Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007 06-05 Meridian City Council Meetina June 5. 2007 A meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:17 P.M., Tuesday, June 5,2007, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd. Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, Keith Bird, Joe Borton, and David Zaremba. Members Absent: Charlie Rountree Others Present: Bill Nary, Will Berg, Anna Canning, Brad Watson, Len Grady, John Overton, Joe Silva, Bill Johnson, Bill Parsons, and Dean Willis. Item 1: Roll-call Attendance: Roll call. X David Zaremba X Joe Borton o Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird .lL Mayor Tammy de Weerd De Weerd: I'd like to welcome you here this evening. I'm sorry for our delay. We appreciate you joining us. We will start tonight's meeting, it is 7:17, with roll call attendance. Mr. Berg. Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance: De Weerd: Thank you. Tonight we will be led in the pledge of allegiance -- oh, I see some Boy Scouts. Would any of you boys like to lead us in the pledge? All of you. All right. If you will, please, rise. (Pledge of allegiance recited.) De Weerd: Thank you so much. I do have some pins that I would like to give you for leading us tonight and I'm sure Councilman Bird has candy. I do the healthy stuff and -- thank you for the last minute add there. We do enjoy having our youth join us and certainly lead us in the pledge. If you could share with us what troop you are from. Six hundred? Okay. And who is sponsoring you? Thank you. Thank you for being here tonight. Item 3: Community Invocation by Bishop John Wheeler of the Paramount Ward of the LOS Church: De Weerd: Okay. Item No.3 is our community invocation. We will be led tonight by Bishop John Wheeler with the Paramount Ward of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter- day Saints. Thank you for joining us tonight. Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 2 of 84 Wheeler: Our Father in Heaven, as we come here this evening at the beginning of this City Council meeting, Father, we give thee thanks for the many blessings that are ours to enjoy, the liberties that our ours here in this country and the -- not only the wonderful nation that we live in, but the wonderful community that Meridian is. The growth and the prosperity and the opportunities that we enjoy. Father, amidst these opportunities come challenges as well and we pray that thy Spirit would watch over and be with the proceedings here tonight. We are grateful for the members of this City Council, the Mayor, and the other people who support the activities that will be going on here this evening and we pray that thou would watch over them and bless them with wisdom and guidance and direction that we as a community may work together in the spirit of collaboration and have thy wisdom and guidance to be upon us. Father, we are again grateful for the blessings of the area in which we live and for the opportunities that are before us as members of this wonderful city and community. These things we give thee thanks for and pray for in the name of thy son, Jesus Christ, amen. Item 4: Adoption of the Agenda: De Weerd: Bishop Wheeler, if I could also give one of our City of Meridian pins. And I give you the coveted water tower pin. Thank you for joining us. Okay. Item No. 4 is adoption of the agenda. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: On the Consent Agenda, Item A has been asked to be tabled to July 3rd, 2007. On Department Reports, Item D, Legal Department, has asked to pull that discussion. and Planning and Zoning Department has added -- asked to add Department Report Item E. And Item No. 16 Resolution number is 07-562. Items 19 and 20 have been asked to be continued to June 26,2007. And Items 25,26,27 and 28 have been asked to be continued to July 10th, 2007. And with that I move we accept the amended agenda. Borton: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve the agenda as amended. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 5: Award of City of Meridian Scholarships: De Weerd: Item 5 is the award of the City of Meridian Scholarships. We awarded two of them a couple of weeks ago and these two were unable to join us at that time. So, if I could, Council, let me first read to you of our recipients and then, I will ask them to join me in the front. So, our first one is Jared Truxall and, Jared, if I messed up your last Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 3 of 84 name I apologize. Jared, where are you? There you are. Thank you for joining us tonight. Jared is a 2007 Graduate of Centennial High School. He has been awarded a one thousand dollar City of Meridian Scholarship towards his study of Engineering and Biomedical Engineering at Boise State University. Jared is a National Honor Society member who excels in math and science. He has volunteered with First Book, the Meridian Food Bank, Project Resell, and assembling care packages for soldiers and