October 3, 2006 C/C Minutes
Meridian City Council
October 3, 2006
Page 37 of 53
Roll-Call: Bird, nay; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE NAY.
De Weerd: Okay. Item 10. Mr. Nary, since we don't have an annexation, do we still need
a motion?
Nary: Madam Mayor, yes, you would.
De Weerd: Okay.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we deny Item 10, PP 06-030, preliminary plat.
Borton: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion to deny Item 10. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, nay; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE NAY.
Item 11:
Item 12:
Item 13:
Item 14:
Public Hearing: AZ 06a035 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 12.06
acres to C-C (1.50 acres) and R-40 (10.56 acres) zones for Regencv at
River Vallev by The Regency at River Valley, LLC - east of Eagle Road
and north of Fairview Avenue:
Public Hearing: CUP 06a022 Request for a Conditional Use Permit
approval to construct a multi-family development consisting of 204 multi-
family dwelling units on 12.06 acres in a proposed R-40 zone for Reaencv
at River Vallev by The Regency at River Valley, LLC - east of Eagle
Road and north of Fairview Avenue:
Public Hearing: VAR 06a014 Request for a Variance to UDC 11-3C-6A
to provide less than 2 covered parking stalls for each multi-family dwelling
unit for Regencv at River Vallev by The Regency at River Valley, LLC -
east of Eagle Road and north of Fairview Avenue:
Public Hearing: VAR 06a015 Request for a Variance to UDC 11-
4.3.27B3 to proVide less than 80 square feet of private, usable open space
for each multi-dwelling unit Reaencv at River Vallev by The Regency at
River Valley, LLC - east of Eagle Road and north of Fairview Avenue:
Meridian City Council
October 3, 2006
Page 38 of 53
Item 15:
Public Hearing: VAR 06-016 Request for a Variance to UDC 11-3H-4B2
to construct a vehicular access to a state highway at a location other than
a section line road or the half mile mark between sections Regencv at
River Vallev by The Regency at River Valley, LLC - east of Eagle Road
and north of Fairview Avenue:
De Weerd: Okay. Thank You. Items 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15 are all public hearings on this
same application or same subdivision. AZ 06-035, CUP 06-022, VAR 06-014, VAR 06-
015, and VAR 06-016. I will open these public hearings with staff comments.
Hood: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. The Regency Subdivision --
there is, actually, not a subdivision application associated with this project. I'll talk about
that a little bit more later. There are two parcels that you can see outlined here in the
teal color just south of the C-G. That's our subject site. It is located on the east side of
Eagle Road, approximately a half mile north of Fairview Avenue. I'll throw up the aerial
here. To the north is the Finch Lateral and, again, I'll talk about that here in a minute as
well. There are also some single family homes mixed in here on some large parcels.
Most of this has been zoned in the city with a commercial designation as part of the
Redfeather development. There aren't any commercial uses approved on this site
currently, but, again, it is zoned C-G in the city. To the west is Stokesberry Subdivision.
It's an office park. And, then, you have got the elementary school, River Valley
Elementary School, just to the west of that. To the south is the turf farms. To the east,
as I mentioned, there are some future single family homes in Redfeather as it
progresses back to the west. Madam Mayor, I went through all of the applications that
are associated with this and I will just briefly touch on each one of them and, then, go
into some more detail on each one, I guess, as well. So, annexation and zoning is 12
acres requested for zoning. 1.5 acres -- one and a half acres is requested to be C-C
right on Eagle Road. So, it would be this pad site here along Eagle Road and, then, ten
and a half acres is remainder area proposed for the R-40 density residential zone.
