the majority of the pawn shops are in Boise. Currently -- and I understand Mr. Stewart's comment in relation to the guns. Any information available in reference to weapons is Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 74 of 78 important to us in this program. For example, I was tracking a weapon not too long ago, which was a pistol that was nickel plated. I was able to add that information into the program and specifically look for a nickel plated .357 Magnum. So, that narrowed my search down. In reference to the program from the pawnbroker's standpoint the program is very easy to access, it's very user friendly, and there is one screen that they go to specifically that's called ticket assistance and it's very self-explanatory and they are able to add the information of the person who is pawning the item, which includes their name and date of birth and Social Security number and drivers license ID, all that good stuff. And at the bottom portion of that, then, they are able to put in the description of the item that's being pawned or multiple items. And, then, it's just a click on an icon and it sends that information directly to the company that manages the system. The benefits of this is that we have that information in the system within 24 hours after it's pawned and from my vantage point it's important for us to be able to access that information as soon as we get the report, which is usually two to three days from time that the patrol officer has taken that report, so we can immediately access it. And the other advantage if the item hasn't been pawned at that point, then, I can flag that information by a report number and it will run -- automatically run a daily check on that -- on that item that I'm looking for and it will flag me if it's located an item. So, from my vantage point it's a huge time saving for us and for the victims that are involved in these crimes. It gives us a little better chance of recovering that property for them. In agreement I was able to review the ordinance and there were some changes that I recommended as well and I think that they will be beneficial for the city, as well as the merchants that are involved in this. That's all I have. Do you have any questions? De Weerd: Detective, do I understand that you will be providing training? Taylor: I can. And I will be happy to go to the pawnbrokers and show them how to set up the program. I work closely with the employee at Leads Online, her name is Ashley. I speak with her occasionally and they are very willing to help anytime there is a question. They are very quick in response. And if you do have a question, you'll get a little icon on the server and it will -- it's a contact button and they will respond to that and every time I have ever called I have been able to get help with the program. So, they are very good to work with. De Weerd: Thank you. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: And don't get my comments misconstrued here. I think -- I see your side of this issue. I am a bit concerned about the other crime that can occur because of this and not knowing what goes on in a pawn situation, because it's been 45 years since I have pawned anything. I observed the process in Boise just to get a sense of what's happening and you have indicated some of the types of information that's required. It's pretty extensive, to and including a fingerprint, thumb print. So, I think there is some Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 75 of 78 other victims that could fall prey to this process that are unknowing and have really no way of being notified if, in fact, the private provider of this -- somebody gets into their data base and steals my name, my Social Security number, my address, my driver's license number, and my thumb print. And I just caution that this identify theft thing has got a lot of people paranoid and I'm not saying it's because I'm paranoid, but I can see that we've all had it drummed into our heads recently, we don't give our vital statistics out to just anybody and I don't -- I don't know, is there some protection in the system for me as the consumer of a pawnbrokerage? Taylor: Mr. Rountree, your point's well taken and I have covered some of those questions along with Ashley that works for Leads Online. It's a very secure website. It's open to law enforcement only. I'm not going to say that it couldn't be hacked into, as well as our bank account information or anything else. I mean it's a risk that we take. I feel pretty secure with the website. I know that they have taken a lot of provisions to make that a secure site and open only to law enforcement. Passwords are changed on a continual basis. I have to renew my password about once a month and there are times that I forget my password. If that happens there is also an icon I have to click on. They will send that directly to my e-mail and only my e-mail. And there is no phone call. There is no verbalization of that password over the phone. There, again, the electronic age, I'll stand by the program as far as I can in knowing what I know about it and I feel good about it. The thumb print was, actually, one of the items that we requested to be eliminated out of the ordinance, so that we didn't have to go the extra step. That also was a concern with our merchants here in town, so -- Rountree: I guess my general observation is it seemed to me that the process was a significant deterrent to a criminal with any degree of intelligence. Taylor: Right. Rountree: You're going to catch some really stupid people -- Taylor: Oh, yeah. And believe me-- Rountree: Which is probably most of them, but-- Taylor: And, granted, surprisingly enough, I'm working -- I told the chief tonight that I'm watch a particular individual that lives here in town right now and I have watched this gentleman over the past 45 days now pawn 82 