Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDecember 19, 2002 Meridian Planning & Zoning December 19, 2002 Page 60 of 116 McKinnon: I hope so. Zaremba: It was for March 31$1. McKinnon: March 31$1 would be the end date and that's the motion that, plus the 12 children. Zaremba: Yes cumulative 12, plus her own. McKinnon: Okay. Thank you. Borup: Okay. As I said, the ayes have it. Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE NAYE Borup: Thank you, Commissioners and thank everyone for being here and hope -- Zaremba: Thank you for participating in the process. Borup: We appreciate that and we hope this was a solution that was helpful for everyone. Rohm: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to take a recess. Borup: Yes. McKinnon: One question to Sharon. When will the City Council Meeting be held for this? Smith: We can rush this application and the notices -- if I get in first thing in the morning and do notices, it will be heard January 14th. McKinnon: Thank you. Borup: It tentatively could be -- they are going to try to get it on the January 14th Agenda. Commissioner Rohm asked for a short recess. I think that would be appropriate. (Recess at 10:00 P.M.) (Reconvene at 10:17 P.M.) Item 11. Public Hearing: RZ 02-008 Request for a Rezone of 1.99 acres from R- 15 to R-40 zones for pro~osed Creekside Arbour " by Bill and Lucy Leavell- 1425 Northeast 51 Street: . Meridian Planning & Zoning December 19, 2002 Page 61 of 116 Item 12. Public Hearing: CUP 02-040 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for apartment units on 1.99 acres in a proposed R-40 zone for proposed Creekside Arbour" by Bill and Lucy Leavell- 1425 Northeast 5th Street: Borup: We will continue our meeting this evening. Let's continue with Item Number 11 and 12, Public Hearing RZ 02-008, request for a rezone of 1.99 acres from R-15 to R-40 zones for proposed Creekside Arbour.- now, this should be three, rather than two? It is two. Okay. Creekside Arbour II by Bill and Lucy Leavell and Public Hearing CUP 02- 040, request for Conditional Use Permit for apartment units on the same 1.99 acres in a proposed R-40 zone at 1425 Northeast 5th Street. Open both these Public Hearings at this time and start with the staff report. McKinnon: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. I have outlined the actual site on the map that's hanging on the wall right now. The property is the bolded area. It's just off of Fairview Avenue and it's immediately adjacent to the other parts of the apartment complex and there was some discussion just a moment ago concerning whether this was part three. This is actually .. and they have clarified for us -- the annex of Phase 2. Again, the property is right here. This aerial photo was taken prior to the development of the rest of the apartment complex. However, this area that I'm showing with the highlighted pen, has already been developed with apartment type housing. There is another more recent.. no, thafs an older photo, wow. The proposed site is basically rectangular in shape. The site has been requested for a rezone, as you have noticed, to an R-40 zoning designation. The future land use comprehensive map states that that property should be zoned high density residential. R-40 fits into that requirement for the high density residential. If you consider the fact that the applicant is asking for six individual two-story apartments with eight apartments in each building that would be a total of 48 dwelling units on the site, for a gross density of 1.99 acres with, essentially, 24 units per acre, which is well under the 40, very similar in type, style .. actually, a little higher density than the existing site. There are some single unit apartments in this project, single room apartments. As far as the staff report goes, the major points of interest that I would like to point out to you would be the Site-Specific Requirements Number 1. There is A and B , but they should replace t he rock that's shown in the planter beds. Meridian City Code .- the Landscaping Ordinance specifically prohibits the use of non-organic material in required planter beds. These are required planter beds as buffers between land uses. They do need to change that to organic material. I talked with the applicant and they are okay with the Site-Specific requirement. Number.. letter B under one, if they add a minimum of 50 square foot planter with a two-inch caliper tree in between the three trash enclosures and the sidewalk without a landscaping break a nd I in early arranged parking. L et me explain what that means. As I read that and talk to the applicant, that's somewhat confusing in the wording. As you will notice in the Site Plan, there are three garbage facilities, or dumpsters, probably three-yard dumpsters that would be used by the apartments and the people that live within the apartments. The Landscape Ordinance requires that you have no more than 12 parking spaces linearly arranged without a landscape break or a break of some sort. Rather than install any landscaping to break up the linearly arranged parking, they have installed these trash enclosures to break that up. It doesn't Meridian Planning & Zoning December 19, 2002 Page 62 of 116 meet the intent of the Landscape Ordinance. If the applicant were to pull the trash