Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003 04-15 Meridian City Council Meeting April 15, 2003 The regular meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:05 P.M., Tuesday, April 15, 2003, by Mayor Robert Corrie. Members Present: Robert Corrie, William Nary, Tammy de Weerd, Cherie McCandless, and Keith Bird. Others Present: William Nichols, Brad Hawkins-Clark, Brad Watson, Will Berg, Ken Bowers, Doug Strong, and Dean Willis. Item 1: Roll-call Attendance: Roll call. __X Tammy de Weerd _ X__ Bill Nary __X Cherie McCandless __X Keith Bird ___X__ Mayor Robert Corrie Corrie: All right. I will open the City of Meridian's City Council regular meeting, Tuesday, April the 15th, 2003, at 7:05 p.m. At this time I'd like to have the City Clerk have the roll- call attendance, please. Item 2: Adoption of the Agenda: Corrie: Okay. Item No. 2 is adoption of the agenda. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I will make the changes as we go through the agenda on the Consent. We got some things that we need to pull and probably some that we need to continue, but on the main agenda, Items No. 8, 9, 10 and 11, the Silverleaf Subdivision, has been requested to be continued to June 15th, 2003. Corrie: July. Bird: July. I'm sorry. To July 15, 2003. And with those changes noted, I don't believe there are any other changes. I would move that we adopt the agenda as noted. McCandless: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded to adopt the agenda as changed. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Opposed no? All ayes. Motion carried. Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 2 of 51 MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 3: Consent Agenda: A. February 19, 2003 Approve minutes of City Council Special Meeting: B. March 25, 2003 Approve minutes of City Council Regular Meeting: C. April 1, 2003 Approve minutes of City Council Regular Meeting: D. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 02- 033 Request for annexation and zoning of 104.77 acres from RUT Parkstone Subdivision to R-8 PD zones for proposed by Hillview Development, Corp. – west of North Eagle Road and north of East Ustick Road: E. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: PP 02- 033 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 334 building lots and 34 other lots on 104.77 acres in a proposed R-8 PD zone for Parkstone Subdivision proposed by Hillview Development, Corp. – west of North Eagle Road and north of East Ustick Road: F. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 02-049 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Unit Development for 275 single-family dwellings, 52 townhomes, 4 office lots, 2 commercial lots, 1 mini-storage lot, 1 pocket park, 1 city neighborhood park and 32 common lots on 104.77 acres for Parkstone Subdivision proposed by Hillview Development, Corp. – west of North Eagle Road and north of East Ustick Road: G. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Denial: AZ 02- 032 Request for annexation and zoning of 5.0 acres from RUT to Northbridge Subdivision R-2 zones for proposed by Centennial Development, LLC – west of North Meridian Road on West Ustick Road: H. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Denial: PP 02- 035 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 5 building lots and 4 other lots on 5.0 acres in a proposed R-2 zone for proposed Northbridge Subdivision by Centennial Development, LLC – west of North Meridian Road on West Ustick Road: K. Beer, Wine, and Liquor License Renewals: Texas Roadhouse – Beer and Liquor Epi’s A Basque Restaurant – Beer and Wine Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 3 of 51 Meridian Bowling Lanes – Beer and Liquor Pizza Hut – Beer Fred Meyer – Beer and Wine Bill n Lynn’s Place – Beer and Liquor Lotus Garden Chinese Restaurant – Beer Bolo’s – Beer and Wine Rite Aid – Beer and Wine Wingers – Beer and Wine Chicago Connection – Beer and Wine Cherry Lane Golf Course – Beer and Liquor White Water Saloon – Beer and Liquor Primo’s All You Can Eat - Beer L. Approve Lease for Additional Office Space for Public Works / Building Department: M. Change Order No. 1, Victory Road Water Main Design – Civil Survey Consultants: N. Award Bid / Contract for Landscaping at the South Entrance of the Waste Water Treatment Plant: O. Addendum to Agreement for Professional Services, J-U-B Engineers – South Slough Sewer Project: P. Resolution No. : Amending Resolution No. 142 Adopting Deferred Compensation Plan for the City of Meridian Employees: Corrie: Consent Agenda. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: On the Consent Agenda, Items D, E, and F, the Parkstone Subdivision, has been asked to be moved back until April 15th, 2003, so we can get some -- Corrie: April 22nd. De Weerd: 22nd. Bird: Or April 22nd. I'm sorry. And, then, with the permission of Nary and McCandless, I'd like to pull items I and J to 5-I and 5-J on the regular agenda. McCandless: Second. Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 4 of 51 Nary: Second. Bird: Okay. And with that I would move we adopt the Consent Agenda and for the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest on all proper papers. Nary: Second. Corrie: Okay. I -- for purposes of Item P, what is that resolution number, Mr. Clerk? Amending Resolution Adopting Deferred Comp Plan. 03-402. All right. Okay. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll-call vote, Mr. Berg. Roll-Call: McCandless, yea; Nary, yea; de Weerd, yea; Bird, yea. Corrie: Okay. All ayes. The motion is approved. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 4: Department Reports: A. Mayor’s Office – Mayor Corrie: 1. Appointment of Meridian Development Corporation Board Member (to fulfill Jim Johnson Seat #1until 8-04): Corrie: Okay. Next is Department Reports and appointment of Meridian Development Corporation board member to fill Jim Johnson's seat #1 until 8-04. At this time I would like to recommend the name of Mr. Jonathan P. Cecil, who lives at 620 North Mineral Wells Avenue in Meridian, Idaho. I have given you -- you all got a copy of his resume. I did have a meeting and talking with Jon, he is a planner with the City of Meridian, he has extensive knowledge on urban renewal, local government, and municipal financing. He was a city administrator -- planning and zoning administrator of urban renewal and executive director for the City of Jerome and he's well qualified for this seat on the MDC. So, I will answer any questions you might have, but I will be recommending -- I am recommending him to be placed on the MDC board. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: Just -- he is a planner with Ada County and he lives here in Meridian. He's very knowledgeable about urban renewal areas and he's familiar with our attorney and I think he has talked with you, and I also spoke with him. I think he will be a great addition and a different voice coming from a different angle and I would like to move that we approve your appointment of Jonathan Cecil until August '04. Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 5 of 51 Nary: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded. Any further discussion? Okay. All those in favor say aye. Opposed no? Okay. Then, Mr. Jonathan P. Cecil will be part of the MDC board. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 5: (Items Moved from Consent Agenda): I. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Denial: AZ 02-034 Request for annexation and zoning of 5.0 acres from Bleak Subdivision RUT to R-3 zones for proposed by Kent and Nancy Bleak – 4920 West Cherry Lane: J. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Denial: PFP 02-005 Request for Preliminary / Final Plat approval of 1 building lot and 1 other lot on 5 acres in a proposed R-3 Bleak Subdivision zone for proposed by Kent and Nancy Bleak – 4920 West Cherry Lane: Corrie: Okay. The next is the items moved from the Consent Agenda. The two items that have been removed is I and J, Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law of denial on the annexation and zoning of the Bleak Subdivision and preliminary and final plat approval. Mr. Nary. Nary: Mr. Mayor, one of the discussion points I wanted to discuss on Item I, the Findings on the annexation denial, what I would move is that we amend the findings -- one of the things that was presented in the staff report and was not addressed any further by other testimony was the fact that currently this particular property does not have sewer service available to it and there was discussion if there was going to be an annexation and when that could be done and how that could be accomplished through some sort of agreement for hook up later, but the Findings don't reflect the fact that there is no current sewer service. So, I was going to move to amend the Findings to also include that there is no current service. Now, was I incorrect? Did I hear that incorrectly, Brad, that that property does not currently have sewer service available? Hawkins-Clark: Councilman Nary, that is correct. It does not. Nary: So, I think the Findings, to be accurate, need to reflect the fact that there is no current sewer service and the other thing I was going to make note for the record, we did receive a letter from Kent and Nancy Bleak, dated April 10th, that was attached with a map of the area, basically, requesting that we reconsider our decision based upon the -- their belief that it is compliant with the Comprehensive Plan. I think we discussed that extensively, the fact that it may be -- it may be compliant with the Comprehensive Plan wasn't really the focus of the discussion. My recollection is the discussion was dealing Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 6 of 51 with the big picture of what was being proposed and no different than any other application for annexation when we also have an opportunity to look at what's going to be proposed there, we have to make a decision as to whether or not what's being proposed is something we feel is compatible with the city and the Comprehensive Plan and the zones that are appropriate and what is going to be there and whether or not that's something that we would like to see. I think that was the focus of the discussion. That is reflected somewhat in the Findings, but I'm not willing to make a motion to reconsider. I think we had this discussion, I don't think the letter, although well written with some good information, doesn't have any new information. I think it's the same information we heard previously. We did discuss that. So, I was not going to make a motion to reconsider, but I would move to amend the Findings to reflect the fact that it was presented -- the evidence did present that there is no current sewer service available to this property. Corrie: Okay. Any other discussion? De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: Neither Councilman Bird nor I can bring it back on the table, so -- Corrie: That's correct. De Weerd: It would be either Councilman Nary or Councilwoman McCandless, so -- I thought the letter did restate some strong arguments in favor of reconsidering and offering housing choices and, looking, it does comply with the Comprehensive Plan, but I know that's not any news to you on what I feel. Corrie: I guess the question from the Chair here is do either one of you want to change -- or recommend a change? Nary: I do not. Corrie: Okay. Hearing that, then, Mr. Attorney, do we need to have the motion on the amended Findings that Mr. Nary brought up and, then, we can -- Nichols: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, the annexation Findings would be the ones where the additional information needs to be presented and, then, the -- we will bring -- we will simply include that as an additional Finding of Fact in those Findings and the Conclusions, I think, would remain the same. Nary: Correct. Nichols: So, we would just include an additional finding and the Findings for the preliminary plat would remain the same. Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 7 of 51 Corrie: Okay. Nary: That being said, Mr. Mayor, I move for Item I, AZ 02-034, that we amend the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for this particular Bleak Subdivision to also reflect that there are no current -- there is not current sewer service to this particular property. McCandless: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. Opposed No? Okay. I guess I get to vote and I will be -- I vote an aye, too. So, I will vote aye. MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES. TWO NAYS. MAYOR AYE. Nary: Mr. Mayor ? Corrie: Okay. Mr. Nary. Nary: I certainly understand why Councilmember Bird and de Weerd voted against it, but there really was evidence that there is no sewer service there, so it's not really doing anything, it's just reflecting the facts that were presented. Nichols: Mr. Mayor? Bird: We know. Nary: I know you know. So the record reflects it. Corrie: Mr. Nichols. Nichols: Mr. Mayor, now there needs to be a motion to adopt the Findings as amended. Nary: Now these you can vote no again. Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I would move the approval of -- and since we have done this on the Consent Agenda, unless someone has an objection, I was just going to move for approval as is on both of them. I move to approve Items I and J, AZ 02-034, the amended Findings for denial for the request for annexation and zoning of Bleak Subdivision, and the Findings as presented and Conclusions of Law for PFP 02-005, for the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest. McCandless: Second. Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 8 of 51 Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. Opposed? Okay. Then, the Chair will vote aye. MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES. TWO NAYS. MAYOR AYE. Item 6: Ordinance No. : AZ 02-029 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 39.92 acres from RUT to R-8 zones for Watersong Estates proposed by Howell-Murdoch Development Corporation – northwest corner of North Linder Road and West Ustick Road: Corrie: Onto Item No. 6. That's democracy. All right. Item No. 6, which is Ordinance No. 03-1017. This is a request for annexation and zoning of 39.92 acres from RUT to R-8 zone for proposed Watersong Estates by Howell-Murdoch Development Corporation, northwest corner of North Linder Road and West Ustick Road. At this time I would ask the City Clerk to read Ordinance No. 03-1017 by title only at this time. Berg: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. Ordinance No. 03-1017, an Ordinance finding that Howell-Murdoch Development Corporation, the owner of certain real property generally located on the west side of Linder Road, one quarter mile northeast of Ustick Road in Meridian, to be known as Watersong Estates Subdivision and which lies contiguous or adjacent to the city limits of the City of Meridian, county of Ada, State of Idaho, have made a request for annexation in writing to the Council and that said land be annexed to the City of Meridian, zoning designated Medium Density Residential District (R-8), and declaring that said land, by proper legal description as described below, be a part of the City of Meridian, County of Ada, State of Idaho, repealing all ordinances, resolutions, orders or parts thereof, in conflict herewith, and directing the city engineer to add said property to the official maps of the City of Meridian, Idaho, and directing the Clerk of the City of Meridian to file a certified copy of the ordinance and map of the areas to be annexed with the Ada county recorder, auditor, treasurer, and assessor and the State Tax Commission of the State of Idaho, pursuant to Idaho Code Section 50-223 and Section 63-2215. Corrie: Okay. You have heard the reading of Ordinance No. 03-1017 by title only. Is there anyone from the audience that would like to have the ordinance read in its entirety? Okay. Council, you have before you a request for annexation of Watersong Estates by ordinance. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I move we approve Ordinance No. 03-1017, request for annexation and zoning of 39.92 acres from RUT to R-8 zones for the proposed Watersong Estates and ask the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest with suspension of rules. Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 9 of 51 Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded to approve Ordinance No. 03-1017 with suspension of rules. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll-call vote, Mr. Berg. Roll-Call: McCandless, yea; Nary, yea; de Weerd, yea; Bird, yea. Corrie: All yeas. Ordinance No. 03-1017 will be effective after the ordinance is published. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 7: Tabled from April 1, 2003: FP 03-011 Request for Final Plat approval of 26 building lots and 8 other lots on 5.48 acres in an R-8 zone for Mosher’s Farm Subdivision by CMD, Inc. – northwest corner of North Ten Mile Road and West Pine Avenue: Corrie: Item No. 7 is tabled from the April 1st, 2003, request for final plat approval of 26 building lots and eight other lots on 5.48 acres in an R-8 zone for Mosher's Farm Subdivision by CMD, Inc., northwest corner of North Ten Mile Road and West Pine Avenue. Staff comments first. Hawkins-Clark: Thank you, Mayor, Members of the Council. This item was continued primarily due to some reconfiguration of the sewer and -- through the subdivision, as well as pressurized irrigation and those issues have been worked out with Public Works, so I will go ahead and just briefly touch on the final flat. It is located just north of West Pine Avenue on the west side of Ten Mile Road. The Ten Mile sub drain is adjacent to the southern boundary of the plat. It is just a single phase development. The plat has 26 building lots and six other lots. It was annexed with an R-8 zone. The staff report dated April 1st by Wendy Kirkpatrick and Bruce Freckleton does outline a couple of recommended conditions from staff. The plat as shown on the screen is generally in compliance with the preliminary plat. They are providing a pedestrian connection to the Chaparral Elementary School lot. The one modification that was changed with Public Works -- they have added a new common lot here down in the southeast corner of the project to run the sewer through. It is a 15 foot wide common lot, not a 20. That's due to an existing house that is on this lot here. The house, if we had a standard 20, the easement line would be on the -- basically, the wall of the existing house. So, Public Works has agreed to reduce that to a 15 foot. I think the only two additional notes to make on our conditions relate to -- that -- there is one on that lot and we ask that a dedicated blanket sewer easement on Lot 32 of Block 1, that would need to be a new note that would be added to have that blanket sewer easement over that full lot and that's not in the staff report, so we would recommend that that be added, as well as a new condition that says that the landscape plan dated March 25, '03, is approved as submitted and that does have a basketball court, as you may recall, as part of the planned development in their open space lot here, which is accessible off of the cul-de- Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 10 of 51 sac. The revised plat that has this 15 foot wide sanitary sewer in it is dated April 14, '03. I think that's all staff has. Corrie: Okay. Thank you. Any questions, comments for staff? Nichols: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nichols. Nichols: Brad, could I have that lot and block again? I didn't get it quick enough. Hawkins-Clark: Oh. Lot 32, Block 1. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: We did not get staff comments on this. Or I don't have it on my disk. McCandless: I don't either. Corrie: Actually, all we got is a couple letters from Wendy. It was a letter dated April 1st from Wendy Kirkpatrick, Planner II. There was a letter that it had to be tabled to today. That's all we have. Hawkins-Clark: I have record that -- it was dated April 1st. I'm sorry. Other than that, I don't have any other record that it was sent to the clerk's office, so I would have to rely on Will for that. Corrie: While we are waiting, it the applicant here tonight or representative? Did you get a copy of what we are -- name and address just for the record, so we -- Ketterling: Yeah. Kasey Ketterling. I'm representing CMD. I'm an engineer with Leavitt & Associates. Address 1324 1st Street South, Nampa, Idaho. I do not have a copy. I have not received a copy. Corrie: This says site specific and general comments. Ketterling: I was going to ask if Doug received a copy. I wasn't sure if he received one or not. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 11 of 51 Nary: Do you need some time to review it? Do you want us to move this down a couple of slots and, then, you can look at that for a minute? Ketterling: Well, that would be just fine. I have talked quite a bit with Public Works. I'm aware of their desires and their needs, so I'm probably familiar with these items, but would that be okay if I -- maybe you guys need a couple minutes yourself to look through it. Corrie: Okay. But you're fine with all the comments and that? Ketterling: Let me just take a minute. Corrie: Okay. That's fine. Ketterling: I don't know if you want to move to another item or -- Corrie: Okay. Well, we can do that. We can -- Ketterling: If I can just take a minute I would just do that as well. Corrie: Okay. If it's going to take just about a minute, then, we will wait. Ketterling: Okay. Corrie: That will give us a chance for us to read it up here. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: Brad, in the site specific comments you wanted to add an additional comment? Is that what the change was? Hawkins-Clark: That's correct. De Weerd: That was just regarding a plat change? Hawkins-Clark: Correct. There was, actually, two. One was to require a blanket sanitary sewer easement on Lot 32, Block 1 and, then -- which I guess would be number five. And, then, number six would be that the landscape plan, dated March 25, '03, is approved as submitted. Those would be the two. De Weerd: Okay. Yeah. These are all pretty general, so -- Corrie: Do you -- Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 12 of 51 Ketterling: Yes. Kasey Ketterling, again, for the record. We don't have a problem with any of these comments. Item number four on the site specific comments, is that, once again, calling -- I don't know if you guys remember the discussion we had on tiling that ditch during the annexing phase of this subdivision, but I was under the understanding that we were not to going to tile the drain, except for those areas which would impact the sidewalk. We would tile enough of the drains that the sidewalk would have adequate soil underneath it. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: That was my understanding, too, Mr. Mayor, that we weren't requiring that, other than where the sidewalks are coming. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: So would we -- Brad, to be safe, we should probably look at amending four, because I think -- I think everyone's right, I think the discussion was simply tiling the section that was, essentially, where the sidewalk is adjacent to Ten Mile and not the remainder of it. Ketterling: That's as we remember it as well. Hawkins-Clark: Mr. Mayor, I think that's correct. If we just checked the preliminary plat conditions in the annexation. So, if we just require the final plat to comply with the preliminary plat annexation findings, then, I think we would be covered. Ketterling: Okay. That's fine. Corrie: Okay. Anything else? Ketterling: Not from us. Corrie: Okay. All right. Thank you. Ketterling: Thank you. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I move that we approve the request for final plat of 26 building lots and eight other lots on 5.48 acres in an R-8 zone for Mosher's Farm Subdivision, to include staff Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 13 of 51 comments dated 4/1/2003, I hope. I know it says 2002. To add requirements to site specific to require a sanitary sewer easement on Lot 20 -- or 32, Block 1, and the landscape plan of 3/25/03 and to amend item number four to comply with the preliminary plat. And ask the attorney to draw up Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order. Bird: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded for approval with the additions. Corrections. Any further discussion? De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I guess just to add a notation on the date of the revised plat of 4/14/03. Bird: I agree. Corrie: Second agree? Okay. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll-call vote, Mr. Berg. Roll-Call: McCandless, yea; Nary, yea; de Weerd, yea; Bird, yea. Corrie: All ayes. Motion is approved. Request for final plat. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 8: Tabled from March 4, 2003: AP 03-001 Request to Appeal Meridian Silverleaf Subdivision Planning and Zoning Commission’s Denial of Preliminary Plat by Shawn Nickel and Crestline Development, LLC – 2683 West Chinden Boulevard: Item 9: Continued Public Hearing from March 4, 2003: AZ 02-030 Request for annexation and zoning of 38.65 acres from RUT to R-4 zones for Silverleaf Subdivision proposed by Crestline Development, LLC – 2683 West Chinden Boulevard: Item 10: Continued Public Hearing from March 4, 2003: PP 02-031 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 72 building lots and 8 other lots on 38.65 Silverleaf Subdivision acres in a proposed R-4 zone for proposed by Crestline Development, LLC – 2683 West Chinden Boulevard: Item 11: Continued Public Hearing from March 4, 2003: VAR 03-006 Request for a Variance to exceed 1,000 foot maximum block length and Variance Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 14 of 51 Silverleaf Subdivision to open space requirement for by Crestline Development – 2683 West Chinden Boulevard: Corrie: Item No. 8, 9, 10 and 11 have been requested to be continue the tabled appeal for the Planning and Zoning Commission and to continue the Public Hearing on the request for annexation, the Public Hearing for the preliminary plat, and continued Public Hearing on request for variance until July 15th, 2003. At this time I will ask is there anyone here that would like to give testimony now that's here, if they cannot be here on the 15th of July? Okay. Hearing none, then, Council, I will entertain a motion. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Are you going to -- we already continued the Public Hearing, so are you opening up the public hearings? Corrie: No. Not at this time. We can just continue it, because -- Bird: Okay. How about Item No. 8? Corrie: Request for the appeal? Bird: The request for the appeal. That -- we'll have to handle that as a -- as just a tabled motion, then, won't we? Nichols: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nichols. Nichols: Perhaps as an abundance of caution, the requirement is that we have to have a hearing within 45 days of the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Or, no, maybe it was they have to make their recommendation in 45 days of the hearing. But, at any rate, if you open these hearings, then, continue them to that date, there isn't any question about it. Corrie: That was going to be my next question. Do we need to go ahead with the 45 day -- since they requested it. Okay. And in reference to Mr. Bird's request, do we need to just table the request for appeal and, then, open the public hearings on the other three? Does that satisfy the rules? I'm thinking that's what we should do. Anyway -- Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 15 of 51 Bird: I would move that we table PP 03-001, request to appeal Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission's denial of Silverleaf Subdivision preliminary plat by Shawn Nickel, Crestline Development, LLC, 2683 West Chinden Boulevard to July 15th, 2003. Nary: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded to table the request for appeal of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission's denial of Silverleaf Subdivision preliminary plat until -- tabled until July the 15th, 2003. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. Opposed no? All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: So, at this time I will open the Public Hearing, then -- the continued Public Hearing on Item No. 9, 10 and 11, which is a request for annexation and zoning, preliminary plat, and a variance on Silverleaf Subdivision and having no one wish to testify at this time, I will ask for a continuance request to postpone -- or continue it until the 15th of July. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I would move that we continue Public Hearing AZ 02-030, request for annexation and zoning of 38.65 acres from RUT to R-4 zones for the proposed Silverleaf Subdivision by Crestline Development, LLC, 2683 West Chinden Boulevard to July 15th, 2003. De Weerd: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded. Any discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Mr. Mayor, I move that we continue Public Hearing PP 02-031, request for preliminary plat approval of 72 building lots and eight other lots on 38.65 acres in a propose R-4 zone for proposed Silverleaf Subdivision by Crestline Development, LLC, 2683 West Chinden Boulevard to July 15th, 2003. De Weerd: Second. Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 16 of 51 Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded to continue the Public Hearing until July the 15th on PP 02-031. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. Opposed no? All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I would move that we continue Public Hearing VAR 03-006, the request for a variance to exceed 1,000 foot maximum block length and variance to open space requirement for Silverleaf Subdivision by Crestline Development, 2683 West Chinden Boulevard to July 15th, 2003. Nary: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded to continue the Public Hearing on VAR 03-006 of Silverleaf Subdivision until July 15th, 2003. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Opposed no? All ayes. Motion is carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 12: Continued Public Hearing from April 1, 2003: AZ 03-001 Request for annexation and zoning of 10.006 acres from RUT to L-O zones for Central Valley Baptist Church by Central Valley Baptist Church – east of North Ten Mile Road and south of West Pine Avenue: Corrie: Item No. 12 is a continued Public Hearing from the April 1st, 2003, request for annexation and zoning of 10.006 acres from RUT to L-O zone for Central Valley Baptist Church by the Central Valley Baptist Church, east of Ten Mile Road -- north Ten Mile Road and south of West Pine Avenue. At this time I will continue the Public Hearing on the request for annexation and zoning and invite staff's comments first. Hawkins-Clark: Thank you, Mayor, Members of the Council. I did give a summation of the annexation request two weeks ago. As you may recall, the applicant was not present at the meeting and Council was not comfortable moving ahead, so I can go through anything you'd like, but since I have already entered into the record staff's report, I'll just either stand for questions or leave it open for the applicant. Corrie: Okay. Any questions of staff at this point? Would the representative of Central Valley Baptist Church -- since this is a continued Public Hearing I need to swear you in. Is the testimony you are about to give the Council the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Houston: It is. Corrie: Name and address, please, for the record. Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 17 of 51 Houston: I'm Doug Houston. I'm with Olson & Associates, Architects, 5680 East Franklin Road, Nampa. Representing Central Valley Baptist Church. We have nothing to add to staff's comments and we have reviewed the conditions of approval and have no issues with those conditions. Corrie: Okay. Thank you. Any comments, questions from staff -- or Council. Excuse me. Bird: I have none. Corrie: Okay. Thank you. Is there anyone else here that would like to issue testimony? Okay. Council? Further discussion under the Public Hearing? Hearing none, I will entertain a motion, then, to close the continued Public Hearing on this request. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we close the Public Hearing for the Central Valley Baptist Church by Central Valley Baptist Church, AZ 02-001, the annexation and zoning of 10.006 acres. Nary: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded to close the Public Hearing. Is there any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Opposed no? All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: First discussion? Hearing none, I will entertain a motion, then, for the request -- motion for the request of annexation and zoning. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move that we approve AZ 03-001, the request for annexation and zoning of 10.006 acres from RUT to L-O zones for the Central Valley Baptist Church by Central Valley Baptist Church, east of North Ten Mile Road and south of West Pine Avenue, and incorporate staff comments and for the attorney to draw up the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order. De Weerd: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded to approve the request for annexation and zoning. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll-call vote, Mr. Berg. Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 18 of 51 Roll-Call: McCandless, yea; Nary, yea; de Weerd, yea; Bird, yea. Corrie: All ayes. Motion for request for annexation and zoning is approved. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 13: Continued Public Hearing from April 8, 2003: AZ 03-004 Request for Montvue annexation and zoning of 1.37 acres from R-1 to L-O zones for Medical Clinic by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc. – 360 East Montvue Drive: Corrie: Item No. 13 is a continued Public Hearing from April the 9th, 2003, at the request of the applicant of Montvue Medical Clinic. This is a question for annexation and zoning of 1.37 acres from R-1 to L-O zones for Montvue Medical Clinic by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc., 360 East Montvue Drive. At this time I will continue the Public Hearing and ask staff's comments. Hawkins-Clark: Mayor, Members of the Council, this item is for annexation and zoning. It's a 1.36 acre lot, located in the Montvue Subdivision. It's highlighted there on the center of the screen. St. Luke's Medical Center is immediately south. South Eagle Road. As you well know, there is a signal here on South Eagle Road just north of the interchange that serves a private street that was constructed with the St. Luke's 1999 -- or, I'm sorry, was approved with St. Luke's 1999 expansion. The entire Montvue Subdivision, as you may recall, was a part of the discussion during the Comprehensive Plan amendment last year, the year before. It is designated as commercial on the Comprehensive Plan and there are policies, as was noted in Pinnacle Engineer's application that do support office and medical type uses in commercial -- commercially designated land on the Comprehensive Plan. So, the request to L-O does comply with the Comprehensive Plan designation. It would be the first of what I believe -- 24 lots in Montvue Subdivision. Most of them are about an acre in size. This would be the first request within that subdivision to annex to the city. The subject site here is on the aerial photo. As you can see, there is a large lot. There are single family detached houses around the lot. The St. Luke's project is well built out now. The private St. Luke's Drive does extend all the way back to serve the Touchmark senior center now and there is a sidewalk -- well, a pathway, an asphalt pathway on the north side of that sidewalk that goes the full length from Eagle Road all the way back to the Touchmark site. Here is the elevations for the proposed building that were submitted with the application. The structure is proposed to be two story. Just as a reminder, this application is not proposing any development. It is strictly an annexation and zoning request, but we did ask them to submit basic concepts of what they are proposing to do there, just for the Council's understanding and edification. So, the ordinance typically would just annex the ground, but this is what they have submitted with the application of what they are intending to do with the property, even though there is not a conditional use right now or a plat of any kind. These photos are a little difficult to see, so I will just go on to the site plan that they have submitted. Again, it's a concept. The main point of discussion at the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing was the point of vehicular access between Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 19 of 51 Montvue Drive within the subdivision and accessing St. Luke's Drive, the private street here. Ada County Highway District Commission did not allow a public street. They -- their conditions, again, are -- during annexations are just what they would apply should a development application be submitted. So, they put a caveat in there, but their point being that they don't -- they do not want to see a public street connecting Montvue to the private St. Luke's Drive, so they have proposed a 29 foot wide private road that would be within a 40 foot easement. There is existing evergreen-type plantings that are on this western side of the entry road. The entry to the lot would be off of here on this west side and, then, parking, generally, around the north and the west, with the building situated here in the center, the new structure. They are proposing a sidewalk on just one side of the street, the east side, since they would have to remove all these plantings and, essentially, eliminate the buffer between that and the single family lot. Two agreements, as I understand, from the applicant Clint Boyle, have been executed since the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. One of those agreements is between St. Luke's and the homeowners association that sets up their terms for the access and the other agreement is between the lot owner slash developer and the homeowners association in terms of use of that private drive and access out to the signal. They are private agreements. The city is not a party to them. We have not received a copy. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation, I believe, is agreeable by the applicant. The Planning and Zoning hearing did have a lot of discussion, as I say, about that access and there is a lot of history, as I believe the Mayor and Councilman Bird and Councilwoman de Weerd will recollect on the -- the St. Luke's project. We are requiring that a certificate of zoning compliance be submitted prior to any redevelopment on the site and if they are looking for anything other than standard limited office uses, they would have to do a conditional use, which, of course, would involve a new Public Hearing that everyone would be notified. We are requiring a development agreement that outlines basic L-O uses and other than that I'll stand for any questions. Corrie: Council, any questions of staff? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Okay. Since this is a continued Public Hearing, I will invite the applicant. Is the testimony you are about to give the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Boyle: It is. Corrie: Name and address, please. Boyle: Clint Boyle with Pinnacle Engineers. Business address 12552 West Executive Drive in Boise, Idaho. Mayor and Council Members, it's a pleasure to be in front of you, as always, with another project that we believe will be beneficial to the city. This particular project -- the overview of this has been well presented by the staff. We have worked with the staff extensively on this project, appreciate their efforts on this. This particular area does have a history. Many of the Council members know more about Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 20 of 51 that history than I do that have been on the Council for some time. This proposal in front of you tonight is for an annexation request on 1.37 acres of land with a limited office zoning designation, which is in conformance, we believe, with the Comprehensive Plan and that would be the recent Comprehensive Plan that was adopted by the Council. There are findings that support that. Those are outlined in the record and I'll leave it at that. I just want to limit my comments and indicate that we are in agreement with the recommended annexation and zoning conditions of approval, as outlined in the recommendation to the City Council that's been presented. I believe that St. Luke's presented the agreement -- the access agreement to the city clerk for access to St. Luke's Drive, as well as access across this individual property for the Montvue residents. I won't belabor those points too extensively here, other than to mention that these agreements I know from the neighbors of Montvue and from St. Luke's and others in the area have taken quite some time to put together. There has been a lot of effort that have gone into them and my understanding of them is that something has been reached that's acceptable to everyone, which will allow for access out of Montvue Subdivision as we know it, which would be the residential lots in this area, will allow for an additional outlet to St. Luke's Drive and allow them access to the signal light at Eagle Road. So, we think that this project is a key to providing that access for the neighborhood. The developers on this project are certainly receptive of allowing and facilitating that access and believe that it will be beneficial to the neighborhood. With that said, I will stand for any questions. Again, just reiterate that we are in agreement with all the conditions listed in the staff's recommendation to City Council. Thank you. Corrie: Thank you. Any questions of Mr. Boyle? Okay. Boyle: Thank you. Corrie: Is there anyone else from the public that would like to issue testimony at this time? Council, further discussion on the Public Hearing? Okay. Hearing none, Mr. Bird. Bird: We have got another -- Corrie: Oh. Okay. I didn't see him. Is the testimony you are about to give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Hall: Yes, sir. Corrie: Name and address, please. Hall: Mayor Corrie, Commission Members, my name is Chuck Hall, I'm the director of architecture and construction services for St. Luke's, 520 South Eagle Road. I believe that there was a copy of our settlement agreement between St. Luke's and Montvue that was sent to the Mayor and Council Members by our attorney approximately a month ago. That was from Bob Burns of Moffatt Thomas, et al. Some of you know the history, some of you probably don't want to know the history, but the success is that St. Luke's and the vast majority of the property owners in Montvue have reached an agreement Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 21 of 51 that allows Montvue access to and through our property to the traffic signal. That agreement also says that the location of that road will be determined by those people who have signed that agreement. So, I appreciate that you're not approving a plan tonight. I just want to make sure that everybody is clear that we will work with all of the people who sign this agreement to jointly agree on the location of that road. I think the applicant is very aware of that. So, just with that, if there is any questions, I will be willing to answer any questions you have. Corrie: Thank you. Any questions? Bird: He answered the only question I had. That's what I wanted to hear. Corrie: Is there anyone else that would like to issue testimony? Yes, sir. Reiswig: My name is Don Reiswig. I live at 3360 North Montvue Drive. Corrie: Raise your right hand, please. Is the testimony you are about to give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Reiswig: It is. Corrie: Thank you. Reiswig: Okay. I live at 3360, which, if you look on the map here, it's -- as you come in off of Eagle Drive and would make a -- yeah. It's the third house in, the third lot in, and as a resident of Montvue I'm glad to see that the master plan was voted as commercial use. I'm all for that. I'm all for the development of medical office buildings or other type of buildings that are developed in there, but what I am against at the present time is the use of Montvue Drive on Eagle for an access for a business, because of the extreme danger of an accident there and I would -- I didn't get here in time for the -- to hear the presentation, but I -- I would -- as a resident would like to see this not go forward until there is a time that there is a satisfactory connection either to St. Luke's light or until the connection between Touchmark's Louise Drive and East Montvue Drive are made. And that's all. Corrie: Okay. Any questions? Bird: I have none. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I guess what I'm curious -- and I think I understand your point, but were you concerned that this -- that this access point here won't be developed when this building is developed? Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 22 of 51 Reiswig: I am -- my concern -- my concern is that if this is developed in this location, you know, if it is developed, then, that's fine. But until the point in time that either this is developed or this connection is made, that there not be a medical or any other type of business allowed in there, because my wife has almost been killed, I have almost been hit numerous times getting in and out of their and until -- only until a bona fide, safe egress and ingress is accomplished -- until that time I think that it's just asking for somebody to get killed out there. Nary: So that I'm clear, sir, what you want is us to make the condition that says that before they can begin -- before they get a certificate to occupy this building, this has to be opened. Because once this is opened, no one is going to drive down your street to go to the back. Reiswig: That's correct. Nary: Okay. All right. Corrie: Thank you. Is the testimony you are about to give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Butler: It is. Corrie: Name and address, please. Butler: JoAnn Butler, 251 East Front Street. Just a short response to the person that was just up here to testify before the Council. As you know, the ACHD has made a finding for the city that the safety on the access presently on Eagle is safe and I think that's correct, that testimony is best directed to ACHD, perhaps, but your staff report does show that the ACHD has approved that access point and so we would be opposed to any condition of approval that would limit this. And, also, as Mr. Hall has pointed out on behalf of the neighbors, the exact access point has not yet been determined, because that will be determined with all the neighbors and St. Luke's. Thank you. Corrie: Thank you. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I just have a question. So, ACHD has said that access out onto Eagle is safe? Butler: Correct. I think that in your staff -- I mean they have approved that access point. I don't know that they have said that, but they certainly did approve that. Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 23 of 51 De Weerd: Okay. Nary: It is hard to get in and out of there. Corrie: Yes, ma'am. Is the testimony you are about to give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Griffith: Yes. My name is Tricia Griffith, 3295 North Montvue Drive in Meridian. I just want to say that we never had a chance to make any kind of comments to ACHD and neither did St. Luke's or Montvue, so, you know, I guess I really don't understand the procedure, but before the road is built and -- they have on there private. I would like to make sure -- we wanted it to be public to St. Luke's Road and so I think that discussion hasn't been brought up and, like I said, we never got a chance to make any kind of comments to ACHD on that, so -- so I hope -- you know, what they are talking about tonight, it doesn't have the discussion about -- regarding the road. Corrie: Okay. If I'm understanding this correctly, all we are going to do is annex into the city. We are not doing any site plans or anything like that. Griffith: Right. And that's what I just wanted to make sure -- Corrie: And you will get notified when they do this when it comes before Council. Griffith: Right. Yeah. But I'm saying, you know, if ACHD said that the Montvue entrance was a safe place, you know, we never had a chance to make comments regarding that with ACHD, so -- Corrie: Okay. Griffith: Okay. Thanks. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Mrs. Griffith. And I don't know if you can answer this or not, but I sat through a lot of hearings on this Comprehensive Plan and I seem to recall on the Montvue Sub, every time that was brought forward it was brought as a -- from all the property owners that there was a collective desire to make this commercial, to collectively sell this, so what happened, where did it die? Griffith: Oh, we don't have a problem with that. Nary: Oh. Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 24 of 51 Griffith: What I'm talking about is if we are going to -- if we are not going to discuss about the road, I don't have a problem. You know, I just want to make sure that the connection is public to St. Luke's Road. Nary: I understand. I guess I kept thinking when we were going to see something from Montvue Sub it was some large group development, some large property development. I guess that's not -- not in the offing today? Griffith: Well, I wish someone would come in. If you know somebody, we'd welcome that. Nary: I think that's what you guys told us. That's why I -- Griffith: Well, we are hoping. Nary: One little piece of it. That's what I guess thought was -- Griffith: Well, we were hoping and there was several buyers, but it took us awhile to -- to come up with an agreement and stuff, so they kind of went other places. But we are still looking. Nary: Thank you. Corrie: Is there anyone else to issue testimony? Nichols: Mr. Mayor, I have a question of staff, if I may. Corrie: Okay. Mr. Nichols. Nichols: Brad, with the -- if the annexation and zoning is approved with conditions, as recommended by the Commission, will there need to be any kind of hearings in front of ACHD if they want to put up a building that complies with that limited office zoning that they seek? Hawkins-Clark: Mr. Mayor, Mr. Nichols. No. The staff report that I have in the public record is -- states that the commission did hold a hearing February 19th, 2003, at noon. There was a tech review meeting that was held February 7th and, then, a hearing February 19th at noon. But to get to the specifics of your question, no, if it moves ahead as the P&Z Commission has before you, an office type of use would strictly be a building permit process. We would forward a copy of our certificate of zoning compliance application to the Highway District, who, in turn, typically, just applies their conditions that were put on the annexation. But there is not at that point, typically, hearing at the Highway District. Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 25 of 51 Nichols: Okay. Just so that we understand, the things that we have seen up here that shows a private road and the rest of it, that's merely concepts and they are binding on the developer as such? Hawkins-Clark: That's correct. The wording is -- on number three of the conditions does say that the agreement, referring to the development agreement, may require construction similar to the site plan offered. So, I guess that's as much a call of yours as not, I mean whether or not we can put those kind of specific conditions on an annexation, that -- if you agree with the zoning and you believe that the L-O zone standards and dimensions are adequate as they are in our ordinance today, typically, we have said let's not require conditional use permits, etc., in the future, because we think that the L-O zone standards and dimensions are adequate. But I think that there is a legitimate place -- there is a development agreement process to add additional conditions should you desire. Corrie: I feel something coming on here. Butler: Thank you. JoAnn Butler. Just to react to that. This is an annexation and a rezone and we -- as staff has pointed out and P&Z as recommended to the Council, we do meet all the conditions for annexation and rezone. So, this would not be a conditional rezone, which is not something that we have in Idaho, so I think that I just wanted to address that public street. I wouldn't expect to see it as a condition. We do know that the neighbors have wanted this public street access. The developer of this property, if this actual access lines up in this area, if all the neighbors should agree, they are certainly not opposed to that. And if anyone can persuade ACHD that that's appropriate, you know, they are not opposed to it. We just don't -- we just know what ACHD has told us and the city so far is that they do not want to see it as public. But, like I say, if the neighbors are successful as a group in asking ACHD -- getting their approval on a public, we will be more than happy with that. Thank you. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Ms. Butler. So, I guess what I'm wondering, then, is it sounds like we only have a couple of options. I mean we can access this property. Would your client, then, be opposed to us annexing this property and putting a zone that required all uses on it require a Conditional Use Permit? Butler: Oh, yes, I guess we would. I think that -- Nary: But we can still do that. Butler: If you wanted to change the application. In essence, you have an application for an annexation and rezone to L-O and findings that show that L-O would meet the Comprehensive Plan. If you -- you would either -- I think you would either deny the L-O Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 26 of 51 for some reason that -- saying that it somehow didn't meet your findings. But to change the -- I guess -- I don't think you're asking if we wanted to change the application to some different conditional use -- Nary: Well, all I'm hearing, I guess, from the other testimony is the concern about, again, increasing the traffic, increasing the travel through Montvue. What their concerns is -- and I think what I heard Mr. Hawkins-Clark say is that if we approve this as requested, they can build this building and begin -- and open this business and if the private agreements fall through and nothing ever happens, they won't have access onto St. Luke's Drive, they will have to drive all the way through Montvue Subdivision to get to this building until that happens some day or the street the other direction gets built through or something -- I mean it sounds pretty sketchy to me, so I guess -- Butler: Let me see if I can make it less sketchy, then. Nary: Okay. Butler: Because this was discussed a great deal at the Planning and Zoning Commission and there were a great more neighbors at that time that testified, because the Planning and Zoning Commissioners asked many of these questions at the same time and asked what were the neighbors thinking. This annexation and rezone that was proposed, ACHD reviewed and said the capacity -- the streets, both in Montvue and on Eagle were appropriate and that the use was not going to -- they could approve it as is and that your staff report shows that. You do have an individual here tonight that has some concerns that was not the concerns of the neighbors who -- at the Planning and Zoning Commission said that they agreed with -- I don't want to put words in their mouth, but they understood that, yes, that's how traffic would come into this area if one of the other two connections was not made or if both those connections are not made. We have no plan to build at this time. So, that has not been an issue and let me not forget some of the other issues that you had. So, I think you have the issue was the connection from Montvue a problem? No. The neighbors testified to the P&Z that we have -- our desire is to get this -- get it commercial. The city saw fit to make it commercial in its Comprehensive Plan and that's exactly what this application does. It supports that concept that -- the Comprehensive Plan and the neighbors' perspective. When they talk -- you know, I think you also have an issue about the public road connection to St. Luke's. Clearly, whether it's public or private, the connection is the same. I mean, obviously, traffic is going to pass over it in the same fashion. So, it will be cloaked with either way. So, we are just saying that -- and which we have said the neighbors, too, and said -- invited their attorney to make sure there was an easement agreement in place, so at least they had the private connection, but either way, public, private, the same traffic will pass over it. We are just saying that if they really see a need to make it public and can convince ACHD for some reason having it public, versus private -- actually, I don't see the difference, because I think opening it will allow the traffic to flow through either way. So, I hope that answers your question and makes it a little -- Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 27 of 51 Nary: Thank you. Butler: Okay. Thank you. Corrie: I don't want to get in a debate here. If you have got something new to add, come up, if you want to come up, but, otherwise, I'm not going to get into a back and forth thing here, so -- just your name and address. Name, please. Reiswig: Don Reiswig. 3360 North Montvue. And I don't want to get into it either, I just want to make it very clear I was at the P&Z meeting and the plan that we saw at the P&Z meeting -- and if you talk to the people from Planning and Zoning, that their impression was that this road would line up with the St. Luke's access directly across and at the P&Z meeting this lady said that we are not here to talk about whether -- about the placement of the road, it's strictly about annexing and changing this to an L-O zone. With going -- if this is -- in the master plan it's designed as commercial and commercial, my understanding, is that we have to have a Public Hearing and Conditional Use Permit application. With an L-O zoning there is nothing. They can walk in there tomorrow and get a building permit. So, I want to make -- I just wanted to clarify that there was -- that limited understanding on this previous application in front of P&Z and the staff at that time recommended to the Planning and Zoning Commission to not pass it at that particular night. Corrie: Okay. Thank you. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I guess I will make a couple of comments while the Public Hearing is still open. When we get requests for annexation, generally, a plan accompanies it and the benefit of that is that we get all the information at the same time, we can make a determination that this, indeed, will be a benefit to our community. It gives the residents an opportunity to see what that benefit will be and an ability to comment on issues that will affect them. We did, indeed, say limited office does not have some of the traditional affects that most uses that we require a CUP, so that neighbors can comment are generally not an issue. But that this has issues associated with it and it is an issue of access and while I am very pleased to hear that St. Luke's and the neighbors have come up with some kind of agreement and there will be an access, there still seems to be road blocks to that -- sorry for the pun. But by creating an office complex in the middle of the neighborhood that, in my opinion -- and I'm not a traffic engineer, but I would not want to be going in and out of that Montvue Subdivision onto Eagle and I certainly don't want to create a situation where that limited office building is built before some of these access issues onto this St. Luke's Road or into Touchmark happen beforehand, I'm not going to be responsibility for that and I can't support it, without the conditions that the access issues are taken care of and if those conditions can be put in a development agreement, that's great. We can do this. Traditionally, this Council does Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 28 of 51 not like to annex without a plan. And there is very good reasons for that and this underscores all of those reasons. So, that's just where one Council member stands on this and I did it in the Public Hearing, so -- Ms. Butler, I know, always has a comment, we can accept that. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: And I will, I guess, add one other thing, I guess. I would concur with what Councilwoman de Weerd said. If this -- Brad, could you back up to the -- I guess it was -- this one is fine. If we didn't have this access point here, in my opinion, we would never approve this. We would never approve the business development of this subdivision this far away from this major roadway and having all the access in and out of here. That's what I think. I don't think we would ever approve it. So, without this connection, there is no way we would ever approve it. This isn't done. I'm not sure -- I guess I'm not ready to approve this knowing that this isn't completed and that the potential is that this can get built, developed, open for business and all of the traffic is in and out of here. ACHD may have said that this entranceway is safe -- safe is different than accessible. Every one of these people came and told us how inaccessible their homes are now. I can't see having any business bringing additional traffic through here is going to make better than what it currently exists. So, until that -- until I have more assurance that this access point is going to be there, I'm very uncomfortable approving this as it is. Butler: JoAnn Butler, 251 East Front Street. For Councilmember de Weerd and Councilmember Nary, this has -- made the comment that you would not make this annexation and zoning, because somehow you would feel responsible and somehow you're saying you would never make this annexation and rezoning request. Let me try to back up and ask you, I guess, why. Partly because this is on a public street and we do know that this is the first of the rezone in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan that all of the neighbors in this area have asked for. This is -- it has to start somewhere. It has to start somewhere. And ACHD -- and, of course, you're not responsible. ACHD has made the determination that the capacity is such that this is -- this is can be appropriate. And so I think that is your traffic engineer that's provided you with that information. I appreciate your -- although I appreciate the thoughts, I know that we have to get started somewhere and let me also say that there is a development agreement. Your conditions of approval require a development agreement and where the P&Z seemed -- well, sorry, on the other staff -- on the other slide that shows the plan. Can you put that up for me, Brad? What the P&Z recommended was that this be part of the development agreement, because they are very much aware that the Council likes to know, so that the neighbors know what is proposed for the site. So, this is part of the development agreement. Your condition of approval said that the only thing that would not be part of a development agreement is the issue of this private drive. The P&Z really talked a great deal about the fact that there are private agreements and there are public decisions and the two don't cross each other. When -- you have your standards that you have to meet with regard to annexation and zoning and we have complied with that. In Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 29 of 51 addition, the neighbors and St. Luke's -- and we are now one of those neighbors, because we have purchased the property and so we take subject to the agreement with St. Luke's and the easement that has been placed on the property. So, those private agreements are in place, but they have nothing to do with -- or are separate from the public decision that you make based on your findings and facts and conditions and your findings and facts and those criteria set out in the ordinance. And so I would have to ask the Council -- we see no -- no criteria that we don't meet and so if you were to not approve the annexation and zoning, we'd ask you to be very clear what standards we don't meet. But I would not -- just so I could be as cut and dried as that, I mean if there is something else that I can -- that's not being explained to the Council and we can do a better job of it, please, ask those questions. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I guess I was clear in my own mind what my points were and that is land use and transportation planning are closely linked and I know we are not the road authority, but we are responsible for public safety and we have a responsibility to our community not to plan for a catastrophe. And, I'm sorry, I really strongly believe that if we do this and it's allowed without a Public Hearing to be developed, without those accesses being resolved, either out into Touchmark or whatever it's called now, or down into St. Luke's, that we are not serving the public trust that has been placed upon us and that is on the safety of our community and, I will tell you what, no one cares whether it was our decision or ACHD's, I know who will get the phone and it will be the man sitting to the left of me and I don't think it's a phone call he wants to get and it's certainly not one that I want to promote. Butler: Mr. Mayor, Council Members, and Councilmember de Weerd, as you know, that this is discussion is -- in essence, has been resolved, because St. Luke's and the neighbors have signed an agreement that will allow an access either to Touchmark or somewhere along this line. So, all that remains is for them to decide exactly where it is. So, an access will be made, and so I think that the private parties have basically taken that decision -- made that decision for the City Council. I mean they have said we are going to provide an access in one of two places, either through the Touchmark development or along this line. We would love to see it right here and we will probably ask the neighbors to push for that, but one of two things they are going to decide and so I think that decision has been made, you have got two recorded agreements that point that out. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: Just to finish up my comments is I -- and I appreciate that St. Luke's and the neighbors have been able to reach the agreement. It's still an issue of timing and the Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 30 of 51 timing is the issue that is of concern to me. I know how long this fight has been going on -- or this -- how long the negotiations for this agreement have taken and it's been a lengthy process. That could be in well -- years before we get where that access is going to be or when Touchmark goes into it. So, we could annex and rezone this and say a building cannot be built until those agreements are made. I think that would solve my concerns, because, then, at least I know that they are not going to be going onto Eagle Road through the only available access of today. And so, you know -- and I don't have a problem with tying it to this -- to this drawing and with those conditions. All I'm saying you told us you did not want those conditions on there. Without those conditions on there I certainly do not feel comfortable approving that today. Butler: Well, Mr. Mayor, Councilwoman, if -- I can't speak for my client as I stand here. If you don't mind if I confer with my client just a moment. Corrie: Let me ask you a question to be clear in my mind. If the -- an entrance is put in to Touchmark, you will not put in that road that connects there to St. Luke's Drive? Butler: I believe that the agreement between St. Luke's and the neighbors calls for one access point. Corrie: So if we say put it in there, that that will be the connection, then, you will not put in the one at Touchmark? Butler: First of all, this is a private agreement -- that would be a private agreement that you would be talking about between St. Luke's and the neighbors and I think they would -- the neighbors would probably balk at the city saying you must put it in X place, because -- Corrie: No, I'm not saying that. Butler: Oh. Okay. Corrie: If we -- the way I'm reading this, we are working on a time issue, like Mrs. de Weerd said. If we pass this without any condition other than the L-O, you don't have to come back to us and if you put it for a Conditional Use Permit -- Butler: Correct. Corrie: Then, if you -- tomorrow you put it in and the road to Touchmark isn't put in for a year and a half, that's what we are talking about. We -- how do we get those people in there. So, we need to have some kind of surety on the time and, personally, I'm like they are, I would like to see that road put in and I'd like to see both of them put in. I mean that's -- I don't know what the neighbors are saying, but we got to have some kind of surety that that doesn't go in there tomorrow, because it could. Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 31 of 51 Butler: Well, Mr. Mayor, I did hear that and if you would allow -- if the Council would allow a short -- maybe a recess to confer with my client for just a moment. Corrie: Okay. Go ahead. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: It might be appropriate to have a -- Corrie: Let's just have a ten minute break and, then, we will come back at 20 minutes to 9:00. (Recess.) Corrie: All right. I will come out of recess on the Public Hearing on Montvue Medical Clinic. And Ms. Butler. Butler: Mr. Mayor, City Council Members, as we took this recess and we discussed this with our client's representatives -- our clients aren't here right now tonight, we would ask -- and also in talking to the city attorney, it's clear that the Council hasn't had the opportunity to review those recorded settlement agreement and the easement and we would like the Council to have that opportunity. We would also like to directly talk with our client. So, if we could ask deferral to your next available hearing, so that you have that opportunity and we do, too, and we can discuss this further at that time. Corrie: Would May the 6th be okay? Butler: May the 6th sounds fine. Corrie: Council, you have heard the request of Council. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I would move that we continue the Public Hearing on AZ 03-004, the request for annexation and zoning for Montvue Medical Clinic to our May 6, 2003, meeting. McCandless: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded to continue this Public Hearing until 5/6 of 2003. Any further comments? All those in favor of the motion say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 32 of 51 MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 14: Continued Public Hearing from April 8, 2003: Dust Abatement Ordinance: Corrie: Item No. 14 is a continued Public Hearing from April the 8th, 2003, Dust Abatement Ordinance, and we do have a letter from one of the -- David McKinnon that he would like to continue this and to kind of get everything tied up in a package with the rest of the Treasure Valley, so I would -- perhaps we can make that one come in, then, on the 13th, Brad, of May. All right. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we continue the Public Hearing for the Dust Abatement Ordinance until May 13th, 2003. Nary: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Opposed no? All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 15: TE 03-002 Request to allow a one year Time Extension for Conditional Baltic Place Subdivision Use Permit for by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc. – south of Franklin Road and Baltic Street: Corrie: Item No. 15 is a request to allow a one year time extension for a Conditional Use Permit for Baltic Place Subdivision by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc., south of Franklin Road and Baltic Street. Staff got any comments? Hawkins-Clark: Mr. Mayor, I guess the only comment I would make is that the -- there was a variance, as you may recall, that was approved for the plat, so just not to confuse the Council and Mayor, that it is a different request than what we heard two months ago. The conditional use permits have 18 months to begin construction and the plats have the 12 month time frame attached to them, so there is a different ordinance that we are dealing with, so that's just a clarification point there. Other than that, you should have the March 28 request from Clint Boyle of Pinnacle Engineers that outlines the ACHD issue there. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 33 of 51 Nary: So, Brad, I guess the bottom line, this one is -- the other issue wasn't timely, this one is timely, because of the longer time period that's allowed and I didn't see any objection to this from staff. Hawkins-Clark: That's correct. Nary: Great. Thank you. Corrie: Any comments, Clint? De Weerd: He agrees. Corrie: Okay. Let the record show that the Pinnacle Engineers representative agrees, so I will entertain a motion for the extension. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move that we approve the one year time extension until May 1st, 2004, for the Conditional Use Permit for Baltic Place Subdivision by Pinnacle Engineers, south of Franklin Road and Baltic Street. Nary: Second. Corrie: Okay. Any further discussion? All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 16: FP 03-016 Request for Final Plat approval of 41 building lots and 10 other Baldwin Park No. 3 lots on 15.01 acres in an R-8 zone for by Capitol Development – ¼ mile south of McMillan Road, east of Linder Road: Corrie: Item No. 16 is a request for final plat approval of 41 building lots and ten other lots on 15.1 acres in an R-8 zone for Baldwin Park No. 3 by Capital Development, one quarter mile south of McMillan Road, east of Linder Road. Staff comments. Hawkins-Clark: Thank you, Mayor, Members of the Council. The third phase of Baldwin is here before you. The screen shows phase one that has already been recorded. Phase three -- phase two is north of the phase that's shown there. Phase three is further to the east and connects here with phase one and the staff report that was, actually, dated today, that's just showing the hearing date, is what those dates are showing now, just in case you're kind of wondering why they show the current date. It was received by the clerk's office on the 11th. There is a couple of items just to clarify. We have received a written response from Steve Arnold of Briggs Engineering responding to our Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 34 of 51 recommended conditions. The main one to point out is item number eight, site specific condition A, 8-A, that deals with the Colorado spruce that they are proposing within their landscape median. Again, the entry road is on the north portion of the plat here and they have two planter islands. Phase one was approved with these conifers. Our landscape ordinance does, actually, prohibit conifers within required street buffer areas, for obvious reasons. Some of those conifers get up to 30 feet wide and can be a hazard. The Colorado Spruce -- we received a letter from Eagle Nursery -- design manager at Eagle Nursery, Jason Aire, he states that the Engleman Spruce, actually, is ten to 20 feet wide and is probably the narrowest within that family. It gets to around ten to 12 feet wide. So, within a 25 foot wide planter -- their point is that the evergreens are not going to cause any kind of hazard at maturity. I guess the point on this is that we -- it's not a required landscape area. These medians are put in at the option of developers. I think, technically, since it's not a required landscape area, if it's deemed to be safe, we are okay under the ordinance to approve these. Phase one was approved with them. Their argument is that it's just a continuation of the plan and style that they have already established within their entry corridor. So, I think as long as the Colorado Spruce is prohibited and this Engleman is the one that is approved with the plan, that there is no safety issues involved in terms of the width of the tree. I think that was really the main issue. There was a clarification on fencing on the south side. The White Drain does abut the south side of this phase and they will just continue their perimeter fencing along the residential lots all along the drain. There is agreement that they will put the shorter fence along the common lot that is running north and south here for our standard micropath conditions. That's it. Thanks. Corrie: Questions from staff? Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Brad, because I can't remember what the other phases are, did you say this is a micropath right here? Is that what that is? Hawkins-Clark: Yes. Well, technically, it's not a micropath in that it's greater than 250 feet long, so -- Nary: So, it's a macro micropath. Hawkins-Clark: But, yes, they are proposing a five foot wide path in there. Nary: And is this a street here? Hawkins-Clark: They are both pedestrian only. Nary: So, where does this path go, just right here and these people's back yard? Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 35 of 51 Hawkins-Clark: Yes. That's correct. Nary: Okay. That's what the other phase is? Because I don't remember. I'm sorry. I just don't remember. Is that -- is that in the other phases like that, too? Hawkins-Clark: It is. Corrie: Any other questions? Okay. Is the applicant here? Nothing to say, other than the request -- Arnold: I will stand for questions, if you need them. Corrie: Okay. So, just repeat what you just said. Arnold: Steve Arnold, Briggs Engineering. I'm here representing Capital Development. With staff's comments, we are in support of the staff report and we will stand for any questions. Corrie: Okay. Thank you. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I just wanted to ask a question on the micropath, because I don't remember it either. It's going to be paved? Arnold: The north-south one? De Weerd: Uh-huh. Arnold: Yeah. There will be a pathway within it. De Weerd: And, then, a fence on both sides? Arnold: Correct. De Weerd: And it goes clear up to the property line, so there is no landscaping on either side? Arnold: It's a 20 foot wide island. It will be a five foot wide pathway. De Weerd: And what goes on each side? Arnold: I believe that developer is putting in some grass and some rock to retain drainage. That was a comment that's on one of your staff reports. Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 36 of 51 De Weerd: Okay. Brad, have we -- do we have standards for that, so some of the issues of roots pushing asphalt up and those kind of things have -- do we have anything to kind of deal with standards on these micropaths? Hawkins-Clark: Mayor and Councilwoman de Weerd, we have no adopted design standards in the zoning ordinance or subdivision ordinance at this point in time. The parks department in their master comp plan, which is yet to be adopted, does have three different types for the public pathway system that talk about widths of the hard surface and the landscaping on both sides, but in a subdivision where they are providing their open space and the design issue certainly will come up and we do have a condition in their preliminary plat that talks about the drainage can't come off and settle at the bottom of these fences that are along both sides of that 20 foot open space. You know, they are going to have to be shorter fences. So, the preliminary plat does put a few conditions on the design of these, but in terms of adopted ordinances, no, we don't, other than our -- just a micropath, which, like I say, is just 250 feet, it's just intended to sort of connect two streets or to connect two subdivisions or to connect to a school, but in a longer linear open space like this, it's really just case-by-case in terms of the design standards. Corrie: That brings up a question. Is that going to be turned over to the homeowners, then, after it's in, that they have to keep it up? Arnold: They will maintain that pathway. Corrie: Okay. Arnold: If I can follow up on some of the comments. My client is the same client that did Bristol Heights. They are -- I don't know if you're familiar with that. They have extensive pathways throughout there and I know that from their experience there that they are going to make sure that whatever planting that's put in there doesn't hinder or reduce the micropath or the longevity. So, you're not going to get roots pushing things up. De Weerd: Thank you, Steve. Corrie: That's good, because we don't want to get complaints later. Thank you. Okay. Any other Council questions? Okay. I will entertain a motion on the request for final plat approval of Baldwin Park No. 3 with the conditions. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I move we approve the request for final plat of 41 building lots and ten other lots on 15.01 acres in an R-8 zone for Baldwin Park No. 3 by Capital Development, to -- I think there was an issue on item number 8-A, to just add the -- to prohibit conifers, but Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 37 of 51 allow the Engleman Spruce trees and to ask the attorney draw of up Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order. Nary: Second. De Weerd: Oh, Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: If we can note the date of the final plat, just for a reference point. Hawkins-Clark: It is the one submitted with the application. March 14, '03. De Weerd: Thank you. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded to approve the final plat with the conditions as noted. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll-call vote, Mr. Berg. Roll-Call: McCandless, yea; Nary, yea; de Weerd, yea; Bird, yea. Corrie: All ayes. Request for final plat of Baldwin Park No. 3 is approved with conditions. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 17: Public Hearing: AZ 02-031 Request for annexation and zoning of 39.05 Castlebrook Subdivision No. acres from RUT to R-8 zones for proposed 2 by Crestline Development, LLC – 4000 West Pine Avenue, east of North Black Cat Road and south of West Cherry Lane: Item 18: Public Hearing: PP 02-032 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 150 building lots and 9 other lots on 39.05 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Castlebrook Subdivision No. 2 proposed by Crestline Development, LLC – 4000 West Pine Avenue, east of North Black Cat Road and south of West Cherry Lane: Item 19: Public Hearing: VAR 03-005 Request for a Variance to allow certain blocks to exceed 1000 foot maximum length and certain block lengths to Castlebrook Subdivision No. 2 be less than 500 foot minimum for by Crestline Development, LLC – 4000 West Pine Avenue, east of North Black Cat Road and south of West Cherry Lane: Corrie: Item No. 17, 18, and 19 are public hearings. Item No. 17 is a request for annexation and zoning of 39.05 acres from RUT to R-8 zones for proposed Castlebrook Subdivision No. 2 by Crestline Development, LLC, 4000 West Pine Avenue, east of North Black Cat Road and south of West Cherry Lane. Item No. 18 is a Public Hearing, Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 38 of 51 request for preliminary plat approval of 150 building lots and nine other lots on 39.05 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for proposed Castlebrook Subdivision No. 2 by the same development company. And Item 19 is a Public Hearing, request for a variance to allow certain blocks to exceed the thousand foot maximum length and certain block lengths to be less than 500 foot minimum for Castlebrook Subdivision No. 2. So, if -- hearing no objections, I will open the Public Hearing on all three public hearings, 17, 18, and 19 to hear testimony on all three at one time and, then, we will take them separately as we vote. So, I will open the public hearings and invite staff's comments. Hawkins-Clark: Mayor, Members of the Council, on the first item, the annexation and zoning request, they are proposing an R-8 zone. Castlebrook Subdivision No. 1 does abut to the west, which has frontage on North Black Cat Road. That also has an R-8. The access to this Castlebrook No. 2 would be taken off of an extension on El Gato, which is in general alignment with Pine further to the east. The Parkside Creek Subdivision and Western Ada County Recreation District's Fuller Park are on the north side. That is an R-4 zone. All the other properties that surround to the east and the south are still in Ada County and have the RUT. The Comprehensive Plan has this whole area as medium density residential and the R-8 request does fit with that. On the next item, the request for the preliminary plat -- and, again the subdivision is proposed to take access off of El Gato at a single point. They do have Ten Mile Creek that runs along the entire north boundary and, again, the public park is on the north side of Ten Mile Creek. They are proposing 150 building lots. They have 6,500 square foot minimums. There is not a planned development application associated with this subdivision, so they are proposing to conform to our R-8 minimum standards, 65 foot frontages, 6,500 square foot lots. The request initially of staff was made to create a connection internally here. They, originally, had just a large single block in here. That modification was made to provide better circulation internal to the subdivision. Castlebrook 1 was approved with just a single stub street and, of course, they are proposing to extend that into -- into this subdivision. The Planning and Zoning Commission made a recommendation on the plat to have a five foot wide asphalt pathway constructed along the north, the Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District lot and this is fee simple ownership by Nampa-Meridian, it's not an easement. The applicant's property line does stop at the Nampa-Meridian south boundary there of that Ten Mile Creek separate ownership there. However, the recommendation was for them to get a license agreement to do that. They are also proposing some kind of a bridge connection that is -- that would provide access from their subdivision to the park and that's item number one on the recommendation on page two and the one change I would suggest to that is on the last sentence, talking about when the pathway and the culvert, which is what Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District has, I understand, recommended to the applicant is the culvert instead, that those -- currently it says it should be constructed prior to the sale of any lots adjacent to the pathway. I'd recommend that we change that to prior to the first certificate of occupancy of any lots within that phase. I think, you know, there is -- it's a little bit vague in there in terms of when -- I guess the question is if they are unable to get the license agreement, which is a different time frame, that's, actually, required prior to signature of the final plat of the first phase. So, obviously, that's going to dictate quite a bit. The license agreement with Nampa-Meridian is going Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 39 of 51 to have to be submitted to the city engineer prior to the city's signature. I guess it somewhat depends on what that license agreement states. You know, we need to -- we have had a request from Nampa-Meridian to release funding that we have had for three years for Thousand Springs for bridges that were approved as part of Thousand Springs across the Ridenbaugh Canal. That's never happened, so the applicant's wanting to receive their money -- their surety back from the Highway District, because no agreement was ever reached. Obviously, this is a little bit different than the Ridenbaugh in terms of volume and size, but I think it's still a concern as to when we are going to get that connection and, frankly, if there can't be an access across there to the park, I think that we would like to see more discussion happen. I think that's a -- part of the density, you know, that we are supporting that comes because they do have access to the park across the Ten Mile. I think it's still important to clarify that first condition as to when -- when the path and culvert are actually constructed. The phasing plan that was submitted, generally, they