Loading...
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.