Concurrent with that request is the Conditional Use Permit to construct a multi-family
development that consists of 204 multi-family dwelling units. Now, this is a little bit
different multi-family development than we are used to seeing in that they are multi-multi
family units. There are -- most all of these are 24 unit buildings. There is a 12 unit
building right here. There is a mix of bedrooms within these. Some are one and two
bedrooms, some are two and three, some are one and three. This area I think is
business -- I can't read it exactly, but it's kind of got a different little professional feel to it
anyways and its marketed to those folks a little bit differently. There is also a private
street request -- there are several private streets. The one I want to touch on first has to
do with its connection to Eagle Road, a state highway, which is not at the mid mile
location. This property does have access to the mid section line. However, that does not
extend out to Meridian Road at the mid section line. So, they'd ask for a variance -- a
temporary variance, if you will, to have access at this access point to the development
at this time. It is their only frontage. There is no other public street frontage today. Staff
is recommending approval of that variance on a temporary basis until this public street
-- public collector roadway can you extend out to Eagle Road, get a signal put in here
and, then, this will be the primary entrance into the development until Allys Way, which
Meridian City Council
October 3, 2006
Page 39 of 53
I'll touch on here -- a little bit here in a minute, gets pushed up to Ustick Road. So, as a
condition for recommending approval -- a temporary approval of that variance, we want
to see all of these lots take access -- consolidate their access points, give cross-access,
so we can eventually feed all of these properties that have access to Eagle Road down
to the future public street and use this as an access and close off the access points that
these parcels particularly today utilize. So, that's one of the variance requests. The
other one has to do with parking. I did talk with the applicant just actually during the
hearing. There is a little bit of a -- I counted the number of stalls proposed through the
multi-family and, actually, I came up with a count of 403 parking stalls. They assured me
that there will be at least 408 parking stalls, which is a minimum number required per
the UDC in this development. The variance is related to the requirement to provide
covered parking stalls. This plan is not the revised plan. Essentially, staff's
recommendation is that anywhere that is not encumbered by the irrigation easement,
which all these parking stalls up in here, and that are not adjacent to this building and
up to about half of this building and around the loop at the clubhouse -- I'm sorry, that's
the clubhouse there and open spaces and trails -- some walking trails in between. That
those areas I just pointed out not be required to have either carports or garages. That's
what the UDC requires. Two covered parking stalls per dwelling unit. We will talk about
that a little more. The applicant, I understand, has a visual that they can show you. It's
kind of color coded showing where garages are, where carports are, and where surface
parking spots are. And, then, finally, the third variance request has to do with the 80
square foot private usable open space that's required for multi-family developments.
This requirement was added to the UDC primarily because there is no private usable
open space outside of the units that someone can call their own and barbecue or just
hang out on a patio on their deck, things of that nature. The bottom units on those -- of
these, if not all these, do have a patio area, but the upper two floors do not propose any
private usable open space for those residents. I think real quick what I will do is I guess
I'll finish with the private streets. So, all the access drives in here are private streets that
will carry a separate private lane, blue signs, so that emergency services can find the
units that are addressed off of each private lane. I do have a hot-off-the-press e-mail
from Joe Silva stating that he's okay with having just the one access point here and in
the future the one access point being here, because all these buildings are going to be
fully fire sprinklered NFP 13, which, basically, I understand is everything gets
sprinklered, the attics and everything are fully sprinkled. So, there is currently a lack of
access into this site, but it will be -- at least the fire department's okay with having a
single access point of this development temporarily. In that same vein I want to touch on
Allys Way just for a minute. Allys Avenue is what it's also been called. I'm not quite sure
what it's going to end up being called, but that's the other collector that shoots up north,
comes out at Lowe's. It's currently got the conduit and the signal mass and things for
the signalization right there at the Lowe's entrance. ACHD is requiring developers as
they come in and develop in the city to construct their portion of that collector roadway,
so maybe I'll jump back to the vicinity real quick. It doesn't go all the way up, but if you
can use your imagination just for a minute. Ustick Road is right there. So, we -- here
probably a couple months ago ACHD on this parcel on the south, that first leg of that
collector being constructed to that point, so when Redfeather comes in we will at least
have the first half mile of that constructed and, then, hopefully, they will come down and
Meridian City Council
October 3, 2006
Page 40 of 53
tie in with Records when this property develops. And, again, we will have this
connection out here. So, this applicant will be -- I think one of the requirements from
ACHD was they will be road trusted for half of the requirements of a crossing of this as
well, so Redfeather will do the other half and we will actually have a bridge crossing and
they are constructing their portion of this collector road, which will align with River Valley
or whatever it's called across the street. The development agreement is proposed by
staff, just because this isn't your standard single family development that we typically
see, there are quite a few -- I don't want to call them odd ball requirements, but the out
of the ordinary restrictions and requirements that we felt it was a good project to have a
develop agreement on and restrict the uses that occur on this property. I think I covered
all the variances that were partially supportive of one, not recommending approval of
the waiver of another one, and I think I'm pretty clear. If not, you can sure ask me any
questions. The applicant I believe is also going to clarify what they intend to do with the
Finch Lateral, aka the South Slough, if you prefer and similar to the last project if it's
going to be tiled or not tiled. It is a pretty large facility. Maybe just quickly some more
highlights -- and I will let the applicant kind of sell their project, if you will, to you, but the
gross density of River Valley is 17.86 dwelling units per acre. There is approximately 2.7
acres or 22 percent of the site being set aside for open space. They are providing a
community clubhouse with an exercise room, billiards table, a lounge area, a barbecue
area, dining facilities, children's play area, tot lot, the open space I mentioned, a hot tub
and pool, a water amenity right in the center of clubhouse visitor area and walking trails
throughout as I mentioned earlier as well. With that I think I have touched on all of my
points and, hopefully, gave you the -- I gave the full view of the project and what's
before you all and allow the applicant to supplement that, but if you have any questions
I will be available for those.