the homeless. He is also an avid basketball and soccer player. And we recognize your contributions to our community and we thank you for your leadership and the fact that you give back. Our second one is Drew Lacombe and Drew is a 2007 Graduate from Mountain View High School, has been awarded also a one thousand dollar scholarship from the City of Meridian, which will help him study Pre-Health Sciences and Political Science at the University of Washington. Drew is extremely active in school clubs and organizations and he is on the Mayor's Youth Advisory Council as the Vice-Chair, and has volunteered more than 285 hours of service to the area care centers. In 2005 he was one of only 27 juniors in the U.S. selected to serve as a page in the U.S. Senate. Drew's ultimate professional goal is to become an emergency room doctor. I can tell you what, it has been my greatest privilege to serve with the youth in our community and to any of our youth who step forward and give back to our community, learn so many valuable life lessons and they have, indeed, emphasized that our future is bright. We have great leaders coming up and they may be 30 percent of our population, but they are one hundred percent of our future and it's so important to recognize these young people for what they do in our communities. And I do have a certificate that I would like to present to them. The checks will be given to their higher learning institutions directly and so Drew and Jared, if you will come up and join me in the front. And I will warn you, usually I get emotional about this and I have been really good so far, so so far so good. Jared, this states in recognition of your leadership and service to our community. You truly make a difference and we appreciate everything you have done. Congratulations. And Norman Andrew Lacombe, same to you, buddy. Would either of you like to say anything? Truxall: Thank you. De Weerd: Drew? Okay. There you go. Lacombe: Well, I have been extremely active this year and my senior year has really been the most difficult and challenging with my school year and I graduated this past Saturday from Mountain View High School with a 3.96 GPA cumulative and know that I wouldn't be able to do that without having a -- that solid rock of a foundation of the council that I went to almost twice monthly and that was an awesome place to be able to come to meet together with the other youth in our community and it was a great way for me to actually engage myself with helping others in our community and I hope that all of you will encourage your young ones and your children and friends to also join up when they are high school age. So, thank you and thank you, City Council, for the scholarship. Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 4 of 84 De Weerd: I'd also like to thank the parents and the family members of these young people. Usually they model what they -- the people that they live with and we appreciate you sharing your young adult with our community and we wish you success, both you and Drew. Good luck. Item 6: Consent Agenda: A. Tabled from May 22,2007: Resolution No. : Adoption of Records Retention Schedule: Table to July 3, 2007 B. Approve Minutes of May 8, 2007 Pre-Council Meeting: C. Approve Minutes of May 15, 2007 City Council Regular Meeting: D. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: RZ 07- 002 Request for a Rezone of 0.628 of an acre from I-L to C-G zone for the Lynn Thomas Property by Lynn Thomas - north of East Franklin Road and east of Meridian Road: E. License Aareement with Nampa Meridian Irriaation District for Pathway Aareement for Sprina Creek Subdivision: F. Cooperative Aareement with Briahton Corporation for Water Improvements in Coordination with Brighton Corporation Project Intersection Meridian Road and McMillan Road: G. Contract for the Storm Water Manaaement Support with Brown and Caldwell. Inc. for $39,700.00: H. Amendment to Roster of Qualified Consultants for Enaineerina Services for Water, Wastewater and Miscellaneous Public Works Projects: I. First Amendment to Aareement for Professional Services with Kay Frances Company: J. Approval of Bid for Water and Sewer Improvements in Coniunction with the Intersection of Meridian and McMillan Roadway Proiect to Briahton Corporation: K. Contract Chanae Order for Adventure Island Splash Pad Installation with Haemker General Contracting: L Approve New Beer & Wine License for Ustick Chevron. LLC by Steve Eddy located at 770 West Ustick Road: Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 5 of 84 De Weerd: Okay. Item No.6 is our Consent Agenda. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Item A has been asked to be tabled to July 3rd, 2007. With that I move that we approve the rest of the Consent Agenda and for the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 7: Department Reports A. Mayor's Office 1. Appointments to the Parks and Recreation Commission: De Weerd: Okay. Item NO.7 under Department Reports. I'm very pleased, Council, to have in front of you appointments to the Parks and Recreation Commission of three individuals and I believe that I noted on their letters of interest and/or resumes when their terms would be -- what their terms are. First with Phillip Liddell and is Phillip here? Thank you for joining us. Phillip has a very interesting background in architecture and engineering -- in working for architectural and engineering firms and he's also been directly involved in helping design and manage the varsity basketball athletic field improvements at Eagle High School and so he -- he went through a very vigorous screening with myself and two of our parks and recreation commissioners and we are very pleased to bring his name forward to you. His term would expire in October of 2007 and I would anticipate, if we haven't totally overwhelmed him, that he will be brought back in front of you at that time. The second name I bring to you is Tom LeClaire. Tom, are you here tonight? There you are. Thank you for being here. And I'll ask each of you if you would like to share anything with the Council afterwards. So, Tom is a resident here in Meridian. He's also been a councilman and a planning and zoning commissioner up in my home town of Moscow. I was going to say Meridian, because I think this is my home town. But that's where I grew up. And he brings some -- some good perspective, as well as some great experience from another community and sharing some of the things that they did to promote and elevate their parks system. The third name I bring to you is Gary Shelley. And, Gary, are you here tonight? There you are. You know, I know your faces, but it seems like I know a number of faces in the Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 6 of 84 audience, so forgive me. Gary has great experience. He has lived and breathed parks and recreation. He is the Eagle Island State Park park manager and he's very involved in youth athletics as well. His position is to October 2009 and Tom's was to be to October of 2008. They -- all three are filling existing seats of members who have stepped off for various reasons and, Council, I bring these as the slate of appointees to fill our parks commission. Any questions? Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Borton: The credentials of the three gentlemen that you have just introduced to us are phenomenal and I think they are going to be a great asset to our Parks and Recreation Commission. I know this Council truly appreciates the input of the commission in all respects and I gladly welcome all three of you to that job and appreciate hearing more from you in the future. And I would -- I would move to appoint to the Parks and Recreation Commission Phillip Liddell, Tom LeClaire, and Gary Shelley with enthusiasm and welcome them immediately. Zaremba: And I second that. We appreciate the volunteer spirit. That's wonderful. Borton: Did they volunteer? Do they know that? De Weerd: No. That's why I'm not going to invite them to speak until after the vote. Zaremba: Did we leave that part out? De Weerd: So, I do have a motion and a second. Is there any discussion? Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Berg: Madam Mayor, if I just could reiterate, Tom was expiring October '07. Phillip was expiring October of '08. And Gary is October '09. De Weerd: Gary, '09. Tom '08. And Phillip in '07. That's what I have on my sheet. Berg: Okay. De Weerd: And I think that's what I left on their voicemail.so -- Phillip, do you have anything you would like to share? You have to come up front. You get to come up front. Liddell: I'm happy just to be a part of this -- Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 7 of 84 De Weerd: You'll have to turn the mike toward you. Liddell: I'm happy to be here and to volunteer my time and I look forward to contributing to the success of Meridian Parks and Recreation in any kind of advisory capacity that I can be and looking forward to it, so -- De Weerd: Thank you. Well, two of the four of us have been on the Parks Commission in the past, so -- and, certainly, I can speak for all of us up here, we all have a passion for parks. Liddell: I do, too. I'm looking forward to it. I thank you and I'll be at the next meeting. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Which is I think next week. Right, Doug? Yes. Zaremba: It's Wednesday, the 13th. De Weerd: Tom, do you have anything? LeClaire: I also thank you for your vote of support this evening and a great community to be involved in and look forward to a lifetime of involvement in the Meridian community and this is a great place to start. So, I want to thank you all for your vote of confidence and I will get to work next week. Thanks. De Weerd: Thank you. Gary? Shelley: There is not much to add to that. I'd just like to thank you for the opportunity. I'm looking forward to giving back to the community. I think we have got a wonderful place to live and look forward to working with all of you. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. And, Council, I'm excited to work with these gentlemen. They each have a passion and a vision that they have explained and I think our commission will have some good energy on it. So, we appreciate you joining us here tonight. B. Public Works Department 1. Budaet Amendment for GIS Consulting Services: De Weerd: Okay. Our next Department Report is our Public Works Department. It looks like we will kick it off with Len. Grady: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Public Works Department is requesting a budget amendment for GIS Consulting Services. That would -- the existing budget is 5,000 dollars. We just need to bump that to 10,000 dollars. That money is used primarily for making existing routines and stuff more efficient. So, I would -- it would be an effort to make things more streamlined. So, with that I will stand for questions. Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 8 of 84 De Weerd: Thank you, Len. Council, any questions? Bird: No. Borton: Madam Mayor, if there is no other discussion, I would move that we approve the budget amendment for the GIS Consulting Services in the amount of 5,000 dollars. Bird: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve the request in front of you. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. 2. Request for Waiver of City Services Hook-Up Requirements for Tricia Donoghue with the Treasure Valley Veterinary Hospital at 2600 South Meridian Road: De Weerd: Okay. Item No. 7-B-2, request for waiver. Brad, did you want to introduce this item? Watson: Yes, Madam Mayor, City Council members. This may be titled just a little bit incorrectly. This is a project that, in concept, came to you about a year ago. It's the Treasure Valley Vet Clinic on 2600 South Meridian Road. It's directly east across Highway 69 from the new Nazarene church that's going up. They are currently in the county and not annexed. They are proposing some modifications to the existing business and the applicant is here and he can detail those for you a little bit more. Anyway, about a year ago it sounded like you were -- the Council was in support of this, as long as they could take another look at the plan and what was going to transpire. The one thing that's changed from a year ago is that there is now city water in front of the facility and depending on how you look at it, sewer is in the general vicinity of the project. It's my understanding that to move forward with an Ada County permit they do need city water and fire protection on the site. So, I believe that they are asking to connect to city water for both fire protection and domestic use and not have to pull the sewer 400 feet from the south up to their property. There is an intervening property immediately south of theirs that needs to develop for that sewer to connect their site. Just for the record, there is a sewer main on the west side of Highway 69, but reasonable access is kind of hard to qualify for that property. It would involve a bore across a state highway. So, I'm not sure that's financially feasible. I believe -- and the applicant can clarify for me, but I believe the question here tonight is should they proceed through the Ada County process for -- for conditional use or should they approach the city and annex now and not necessarily waste their time with the county. They are contiguous to city limits. But the sewer question needs to be addressed. Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 9 of 84 Would they be required to pull that sewer up across an intervening property now or could you write something into the conditions of annexation that would make any further redevelopment of their property kick that sewer requirement in. And I hope I didn't butcher that too bad. They have got several representatives here that can answer questions better than I can. De Weerd: Okay. Nickel: Good evening, Madam Mayor, Council. Shawn Nickel, 148 North 2nd Street, Suite 101, in Eagle, here tonight representing the Treasure Valley Vet Clinic. As you, hopefully, recall, I was here about a year ago asking members of the Council permission to move forward with the county CUP process for improving the Treasure Valley Vet Clinic facility at that time and it still remains a concern with the availability of sewer. We proceeded after your guidance last year working on the application with Ada County and, unfortunately, it's taken us about a year to get that application submitted to Ada County. It's submitted, it hasn't been accepted yet pending the outcome of tonight's question. As you recall, the property is about two acres in size and there is room on the property for future redevelopment of not only the vet clinic, but also some future office buildings. What we proposed a year ago was a promise to you that to move forward with the county, because we don't have to rezone the property, we can do the vet clinic improvements in the RUT zone as it currently stands and we could also utilize