enclosures, like the highlighted one, to the north and provide a 10-foot landscape buffer behind it immediately adjacent to the sidewalk, they could do one that's essentially 50 square feet. They could put a two-inch caliper tree in that, with the associated bark or whatever type of organic material plants or bark, that would go around that new landscape buffer. Essentially, the other two garbage dumpster areas as well could be pulled closer to the driveway aisles and the landscaped trees and landscaping could be placed there. I talked to the applicant about that and they don't have a problem with that, they are okay with that, and I wanted to point that out to you and offer some additional clarification. Those are the major issues that we really have. They don't seem real major ones. I explained them to you, I have talked to the applicant, they agree with the conditions of approval. I would ask if there are any questions that you might have of staff at this time. Borup: Any questions from the Commissioners? Centers: Yes, Mr. Chairman. Dave, this Item 6 under site-specific, does that address the letter from Loren Ross and that drainage problem on the Leavell property or.. McKinnon: Do you have the letter from Loren Ross? Centers: Did you see the letter with pictures? McKinnon: I don't have a letter from Loren Ross in my app. Okay. Bruce can address that. Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, the concern area -- the area of concern, the subject of Mr. Ross's letter, was for the phase of apartments that was built here, which was, I believe, under the Hunter Glen application, and also the phase that was in this area. Excuse me. Yes this area. Pertaining to the drainage that dropped into this ditch that goes right across here. Centers: Okay yes. Freckleton: This is the subject application area here. Centers: Thank you. Zaremba: I think the issue is he felt the drainage was not properly dealt with and if he is adjacent to this property, how convinced are we that drainage is going to be properly dealt with on this application specifically? Borup: And that's what Item Number 6 addresses. Zaremba: Yes. Meridian Planning & Zoning December 19, 2002 Page 63 of 116 McKinnon: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, I'd love to hear some testimony a bout that -- Borup: I'm sure we will have a chance for that. Okay any additional questions? Does the applicant have anything they'd like to add? Knopp: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, my name is Larry Knopp, 355 South 3 rd Street. I 'm the architect representing the Leavell's 0 n this project. I think Dave has covered all the site-specific on both the Conditional Use and on the rezone. As he has indicated, we don't have a problem with any of them and we will work with Planning and Zoning on that redesign of the trash and landscaping and get it to where we want it, so that we are in compliance with the Landscape Ordinance. Borup: Is that the intention on the trash to move it closer to the .. Knopp: Yes. Whatever works. Borup: -- parking and have the landscaping between that and the sidewalk? Knopp: Right. Borup: Okay. Knopp: And what we have designed as far as the trash enclosure goes is a facility that the Nampa Sanitary Trash Company likes to see. If we pushed it out towards the driveway, what we will probably end up doing, because what we have got is an offset gate on the front of it that allows the residents to put trash in the enclosure with the gate still closed and screening that trash enclosure. As everybody probably knows, if you close those gates and the people.. people won't open them, they will throw the trash over the -- and, then, it's just a big mess. Probably what we might end up doing, looking at and working with the trash company on this, is we might leave the gates flush, so that we don't have a problem of them encroaching into that driveway. Provide a little sidewalk on the back side next to the pedestrian walk that -. and an opening that the people can go into that trash enclosure, throw the trash into it, and I think that will work great for everybody that's concerned. We will work with them on that come up with a solution that will satisfy everybody on that one. Now onto the drainage issue, a letter from Mr. Ross on what has happened. I initially was not in the original phase or the original concept of Creekside Arbour, which is on the south side of Badley Street, which is .. let me see. Get this high tech stuff here. Which is in this area below here. That's the original phase that started this whole thing and which facilitated Badley Street being extended down and brought in -- Borup: Might want to just bring your mike over just a little bit. Knopp: And as the Commission very well knows, water rights, drainage ditches and irrigations ditches are fairly sacred in our state. We are required to continue drainage Meridian Planning & Zoning December 19, 2002 Page 64 of 116 through our project, if it's there and, continue it to the point where it either enters or exits. This is really what has transpired through the original phase and Phase 1, which I did, which is this phase and, then, Phase 2, which we are talking about right now, which is this portion. The Leavell's on the original improvement, the original rezone and Conditional Use for