Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutApril 18, 2006 C/C Minutes --- -- -- ---- '- ,- , Meridian City Council April 18,2006 Page 38 of 99 Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: I move we deny Item 14, Variance 05-023 with Bienville Square Subdivision. Bird: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion to deny the variance request on Item 14. Any discussion? Hearing none, Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 15: Continued Public Hearing from April 4, 2006: AZ 05-058 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 49.95 acres from RUT to a R-B zone for Keeao Sprinas Subdivision by Todd Campbell - 5910 North Black Cat Road: Item 16: Continued Public Hearing from April 4, 2006: PP 05-060 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 201 building lots and 9 common lots on 49.95 acres in a proposed R-B zone for Keeao Sprinas Subdivision by Todd Campbell - 5910 North Black Cat Road: Item 17: Continued Public Hearing from April 4, 2006: V AR 05-024 Request for a Variance to reduce front garage setbacks to 15 feet from back of sidewalk in a proposed R-B zone for Keeao Sprinas Subdivision by Todd Campbell - 5910 North Black Cat Road: De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Nary, can you go find Mr. Rountree? Okay. Item 15, 16, and 17 are public hearings on AZ 05-058, PP 05-060 and V AR 05-024, the continued Public Hearing and I will start with staff comments. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton. I'm sorry. Borton: Before you do, I do need to recuse myself from consideration of this item. De Weerd: Okay. While Councilman Borton excuses himself, Mr. Rountree has returned. Rountree: I have returned. De Weerd: Anna. - - - -- , --- -- - - - --,. -- ----- --- ----.---- ----- - -----""---'-----"'- - ,,-- ------.. -- --- - - -..-- -- -- - - - ---- ",,---- -.. - -- - -- --------, -------- ,,---- -----------.,--.--- --"-,,,.--------------------------- , Meridian City Council April 18, 2006 Page 39 of 99 Canning: Hot potato night there. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Keego Springs application. It's located east of Black Cat Road and south of Chinden Road. I just got Tamara in the eye with the laser pointer. There we go. So, this is the location. You will notice that we are also showing the Bainbridge project, the Volterra project is not showing up. It does take in the entire property -- large property shown south of the proposed project. The applications include an annexation and zoning, preliminary plat, and variance for front setbacks. The gross residential density is 3.53 units per acre. The net density is 4.69 units per acre. The request includes annexation and zoning of 49.95 acres to R-8. The median -- De Weerd: Okay. Anna, just a clarification for the record at this time. I will exclude comments on the variance, Item 17. Isn't that a variance -- oh, forget it. It has no access -- Canning: It is not an access one. Yeah. De Weerd: Sorry, Charlie. You get to stay with us the whole time. Sorry for the interruption. Canning: That's fine, Madam Mayor. Did you open that Public Hearing? De Weerd: Yes, I did. Canning: Okay. Thank you. The -- so, it was annexation and zoning of 49.95 acres to R-B and, then, preliminary plat approval of 201 single family residential lots and nine common lots. In response to the initial concerns about this application, the applicant has included a partial school site and this is the location of the partial school site. They would share that school site with Volterra. I do have a picture of that I can bring up. It's not in the presentation, but I will work on providing the rest of that site for you. And they have provided that. I think you have testimony from Mr. Fuhrman -- Freeman, sorry, Mark. From Mr. Freeman regarding the school district. I really am sorry about that. I'll let him provide the additional comment regarding the ability of the school district to acquire the property. I did speak briefly with Mrs. McKay regarding the other half of the school lot and Mr. Freeman may have additional testimony on that, but I did speak with Mrs. McKay today. She did say that Frank Vareille and she had met with Wendell and Amber Van Auker, who is the school district's architect, and they indicated they desperately needed an elementary school for this area. The school district asked for half of it to be on the Volterra Subdivision, which had already been approved by City Council. They -- they produced a site plan that straddles the two subdivisions and, then, Frank met with them about a month ago and Frank did commit to Wendell Bigham of the school district that Primeland Development would donate approximately 4.5 acres to the school district for the elementary site. So, the school district will be participating in building the collector road that goes to the school site, but -- and it will have frontage on that collector, but they did donate the 4.5 acres. There is very specific wording in there about the development agreement regarding the school district negotiations and '-"~'".'~" ,-...---- -- - _._--~.n'- - ~ - - -.- -- "-"-",,",,-,,"-." '" "'..~ ~ - -.. " .'- ,,-- ..- --.. n . . -- - ---- --- - . -. -.. - - - ....-.... -..... .._"_.,,,,-;cc.c--- -. - -. n____.._-..,,--..-..-. .,,-- """" _.__._n_--._" ..--' ---...- .. . . .- .~~------_...- - .- - - - ..-----. ..,.....- ..,- - .- ._, - ------.--- -"..-.- - .- -. '---------.-----. "..... .--- --. -- n --" " ----.--. -- -- Meridian City Council April 18, 2006 Page 40 of 99 it's included with Mr. Freeman's testimony, so I think I'll save that discussion for later. I can bring up the exact language that was proposed by P&Z and, then, the modifications as proposed by Ms. Butler if necessary or for Council if they desire. The Commission did hear this application and have recommended approval. They heard it on February 2nd and March 2nd. At that hearing Joann Butler, Jim Howard, and Todd Campbell spoke in favor of the application. Don Brown representing Rambo Subdivision spoke against it. Wendell Bigham did -- from the school district did comment. And the key issues of the discussion were the school site, fencing along the north boundary, and, then, the stub street to the property to the south, which is currently not -- in this one is not shown and that is the question of whether they should have a stub street going to the Volterra collector, preferably adjoining the school site, to give that school site some more frontage from within this subdivision. The key Commission changes to staff's recommendation were to modify the condition regarding their recreation facilities. Right now they have them on this lot, this lot, and this lot and the -- which are all central to the site, but they are all separated by public roads. So, the Commission asked that they be relocated in this area and they have agreed to that. They, actually, did provide us an additional site plan that showed those facilities relocated. It did not address all the other concerns that P&Z had asked them to address. So, we are still going by this site plan, because the new one doesn't get us all the way, so -- but they are able to accommodate that over in one area on the east hand -- the center east portion of the site. And they also modified the condition regarding the school -- the school site as noted before. They added a condition regarding pedestrian micropath from Loggo Drive to the school site at some point along the north boundary and a condition which states all perimeter fencing adjacent to the school site shall be restricted to open vision fencing. So, the outstanding issues before City Council clearly are the elementary school site and the variance application to the front setbacks. When this applicant first started coming in we still had the planned development. I think that they had a hard time switching from the planned development to the new standards, but we kept on trying to tell them you couldn't just ask for a waiver, so, they -- of dimensional standards, so they are asking for a waiver of the front setbacks in the alley-loaded portions. We believe that's where they are asking for them.. We have asked for clarification. Haven't gotten specific information regarding that, but we do believe it's just for those properties taking access from the alley. They'd like to have a ten foot setback. Currently, the only place we allow ten foot setback is in the Traditional Neighborhood Residential District. That district is specifically designed for this. It's intended to get that look and feel that goes along with a whole list of development standards. Pulling out one of those standards and allowing it through the variance process does not seem appropriate. Staff was not able to make the findings that this site warranted a variance. There are no outstanding issues or physical constraints that would prevent them from meeting the standard setback in this area. So, we are recommending against the variance. To that end you do have Findings before you tonight. They are -- you have Findings for approval of the annexation and zoning and preliminary plat and you have Findings for denial of the variance request. And with that I will answer any questions you may have. De Weerd: Council, do you have any questions at this time? - --- --- Meridian City Council April 18, 2006 Page 41 of 99 Bird: Not at this time, Mayor. De Weerd: Okay. Is the applicant here? If you will, please, state your name and address for the record and if that microphone goes up high enough -- Campbell: I will bend over. "m Todd Campbell. I am the applicant. I reside at 2320 West Preston Street in Eagle, Idaho.. 