the existing septic system with a small upgrade. So, we move forward, a couple months ago we started questioning -- as we were going through our design we were questioning fire protection with Mr. Silva of the fire department and come to find out we have to have a fire hydrant on the site. That would require us to be provided with city water for that fire hydrant. So, we are submitted to Ada County, we have spent the time and energy to go that direction. We are -- we have proposed a condition of approval to the county that any future redevelopment would require an annexation request to the City of Meridian, in addition to connection to facilities for any future redevelopment of the property. What we ask tonight is -- and we would still like to move forward with the county, but we need water for fire protection. We would also like it for our domestic use, since we are going to be bringing it on site for the fire use. So, that's -- that's kind of where we are today. And I'll stand for any questions you may have. De Weerd: Thank you, Shawn. Council, any questions? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Nickel: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Anything further, Brad? Watson: No, Mayor. Meridian City Council June 5. 2007 Page 10 of 84 De Weerd: Okay. Council, any further information needed at this time? Okay. Do I have a motion? Zaremba: Madam Mayor, I guess I do have a question. Would we need to make the requirement to hook up in the future, if there is any further development, a part of this motion or are we accepting that that's a condition the county is going to lay upon them? De Weerd: That's a standard condition that our staff has typically made. Zaremba: Okay. In that case, Madam Mayor, I move we approve Item 2 -- item B-2, request for a waiver of city services hook up. Bird: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve the request in front of you. Any discussion? Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: Just -- I don't know, I think Mr. Watson's comments were on point. I don't know if that really accurately describes what it is we are doing. But the waiver of city services hook up -- I guess the intent of the motion is to actually approve the hook up to the water for the hydrant and domestic use and not require annexation at this time. Zaremba: Yeah. I actually was -- I was going by the description in the discussion, not the title necessarily, so -- Borton: Okay. Zaremba: Yes. I intended to have it understood the way you expressed it. De Weerd: So, you're approving the hook up to water and not requiring hook up to sewer, nor annexation at this point. Zaremba: This is correct. De Weerd: Okay. Borton: Until redevelopment. Bird: The second agrees, because that's what was presented to us, as I understood it. De Weerd: Okay. Any further discussion? Clarification? No. Okay. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll. Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 11 of 84 Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. c. Fire Department 1. Donation to the Fire Department from the "Light My Fire Organization": De Weerd: Okay. Item C is our Fire Department and, Joe, are you doing this? Okay. Silva: Good evening, Mayor, Members of the Council. I wanted to thank you very much. I want to start out by thanking you very much for providing me with a very good segway with our appointments to the Parks and Recreation Commission. What makes our community very special is all the volunteer efforts that go into making our community very special. And with that being said, what I'd like to do is we are going to be receiving a very special gift from the Light My Fire Organization and just to kind of give you a little bit of a background, the Light My Fire Organization has been in existence for 13 years and they have raised 50,000 dollars to support the Boise fire safe trailer and 18,000 dollars to assist victims who have been displaced by fires in their homes. And that group is comprised of the independent insurance adjusters -- or I should say insurance agents within our area. Also the Boise Association of Independent Insurance Agents, Boise Insurance Professionals, and Disaster Kleenup and Paul Davis Restoration. And they have been very successful and they had a fund raiser this year and they had a very nice banquet at the Double Tree Riverside and had about 400 guests and a live and silent auction and raised considerable amount of money. We are very pleased to be the recipient of an award this evening. What I would like to do, with that being said, is have the chairman of that group come up and say a few words, Mr. Bob Ricketts. Would you come up, please? And if I could have a couple other guests come up also. Judy Ricketts. Mike Seidl, Peg and Dick Harris. And Erica Koontz. Ricketts: Thank you, Joe. It's our pleasure to be here this evening. I would like to thank the City of Meridian for putting in their -- seeing the wisdom to put in their fire safe house over