the apartment, had to construct Badley Street down an improvement -- improve it and, then, give it to ACHD. They improved it according to ACHD standards and they tiled and extended the drain ditch or the irrigation ditches that were in there through and that's what we have done. I went out and took some pictures of what we have got and what's happening there now. I thought maybe it might be a little better clarification to the Commission. This photograph shows -- that photograph shows the perimeter fencing and screening that was installed in Phase 1 that I worked on, which we have continued -- we have continued up the west side up and clear over to this point. The screen fence was done in recognition that this parcel, as soon as they could get to that phase, they would start on it and do that phase, so the .. Borup: Commissioners, the second photograph we have got is the one he's describing. Knopp: Right and that - we tiled that drain through and that ditch that goes along through there and must feed something down here. We brought it, tiled it to that point, and that's the picture that you guys are looking at, at this point in time. I think it's fairly evident through these photographs that that ditch has been there for a number of years and that's why the agencies, through the original phase and through Phase 1, made us tile it and continue that through, so .. and that's what we have done. Now, on this Phase 2, we will be .. we are required to have a civil engineer do a Drainage Plan and that drainage on this portion will be handled on that as required by the ordinance and by state law. We will have to submit a Drainage Plan during the permit process that they will review and approve. Rohm: Do you have a preliminary Drainage Plan? Knopp: No, we don't. Centers: Well, staff covered that. Knopp: N o. We have to provide 0 ne. I t's a pretty standard condition that that site drainage be handled and addressed during the construction drawing contract document phase and be approved prior to issuance of a Building Permit. Otherwise, we make it short and sweet and we don't have to drag this on all night. Borup: Any questions from the Commission? Zaremba: I'm just curious where.. I can see where the terminal end of that drainage is. Where does it begin and what is the source of whatever is being drained? Centers: Way down here. Meridian Planning & Zoning December 19, 2002 Page650f116 Knopp: It's back down over here someplace. This is the original phase and I'm not sure where and I can't give you that and maybe n and maybe the Leavell's can tell you where that ditch originated. I do know that it was tiled right along the street under the street and it stopped right under the street there on phase -- or on the original phase. Then, when we did Phase 1, which is this phase, we extended that, because the ditch was right on -- right on our property here. We extended it from the road down the fence line and day lighted it out at this ditch. That's all we did on Phase 1 and we won't be doing any -- Zaremba: I guess my question is whatever is in that water, I guess, that's being drained from somewhere, is not actually draining off of your property, it's being carried from some upstream place -- Knopp: That is correct. Zaremba: -- to there so -- Knopp: That is correct. Centers: That's your fence? Knopp: Pardon? Centers: That's your fence right there? Knopp: Yes. Centers: Yes. Knopp: Yes. Freckleton: Mr. Chairman? Borup: Some clarification? Freckleton: Well, Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to make a point that this discussion about this ditch was in a previous phase. It's not within the boundaries of this application. We are talking about stuff that has happened in previous phases, so keep that in mind. Centers: Works with me. McKinnon: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, I have one question for Larry, if I might. Mr. Knopp, the fence that is shown in this picture is the same type of fence that you're going to continue on this Phase 2 of this project, the concrete fence? Meridian Planning & Zoning December 19, 2002 Page 66 of 116 Knopp: No, it isn't. We did a concrete fence on a portion of it and at - I believe we did it -- did the concrete fence to this portion and, then, we continued a wood screen fence from there down and over to that point. Borup: So that fence is installed now? Knopp: Yes. That's installed now and will stay there. We elected to screen it and go through the cost of it now, because we knew that this phase was coming up and we would have to do that. One reason why we changed it to a wood fence was that concrete fence that we put in was very expensive and we would love to have done that, you know, and continued, but I mean there is a point in time where we have to be realistic on what the cost is, so .. also all the utilities are stubbed in for this. Everything is there. We have designed it, stubbed it in, so that we would disturb that private street out there very little. We didn't want to dig it up and tie back into it. The existing irrigation system landscape system will -- is an ongoing well, existing well that was there, that has been sized to accommodate the total project, so we don't have any -. you know, we don't have any problem there as far as irrigation or happen to address it from the ditch that's there, so -. Borup: Okay. Thank you. Knopp: Thank you. I could probably leave these other pictures, if you would like, of what's transpired as far as that ditch, but as Bruce had indicated, that was -- that was originally done under phase -- under the original phase of this and so we will wait for- Borup: Yes. It's off site from this application. Anything else from the applicant? Leavell's have anything else to add and -- Leavell: I'm Bill Leavell and it's 2720 South Areola .