83616.. I'd like to thank staff for their thorough overview of the project. We would like at this time to withdraw the application for the variance. We feel like that We would be able to achieve the look that we want within the subdivision without going further on that point. I will give a brief overview of what we are trying to accomplish with this subdivision. We have taken into account Planning and Zoning's recommendations of approval for relocating the common areas, the pool site, the tot lot, all more in a safe manner across the street, all adjoining one another. We are trying to achieve a mixed use of housing with alley-loaded product, some 65 foot lots, and, then, some larger lots as we get back into the eastern portion of the project and feel that by doing this we not only accomplish an affOrdability factor for the city. but also a diversity factor creating more of a neighborhood feel for the community. We have - you know, I guess the big issue tonight is with the school district and the things that we have been doing to try and facilitate a site for them -- we want to sell them a site. Mr. Freeman faxed over to the staff late this afternoon a motion for position something -- basically saying that he thinks that we -- our negotiations have been unsuccessful and are completely at a deadlock. We have never received an offer from the district to purchase the ground. We are not in a position to donate ground. J wish we were. We don't control 850 lots like the subdivision to the south. We have -- with the elimination -- or with the addition of the school site, we have a hundred -- approximately 175 lots, not the 201 that Anna said, if We do end up furnishing a school site. I want to just bring to your attention some of the facts that -- behind the scenes that we have been doing with the school district. We have spent thousands of dollars, several months redesigning our plat to accommodate a school site. I'm going to read a letter or some comments that I put together that kind show the history of the things that we have done since we have acquired the site. It says: Dear Mayor de Weerd and Members of the City Council, r wanted to take a few minutes to keep everyone interested - everyone interested apprised of the history and current business dealings between myself and Joint School District No.2. Myself and Mr. Chad Hess acquired the parcel where the Proposed Keego Springs Subdivision is the last week of March 2005. When we made our offer on the parcel there were, in fact, four other offers presented to the seller at the same time as our offer, as stated to me by the listing realtor involved. Upon successful negotiations on the parcel we started Our design of the property. On September 7th, 2005, Kurt Reliford from J.J. Howard Engineering and myself had an initial pre-application meeting with Anna Canning and the planning staff at the City of Meridian. During our meeting Anna gave us some suggestions to the design of the project Toward the end of the meeting she stated that we needed to get in touch with the school district in regards to their need for a potential school site in the area. On September 8th I placed a call to the district offices and left a voice mail to a generic voice mail extension that I was forwarded to by the receptionist. I received no return call from Mr. Bigham. On October 24th I called the district offices once again, left .- - -~ Meridian City Council April 18, 2006 Page 42 of 99 a message for Wendell to call me. Once, again, I received no return call. After this time I started consulting with Kurt RelifOrd, Our project engineer, and Mike Spink, my counsel. Mike Spink, my counsel, and Mark Freeman had Our initial -- first initial meeting on November 30th. Here at this meeting I agreed to help the district and to sell them a portion of Our property. Our initial Planning and Zoning meeting Was supposed to take place December 15th, but was tabled as requested by the district. We were scheduled for February 2nd. Kurt initiated some discussions with the engineers from the approved Bainbridge Subdivision. approximately 450 lots, and the approved Volterra Subdivision, approximately 830 lots. Bainbridge declined, but Volterra would consider it. On January 4th Wendell. Kurt, and myself discussed -- and Wendell, Amber Van Auker, the district's architect, all met at J.J. Howard's office to discuss Possible layout and size requirements to accomplish the district's need. After this meeting Wendell stated he needed to get in touch with the developer from Volterra to talk to them. We heard nothing until we again initiated calls to Wendell, Amber, and Mark Freeman. At the Planning and Zoning meeting on February 2nd, 2006, Wendell assured the Planning and Zoning Commission that within the next 30 days he could make a deal happen with Volterra. The P&Z Commission gave Wendell another 30 day time period in order to get a hold of Volterra and see if they would participate in the school site. Our next hearing was scheduled on March 4th, 2006. During the time period between the two hearings we heard nothing from Wendell. At the hearing on March 4th Wendell got up and stated that no agreement had been made with Volterra as yet. Planning and Zoning adopted into their condnions of approval that the district had until June 1 st, 2006, to secure -- to secure deals with us and Volterra. On March 4th Volterra finally agreed. We had agreed a month earlier. We have, as of April 7th, seen no written offer from the district for the site. Wendell has suggested to us that we should donate the site, but we are in no position -- financial position to do this and we have told him so. I have never received a phone call from Wendell, an e-mail from Wendell, or an offer from Wendell. I have left him several voice mails on his cell phone and his office, which he will call Kurt, our engineer, but, then, not communicate directly with us" As you know, our Public Hearing meeting with the City Council was scheduled for April 4th. We were rescheduled until April 18th. Mark Freeman placed a call to Mike Spink on April 6th and slated that if we do not hurry up and sell the site to the district he was going to oppose the project at the next scheduled hearing. I find this offensive. We have tried to expedite this process, but the district's lack of timeliness has cost us months in the approval process. I feel it is important to the Council to know the history of what we have been doing and what the school district has and has not been doing. We are willing to sell the site to the school district. If you have any questions, otherwise, I'm going to defer any legal issues to our counsel that's here tonight. De Weerd: Council, any questions for the applicant? Bird: I have none at this time. De Weerd: Okay. I'm sorry, Mr. Wardle, did you have a question? Meridian City Council April 18,2006 Page 43 of 99 Wardle: Just a point of clarification. Was that your presentation on the subdivision? You have -- Campbell: That Was on the subdivision -- or the annexation. Wardle: On all that? Campbell: The whole bit. Wardle: So, no elevations or any of that kind of stuff? Campbell: No. we do not. Wardle: Okay. Campbell: Well, we have the - we have the landscape plan that has been proposed. It has been adopted - We have not adopted the conditions from Planning and Zoning. These are some of the sites. The entrance features that We would have. The pool site that we would have. The proposed amenities within the central location of the subdivision, but have since been relocated to the east. Would be a divided collector street coming into the subdivision and tree lined streets, detached sidewalks. A pool. Hopefully, a school site. Waterfall entrance. We feel it would be a -- you know, a fair1y nice development for the city. De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions, Council? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: Okay. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record. Butler: Thanks. Joann Butler, 251 East Front Street in Boise representing the applicant. Before J get started J just wanted to point out just a technical thing in the staff report. There seems to be a conflict in the conditions of approval and I'll just point this out. This is on Exhibit B and I don1 know that you need to jump around in your packets, but on page one of Exhibit B, the sixth bullet point is a condition in connection with annexation, talking about -- sorry -- prior to the submittal of a final plat the applicant would provide documentation that negotiations with Volterra and the other portion of the school site have been finalized and that the district approve the configuration- That isn1 what the Planning and Zoning Commission Was - mentioned and we think that would be an impossible condition to know what others are doing. But on the next page and on the second page of your packet is the condition that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended with input from Wendell Bigham who had said that he felt by June 1 st - that was why that June 1 st -- it didn't just get pulled out of the air, that was a comment to us that it was agreed at that time if the school district couldn't finalize the discussions between the two parties, then, Mr. Campbell could come back and request a modification to the plat that we hope you approve tonight. Just briefly the issue is ...-- Meridian City Council April 18,2006 Page 44 of 99 schools and Council might recall that I appeared before Council when Volterra was before you and I didn1 appear to oppose Volterra, but I did -- I appeared before you, because I was concerned and SUrprised, because the district did not even provide a standard lelter about a school facility in connection with that project, even though it was 830 homes, and the district didn't come to the hearing either.. J know that the Mayor and staff said at that time we somehow know that the district does not want a site in this area. And tonight the district is desperate for a site in this area. I think we have heard the figures Vofferra at 830 homes, Bainbridge at 429, and Keego Springs at 179. That's 13 percent versus 55 percent of the homes for Volterra in the area and 32 for Bainbridge.. Late this afternoon, as Mr. Campbell said, I received a copy of the district's letter or motion asking the cny to deny this specific project. Not Vonerra, not other -- and not other specific projects that we are aware of. Mr. Campbell told you and described to you how he has been trying in effort to work in good faith with the district, but the district has claimed that they have been totally unsUccessful. Apparently, Mr. Campbell's -- and I believe honest discussions did not meet the district's definition of success and I don't want to squabble and I don1 think Mr. Campbell wants to squabble with the district. He is saying that he can sell to the district the site and is willing to work on the design of the site- And we certainly do applaud Mr. Vareille" If he can donate four acres at the end of his 830 home development, we are really happy. I think Todd made it clear that if he Was in that same position things might be different. Todd has asked the district to be fair. By throwing his hands up tonight two hours before the Council meeting, I think that the district is -- appears to be trying to use this public city hearing process to I guess maybe gain leverage, try to force an unfair outcome to the negotiations -- I don~ know. But it seems strange when we are two -- about a month and a half before June when the condition of approval would give us that time and I just don1 think that's right. We are asking the Council to approve Keego Springs tonight as redesigned to assist the school and that has been at great cost and time to Mr. Campbell and we hope that you Will do that and allow those negotiations 10 continue on in an even keel. Thank you., De Weerd: Thank you. Any questions for Ms. Butler? Bird: I have none, Mayor. De Weerd: Okay. Canning: Madam Mayor, to brtefly follow up on the item that Ms. Butler spoke of regarding the change in wording, that on my notes for Council under the outstanding issues for City Council, that recommended wording is in that first nem there. Staff does agree with the need for clarification. De Weere : Okay. Thank you, Anna. Okay. This is a Public Hearing. Is there anyone who would like to provide testimony for this application? Carrico: My name is Sarah Carrico.. I live at 4685 Redwood Court. We are directly north of the requested development We have one very cordial request, which is a - Meridian City Council Apri/18,2006 Page 45 of 99 fence between us and these 15 lots that will be bordering the back of four houses. We have formed a rather tight-knit and quiet neighborhood as of yet. I have lived there for 12 years and a number of other people have lived there longer and we don~ want anything fancy, but we don't want any plastic either. So, we are looking for something that can protect Our assets, protect from dumping of grass clippings. We have horses and other animals and we never know if we are going to get more. And we are really not looking to cause any trouble, just something to keep what is a little bit of a different atmosphere from what is planned, what it is right now. De Weerd: If you could Use the pointer there in front of you, Sarah, and show us which lot you are. Carrico: We are right there. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Any questions from Council? Bird: I have none. Rountree: None. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. I also have Mr. Freeman signed up. Freeman: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Mark Freeman, 3550 West Birdie Court in Meridian, Idaho. I'm here on behalf of -- De Weerd: If you can pull that up a little bit. Thank you. Freeman: "m here on behalf of my client Joint School No- 2, otherwise commonly referred to as the Meridian School District. I have submitted, albeit at the 11th hour, written comments in support of the district's position on this application. I assume that Mayor and Council have received those. I have copies here if you happen to need one. De Weerd: No. We did receive that. Thank you. Freeman: I'm here, you know, primarily to respond to questions about the material submitted and to respond to matters raised by the applicant and the applicant's attorney. Maybe to summarize might be the best way to do this. You have heard a lot of comments about the distrtct's alleged inactivity in trying to get a school site here and the reason that -- Wendell Bigham, by the way, couldn't be here tonight, that's one of the reasons I'm here. I'm here to let the Council know that nos the school district's position that a school site in this square mile area is crucial to the school district. We can discuss why it didn't happen earlier or where it's going to happen, but the issue is Meridian School District needs an elementary school site in this square mile. There is a decent size chunk of it that's already been approved- The district was attempting to purchase this property or a good share of il for a school site before il was purchased by the applicant and, obviously, that didn1 happen, the applicant purchased the property. --- - Meridian City Council Apri/18,2006 Page 46 of 99 The initial application didn't have a school site in it. You have heard the disèussion about how ij happened where, eventually, it resulted in a school site -- or a portion of a school site being included and the comments of staff that addressed the issue of a shared school site and how it's going to be held off until June 1st are appropriate, but the difficulty is that quite a bit of time has elapsed since the district first sat down in my office, as indicated by the applicant, and had discussions about purchasing this site. And not much has happened- We can all point fingers at who is responsible. I can -- I must, you know, state on the record that I'm SUrprised by the applicant's comments and I have heard similar comments from the applicant's attomey that the district has never made an offer on the property, because I made the offers on the property. My client decided they wanted me to negotiate on this piece of property. And I'm -- there was an offer to purchase the property made dUring that meeting -- a general discussion about an offer during the meeting back in November and there was an offer made by -- I sent an e-mail to the applicant's attorney Mike Spink in Ms. Butler's office on the 15th of January and -- which contained -- it wasn1 a purchase agreement, ij was an e-mail saying here are some terms that the district would like to purchase the property under and never did receive a response to it. Contacted Mr.. Spink in the beginning of April, left a message saying can we get a response to this offer. All the time We are being told that We are delaying everything and I didn't get a response for close to a month and, then, the response that came back, in essence, was a purchase agreement that the applicant's attorney put together and submitted on Monday to us this week, which required a substantial earnest money deposit, which would be automatically released to the applicant on Wednesday of this week" I guess I can step back and say I'm confident that as far as the normal terms of a purchase agreement, I'm confident that the district-- the district's attorney and the applicant's attorney can