items, all construction-related tools, as well as a construction trailer, so -- but I can't catch him -- Rountree: And he's never driven a nail, that's what you're telling us? Taylor: Exactly. Exactly. So, the program has some wonderful uses and tools available to us in law enforcement. And the good part is most bad buys aren't familiar that we have this tool and we don't readily advertise it. So, I think it will be a real benefit to us in the future, so -- Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 76 of 78 Rountree: Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Any other comments? Watson: My name is Paul Watson. I live at 424 West Broadway Avenue here in Meridian. Madam Mayor, City Council. I agree with Mr. Musser that there are things that we got to work out. It's going to take some time. I don't think any of us are trying to be negative. None of us want to condone theft, okay? Everybody has their privacy. Because someone pawns does not mean they are a thief, okay? And we are willing to work with whatever we do. If you have no questions, that's the only comment I have. De Weerd: Okay. Watson: After being here all this time I had to -- De Weerd: Thank you. Rountree: Thanks for you patience. De Weerd: We wanted you to have your day at City Council. Okay. Mr. Berg. Berg: Madam Mayor, I just have a process question. We amended the ordinance to make -- establish the fee by the City Council and I presume it's by a resolution, but we already have a fee in the ordinance. I was just curious if we have to do a Public Hearing for that fee or if we can just establish it with a resolution, because we are just transferring it out of the ordinance onto a fee schedule. Baird: Madam Mayor and Mr. Clerk, has the fee changed? Has the amount changed? Berg: Madam Mayor, we haven't really figured out that we wanted to change the fee. I don't know what the other processes are, which I need to talk to the police department to see if there is more costs involved with -- Baird: Okay. I can tell you what the rule is and if it's a new fee or if it's more than a five percent change, we would have to advertise it for a Public Hearing pursuant to state statute. But if it's just going from one place on our records to another, then, you wouldn't have to do that. Berg: And, Madam Mayor, I guess that was my point. Then we probably need to prepare a resolution to set -- put that on a fee schedule when we do the ordinance? Baird: Sure. Berg: So that we don't drop it and have no fee at all. Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 77 of 78 Baird: We will make that happen. Berg: Okay. Thank you. Musser: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, two additional points. First off, I do want to comment in reference to thefts and some of the bad things that we usually associate pawnbrokers with. That's not necessarily the case with both of our pawnbrokers that we have here in town. They have been very reputable, very easy to work with, and run good businesses and I have been associated with both of them for quite awhile here in town. So, I do want to go on record with that and provide that information to you. The mere fact is, though, is that we have some other less reputable folks and we don't know what we may have in the future, which forces us to have the ordinance and to continue to work to keep it as efficient as possible through the mechanism that we have. Additionally on the data base that we have, where this is a data base that is collecting vital information, they are bound by federal statute to do immediate reporting to those people if they do lose that data base or have it impacted by somebody that's able to get into it and remove the information on it, similar to a financial transaction data base with any type of bank or a lending institution, that type of thing. Any of those are required to have it. So, that would be the only protection to my knowledge at this point is by federal statute on that, if that helps with that question as well. Rountree: Thanks, Bill. De Weerd: Thank you, chief. Okay. motion. Council -- Keith, now I would entertain that Bird: You would? De Weerd: Yes. Bird: Well, I think I'm going to give them a little more time, because I'm afraid that we -- De Weerd: Even the 2nd is -- Bird: So, I think I would move that we continue the Public Hearing for the amendment of the pawnbroker ordinance to May 2nd, 2006. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Thank you. It's been moved to continue to May 2nd. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Meridian City Council April 4, 2006 Page 78 of 78 De Weerd: Council, just a couple items very quickly. We do have a tour with the Ada County Commissioners on Friday, April 7th. We ask you to join them for lunch if you have an interest. Certainly you're welcome to join on the tour. It leaves at 10:00 a.m. from City Hall. We will be sending a mailer out on the south Meridian, north Kuna area informational meeting that is April 12th at 6:00 to 8:00 p.m. at Mary McFearson Elementary School. So, I had e-mailed this out to you guys. Just a heads up. I know that Sharon and Will had gotten information out to you about a letter we got from Harks Corner about our beer and wine license and that was just an FYI to all of you. And that's all I have, so -- Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Before we leave, everybody coming to the prayer breakfast in the morning? Borton: You're getting us on the record. Bird: Huh? Borton: You're getting us on the record. Rountree: No, I'm not. Bird: You're not? I can't believe that. You got to be at the statehouse. I move that we adjourn. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. All those in favor say aye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 11:10 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) / DE WEERD 4- / (9 / (}b DATE APPROVED