- or North.. South Areola Lane. Anyway, that ditch originated clear up here by another apartment complex on the other side of me and, then, came down behind my property. I had to tile it .. put a ditch in under the road right here. Anyway, we tiled that under the road also. When I bought the land from Ross right there, the little square you can see, the first part of Badley, it went all the way down to Badley with that and quite extensive putting that road, too, because we had a bog right in there in there where that creek was and we had to dig that out. We lost a Cat down there, too, one time, a D-6, and had to dig that thing out. Anyway, that's where the water is coming from. Then, it's coming from up here at the corner at 21/2 Street there, that woman flood irrigates and there is a steady stream of water when she's irrigating coming down Badley and then going into that ditch right there. That's where most of the water is coming from and it's coming from this other side, too, where the houses are built. They irrigate and water comes down there so I'm seeing all the water coming from 2 1/2 Street down. Borup: Okay. Thank you. We have only got one person left. Mr. Ross, did you have something you would like to add? Meridian Planning & Zoning December 19, 2002 Page 67 of116 Ross: I don't have anything to say. You have said - I'm Loren Ross. I own the adjoining property to the project and -- Centers: Excuse me. Right here? Ross: That's correct. I own from Fairview to Badley continuous 3rd Street being the .. East 3 rd Street being the west boundary part 0 f the property. Tot he east would be Leavell's. Most of what was said was accurate. There were some places that I felt was inaccurate that has been testified. I realize this is not consistent with the application, but I can't support future development of property until we address what's already been in place. I feel it's been.. the drain hasn't been properly dealt with and the people that are responsible for it and that could be a collage of Leavell's, ACHD, or the City of Meridian. Somewhere -- I sold land for the road to come through and I sold that for a couple of reasons. One of them to be a good neighbor and secondly, I think it's for the betterment of the community that this property should be developed, as opposed to sitting the way it is so I did sell that property. The part you see from my property line going east, if I'm not mistaken, that's private -- that's a private road. From there to there, I believe, is private, from here to here is public, if I'm not .. if I understand correctly. If, in fact, this drains into the same drain, I'm not sure that's a legal drain, being private property, it has to drain into a drain ditch. I did have conversations with Bill before this phase was in. I was down there, because we wanted to talk about the fence and he told me the type of fence he was going to put in here. I saw this drain and I said, well, how are you going to deal with that drain, because it was directed onto his property. I was told at that time that it would be incorporated into the drain beds for their project. Consequently, my letter - the first letter dated in March of 2001, I was down doing some maintenance on the property and, low and behold, it's right there. Now, there is a reason he lost his Cat right there and there is a reason this land is all filled, because of the bog. It always was. We have owned the property for 54 years so we have a little reference point. This has been blocked through here for 20 years so if all of this so-called drainage is coming through here, where has it been going? Not on my land. The only thing you see on that ditch is stagnate level high water table. Your water table through all of this of area right here is roughly three and a half feet. You can go dig a posthole anywhere, come back 20 minutes later, and it will be half full of water. Don't matter, you can do it today, you can do it during irrigation, that's what it is. You can lose all kinds of big equipment down there, but it's not because of irrigation, it's the high water table. The water right here -- and at my expense I tiled right here down to a collector point. This is the intersection of Gruber and East 3rd. I tiled this about two years ago and this is where the water comes down from 2 1/2 Street here and when they put the road in they tiled right under right here, put the collector box right here. I put in a collector box and tiled right on down to the collector point. This is all high. This is all blocked. If there is water coming here, why do we never see it? All you ever see is static water level, so .. Borup: So you're saying this is a drain ditch that doesn't have any water in it? Meridian Planning & Zoning December 19, 2002 Page 68 of 116 Ross: That's correct. Hasn't for 20 years. This