are proposing to start here on the western half, come down, take in just kind of the frontage of the large open lot here and, then, come down on the east side of the entry drive. So, that would, obviously, include building the pathway up to this park in terms of phase one improvements and, then, the balance of it would come in when their final plat for phase two for this western -- or this eastern half comes through. I think the last comment I would make relates to item four on page three, talking about the fencing plan. I think you probably would best -- the condition would best go in the annexation -- it could go in both, but that we add that an open vision fence or a four foot solid fence be constructed along all of these lots on the north boundary adjacent to the pathway and I understand that Mr. Amar is looking at a four foot vinyl, so I think we just would like to get that onto the -- into the conditions, so that we can -- our building department can inform those property owners when they come through that they are restricted on those fences. Nichols: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nichols. Nichols: Brad, is there anything in the conditions or in the discussion about those fences that front that large open space lot -- or not front, but the back lines of those? Has there been any discussion about the height of those fences? Hawkins-Clark: Right. Mr. Mayor, Mr. Nichols, the landscape -- or the subdivision ordinance only deals with fencing adjacent to micropaths. So, any additional fencing restrictions that the city wants to place would have to be put, you know, as separate conditions, because the ordinance doesn't address it. But the recommendation does not, it simply deals with the fencing next to the micropaths and, then, the one I just added deals with the pathway along the Ten Mile Creek. But I think that's a good point, that you have got that green open space that would also -- but I think in other subdivisions they have gone with four foot -- four foot maximum around that open area. And, then, the last item deals with the variance request and staff has to apologize, we did not prepare a written staff report on this. That kind of got by us. But to tell you what their application is proposing, the red arrows are pointing to blocks that are greater than Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 40 of 51 a thousand feet in length. The black ones are pointing to blocks that are shorter than 500. Certainly, Block 4, which is on the north -- Parkside Creek did not provide any stub streets and you have got the Ten Mile that has, obvious, restrictions in terms of vehicular access. So, that's a pretty clearcut case for a variance. The shorter block lengths are ones that as we have talked about in past hearings that Council is supportive of and probably should be removed from the ordinance. They do have a little bit of a design constriction in that they have the Ten Mile and El Gato. The other two block lengths that are longer could be taken care of if they provided two access points off of El Gato. They basically say in the variance application that that's an esthetic -- that's the only main argument is that it's esthetic, so they can get one point of access and provide, you know, a visual corridor into their open space area, which is good planning and makes sense. I don't think that they meet the finding that says that the hardship is not created by them. I mean, certainly, providing two points of access off of El Gato would eliminate the southern two block lengths being -- exceeding a thousand feet, but I would request the applicant address that, I guess, during their testimony. Corrie: Thank you, Brad. Any questions of staff at this point? The representative of Castlebrook. Is the testimony you are about to give the Council the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Amar: Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Mayor and Council Members. For the record, my name is Kevin Amar, address 114 East Idaho, Suite 230, here in Meridian. I will be as brief as I possibly can. With respect to the staff comments and the recommended conditions of approval that were placed on us by the Planning and Zoning Commission, we have no disagreements or no questions about those. We are in agreement with all of those conditions of approval. So, unless you have questions of those I won't address those further. What I will address is some of the comments related to the subdivision, the design, the pathway, and the variance request as we see here tonight. The subdivision itself, as was noted, has 150 lots. When we did Castlebrook phase one -- or subdivision number one -- I think it was last September, at that time this property owner -- upon that approval this property owner approached us. When we looked at this property and in speaking with that property owner, also with Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District, he does, in fact, own this property and it was determined that we could provide a pretty nice pathway -- obviously, this pathway is going to be owned and maintained by the homeowners association, it's not something that we are looking to have the city maintain in any way. But also looking at this bank that is along here and, typically, these drains can be somewhat of a sight nuisance. The Irrigation District will maintain it enough for them to drive up and down it, but as far as weeds growing or, actually, what it looks like, they burn it once in the spring. I'm sure you're all aware of what they do. What we talked to Bill Henson and John Anderson of Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District about is providing the pathway in here, landscaping this, and maintained by the private homeowners association and, then, this pathway -- the actual pathway along this portion would be offset enough for vehicular traffic from Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District to still travel up and down that without -- with their track vehicles and things of that nature, without tearing up that pathway. Any damages that is done to the landscaping, that's something we will deal with and we, being the homeowners Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 41 of 51 association, will maintain it. But that provides something of the esthetics to the subdivision that all these neighbors back up to something that looks nice, rather than a weed distraction and a fence with weeds growing along it that may or may not be maintained. With respect to the culvert, we initially proposed a bridge. At that point Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District asked that we make it a culvert. We will do a culvert and it will still look like a bridge for all intents and purposes, but less maintenance for the Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District. We have no issue with that. With respect to the block lengths, this project -- initially when we had this project -- and on the variance this Block 9 was also in the variance requested, it did exceed the thousand foot maximum. When I initially did this, there was a cul-de-sac at this point. It was requested by staff that we punch that road through creating this block to be too short and this block still to be too long. Prior to that this block was extremely long. In doing that, we requested these three blocks to be granted a variance for the minimum block length and, then, the rest of them, with the exception of this one -- I think it's easier to show the rest of them and point out which ones those are -- to have a maximum block length variance granted. Our desire is to bring one street in and that's street be a collector. As you can see, there is some center islands and one point of entrance into this subdivision, still providing, however, that the secondary access that will be required by the fire department. And on our phase one we will actually include this point of access and this point of access will not be developed until Castlebrook Subdivision No. 1, phase number two, is built and approved and the connectivity is there. So, our desire is to have one point of access. We did go over with your staff, Dave McKinnon, on two points of access and at that time it was determined that by all parties that it's a better visual effect to have that one point of access, safer for all the parties involved, keeping more traffic off of -- which will be in the future a very main road extending from -- well, I guess in the future it would extend into Boise when it gets built and, then, all the way out to Canyon county. We provided you a packet with this subdivision. I don't know if you have had a chance to look at it. One of the items in there -- we did have a neighborhood meeting prior to this application being heard and one of those requests was that these lots be a larger house to buffer to be more compatible with those lots across the -- across the Ten Mile Creek. Consequently, any lots that back up to -- adjacent to the pathway will be required to have a 1,600 square foot minimum home size. That was done in order to accommodate those neighbors that lived on the other side of the Ten Mile Creek. Again, I guess I forgot with respect to the pathway, we will obtain a license agreement prior to final plat approval. We have spoken with John Anderson, we have spoken Bill Henson at Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District, this is no problem whatsoever, they will agree to it, and that will be in place prior to the final plat approval. With respect to path construction, we will build that at the time this subdivision or that phase is built and Brad is correct, the first phase comes up through here, about 75 lots in each phase. We will build that pathway at the time that the subdivision is built. We don't want improvements taking place behind houses after people are living there, with the caveat that if this is built is late November, obviously, we won't landscape it until April when water is back on, so grass and trees don't die. With respect to the fencing, there will be four foot vinyl fencing on all common areas, which would be this pathway, also on the park, and there will be a four foot vinyl fencing that we will install as part of the development. I believe those are the questions that were brought up and I would be Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 42 of 51 happy to answer any additional questions, should there be any, but we are in agreement with the staff report and the recommended conditions of approval and we would ask tonight that we be approved -- annexed and zoned and approved for 150 lots for Castlebrook No. 2. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I know there has been some concern on the pathway up in Coral Creek and whatever the other subdivision is and I do understand that the homeowners association will be maintaining this. Is -- are the standards going to be different with -- I don't know -- I know our parks department has been working on standards within their master planning, but could you work with them in making sure that the pathway that is constructed is not going to be similar to that in the other subdivision? Amar: Mr. Mayor, Councilmember de Weerd, yes, I have seen the pathway at Coral Creek and it leaves something to be desired. We will work with them and do -- it's our intent that we will -- we will do the actual landscaping, we will do the improvements, so it's not something that's left to the homeowners to do in the future or the city to do in the future. I understand possibly at Coral Creek that's something the city will develop. I'm not real familiar with that pathway or how it came about. But I will discuss it with the parks director and we will come up with something not only that will be beneficial, but will also be compatible with what will be here in the future on the other side of Ten Mile Creek. De Weerd: Now, the second question I have is on ground water. Is that area -- are you going to have to bring in fill or is the ground water level there okay? Amar: It is okay. We have ongoing monitoring, materials testing, and inspection and we did dig test holes in this area and the park will also be a retention, detention facility. It's in the lower area, but it will meet your standards, it won't hold ground water -- or it won't hold storm drainage, rather, it would be free draining at all times and will have to do that. And our ongoing witnesses -- or inspection of those test wells indicates that we will have no problem accomplishing that. De Weerd: And you have a fencing plan for that green space? Amar: Yes. We want a continuation of the four foot vinyl fence here and, then, it will continue up here and your micropath and, then, all the way down. So, it's going to have a continual fencing, something that we will install as we build the subdivision. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Amar: You're welcome. Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 43 of 51 Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Just so I'm clear, on this drawing I heard Brad say that the property line for the subdivision runs right to the edge of the property owned by Nampa-Meridian Irrigation. So, is this pink line the property line or this is this black line the property line? Because you said you were landscaping and I don't know what part you were landscaping. Amar: We are landscaping all the way up to -- we will be landscaping Nampa-Meridian's property. Nary: Oh. Okay. Amar: This black line is the property line, but we will be landscaping up to the Nampa- Meridian Irrigation District property. Nary: Okay. Just -- totally just my own ignorance, but what is the difference between a culvert and a bridge? Amar: A bridge is a free span, a culvert is, actually -- it's got a pipe. It's easier to maintain a culvert, because you don't have to maintain underneath it, as you would with a bridge. Nary: I see. Okay. Now, is there access into the park site? It's not fenced all the way around? Amar: It is not. Can we go to the previous -- the area map, please? The park would be in about this location. I do have pictures I can show you, but it is not fenced all the way - - it is not fenced at all, with the exception of maybe Parkside Creek Subdivision. The balance of this is an open -- there is a pathway that extends all the way down, so this culvert or this crossing that we will put in here will actually connect with that pathway that's already existing. Nary: And will that pathway -- this micropath that you're building along this property line here, does it connect to anything over here? Is there one right here? Does it connect through there? Amar: This is Castlebrook Subdivision No. 1. There is a common area in the corner at this location also, so there will be a connection at that point to this pathway, so people can access -- I guess, for that matter, they can access from Coral Creek all the way down and access the other side of the Ten Mile. Nary: How big is the common area here on -- Amar: Twelve thousand square feet, I believe. Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 44 of 51 Nary: On that -- Brad, could you go back to the other layout? In looking at this football field that you have right here, is there any -- is there anything else in here? Is this just grass? Amar: A lot of it will be grass, but we will be providing a recreation area also. This is a picture of one that we did in another subdivision. Nary: So, the intent is to provide some recreation area I guess close to the street area side or what? Amar: Yeah. Up in this area and leave the balance of it for kids to play soccer, football, whatever they want to play. But it's a large open area, so they can play. Nary: And I notice that in here there is some -- these little micropaths for these streets, but I didn't see a whole lot of connection from the southern half here to get up here. Is just the intent is just sidewalks all the way around? Is that the intent? Amar: Yes, sir. Nary: Okay. Amar: I do have my human easel standing off to my right. This shows both Castlebrook Subdivision No. 1 and No. 2. This is the common area in number one. We will connect with this common area No. 2. That pathway will continue on through to this location, so that people can get access to the western -- I don't know what they call it, western Ada County park. Nary: Fuller Park. Amar: Yeah. Corrie: Question. If I was to buy a house backing up to that football field and it's a four foot vinyl fence, what if I wanted to put a gate in there? Amar: That is allowed. Gates are allowed. Obviously, access is allowed onto that. Corrie: So, they can put a gate in if they want? Amar: Yes, sir. Corrie: Any other questions? Okay. Amar: Thank you. Well, I think unless you have other questions, I don't know that Ms. Wildwood or Mr. Nickel need to speak. Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 45 of 51 Corrie: Shawn and Susan, do you want to testify? Okay. Is there anybody else that would like to testify in this? Okay. Evidently, you have done a pretty good job for us here. Okay. Council, any other questions in regard to the Public Hearing? Okay. Then, I will entertain a motion to close the Public Hearing on the request for annexation and zoning and preliminary plat and request for variance, if there is no further questions. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I would move that we close the public hearings AZ 02-031, the annexation and zoning of 39.05 acres from RUT to R-8 for Castlebrook Subdivision No. 2, also Public Hearing PP 02-032, the request for preliminary plat approval of 150 building lots and nine other lots, and also VAR 03-005, the request for variance to allow certain blocks to exceed 1,000 feet max and certain blocks to be less than 500 feet minimum for Castlebrook Subdivision No. 2. Corrie: Do I hear a second? McCandless: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded to close the Public Hearing on the request for annexation and zoning, preliminary plat, and variance. Any further discussion? All those in favor say aye. Opposed no? All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: Any further discussion? Let's take Item No. 17, request for annexation and zoning of Castlebrook Subdivision No. 2. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: Before we make a motion or anything, I'd like to comment to the applicants on this subdivision. I think that for the property they got back there that's about the only thing -- the only way you could do it and I think they went out and saw a lot of resources and talked to a lot of people and have come up with a very, very nice plan for this area and I appreciate it. Corrie: Thank you, Mr. Bird. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 46 of 51 De Weerd: Before Mr. Nary makes a motion, I just wanted to ditto that -- and because he asked the questions. And I appreciate the connectivity across the street to the school, you know, because a lot of kids will probably be in that subdivision and now they have the access to go across the ditch to school. Looks nice. Corrie: I will entertain a motion from Mrs. de Weerd on Item No. 17, request for annexation and zoning. De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Mayor -- whether I asked a question or not, still end up doing it. I move we approve the request for annexation and zoning of 39.05 acres from RUT to R- 8 zones for proposed Castlebrook Subdivision No. 2 and to assure that the fencing plan is open vision and -- and/or no taller than four feet high and I know there was something about the last sentence of one of the conditions about the pathway and the culvert and when it was constructed prior to certification of occupancy on the phase -- what was it? Does that serve your purpose? Corrie: That was pretty close. De Weerd: To include all staff comments and -- oh, and any applicant replies. Bird: I'll second that. De Weerd: Well, can I ask for Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order? Bird: Now I will second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded. Is there any further discussion? Hearing none, roll-call vote, Mr. Berg. Roll-Call: McCandless, yea; Nary, yea; de Weerd, yea; Bird, yea. Corrie: Okay. All ayes. Motion for annexation and zoning with conditions is approved. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I move that we approve the request for preliminary plat of 150 building lots and nine other lots on 39.05 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for the Castlebrook Subdivision No. 2 and ask the Mayor or -- I'm sorry. Not the Mayor, please. He may not be able to write Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order and to include all comments. Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 47 of 51 Bird: Second. Corrie: Let the record show that I did take some law classes, but, you're right, I don't want to do that. Okay. Any other discussions? Okay. It's getting late, so we know we are passed 9:30. All right. Mr. Berg. Roll-Call: McCandless, yea; Nary, yea; de Weerd, yea; Bird, yea. Corrie: All ayes. Motion is carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: Oh. Mr. Mayor, I approve -- I mean I move that we -- I'm getting overconfident here -- that we approve the request to allow certain block lengths to exceed 1,000 foot maximum length and certain block lengths to be less than 500 foot minimum for Castlebrook Subdivision No. 2, as shown on the map and ask the attorney to draw up Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order. Bird: Second. Corrie: Okay. You have heard the motion and second. Any further discussion? Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: On this particular one noted that we have a meeting on the 29th of this month with the Planning and Zoning Commission, a joint workshop. I would ask that of the planning staff that we have this discussion about this particular ordinance on that, because we have granted a variance every time. So, we need to change the ordinance, because it doesn't make much sense to keep doing that, so we can get that process going on that. But, other than that, I don't have any -- De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: Even though this is not the place to have this discussion -- just the place to put it -- I -- we do have on the agenda discussion of the ordinances that Brad gave us at the strategic planning and prioritize it, so it will certainly be on the list for discussion. Nary: Great. Corrie: Glad to hear that. I don't know what all was on the agenda. Okay. Mr. Berg. Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 48 of 51 Roll-Call: McCandless, yea; Nary, yea; de Weerd, yea; Bird, yea. Corrie: All ayes. Motion is approved for the variance. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 20: Public Hearing: RZ 03-001 Request for a Rezone of 6.95 acres from L- Mallane Commercial Complex O to L-O and C-G zones for by The Land Group, Inc. – north of East Fairview Avenue and west of North Eagle Road: Corrie: Item No. 20 is a Public Hearing. This is a request for a rezone of 6.95 acres from L-O to L-O and C-G zones for Mallane Commercial Complex by Land Group, Inc., north of East Fairview and west of North Eagle Road. At this time I will open the Public Hearing and have staff comments first. Hawkins-Clark: Mayor, Members of the Council, this property was annexed to the city and zoned Limited Office in 1992, a part of the Capital Christian Center project. Then, in March of 2001 Council did approve a plat for the property under the name Mallane Commercial Complex. The 2002 Comp Plan does designate the property as commercial. As you know, the Louie's Restaurant sits in the center of this triangular shaped parcel that is west of Hickory and north of Fairview. The requested rezone -- this map does not -- does not show the plat, that plat has not been, I don't believe, recorded yet, so it's not showing up on Ada county's base map data, just what we have here. But the -- four of the five subdivision lots are proposed to go to a C-G zone, which is similar to much of the -- of the Fairview frontage. The proposal is to leave the lot that is in the pending final plat that's adjacent to Dove Meadows Subdivision L-O, Limited Office, so that that would protect the integrity there. They do have other conditions that are related to the buffering along that shared boundary between the residential subdivision and this commercial development. The Planning and Zoning Commission did recommend approval. I think the main thing to just emphasize is that they're -- they are not proposing any changes to the plat that had the 20 foot wide buffer requirement and there is, actually, a wall that's required along that shared boundary. So, in terms of the impact, I think that's pretty well taken care of by just keeping that Limited Office and just doing the Franklin frontage -- or the Fairview frontage as C-G. Yeah. The recommendation should have been received by the city clerk's office March 26th. We just had our standard conditions, there weren't any site specifics on this application, so it should be a pretty straight forward request, I guess. That's all we have. Corrie: Any questions of Council for staff? Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 49 of 51 Nary: Yeah. There was this -- I noticed this one condition about alternative transportation program that's an ACHD recommendation, the special recommendation. I guess I hadn't notice that. Is that pretty common? I hadn't seen that before and I don't know how in the world you can have a lot of alternative transportation right there. I'm not riding a bicycle down Fairview right there. I'm not sure what alternative they are talking about. Is that pretty common? Hawkins-Clark: Councilman Nary, they do include that as a recommendation in the majority of commercial projects that have more than a single development or single building and you will see it in a lot of the Silverstone applications, Resolution Business Park applications, they will often include that. It is a very optional kind of thing that -- the commuter ride people work with the future business owners to try to get car pool incentives to their employees and things like that. Nary: Thank you. That's great. Thanks. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I guess just to have on the public record, the traffic light there at Hickory Way and Fairview, that's scheduled for 2007 or 2008? Corrie: 2007. Maybe earlier with the -- Nary: I think you're right. Corrie: Maybe we can get it quicker. Okay. Hawkins-Clark: I don't see -- I'm sorry, Mr. Mayor. I see that they are -- there is a 3,200 dollar deposit to the public right-of-way trust fund for this development's cost share of that signal. I don't see the date specific in their staff report, but I do think it was 2007. Corrie: Okay. Thank you, Brad. Is the representative here this evening? Is the testimony you are about to give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Hepworth: Yes. For the record, Russ Hepworth with the Land Group. We have read the conditions of this, as far as Planning and Zoning's comments and staff report and we agree to everything that -- that's in the staff report and I'm here to answer any questions, if you have any. Corrie: Okay. Thank you. Any questions? Okay. Thank you very much. Is there anyone else that would like to issue testimony? Okay. Hearing none, Council, any questions on the Public Hearing before we close? Okay. I'll entertain a motion to close the Public Hearing, then, hearing none. Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 50 of 51 McCandless: Mr. Mayor, I move we close the Public Hearing. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made. Do I hear a second? Nary: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded to close the Public Hearing on the request for rezone of Mallane Commercial Complex. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. Opposed no? All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: Further comments? Hearing none, then, I will entertain a motion for the request for a rezone. McCandless: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. McCandless. McCandless: I move that we approve the request for rezone of 6.95 acres from L-O to L-O and C-G zones for Mallane Commercial Complex by the Land Group, Incorporated, north of East Fairview Avenue and west of North Eagle Road, and for the attorney to draw up the proper papers. Nary: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded to approve the request rezone. Any further discussion? Roll-call vote, Mr. Berg. Roll-Call: McCandless, yea; Nary, yea; de Weerd, yea; Bird, yea. Corrie: All ayes. Motion is carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: Just before we move off of this topic, if our liaison can please go back and stress again the need and desire for a traffic light at Hickory Way and Fairview. I know money is tight and that's -- 2007 is a long way off and this certainly could use a traffic light. So, just my editorial comment. Corrie: Okay. Any other comments? Meridian City Council April 15, 2003 Page 51 of 51 Nary: Not until after we close. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made to close the meeting. Do I hear a second? McCandless: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded to close the meeting. All in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: We close at 9:45. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:45 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) __________________________ ______/______/______ ROBERT D. CORRIE, MAYOR DATE APPROVED ATTEST: _____________________________________ WILLIAM G. BERG, JR, CITY CLERK