De Weerd: Okay. Caleb, I guess I just need a little more clarity on the connecting --
maybe a backage road per se that runs parallel to Eagle between this multi-family and
the commercial piece. Is that currently in that design?
Hood: Yeah. Madam Mayor, the piece they own -- and maybe I'll jump back real quick,
just to the parcel configuration. So, everything here is what's going to be C-C. So, that
north side -- south driveway is there and, then, these parcels -- there is two to the south
and one to the north. I don't know if that helps or not, but the cross-access would be --
De Weerd: They are just running it through a parking lot?
Hood: Correct. It's a backage road that will be -- the building and parking between
Eagle Road and this backage drive aisle. It does have -- as you can see in this
conceptual -- and totally conceptual in nature, there is a development agreement
requirement that that come back in for at least design review approval, if not Conditional
Use Permit approval. I can't remember. And, yeah, I don't know that this parking lot
layout would fly when we review it, but the idea is to get a drive aisle connection to the
property to the north and the property to the south and that could or may not have --
preferably may not have on back off parking or people backing into that drive aisle.
That's certainly something that -- if that's the desire of the Council to restrict it further
Meridian City Council
October 3, 2006
Page 41 of 53
than that, I guess, but, again, we haven't spent too much time reviewing that parcel,
because there is no real -- they don't have anyone that's ready to move in there now
and the plan is just conceptual. We could use this as a potential use.
De Weerd: I don't know what our chief of police thinks, but running a two way through a
parking lot can't be all that safe and when it's private it makes is more cumbersome.
But, chief, do you have any comments on that?
Musser: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, you're absolutely right, it would be
cumbersome and if it becomes a private access drive there is not much enforcement in
activity or anything else we can do on that, especially in terms of a two way. We can still
respond in there reference collisions, but there are probably other ways to look at
designing it.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Council, any questions for staff before I call the applicant
up?
Rountree: I have none.
De Weerd: Thank you. Is the applicant -- if you will, please, state your name and
address for the record.
Rindlisbaker: Yes, Madam Mayor and Members of the City Council, grateful to be here
and to discuss this project. My name is Greg Rindlisbaker with the Bach team. Our
address is 11650 South State Street, Draper, Utah. I just want to kind of quickly
overview what our company does and the project that we are proposing, so you can
have an idea of what type of product we produce and that will help clarify I think a lot of
questions that you may have and concerns.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Rindlisbaker: And, then, we will haggle from there. And I'm hoping this clicker will work.
Okay. As Caleb mentioned, this is the project that we are proposing to do. We have
been in business now for about 30 years and we specialize in doing apartment projects
and residential communities. We have been doing apartments for about ten or 12 years
now and through our experience we have learned a lot about what works in an
apartment community, what's going to look good now, what's going to look good in five
years, ten, 20 years and so these variances that we are asking for and some of the
improvements that we put in the project -- and for that reason we want this to look good
for years to come. We have never sold a project. We are the developer, the builder, the
property manager, and the owner of the projects, but 15 years from now I can't say we
will still own the property and it's still going to be part of your city. So, you know, we take
a lot of pride in the project that we do and we know it's going to be here for a long time,
so we want to make sure that the product we produce will last for a really long time.