property - my property has had the water right sold off of it for 20 years. We sold it off and a II of this other I and that's developed in here that's been less than none of the irrigation that came down through here. All of this land as been filled this has been filled. We watch this rather regularly, we keep it cleaned off, and we know what's going on with this land. There is no water going in through here. Hasn't been for 20 years. Centers: So nothing's coming out of that drainpipe? Ross: No. Borup: Sounds like there is no -- Ross: Well, it is now they are draining Badley Street. Badley Street drains into that pipe and that was my comment. If Badley Street - Centers: Due to the slope of the street? Ross: That's where it -- every street has to drain and that's where it went. That's where they put it. Badley Street - now my comment, again, from right here to here -- and I think your records will verify this, that's a private road. Since when can you drain private parking lots or private roads into a .. if it were -- a drain ditch? It's not allowed. Ask your Counsel. Wollen: I don't have sufficient information to give an answer on that. Ross: Well, I have done some research. It's not legal. Anyway, this is filled and this is high so, I'm not sitting here trying to make impossible situations. I sold the road that I felt was being congenial to the community and to a neighbor and I end up with a proposed drainage problem that cost more than the land ever was worth. All I want people to do is step up and take responsibility for the drain. Cure it. They can either go back into their property and put a drain at that end or they can tile across mine. There are no easements. It's not like that ditch has easements. Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, if I could ask Mr. Ross a question. When you said tile it across your property, Mr. Ross, what alignment would you propose? Ross: I would propose going down to -- right along Badley Street. Freckleton: Down to the pipe that you installed? Ross: My pipe probably wouldn't be big enough to install it, if it will .. or to carry it. If it's adequate, I don't have a problem tapping into it. I ran a 12 incher, but what I see there is 24-inch or thereabouts am I correct? You know, you start running 24-inch times 400 feet you can do the math on that. I don't feel I should have to be responsible for that. Meridian Planning & Zoning December 19, 2002 Page 69of116 Centers: Well, I think, Mr. Ross, Mr. Freckleton pointed out earlier.. and you probably knew that -- this issue is not part of our application. I think what you have done is come of record, rightfully so, and, then, you take the issue up with the legal sources or the city regarding drainage off a private road, et cetera, and take it further from there and you have made your point tonight. I would have been here, too, if I were you but it's not part of this application. Ross: The only part of the application I would see, you asked if I would put the blessings on it. I won't. That's the question you asked me is that correct? Centers: No. Ross: You asked me to make a comment on the proposed.. you didn't ask -- this letter didn't ask if I had comments to come to this meeting? Borup: Yes and that's what we asked for is your comment on this application. Centers: I didn't ask you that tonight. Ross: But you asked me if I would concur or accept this -- more development of land, I won't so for whatever that's worth, you can take that for what it's worth. It's a negative. Borup: Okay. Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, for the record, I just want to point out that I received this late this afternoon, so the little bit of time I did have to look into it prior to this meeting, that was when I found these old aerial photos that we included in the presentation for this evening. In looking at the '95 aerial, what I was trying to determine was the existence of the ditch crossing the property. Was it -- does it appear to be historically open during the time of construction. This photo was taken after Phase 1 or Hunter Glen Apartments going in. It's really hard to tell from this aerial, but it does appear that the ditch is pretty well defined across the property. Ross: It would look defined from an aerial, because, as I say, it has static water in it in the areas that aren't filled and you will see cattails. Freckleton: Does it go into a pipe or.. Ross: Right there. Freckleton: Continue on across the -- Ross: The pipe's right there. Freckleton; Okay. Meridian Planning & Zoning December 19, 2002 Page700f116 Ross: The collector right there and it goes like this. Freckleton: Okay and, then, in this photo it was taken in the year 2000, it appears that the ditch has been obliterated it's gone. Ross: There has been some fill right in here for 20 years. In other words, it wouldn't flow. Freckleton: Okay. Ross: You asked me to take it up with the proper sources. I did write the city.. Mr. Brad Watson, which is your City Engineer.. Centers: I read that yes. Ross: But did you notice the date on it? Centers: Yes. Sure did. Ross: Ask me if I got a response. Centers: I guess I don't need to ask. Ross: Well, you might so that's why I'm here. Center: Yes I don't blame you a bit. Let me ask -- you made the comment that it runs into here. You said