HomeMy WebLinkAboutAugust 8, 2006 C/C Minutes
~.
Meridian City Council
August 8, 2006
Page 19 of 40
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion to continue Item 10 to August 15th. All those in favor
say aye. All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 11:
FP 06-035 Request for Final Plat approval for 23 commercial building lots
and 1 common lot on 31.37 acres in a C-G zone for Centre Pointe
Subdivision by Winston Moore - Northwest corner of East Ustick Road &
North Eagle Road:
De Weerd: Item 11 has comments by the applicant that staff has indicated agreement
with. Anna?
""""'-'--"'"".~~--- -~------." ------,--..-
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the applicant just spoke to me and
they are in agreement with the conditions of approval. They just wanted some
clarification on one item and we can do at a later date. It's just on a code issue_
De Weerd: Okay.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Hearing that, I move we approve FP 06-035 with applicant and staff comments.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion to approve Item 11. If there is no discussion, Mr.
Berg, roll call vote.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 12:
Item 13:
VAC 06-010 Request to Vacate a portion of Jericho Road north of W.
Hightower Drive and south of State Highway 20/26 for Hiahtower
Subdivision by Hightower, LLC - Southwest corner of Jericho Road and
Chinden Boulevard:
Continued Public Hearing from June 27, 2006: VAC 06-004 Request
for Vacation of the existing utility easements on the interior lot lines for
Lots 21, 22, 25 and 26, Block 7, Sundance Subdivision NO.3 Sundance
Subdivision No.5 by Dave Evans Construction - northeast corner of
Ustick Road and Meridian Road:
De Weerd: Okay. Items 12 and 13 have been requested to continue to August 15th.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
,"
Meridian City Council
August 8, 2006
Page 20 of 40
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we continue Items 12 and 13, VAC 06-010 and VAC 06-004 until
August 15th, 2006.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion to continue Items 12 and 13 to August 15th. All those
in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 14:
Continued Public Hearing from June 27, 2006: AZ 06-019 Annexation
and Zoning of 10.59 acres from RUT to a R-8 zone for Southwick
Subdivision by Gemstar Development, LLC -1255 West Ustick Road:
Item 15:
Continued Public Hearing from June 27, 2006: PP 06-018 Preliminary
Plat approval of 42 building lots and 6 common lots on 10.59 acres in a
proposed R-8 zone for Southwick Subdivision by Gemstar
Development, LLC - 1255 West Ustick Road:
De Weerd: Okay. Items 14 and 15 are continued public hearings AZ 06-019 and PP 06-
01. I will open these two public hearings with staff comments.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Southwick project. It was
continued from your June 27th, 2006, hearing and at that hearing -- I'll give you a brief
update. It's located east of Linder Road, south of Ustick Road. It's currently two very
long, skinny lots. It is annexation, zoning, and preliminary plat. The applicant had
originally proposed 42 building lots on 10.59 acres. At the hearing the City Council had
become concerned with the concept of flag lots being used as a -- as a design element,
basically, for the plat, rather than typically how you see them as an awkward corner that
the developer is trying to reach to and so they use flag lots. At that hearing I had
suggested that Council wait and I could provide some images of flag lots for you to see
how these are constructed. Since that time the applicant has actually -- proposes now
not to include any flag lots. This is the current proposal and I will let them present this to
you. These are quite a bit larger lots. The lot count went down from 42 to 26 lots. So,
this is substantially different than the original application. Staff has a question as to what
Council's pleasure might be on this. At a minimum we need to ask you to continue this
for two weeks, because we haven't gotten -- we haven't had time to review it to see if it
meets our standards and to review it appropriately. The other question that comes up --
so you could either continue two weeks and we can address those issues in that
interim, but the question becomes whether it would be appropriate to remand this back
to the Planning and Zoning Commission. By dropping that many lots, the density drops
down to about 2.45 units per acre. The Comprehensive Plan designation on this piece
of property is medium density residential. So, there would be a need to at least evaluate