First of all our entrances -- this will be our primary entrance eventually. As Caleb
mentioned, this is the temporary access that we are requesting. Just to clarify, Madam
Meridian City Council
October 3, 2006
Page 42 of 53
Mayor, your concern here, this is -- these are just cross-easements. This piece to the
north is another acre, which will probably be some type of commercial development. It
will be a cross-easement so they can actually come through here and access Eagle,
turn, and, then, come through down here to access River Valley in the long term -- it's
just these -- basically, it alleviates the traffic problem onto Eagle. They can come down
to River Valley, catch the light here at the mid mile and, then, get onto Eagle safely. So,
it, actually, reduced traffic congestion and safety issues onto Eagle. You see that all the
time in malls where they are having cross-easements between restaurants where you
can cross through different restaurant pads or different offices. Right across the street
there is cross-easements between each -- each office building and you see -- I have
seen that quite a bit along Eagle Drive and it really, actually, works out to the benefit of
the city and traffic. The entrances to our project -- this is a typical entrance into our
project. This one was built in Tri-Cities, Washington. We will have signs as you enter in,
a water feature. This is another entrance sign to a project we built in Idaho Falls. This
project is another shot of -- a close up of a shot in the Tri-Cities area of our entrance
into the project. This is a -- we can talk about the clubhouse. There is an entry -- I'm
going to show what the area here is going to look like and clubhouse and the water
features. This is a water feature in Tri-Cities again. You can see the statute we do here.
This is called the Crossings at Chapel Hill. We kind of followed a horse theme. We
haven't quite picked the theme here for Regency, but we are going to do something
similar to this. This one is up in Montana in Billings. We have got an Elk and a lot of
features, actually, in front of this, but same kind of feel. Clubhouse interiors, which will
be right here as you enter in. We try to make it a really nice area. We want this project
to be a Class A project. This project will rival we think any project in the Treasure Valley
area and, in fact, probably the state of Idaho and it's going to be something that's going
to be something that residents will feel -- I think feel proud to live at and will be a nice
benefit to the community. We have a 24 hour fitness center. Key card access. You can
enter the fitness center and workout anytime you want. We can track who is coming and
going with their key card access. Another picture of the fitness center. A pool area. We
take a lot of pride in our pool areas. This will be shots that we are going to be doing
something similar to this area and with our pool areas I want to mention that we have
our in-house landscaping company. We do not subcontract that out. We have learned
that we are very picky about our landscaping, we want it done very well and
maintenance free. All of our flower beds we cover with small rock or aggregate, we put
weed barrier underneath that, so when people come in to maintain it, all we need is a
mow and trim and the project looks great. No weeds, always looks nice, and you will
see that in these pictures. This project is in Tri-Cities, Washington, just finished a month
or two ago. This one is in St. George, Utah. This one is in Twin Falls, Idaho. Another
shot of St. George from the top part. We add little green areas. These are gazebos
where people can come and layout and read while their kids are swimming. Hot tub.
We have water falls into the pool if area public law permits that. Common areas, which
will be these areas. Tot lots. Some grass areas. Something -- similar projects we have
done. This is the barbecue area. I want to point out these barbecue areas are fire proof.
These are on concrete, masonry all construction, vented properly up at the top. And
these are to help prevent fires. This is where we want people to barbecue and we are
going to cover this in the variance request later on on the decks. This is a typical tot lot.
Meridian City Council
October 3, 2006
Page 43 of 53
This one's in St. George, Utah. Typical landscaping. These are the putting greens. I
think this is Tri-Cities, Washington, again. This is the common area shot of our
landscaping in St. George, Utah. Building interiors and exteriors. This is in Ogden, Utah,
our Pinebrook property. This one, again, is in Billings, Montana. This is the Tri-Cities
project again. Interior of our apartment models. This is, actually, an older unit, so we
want to show some of the quality we put in here. We do nice -- nicer wood cabinets,
instead of Milamean, which you see in some apartment complexes. Microwaves above
the ranges. Washers and dryers back here in the laundry room. Now we come to the
Regency. This is what we are proposing that the clubhouse looks like. It will be very
similar to this. The color scheme will be similar to this. It's not been finalized, but very
similar. A building elevation. And you can see on here we have built product in the past
with private balconies on them and we are trying to get away from that and I will go
through that a little bit later on. And you can see here there is private patios on the first
floor, but we are not proposing these on the second and third floor, but on the first. I
want to go onto the covered parking variance. We met with our engineer today and we
wanted to throw the color scheme in here so you could see exactly what we proposing.
We do not meet the ordinance. We have some obstacles that we cannot overcome.
This north side of the South Slough or Finch Lateral, I'm not sure which one it's named.