you put a drainpipe in here? Ross: That's correct. Centers: And, then, this runs into it? Rohm: No. There is no water that goes into that. Centers: Okay. I didn't catch you on that. Ross: What is the issue right here, 2 1/2 Street has gravity irrigation, that's the street right here. It comes down here and when people are through with their water, it goes through a collector box and comes right through here and, then, up until two years ago, this was an open ditch down through here. There were cattails and kids played in it to the point they would come down and plug up this drain from this water coming through here. Then, it would flood all through this area, because kids would throw boards or whatever the case. Two years ago, I had a company come in and tile this all through here to alleviate that problem of the open ditch, but it's been this route for many, many years and that's why this is all plugged off. There was no purpose. Meridian Planning & Zoning December 19, 2002 Page 71 of 116 Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, I don't -- I don't know who.. I can't remember off the top of my head who the engineering firm was that did the original designs for .. Ross: Pinnacle. Freckleton: It was Pinnacle that did Hunter Glen? Ross: That's the names I have was Pinnacle. Freckleton: Hubble did the 0 riginal? Okay. That's when I understand that the first catch basins were installed here was with Hunter Glen Apartments. With the second phase.. when it went in, they picked the discharge point up and put it in pipe over to this discharge point is that correct? Ross: That's correct. Freckleton: Okay at the point in time when Hubble did this original design for Hunter Glen, I believe it was their duty to .. they had to design the drainage system for the project. That might be a place to go back, start asking some questions as to why they.. if this ditch was an abandoned ditch, why did they design their discharge going into an abandoned ditch? Ross: When this road here was extended, Badley, all through here, it's tiled and a collector box right there catches the irrigation for 2 1/2 Street. It goes under the street right here and up until two years ago, it was an open ditch from here to here. I had a contractor put in a collector box right here and tile down here and carries that same water. Why this is down here I haven't a clue, because there is no collection of water here. The only collection of water that is there would be here now -. and the question was asked why is there a 20-inch tile there? Well, because Badley Street drains from here down to here and I'm going to guess here, but if anybody that wants to look to validate if I'm right or wrong, I'm going to suspect that from here to here dumps to there also, which is a private road. Am I accurate? Freckleton: It probably does. Ross: I'm speculating, though. Freckleton: I know there is a - in this project there is a valley gutter that flows this direction back to the west. Ross: That's my point. Freckleton: The size of the pipe had to be designed based on some historical criteria, whether it was.. you know, they had to have some historical flows or something to size that pipe. Meridian Planning & Zoning December 19, 2002 Page 72 of 116 Ross: Or the run-off of Badley Street for a block. Freckleton: So, yes, like I say, I got this, this afternoon. I do think it merits going back and looking into the records and finding out what happened. Ross: For the record, I did have Ada County Highway District come out and look at it and basically what I got was a lot of waffling and tongue wollering and see you later so that's where we are at. Centers: Mr. Freckleton, Mr. Watson is your superior isn't he? Freckleton: Correct. Centers: Correct. Ross: That's alii have to say. Borup: Thank you. Do you have any final comments, Larry? Knopp: Yes. Larry Knopp. This, as I had stated, on the original phase of Creekside Arbour or Hunter Glen or whatever the name was -- because I was not associated in that.. they were responsible for putting in .. extending Badley Street. They worked with ACHD on that, they worked on the drainage, and so what was established in the drainage and what's happening there was under that phase originally. Now, again, I must reiterate, as the Commission, I'm sure, is very well aware of, that you can't stop natural flow, whether it's drainage or whether it's irrigation water, through the state. Ditches, drainage, irrigation, are sacred and you have to maintain that. Size of the pipe and what's going there is kind of sized according to passed history and what's it collecting. You know, we would have -- I'm sure the Leavell's would have loved to be able to say, you know, nothing's going on with that, we will just cover over that ditch, we won't go through the expense of that. We will just get on with our original phase and not have to go with that, but as the law requires, they must maintain flow of that ditch and that's what they did. Like I said, on this phase that I was associated with, we just had to extend that pipe that was brought to that point, down the property line, so that we would continue that flow of this ditch, whether it's active or whether it isn't and so we did that. We day lighted the pipe, and Mr. Ross has got the good fortune of doing the same thing whenever he develops out or whenever somebody buys it and does that. That's -. that's part of the deal. Now, the Leavell's would be more than happy to work with Mr. Ross, go down to ACHD or whatever, and try to resolve any solution that might be rising from drainage off of Badley Street, but that was all engineered to specifications of ACHD and approved in the original phase, so .