workout the details on all the things that go with it. But there is a part of that purchase agreement that the parties are a long ways apart from each other and that's the issue. So, we don't have a school site there today. After meeting with the applicant and coming up with this configuration - it did take some while for Wendell to get together with Frank Vareille of Volterra, mainly because he was out of town. Eventually, he had orally committed, as Anna indicated, to donate a four and a half acre portion of the school site, which leaves another almost five acres from the applicant. The applicant may have been asked to donate a site initially. r - and I can1 speak for Wendell. From my standpoint it's never really been pushed. We understand the difference between the applicant's development and Volterra's development, but one of the reasons that -- or my understanding is the primary reason that Bainbridge isn't involved in these discussions is because the school and school district's architect looked at the layout of the property and decided that extra land on the Bainbridge side really didn1 serve the purposes of the school design, what they needed at that site. So, that's why that party is not here. It's not a matter of not coming up with the money. nos more of an issue of it didn1 really do much for where we were at Volterra has agreed to make a donation of the site. There are some -- there is consideration going to Vonerra for extending the street to the site, so it's not totally without consideration, but the land itself is going to be donated.. And this amount of time -- it's sort of an interesting situation, because you hear both parties coming in front of you and saying so much time has gone by and nothing's happened and they may both be right, but the bottom line is we have a commitment to have a donated portion of the Meridian City Council Apri/18,2006 Page 47 of 99 school site, we don1 have an agreement with the applicant. If the city moves forward and approves this annexation and zoning application with the conditions as stated by staff, then, if -- we won't know until June whether we are going to have a school site there. If we don1, then, what happens? Well, the applicant goes back and re-plats it and has more lots, the density changes, and I assume you guys are the ones that are concerned about density, but the bottom line if that happens is there is a square mile area without a school site and there aren1- there aren1 many other places, if any, in this square mile where the school district believes that it can obtain a school site. So, they have got a situation where the children -- the elementary age students who will live in this area will have to be bused to a school site outside of the square mile across, yoU know, one of the roads, one of the major roads, which, based on my review of the -- I set this forth in Our statement, in Council's ordinance, the code requires -- it doesn't require it, but one of the factors in detennining where a school site is to be located is, you know, its proximity to the neighborhood and major streets and we believe that's a reason to have it in a subdivision. The district also takes the position -- and it's a different position with different types of schools, but a well designed elementary school- - the district believes is an amenity to residential development. Maybe you might dispute that with a high school or a middle school, but a well designed elementary school in a subdivision can increase the value of neighboring lots. So, we find there is some benefit in that. We are really into a situation where We can't - We don't have a deal yet, we are concerned we are not going to get one. If we don~ get one, then, the district's ability to provide education to elementary school students in this square mile will be adversely affected. De Weerd: Good ending point, uh? Any questions? Rountree: Madam Mayor, I have a question. De Weent Yes, Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Mr. Freeman, given the configuration of the parcels we see laid out in both adjoining subdivisions, is that, in the school distrtct's opinion, sufficient for an elementary school? Freeman: Yes. It works out to nine and a half acres, roughly, and according to what I understand, the district is satisfied with that They might have wanted ten acres, but that site would work. If I can -- maybe not directly on point, but r - it's my understanding there is some discussion about a cross-through road that isn't shown here, somewhere in this area, and I heard staff mention -- Anna mention that the preference would be that that road, if there is going to be a road that connects here, that n front the school sne. I don1 know what kind of problems this creates, but I just happen to know this, because I was with Wendell when this -- he was discussing this issue with me and he -- he didn't send me here to discuss this, but I'm going to pass this information on for what it's worth. His concern was that he didn~ mind a cross-connect somewhere Over this way, but his - the school district's preference would not be that it would from the school property. Now, I don1 know if this is something he's changed his mind on or maybe - Meridian City Council April 18,2006 Page 48 of 99 Anna could comment on that, but his concern was that we end up with a large drop-off area. There will be some parking component in here, I assume, and that we have got parents pulling up and dropping their kids off on the street and he didn't think that was such a great idea. So, not directly in relation to your issue, but -- De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions for Mr. Freeman? Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Mr. Freeman, in my short time on the Council I've been through a lot of subdivisions and we have been through a lot of joint meetings with the school district and this is the first subdivision or annexation approval which the school district has either directly or through its agent replied to the city's request for comment. Why this specific subdivision now I guess is my question. Freeman: Madam Mayor, Councilman Rountree, I can't answer that question- I don~ know why. It may have been not only with this site, but other sites it should have come sooner. I have heard the district's representative say that they are uncomfortable -- that they are not in the development business and they don~ -- if they can stay out of it they want to. They don't think it's their job to make these kind of decisions. But in this situation here it's at a crucial stage with the development that's already been approved in that area. We can argue that it should have happened earlier, but with the development that's planned and going to occur there, they need a school site in that area and if we don't get it here, they are concerned they are not going to get one. De Weerd: Thank you. Any other comments? Okay- Thank you. Is there anyone else who would like to provide testimony on this application? If you will, please, state your name and address for the record. Kowalis: Yes. Doug Kowalis. My business address is 1501 Federal Way. I am with -- one of the owners of NAI Kowalis & Mackey, the listing broker on the property when the property was sold. I just wanted to state a few facts here, so that you have that information. There seems to - we are here in, of course, support of Todd Campbell and his development There seems to be a pattern here by the school district and the thing that I wanted to point out is that every good attorney, every realtor, and most individuals know that there is no offer until it's written. If you want to win the lottery you buy a ticket. If you want to buy real estate you write an offer. To my knowledge we have never seen a written offer by the school district. It just so happens that this property that was sold is my step-mother and in the remaining years of her life, a few years, when the school district contacted her -- she had Alzheimer's and was in no condition to negotiate. She turned that process over to her son who is present tonight. The most that Hilda told me was that the school district has told her that they were willing to buy the property, gave her a price, to what she responded that's not enough. So, I think what we are seeing here is them, the school district, using this process to negotiate - Meridian City Council April 18,2006 Page 49 of 99 ~~ price. That's what they are talking about here is the one point that's keeping them apart. I think that you could move this process forward easily by -- because Mr, Campbell is willing to sell the property to the school district at below fair market value, but I don1 think that he should be put in a position where he's dictated at what price that is. I worK with many in my profession who are non-profit organizations and sometimes We are fortunate enough, as the school district is, to get property donated and in some instances we are not and they paid the price. And, again, this is a pattern that we have noticed over this period of time. Is there any questions? De Weerd: Council, any questions? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Any other testimony? If you will. please, state your name and address. Brown: Don Brown. Excuse me. 4595 West Ramblin Court. De Weerd: Thank you. Brown: And "m not talking on behalf of the property owners, "m talking on behalf of an individual that has two kids in the school district and right now in that mile there is 34 some hundred - some odd houses that have been approved and I think that the school district's point is there needs to be a school in there. Right now Ponderosa is over capacity. Hunter's enrollment was capped the day it opened. There are no new schools listed to be built in that area. You're going to have a big problem if something is not come to agreement in that area.. It's just -- it's a mess right now. I don1 know how it got this far and I'm kind of nervous, but "m kind of upset as well, because the ramifications on my kids and their education is at stake at this and if something doesn't come to play with the school in there, it's going to be a mess and you have got a child at Sawtooth, the same thing is going to happen down in that area. So, the school district's got to get - somehow or another there has got to be some accord between the developers and the school district and profit's got to be taken out of the picture. It's got to be taken out of the picture. It's got to be what's right for the community, what's right for the kids, for their education process, because that's all we have got. Thanks. De Weerd: Thank you. Any other testimony? Okay. Canning: Madam Mayor, IT I could respond to a couple comments- The Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation does not include a cross-access point to Volterra. It's just a -- there is no cross-access into Keego from that collector road at the mid mile. So, that's not part of the recommendation now and perhaps I misspoke- I didn1 understand some of the other issues behind n. Wnh regard to Councilmember Wardle's comment about why is this the first time we have heard about this, I can tell you I think that Me.. Freeman was selecting his words carefully during that answer, so - when Bainbridge Subdivision went in there is clear discussion about a future school site on Meridian City Council April 18,2006 Page 50 of 99 this property" Staff was under the assUmption that there would be a school site there also when Volterra went through and I think that's why We didn't get it at either location. The other locations available include -- the only other locations include some large five acre properties here. We have seen a couple of them, the most eastern of those five acres, come in for a subdivision plat. There is larger property up here adjoining Chinden Boulevard with limited access to Ramblin, so that would not necessarily be appropriate. I'm sorry. Wardle: Anna, I guess if I can interrupt -- Canning: Sure. Wardle: My question, which was answered, is just in general, not this specific quadrant of the city. Canning: Okay. Wardle: More focused on the city as a whole and this is the first time We have seen the school district come to the city on any development in any portion of the city, so -- Canning: Okay. I will be quiet now. Oe Weerd: Okay. If there is no further public testimony, I would ask the applicant if they would like to have concluding remarks. Butler: Okay. Thank you. Joann Butler again. The person that brought up the fence, this was raised at the Planning and Zoning Commission and just so you know there is a 1 .3.4 condition of approval that says that we will submit a detailed fencing plan with the final plat application for the subdivision and it goes on from there talking about construction fencing and so on. So, that was addressed. De Weerd: I think what she has brought up is what kind offence is it. Buller: Right. And r don1 think that's known right now in terms of -- is that -- but because that was the discussion, it was - they made it a condijion of approval to say, okay, go back, think about it, but come back to us in public with the subdivision application. De Weerd: Well, I do know that when you have livestock or horses, there is a concern With vinyl and so we -- if it is approved, We would certainly want the applicant to work with the neighbors on appropriate fencing. Butler: Okay. Thank you. Also, the Planning and Zoning Commission did raise the issue of other land in the event -- in the area, because of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map does show a symbol for a school in the area or a neighborhood community center, which is more centrally located. I have no idea if any of that land is available- It - Meridian City Council April 18, 2006 Page 51 of 99 may be vacant -- we just - the Planning and Zoning Commission was just asking where is other land in this area and it was pointed out. Thank you. If you have no other questions. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: What are the square footages of lots that are on the northern border? Butler: I believe We are going to have J.J. Howard address that in terms of - or Todd. Howard; My name is Jim Howard with J.J. Howard Engineering. I know that that's going to be hard to see, but if I could leave the mike, I'll walk over -- De Weerd: There is a mike right there. Howard: Okay.. Along the north boundary of the subdivision, 9,700, 7,400, 7,000, 7,000, 6,500, 8,500 -- of course this one doesnt 8,500. 7,000. So, these are pretty much 7,000 across the top. De Weerd: Okay. Anything further? Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I have a question for Gary Inselman. He's here, he may as well come and talk to us. De Weerd: Please state your name and address. Inselman: Gary Inselman representing ACHD, 3375 North Adams. De Weerd: Thank you. Rountree: Anna, if you would put the plat back up there. Just a question of what ACHD and we have tried to do in concert in terms of internal networking and -- is there a reason why ACHD did not want to have access to the northern parcel at this point that at this isn't developed and why there isn't an access out of this -- vehicular access out of this subdivision to a potential future school site? Inselman: Mr. Rountree, as far as the school site's concerned, we received a transmittal saying the plat had been modified, but we didn1 have a copy of the plat. So, We had no idea how it had been modified. So, we have not addressed that issue yet and we would like to -- if any school site is approved here, because we all know the issues we have with access to schools. As far as a stub street to the north, I'm not aware of why we didn't require a stub. I would have to review our file and research that. Rountree: Okay. Thank you. - Meridian City Council April 18,2006 Page 52 of 99 De Weere!: Okay. I see that there is additional public testimony and since the applicant is the last one to have word, I would invite the public testimony forward. If you will, please, state your name and address. Ha/etor: Merlinda Ha/etor. 6280 North Black Cat Road. De Weerd: Thank you. Haletor: I don1 know if I have comment I'm just looking at this and you brought up a good question, why there isn1 a stub street to the north, because that 30 acres has been purchased and is in the process of being developed and right now their access is very limited. They will not have an access onto Chinden, that 30 acre piece that's right there. Yes. That piece" No. Up. Yeah. They won1 have an access onto Chinden. Right now there is no stub street through to Keego -- Canning: Yes, there is. Haletor: - to the north. Okay. There is a stub street through to Keego? That's our concern. Is it right at the back? Rountree: Madam Mayor, I believe, looking at the layout there, there is a potential access to the north, so it's probably not the best alignment in the world. Haletor: Okay. And where is that? Rountree: At the northern most connection. Ha/etor: And it comes to the east? Bird: To the east. Ha/etor: Is that Bainbridge? Rountree: And to that -- Bird: No. It's right into that. Rountree: Right in there. Bird: Into that little arm off that 30 acres. Ha/etor: Okay. So, it goes from the back of Keego into the back corner of that undeveloped property right now. So, that undeveloped property would have an access through Keego to Black Cat? -- -- --- -- -- - Meridian City Council Apri/18,2006 Page 53 of 99 De Weerd: To Black Cat and to any future school site. Halelor: Okay- ThaI was a concern, because Ihere is going 10 be a whole bunch of houses right there and they will be attending, I assume, that school, if a school is approved for that area. So, it would be really nice if they had that back entrance. Otherwise, they are going to have to -- well, I don't know how those get out, because rig hi now Our liltle property is the rectangular piece rig hi there and we have not sold ii, so there is no access proposed or needed through there and their only other place is Ramblin, which is the COunty road, but it is really close to Chinden there and if we are talking about limited access, there is also already a ton of traffic coming down Black Cat to Chinden and I know, because my little driveway comes out of -- not quite halfway there and it's hard to get oLII in the mornings. Okay. So, that was my concern. So, as long as there is a way to get back in there, so that that subdivision that's going to be developed will have access out onto Black Cat without using any access on Ramblin or on Chinden. I just wanted to make sure that that was a possibility and that you were aware of that. That's it. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Any additional public testimony before I ask for concluding remarks? Okay. Campbell: If that stub street going east in Keego Springs into that vacant property was more desirous going north, we would not have any problem relocating that stub, if that's something you guys desired. Right now I think it flows from Keego, loops up into Bainbridge going east. So, it kind of figures lots through that little nanuw arm coming down. De Weerd: Could I ask -- what is your housing product in the higher density lots? Campbell: It's an alley-type product, similar to the Soda Springs Subdivision that we have Over off of Victory and Eagle Road. Very similar product type, alley-loaded, to the subdivision that you guys heard a presentation on earlier this evening, the rear loaded, you know, front atmosphere -- or front porch atmosphere type product. De Weerd: Okay. Generally we see elevations and I didn't see any in the packet. Were there any elevations at that P&Z? Canning: I don't believe so, ma'am. De Weerd: Okay. Did you provide any elevations at that time? De Weerd: Okay. And I know fencing was mentioned. I also understand your concern about donation of property for the school and that sort of thing. I will make my soap box statement right now, though. We are raising the expectations of development and development to pay their Proportionate share of growth. I think some of the problems in having small piece development at a time, is sometimes the first in don't pay, the last in is usually shouldering a larger share of the burden and that is kind of why I like a larger ...- Meridian City Council April 18, 2006 Page 54 of 99 scale development, because you see the picture, you see the connectivity, you see where the parks are going, where the schools are going. You see connectivity for the pathways, roads structures and all of that. And you also see how the growth is going to pay for itself. I do understand your concern, but at Our point We need to make Sure that services are going to be provided for the people in that square mile and in and around it. Certainly education, school facilities, are an important consideration. We have started to see developers donate land for school sites, donate right of way for the roadways, because our roads are in need of repair and they are stepping up. When there are lingering things that are unresolved, you know. I will quote one Council member: I'm not in a rush to see things developed until we know the whole story and -- Rountree: Now, who would say that? De Weerd: My hero. But I guess, you know, from the city's standpoint is we do want to assure that our citizens know that we take our responsibility serious. The school district, it's true that -- I think they were even referring to it and maybe they weren't Successful in bidding on that and they found that they were in a predicament that they needed a school site in that square mile and they found themselves between a rock and a hard spot. But I -- I feel that we have a responsibility to make sure that all the I's are dotted and the T's are crossed and that certain things are assured before we move forward. And I don1 have a vote until they tie and there is three of us -- or three voting members up here, so I won't be voting, because I can assure you there won't be a tie. But that was just my input into this, is we are raising the bar of expectations. We do have overcrowded schools. We do need to pay attention to our infrastructure needs as we look at development coming into our community and that's all I'm saying is I'm not saying donate the land, but I am saying we do want to see development step up and start be a part of our solutions. Campbell: And that's exactly what we are doing. We are willing to step up.. You say you want to see large scale developments and you want to see school sites within those large scale developments -- there is an 850 lot subdivision to Our south and a 450 lot subdivision to our east -- where are they? You want to see them, they are there. Those are huge developments and there is not a school, there is not a park within any of them. De Weerd: Sir, I believe that you just heard that a school site -- half of it's being donated. They donated all of their road right of way. They are providing a lighted intersection. They are doing their share. And so, again, what my statement was -- I like larger scale development, because you can see how everything will lay out. Campbell: But we don't -- De Weerd: One piece at a time is -- makes it a lot more difficult. Campbell: But we don't see it -- we don't see it until we are in here standing here before you today with a small development and everybody trying to force us to participate in a large scale development. We aren't a large scale development. There has been two --- _u ,--. Meridian City COuncil April 18.2006 Page 55 of 99 large scale developments approved with no school comment, with no negotiations with the school. Volterra has a verbal agreement with the school district. There is nothing written between the school district and Volterra. De Weerd: Sir, my statement was not to anger you. Campbell: It did anger me. De Weerd: Well, I also mentioned, if you listened -- Campbell: I listened. De Weerd; -- is that small scale or last in sometimes bears the bUrden, but we do need to assure that adequate infrastructure is in place. That is Our responsibility. Campbell: I understand that. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Bird. Bird: I can address that and I understand, too, that small developments come. I don1 think anybody on the Council here is expecting you to donate the land. Some do, some don't. The larger ones can. We have the same problem with parks. This same developer has donated ground to the parks, where other developers. large developers, expect to get paid back in impact fees. These people seem to go along. " for one, would not ask you to donate it, I'd ask you to sell at a reasonable price, because I'm a taxpayer for both entities. I also pay a pretty good share of taxes to the school district to be flat truthful with you, I'd glad to see they are being a lillie conservative" Surprise. But, anyway, I - and we are not here to anger you or anything else, but r would ask you what you would think if we put on your preliminary plat, if it is approved, of making that a school site and you cannot change your plat until you come back before us and we will give you some time. Do you have any problems with that, while we are in public testimony here? Campbell: I think that's what we have already done with the June 1 st deadline. Bird: Well, I don1 think - I don't think that's really true and I'm not too sure you can get negotiations with land and stuff done within -- by June 1 st. I would have no problem extending it a little longer than that, which would be fair. I think both parties need to -- Campbell: I would have no problem with that. Bird: Okay. - Meridian City Council April 18,2006 Page 56 of 99 De Weerd: Okay. Just to let you know we don1 pick on the little guys, but last wèek we had an application for 225 lots. He donated all of his road right of way. He donated towards a lighted intersection. He did off-site improvements.. And he donated a lot for Habitat for Humanity. He was 225 houses. So, it's not that much more than yours- And he was stepping up and that's all my point is. And he was a corner piece of property, so he had right of way on McMillan, as well as Linder. So, it's just an example to speak to my point. Campbell: I'm donating right of way and I'll donate a Jot to Habitat for Humanity if you would like that. But I will not donate five acres to the school district. De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Madam Mayor, can we let the applicant have his final word? De Weerd: I think that was a good final word. Rountree: Madam Mayor, r have another question, because, you know, I know you're passionate, but I'm looking at consistency and one thing that we have tried to do with these transitions between rural environments and the new urbanization of these rural environments and we routinely hold up applications for the buttering between large acre subdivisions and R-8s. Typically, Our standard has been to at least have lots bordering large acreages at a minimum of an R-4 and the last one last week that we said no to we suggested that they be as much as 1,700 square feet -- or 17,000 square feet. Excuse me. De Weerd: That's a big difference. Rountree: Big difference. Yeah. But I guess my question is why - why aren't we telling applicants that that's what we are trying to do when we have rural residential and -- the R-8 I don't have a problem with R-8 per se, but in that transition Zone between those large lots in rest of that subdivision, seems to me that we ought to at least be meeting our R-4 standard on those bOrdering lots. So, that's a question for Anna and that's a question for Jim or Todd or somebody. And that's a consistency thing. We have been doing that routinely for years. Howard: I understand what you're saying. My name is Jim Howard, I'm with J.J. Howard Engineers. We did evaluate that. We did look at that. It's unfortunate we don't have the aerial photo, because in part of the process we looked at those homes, those homes are well set back from their rear lot lines. For the most part, those homes are way north of our boundary and what lies between those homes and our boundary is pastures and places for horses. So, they have a natural buffer already built in. We didn't see the necessity of providing additional buffer that they already have. Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. If there is no further questions, Council -- .- Meridian City Council April 18, 2006 Page 57 of 99 Bird: Madam Mayor, before we close ff, I do -- I want to follow up on Councilman Rountree's -I want to ask Todd would you have any objection to taking some of those- - a couple three lots on the north out and making those larger deals? And I realize that you're probably tight with the pencil, but I just - you know, there is that one lot - if you go back to the deal, Anna, there is one lot -- or one place over there -- no, the one before that, kid. De Weerd: Kid? Bird: There we go. There is one -- well, she is a kid to me. Rountree: Everybody is a kid to you. Canning: Thank you. I'll take it. Bird: There is three lots behind that one house. I don1 care if the house is 150 feet away, you can say all you want, they are going to develop. Is there any way that you would be willing at that one point where you back up to those -- I guess there is four lots along there. Looking at taking some lots out and making it a little larger? Like Mr. Rountree said, we have went 17, 18 thousand, but I would be happy with 14 -- 13, 14 thousand. Or 12,000 or -- we are not even R-4s on some of those. Campbell: Mr. Rountree said he would be happy with 8,000. We would not mind losing one lot and spreading that footage throughout the -- the -- since I'm giving one to Habitat for Humanity, you know, one more for the neighbors is just fine, I guess. Bird: We are not-- De Weerd: I didn't ask for it. I was giving an example. Campbell: I appreciate Mr. Hubble giving a lot to Habitat. He's not a small developer. I wouldn't categorize him -- Bird: We will take any donation you want, beings I have to. Campbell: I will be over for a barbecue. Bird: Okay. Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: No, you can't do that. Yes, Mr. Nary. Nary: Before you close the Public Hearing, there is just a couple things, I guess, for the Council to consider. You're asking for at least a partial redesign. The highway district ---,- Meridian City COuncil April 18, 2006 Page 58 of 99 indicated they haven't had an opportunity to review the school site on this redesign as well. There was a date -- I would agree with Ms. Buller that maybe some rewOrding, if the Council wanted to consider on this school sije, tying Volterra's action to this property doesn't really make a lot of sense. But, in essence, if the Council approved this plat as proposed and removed the language that had these deadlines, then, the school site is what's there until they come and reapply for something else. You know, I think the issue that the Planning and Zoning Commission went to, which said they, essentially, had some automatic right to replat their property is not consistent or usual as we have approved in the past. Normally, when the city has approved plats, they have approved what's presented to you and if they want to change it in the future, then, they come back and ask for that change. So, I mean you may have some things to consider and I wanted to put that on the record before you close the Public Hearing, in case the applicant had a response to that, but I know we have had lots of discussion Over who said what to who, but I did at least hear of the school - or the highway district say they hadn't responded, because they hadn't seen the school site that's proposed and the access for it. So, those are the things that I didn't want to get lost in the discussion before you closed it and make considerations. But I would recommend some re-thought on 1.2.13 in regards to whether there is a date that's necessary or whether or not you want to remove Volterra from that consideration and whether this automatic right that seems to have been proposed by the Planning and Zoning Commission fits what you consider to be appropriate. De Weerd: Okay. Campbell: I think ACHD's review of the application and final is conditioned upon the plat. If we need to extend the date for the school district, again, we have no problem with that. You know, hopefully, it's within this millennium, you know. It could drag on forever and ever. We want the school there. They just -- you know -- yeah. Nary: And, Madam Mayor, I think alii was proposing was is I don't know if the Council feels a necessity to have a date. I mean if you approve a plat as is, then, it's a school site until -- if they can't resolve it, they can come back and ask at any point to reconsider it and you can have this discussion again. Campbell: That would -- yeah. That's fine. De Weerd: Mr. Wardle? Wardle: Just waiting for the applicant to have his final word, so -- De Weerd: Okay. Anything further? Campbell: This is my final word. Meridian City Council April 18, 2006 Page 59 of 99 De Weere ; Unless we bring up something else, uh? Sorry about that. Usually: we do this after we close the Public Hearing, so you're just fortunate you have an opportunny to respond. We've learned that lesson, too. So, anything further, Council? Bird: I have none, Mayor. Rountree: I have nothing. De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Wardle, do you have a motion? Wardle: Madam Mayor, I move that we close the Public Hearing on item -- 16 is the only item we are considering; correct? De W eerd: Fifteen and sixteen. Wardle: Thank you. Fifteen and sixteen. Bird: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to close the Public Hearing on Items 15 and 16. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Mr. Nary. Nary: Not to be hypertechnical, but you opened the Public Hearing on 17, they did move to withdraw it, at least on the record you should move to accept it. De Weerd: Okay. Wardle: Madam Mayor, I move that we accept the withdrawal of Item 17. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. All those in favor? Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Is this discussion time? De Weerd: Yes. -- --, Meridian City Council April 18, 2006 Page 60 of 99 Wardle: All right. Thank you. My discussion on the application, first off -- and I asked Mr. Freeman during public testimony why the school district choose this particular project to come forward and voice their opinion. It's something that this Council has been asking for for years, as I can recall, for the school district to be involved. We hear it from the public time and time again where they come before us ,and say -- as they talk about density and the ability for schools to serve their children and we have, in my opinion, a definitive answer from -- at least on a specific project from the school district as to their opinion. I think that we should take them into consideration. But I think it's been the focus of the application and the presentation -- I have some consideration with the alley-loaded lots, as I do with every alley-loaded lot that comes through this -- at the City Council and I didn't see -- I haven't seen elevations, I haven't seen the specifics on those -- the homes that we asked for. And so I have some questions in my mind on not just the school portion of this application, but we talked about density here. So, I'm not inclined to look favorably on the application as current. If the rest of the Council wants to either disagree with me or we can continue it to a further date to maybe clear some of these issues up, I would be amenable to that. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Just a question for Councilman Wardle. What specifically would you want to see if we were to reopen and continue? Wardle: Well, I think the issue of density has been raised and, certainly, I think I have heard a comment from the applicant -- the one question I have that I didn't necessarily ask is the removal of the variance for reduced front garage setbacks from 15 feet, how does that affect the current plat? How does that affect the housing stock and these different styles? We talked about the movement from the Planning and Zoning Commission, the ability to move that -- the amenities to a central location, which we are not -- I understand there is an agreement that we are not seeing here. Those are some of the unanswered questions in my mind. In addition to, obviously, the comments from the school district. De Weerd: Did you ask those questions? Wardle: I believe I did. De Weerd: Okay. Wardle: I believe I specifically -- uh? De Weerd: And you didn't get much information -- .--. -. -'- ..",- Meridian City Council April 18,2006 Page 61 of 99 Wardle: Oh, I asked the applicant during his presentation whether that was his presentation on landscaping -- the specific things that we typically ask for and so I assume that was their presentation. De Weerd: Okay. Any other comment from Council? What would be your preference? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: My comment is -- I appreciate the -- what Councilman Wardle indicated from the school district. It's great to hear from them. But I'm not going to sit here and arbitrate between an applicant and the school district. That's their issue. I think the applicant has made a good faith effort into providing the school site on their plat. I like the recommendation from counsel that it's platted that way, it stays that way, and there is no time certain one way or another. If the deal can't be cut, the applicant at any point in time can come back and replot the whole parcel if they wish. So, in that regard I'm comfortable. I tend to agree, Shaun, with some of the comments you have made. We have -- we have asked and gotten a response from the applicant that they would be willing to increase the size of the buffer area lots. I appreciate that. That needs to be changed on the plat. That is a plat change. I don't think it's a significant one, but it's one that we need to see before we take final action. ACHD is probably going to want an access to the south. For now that somewhat hinges on whether or not there is a school there, but could -- could or couldn't show a roadway there on the plat, depending on what the response is there. I did answer my question about the north and that works. I'm not sure we got any specifics on the alleyway and that's certainly something that we have been around and around and around with the UDC on. And, specifically, we have been asking for some kind of an idea what the product looks like. So, with those pieces I agree with you, Shaun. I guess for the applicant, as opposed to entertaining a motion to deny, I would entertain a motion that we reopen the Public Hearing, continue it, and ask for specificity as it relates to the alley-loaded product, some elevations on the product, a replatting that shows the northern lots that border the rural neighborhood, and -- what am I missing here? Oh. The potential access to the future school site out of this subdivision. Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Wardle. Wardle: If I can just respond quickly. The project as a whole is not something that I have a large amount of heartburn with. I just didn't -- during our discussion and back and forth with the applicant, get all of the information that I was looking for and so, certainly, I would be willing to open that back up and allowing ~- I don't know how long it would take to gather that information, but certainly probably would be in fairly short order. Meridian City Council April 18, 2006 Page 62 of 99 De Weerd: We could ask the applicant to -- Bird: It's either -- it's either do that or I can't buy into it the way it is right now. I'm not going to pass on alleys that don't meet specifications. We fought too hard for that. De Weerd: It's not open right now. Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Nary. Nary: One other point that was raised I don't know if Councilmember Rountree was concerned. That eastern stub street versus it being east or north, the applicant indicated either one was fine. I don't know if you want a comment from someone, but since that was brought up, I don't know if it's a concern to you. De Weerd: And, Mr. Bird, I don't think anyone said that the alleys didn't meet code. No one's even talked about them. Bird: Well, let's go back to them. I want to make sure they don't. De Weerd: Okay. It looks like we need more information and I would entertain a motion to move the direction you want to move. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I move that we re-open the public hearings for Items -- 15 and 16? De Weerd: Uh-huh. Rountree: And specifically for the applicant to have an opportunity to provide the city with a redrawing of the plat that would indicate larger lots on the northern border, at a minimum size of an R-4 or larger, that the applicant provide elevations that will give the city a sense of the architectural type for the alley-loaded product. That the applicant bring back specifics as it relates to the UDC on the alley, alley widths, and, hopefully, we will get a comment from the fire department. And the -- looking at the access to the south and working with ACHD on the flip of a coin on which way to put the access to the north, whether it goes north or whether it goes the way it is now, it doesn't matter to me. It's there, so if it works better for the lay of the land here, the way it is now, is fine to take a look at that with ACHD. Anything else? If nobody has any other comments, that's my motion. Bird: Second. Meridian City Council April 18,2006 Page 63 of 99 De Weerd: Okay. So, there is a motion to reopen with the specified requests as outlined and -- Canning: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Canning: If I may, with regard to the timing of when this comes back, this is a residential project with no planned services in the near future. De Weerd: If you will let us first vote on opening the Public Hearing, I'll do that first. Okay. All those in favor say aye. Okay. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Okay. Now, Anna. Canning: My timing is off tonight. I'm sorry. This is -- this is a residential project where services won't be available for at least two years. I am without staff to process -- to review this change until June. We are full committed on your May hearing, so I would ask that you -~ if you do table this, that it be sometime in June. Bird: Continue it? How long, Anna? Canning: I believe the first hearing in June is better than the second. No, actually, it would be the second hearing in June. Bird: The 13th probably won't have one, because I see that we -~ be the first time we -- De Weerd: When does AIC start? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I was thinking of P&Z week. So, the first -- your first hearing in June is probably okay. It's the P&Z's first hearing in June is -- Bird: The 6th. Canning: Okay. De Weerd: Okay. Do you need any greater clarity? Do you need any further clarity? Rountree: I'll add this to my motion that -- continue it to June 6th, 2006. Bird: Second that. De Weerd: Okay. That was the motion. Okay. We do have a motion to continue to June 6, 2006. All those in favor say aye. Okay. All ayes. Meridian City Council April 18, 2006 Page 64 of 99 MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Anything further, Mr. Wardle? Wardle: No. Just the final word. De Weerd: Final word. Thank you. That means you're not going to speak the rest of the evening. Wardle: Probably not. De Weerd: Go find Mr. Borton. I'm going to call a five minute break. (Recess.) Item 18: Public Hearing: PP 06-002 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 23 commercial lots on 22.85 acres in a C-G zone for Gateway Marketplace Subdivision by Landmark Development - southeast corner of Ustick Road and Eagle Road: De Weerd: Okay. I'll go ahead and call this meeting to order. This is a Public Hearing, Item 18, on PP 06-002. I will open that Public Hearing with staff comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Gateway Marketplace project. It's at the southeast corner of Ustick and Meridian. Ustick. Meridian. And this is a preliminary plat application. As you can tell, it's already been -- Ustick and Eagle. Sorry. Have I got the right project? The Gateway Marketplace or Meridian Gateway. You are Gateway Marketplace. Okay. I have trouble keeping these next two separate in my head. De Weerd: I know. There is something in common with their name, I think. Canning: Okay. De Weerd: Gateway. Canning: My notes are incorrect. It is Ustick and Eagle. The development includes 18 commercial lots to construct up to 250,000 square feet of retail and restaurant uses on approximately 22.5 acres. Apparently we don't have the site plan, Tamara. De Weerd: Slow down. Canning: Sorry. I was looking for the site plan, but we don't have one, but I know the applicant does have one. As I mentioned before, there are 250,000 square feet of proposed commercial square footage and staff has added some conditions of approval