I keep hearing different names. But there is an easement there and we are not allowed
to put anything along that easement, any type of structure. So, we are requesting that
this variance be approved for parking. We have placed the covered carports, which are
kind of in the pink color. You can see where those carports are. And the purple area --
these were blue and red. I don't know why they are purple and pink. The purple area are
garages that we are proposing to put in there. There is 36 garages, upgraded from
carports. We prefer to do more garages, but there is only -- it's kind of a supply and
demand. We do as many as we feel like we can do for the return we can get on that
investment. But it adds something a little bit nicer to the community as well. So, we have
192 covered carports, 36 garages, and, then, 180 open parking stalls, which equates to
480 parking stalls, 408, which will give you the two parking stalls per unit. Now, the back
of garages are not the most beautiful things. What we have done here -- this one's in
Tri-Cities. We have put a lot of landscaping behind these to kind of help hide the look
from the street side. This is a public street here and we have done that to help -- you
know, makes it a little esthetically pleasing. We also broke up the garage here in back.
We can do that as well if the City Council would like to see that. All right. The private
balcony variance. One thing we want to cover -- and I know economics isn't a thing that
city councils and mayors generally look at, but we have to make the project pencil. If we
are required to put in the private balconies, I'd just have to take something from the
project somewhere else. Maybe it might be microwaves, it might be a tot lot -- who
knows what it would be, but to make it pencil I have to put in -- I have to basically move
money one way or the other and I think the return on what you get for the balcony is not
that great. I still am being able to provide one-third of all the units -- one-third of all the
units with private balcony space. If somebody really wants private balcony space they
can rent a unit on the first floor. We are also providing in a common area places for
people to come and barbecue that has been designed to be safe. So, we won't have
people throwing debris -- I mean it's not -- you know, people throwing cigarette butts out
on the grass. Children falling from balconies. You might think that's kind of funny, but it
Meridian City Council
October 3, 2006
Page 44 of 53
does happen. It happened actually two days ago in Salt Lake City where I mom actually
caught the baby before it landed and got hurt. Also, a concern about barbecues being a
fire hazard. People do barbecue and smoke on their -- on their balcony. Now, if they
smoke on the patio outside on the first floor, it's not quite as scary, because they are on
concrete. They get on the second, third floor they are on outdoor carpeting and wood
deck flooring. I'll show you a few pictures and concerns. Our insurance companies do
not like having people put -- I guess that document didn't show up. It's a letter from our
insurance company that we just received two weeks ago. It's kind of ironic that it came
at the same time, but, basically, they have gone down to our St. George project and
said get these barbecues off the decks. Oh, and there it is right there. In order to -- the
paragraph showed up. In order to reduce the risk of fire, gas and charcoal grills or
similar devices used for cooking, heating, any purposes, should not be used on any
balcony under any overhanging portion or within ten feet of any structure. So, they are
concerned about that fire hazard. Here is a fire we had about months ago on a project.
This was in Idaho Falls, Idaho. And as you can see, we have provided a barbecue area
around the pool that the residents can use at their discretion. If it's available they can
use it. A shot from the front. So, you know, in conclusion, I just want to point out we
have patios on the first floor for residents to use if they want private area. We have
storage units -- we have people storing -- oh, I guess this isn't quite the conclusion
piece. We have people that store stuff on those balconies as well and it becomes
unsightly. Now, we can try to police it, we have on-site management, but it's very
difficult to police the barbecuing and people storing stuff on the balconies. You're going
to see some pictures -- not all of these are from our properties, but some of them are.
And, you know, it just doesn't make a goodly amount of curb appeal and we want this to
be a nice place for our residents and when people drive by that are city people -- or, you
know, citizens of the city, we don't want them to be thinking about all that stuff hanging
out on the decks and patios. So, we would ask for your -- we'd ask for your approval on
these applications that we are requesting tonight and I would be happy to field any
questions that you might have.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions?
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: No? Thank you. Okay. This is a Public Hearing. Is there anyone who would
like to provide testimony on this application?