- Borup: So the extension of pipe that you did, I'm assuming is the diameter that was in existence back from the original phase? Knopp: Yes. Meridian Planning & Zoning Oecernber 19, 2002 Page 73 of 116 Borup: It's the same size pipe that was extended on through? Knopp: Right because -- and if there is no pipe existing, then, we have to use history, size of the ditch, to try to -- to try to make sure that we don't neck that down and throttle it down, that that diameter is maintained. It wasn't -- it wasn't our wish to have the 24- inch, it was - it was a design that dictated it to us to maintain that flow and continuity through that property and onto the next property, so -- Borup: Thank you. Knopp: Anything else? Borup: Anything other questions from the Commission? Knopp: Thank you. Borup: Commissioners? Centers: Well, I would move we close the Public Hearing. Zaremba: Second. Borup: Motion and second. All in favor? Any opposed? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Centers: Well, I can -. I think I can understand Mr. Ross's concerns, but, as we stated earlier, they are not part of this application and he's gone on record and I think, if I were him, I would have done the same thing. I would like to make a motion that we recommend approval to City Council for Item Number 11 on our Agenda. RZ 02-008, request for a rezone of 1.99 acres from R-15 to R-40 zone for proposed Creekside Arbour by Bill .. that's Arbour II, by Bill and Lucy Leavell, residing at 1425 Northeast 51h Street, including all staff comments related to that. Mathes: Second. Borup: Motion and second. All in favor? Any opposed? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Centers: I would also like to recommend approval to the City Council for Item 12, CUP 02-040, request for a Conditional Use Permit for apartment units on 1 .99 acres in a proposed R-40 zone for proposed Creekside Arbour II by Bill and Lucy Leavell, residing at 1425 Northeast 5th Street, including all staff comments pertaining to that. Mathes: Second. Meridian Planning & Zoning December 19, 2002 Page 740f116 Borup: Motion and second. All in favor? Any opposed? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Item 7. Public Hearing: Wireless Communication Tower Ordinance: Borup: Thank you all. Okay. Item Number 7, Public Hearing on Wireless Communication Tower Ordinance and that's what I thought. Open this.. I think if that was a problem, it was -- was that at a workshop? We did it in a workshop and so we have gone through everything. I think we have hammered everything out and these are being noticed as a Public Hearing, so I'd like to start with opening the Public Hearing on the Wireless Communication Tower Ordinance at this point and turn the time over to Mr. McKinnon. Zaremba: You know we are not going to let it rest with -- Borup: Yes. The Public Hearing, so we will start with the staff report and go from there. McKinnon: T hank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. I don't believe Commissioner Rohm was a Commissioner a t the time we went through this back in August, but the City of Meridian currently does not have a Cell Tower Ordinance or any ordinances that address the issue of wireless communication towers. Whether they are cell or beeper type of PCS or.. so .. and we felt that, it would be appropriate at this time to adopt some language for that. We held a meeting.. several meetings, actually, and we have discussed a few different items. One of the recommendations that came out from our workshop from the Planning and Zoning Commission that was requested to be added to the wireless communication tower you have in front of you is found in the Recommendation Page 1 and that was to add that they shall be no signs or banners attached to the cell tower. That was, essentially, the only major change that you requested to be placed on the application that was before you in August. Essentially, we have set up an ordinance that's very similar to the City of Eagle, Ada County, Boise City's, took the things that we felt were the best from the -- from those in the area, took some additional language from other cities. We modified it further to include some stealth tower information, which you don't find in very many other jurisdictions, to allow stealth towers as a permitted use in several zones. That's what you have got in front of you tonight. I won't go into an in-depth overview, but we need something in place, we are still receiving applications for cell towers, and it would be really nice to be able to tell people what the requirements are for cell towers in the City of Meridian. With that I would ask if you have any questions. Centers: Mr. Chairman, would it be appropriate to open all three Public Hearings, we discuss them all, and, then, vote on all of them at the same time? Could we do that? Borup: Could we vote on all of them at the same time? Centers: Separately, just like as we do on ..