Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutApril 4, 2006 C/C Minutes .. ., ~ 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: lOA 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 ,~ i- 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 '\ j.' :0- 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 of78 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 of78 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 townhome 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 townhome 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 Coundl 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.