Stanfield: Good evening, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Scott Stanfield,
Mason Stanfield Engineering, 314 Badiola in Caldwell, Idaho. I'll address some of the
engineering issues as quick as I can. We can meet all the engineering and planning
requirements for the site plan, including the 35 foot buffer along Eagle Road to the west,
the 25 foot buffer along our collectors to the south, and Allys Avenue -- Allys Way to the
east. We can provide our five foot minimum buffer adjacent to non-Bach owned parcels
adjacent to us. We can meet the landscape island criteria inside our project. Covered
parking. Again, we are asking for a variance on the covered parking. Asking for your
discretion in that item. Greg indicated on the north boundary along the Slouth/Lateral
Meridian City Council
October 3, 2006
Page 45 of 53
Nampa-Meridian has made it clear they don't want any structures of that type inside the
easement. We worked it out just prior to P&Z meeting and just recently in other
discussion with Mr. Silva. We are going to put the covered patios -- or covered carports
up front and in order to get around the fire code issue regarding separation for
horizontal clearances with a ladder truck going over the top of them, we are going to
upgrade to an NFP-12 -- 12 fire sprinklers, attics, crawl spaces, every room sprinklered,
in order to go ahead and provide what cover we can adjacent to the buildings. The
amenities. Greg went over the amenities quite well, I believe. The tiling of the Finch
Lateral. Our boundary is generally following the Finch Lateral/South Slough. Sometimes
is crosses over the center of it, sometimes it doesn't quite go that far. It's called in a
metes and bounds and not necessarily following the center of it. So, we don't
necessarily have ownership and certainly we don't own the entire Finch Lateral. So, the
question that I would have is can we legally tile that and trespass. With all that aside,
the South Slough, in my opinion, throughout the valley, acts more as a natural drainage
way. It is a natural low point. If you drive up there and look at it and it looks like Ten
Mile, Five Mile, Nine Mile Drain, versus a lateral that just happens to have a water right
associated with it and it is a supply ditch for some downstream users, hence, the name
Finch Lateral. Up and down that lateral, that slough, there are various pipe sizes. There
is 48 inches, there is some in excess of 48 inches. There is some box culverts. There is
some smaller than 48 inches. Downstream there has been some projects over the years
that have been allowed not to tile that. Valen Courts, Woodberry, I believe, some
projects north of Chateau Meadows, Waterberry, and Clearbrook and, then, maybe
even Fothergill going back many years ago. I'm not sure. Most of that, to my knowledge,
has been left open over the years. I did have a conversation with Nampa-Meridian
Irrigation District on September 13th and Bill Henson reiterated to that upstream of there
the county -- I'm assuming he meant the highway district, has a storm drainage to
overflow and when it rains the runoff goes into the slough and his comment to me was
even the 48 inch is not adequate. And I asked that -- and I have copies of the letter in
writing, I asked for him to put that in writing, but I haven't received that yet and I haven't
had any return phone calls. So, other than my testimony and my experience, I can't offer
any more than that on the Finch Lateral. But that's all I have to say and I will stand for
any questions.
De Weerd: Thank you. Any questions from Council? No? Okay.
Stanfield: Thank you.
De Weerd: Is there any further testimony? Caleb, I guess I have a question. Is there not
a needed landscape buffer between multi-family and commercial?
Hood: There is, Madam Mayor. By ordinance there is a 25 foot wide landscape buffer
requirement and that's -- I mentioned it in the staff report or to the Council that we did
not receive a revised landscape plan ten days prior to this hearing that we could
evaluate and update you as to the changes made. I did received a revised site plan, but
it doesn't depict landscaping and there was several changes to the landscape plan. I did
talk with Scott and Greg on the phone today. He mentioned that the five foot
Meridian City Council
October 3, 2006
Page 46 of 53
landscaping adjacent to the -- one of the -- the outparcels, if you will, on Eagle Road,
has now been provided some of the landscaping between -- on Eagle Road, the 35 foot
wide landscape buffer on Eagle Road, which is now being shown -- I do not -- still don't
have a copy of that landscape plan, but we will get that when that C-C lot develops, they
will be required to construct -- the higher intense use constructs the land use buffers.
So, yes, there is a requirement.
De Weerd: Wouldn't it makes sense, though, to have it on what the Council is looking
at?
Hood: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, we tried to get a revised plan for you to
look at and it just -- it wasn't provided, so --
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, do you have any questions for the applicant or staff?
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton.
Borton: If the applicant has a response to that -- the question on the landscape plan, is
that -- is that something that could be provided relatively soon or is there a reason that it
couldn't --
Rindlisbaker: When I was reading through the staff report last week --
De Weerd: If you will state your name again for the record
Rindlisbaker: Oh. Sorry. Greg Rindlisbaker. Address?
De Weerd: No. You're good.
Rindlisbaker: I was reading the staff report last week and came across that requirement
and didn't know that -- like I said, I received the staff report last week and I didn't know it
had been requested earlier than that, or I would have had it completed and to you, but
that's something I could have done, I imagine, within a week, week and a half.
De Weerd: Okay. Okay.
Stanfield: Could I add to that real quick? Scott Stanfield. I think I need to reiterate what
Caleb said. What you, really, have before you tonight is a site plan for the multi-family.
The commercial up front, Rindlisbaker is not sure what kind of tenant is going to be in
there and certainly if that application moves forward for a site plan approval we will have
to meet all of the requirements that you have, but I believe with the multi-family, the
requirement is to landscape the 35 foot up front. And Bach is willing to do that with the
multi-family, kind of dress up their approach. Back on the temporary approach coming
off Eagle, should you grant that variance, both sides of that will also be landscaped, just
Meridian City Council
October 3, 2006
Page 47 of 53
to kind if clean up the approach, because their access points will be right here and not
at their focal point, which is kind of backwards. So these will be landscaped, both sides,
35 foot buffer along Eagle will be landscaped. In fact, the revised site plan --
engineering site plan I have this area open for landscaping right there and we can put
landscaping on the corner there and on the corner there, just to kind of jazz up that
approach in the interim. So, again, as the commercial application comes forward we
won't have any problems meeting the city requirements for the commercial application.
Just wanted to kind of -- what they want to do to clean that area up now.
De Weerd: You know, I guess I understood that, but it doesn't show it and that is what
always concerns me on interpretation of those kind things and, then, to come in and
say, well, that plot is a little bit too narrow, we can't really do all of the landscaping and
maybe we need a variance and so --
Stanfield: I understand. I'll almost promise you that Bach won't come in for a variance,
but he'll have to make that commitment. And the staff report did have that ten days,
even if at the P&Z, it's just something we all got busy and the landscape architect got
busy and we overlooked it. So, it's not that it wasn't in the staff report, because Craig did
a wonderful job of putting the staff report together, even at the P&Z level. So, it's not on
the city, it's on us as a project team for not having that in ten days prior.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Council?
Silva: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, just a point of clarification. For the record
that NFP-13 is sprinkler all areas of those buildings. One of the other benefits -- and we
were speaking earlier about cooking safety and on the balconies, it would require that
all those balconies -- that particular standard would require all those balconies to be
also fire sprinklered. Just a point of clarification for Council to consider.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. I'm looking for your direction on what you would like to do.
Bird: Has the applicant had his rebuttal?
De Weerd: He doesn't -- can he rebut his engineer? I don't know. But does the applicant
have any further comment?
Rindlisbaker: What staff has asked about the landscaping plan, we will comply with
those requirements. If you have any other questions, I'll answers those as well.
De Weerd: Okay.
Rindlisbaker: Thanks.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council
October 3, 2006
Page 48 of 53
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton.
Borton: Greg, I do have one question or at least invite you to comment on Chief
Musser's remarks with regard to the drive aisle connectivity just to the --
Rindlisbaker: Over here?
Borton: Correct. And that's going to -- I think if I heard you right, it will be a -- basically a
parking lot drive aisle behind --
Rindljsbaker: Yeah. This piece here I have been told it's going up for auction.
Borton: Is it correct that it will connect all the way down to River --
Rindlisbaker: River Valley?
Borton: -- River Valley Road?
Rindlisbaker: The idea is, yes, it will, but I don't have control over these two parcels.
Borton: Right.
Rindlisbaker: So, that's going to have to be worked out with the city and those parcel
owners. However, by providing this cross-access here, this parcel now has access to
Eagle through my property and so it will have to have access out onto Eagle on that
piece. Also this parcel here, the same thing, they can come out onto this road and come
onto Eagle. So, we are reducing just by having a shared -- a shared cross-easement
through there. Instead of three accesses onto Eagle, one. And if we can have an access
easement through here, you reduce it down to the intersection and eliminate all those
accesses. So, that was the thought behind it. And I know that when I was starting with
this development I knew this was going to be a hot issue and I was just trying to come
up with any ideas to help resolve those concerns.
Borton: Madam Mayor. Then that access to Eagle Road is temporary until River Valley
is --
Rindljsbaker: Correct.
De Weerd: And so a full access?
Rindlisbaker: Temporarily we have requested a full access, yes.
De Weerd: And how many trips is this to generate?
Meridian City Council
October 3, 2006
Page 49 of 53
Rindlisbaker: I believe on multi-family it's about six -- but I haven't seen those numbers
lately, but about six trips per day per unit. So, 1,200 trips per day on the multi-family. I
don't know what will be generated from the commercial out front.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: If nobody needs anymore public input, I would move we close AZ 06-035, CUP 06-
022, VS 06-006, VAR 06-014, VAR 06-015 and VAR 06-016.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to close the public hearings on Items 11
through 15. All those in favor say aye. Okay. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Is there any discussion?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I'm always concerned when we have variances to make projects work, but
I'm really concerned when we have three in this particular project and possibly a fourth
as it relates to the Finch Lateral. It may not be a variance, but it may be a request to
deviate from what our requirement is. I like some of the features that I see here, but I
would like to see a good number of the features that have been represented, but not
specifically stated on paper as it relates to design, materials, colors, textures, esthetics.
Some of the features I saw and some of the displays they had were not, in my opinion,
particularly esthetic. Not that my opinion counts, but that's a concern I have. So, I
probably at this point would not be in favor of annexation of this particular request.
De Weerd: Okay.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: Regarding the Five Mile Drain or Finch Lateral, whichever you want to call it, I
think we are going to start getting ourselves in trouble -- this has been an issue since
the eight years I have been on the Council -- is our aquifer is going down and down and
down and -- because we are not flood irrigating anymore as much and we are seeming
Meridian City Council
October 3. 2006
Page 50 of 53
to want to tile everything and get it down and, then, when you got a drain ditch like that,
which is -- which is a drain ditch, when you're running off and stuff you have heavy
rains, you're -- if you have got a tile with no way for it to be open and having the runoffs
run into it, you're asking for trouble. So, I'm definitely not for tiling that. I am also, like Mr.
Rountree, I'm not really sold on this. This is something that I don't think I could buy into
right now. It's a lot of area in -- or a lot of density in one little area.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Just a specific comment about the issue which was -- not necessarily in front of
us at the current time, but from a policy perspective if we are going to consider
variances to our current ordinance, based on water use and aquifers, I think we need to
take a look at that ordinance and have our Public Works Department make some
determinations. I don't want to banter about the scientific need for those sorts of things
without good information. So, if that's something that -- certainly, like I said, is for
another discussion, I think we should take a look at and maybe have the Council
request that we have some more information.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Follow up on Councilman Wardle. We have had this discussion many times. We
have had the Bureau, the Corps of Engineers, in to talk to us. I'm sure Bradley has got a
lot of backup. I have backup that I will -- I can get for you, but that's not regarding this
project. It's something we do need to look at. I think we need to look at our whole UDC
ordinance. We have had more requests for variances since we adopted than we ever
did before. And I helped pass it.
De Weerd: Any further discussion? Okay. Do I have a motion?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we deny Item No. 11, annexation AZ 06-035.
Wardle: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to deny Item 11. Is there any
discussion?
Rountree: I have no further.
Meridian City Council
October 3, 2006
Page 51 of 53
De Weerd: Hearing none, Mr. Berg, will you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Okay. Item 12.
Rountree: Madam Mayor, before I make a motion, could I do a motion for all four of the
remainder hearings?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Rountree, yes, you can.
Rountree: Madam Mayor, I move that we deny Items 12, 13, 14 and 15, CUP 06-022,
VAR 06-014, VAR 06-015, VAR 06-016.
Wardle: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to deny Items 12 through 15. If there is
no discussion, Mr. Berg, will you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 16:
Ordinance No. AZ 06-009 Request for
Annexation and Zoning of 19.57 acres from RUT to R-8 zone for
Cedarcreek Subdivision by Centennial Development, LLC - 470 West
McMillan Road:
De Weerd: Thank you. Item 16 is Ordinance No. 06-1266. Mr. Berg, will you, please,
read this ordinance by title only.
Berg: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Ordinance No. 06-1266, an
Ordinance for annexation of property located in a portion of the south 1/2 of the
southeast 1/4 of Section 24, Township 4 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada
County, Idaho, as described in Attachment A and annexing certain lands and territories
situated in Ada county, Idaho, and adjacent and contiguous to the corporate limits of the
City of Meridian, as requested by the City of Meridian, establishing and determining the
land use zoning classification of said lands from RUT to R-8 in the Meridian City Code,
providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County Assessor, the
Ada County Recorder, the Idaho State Tax Commission, as required by law, and
providing for a summary of the ordinance and providing a waiver of the reading of the
rules and providing an effective date.