here in Meridian. The City of Boise has had theirs a number of years. As Joe said, 13 years ago we got involved with this. We have been raising money for operations in support of that for the last 13 years. It was a great pleasure to bring in Meridian this year. The group approached us last year being part of the organization and benefiting from this, from our efforts. This year we actually brought them in and Pam Warren and Joe have been just an enormous help to the committee and their efforts have really gained a lot of support in Meridian for this and for your fire safe house. An educational tool that is needed in our community. It saves a lot of property damage and a lot of lives. And I think just this week you have had a couple of fires, totally preventable. I think education would have helped out a lot there and I think you're going to see some benefit in the future from this. I think one of those fires was a Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 12 of 84 pretty major house fire. So, you know, hopefully, we have some good stories to come back and tell you that, you know, the thing's working, we have them in Boise and it's been a great benefit. We have a -- our function is every February. This next year 2008 it's on February 8, so mark your calendars. I'd love see any and all of you there. We have a great time and we do raise a considerable amount of money. And so this year, the first year in for the City of Meridian, we are excited to be able to say we have brought a 5,000 dollar check to give to the City of Meridian for the fire safe house support over here and we'd like to present that to you this evening. Zaremba: We have a photographer behind you, if you would all turn around. Silva: Thank you very much, Light My Fire Organization. This year's contribution we will use to buy public education materials for our fire safety center. Thank you very much. De Weerd: Thank you for your contribution. The fire safe house has been one of those examples of what happens when a community comes together. It really was built on community partnerships and so it's partnerships like these that help keep it going and public education is critical. So, thank you so much. Zaremba: Wonderful. D. Legal Department: 1. Discussion of Adult Business License Ordinance: De Weerd: Okay. We eliminated the department report for the legal department. E. Planning and Zoning Director - Anna Canning: De Weerd: So, our next item up is our planning department. Anna. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I just wanted to quickly introduce our new associate city planner in the current planning division, Bill Parsons. He comes to us from Sparks, Nevada, and I did a great interview and it looks like he's fitting in with everybody. He's been at work two days now. He's coming back for more. So, that's a good thing. Thank you. That was all. De Weerd: Well, welcome to the City of Meridian. Parsons: I guess I'll say a few things. De Weerd: Okay. Parsons: I belong to the Toastmasters organization, so I figure anytime I get an opportunity to practice my speech I should do it. Anyways, I'd like to thank all of you for Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 13 of 84 having me join your community. I am married. My wife's name is Michelle. I have two wonderful daughters, five and three, and I'm hoping we sell our home soon so they can join me here in Meridian and start our new lives here, so thank you for having me. De Weerd: You're welcome. Zaremba: Thank you. Welcome. Item 8: Items Moved from Consent Agenda: De Weerd: Okay. There were no items moved from the Consent Agenda. Item 9: Item 10: Item 11: Item 12: FP 07-013 Request for Final Plat approval of 6 commercial building lots on 8.06 acres in a C-G zone for Medina Subdivision by Ken Lenz and Jeff Huber of White-Leasure Development Company - Southwest Corner of Meridian Road and Overland Road: FP 07-014 Request for Final Plat approval of 124 single-family building lots and 12 common lots on 24.8 acres in R-8 and TN-R zones for Cavanaugh Subdivision No.1 by Kastera Development, LLC - Southwest Corner of Meridian Road and Victory Road: FP 07-015 Request for Final Plat approval of 48 single-family building lots and 7 common lots on 13.56 acres in an R-8 zone for Milford Creek West Subdivision by H&B Associates, LLC - South of East McMillan and west of North Eagle Road: Tabled from May 15, 2007: FP 07-012 Request for Final Plat approval for 52 single-family residential building lots, 6 commercial lots, and 8 common lots on 27.36 acres in R-8, R-15, and C-G zones for Bienville Sauare Subdivision by Red Cliff Development - 2935 North Eagle Road: De Weerd: And since, Anna, I haven't reviewed your comments, it looks like on each of our final plats we have received agreements from each of the applicants and there is a special note on Milford Creek. Does that need to be pulled for discussion? Canning: No, ma'am. I just wanted you to note on the record that we need to include the changes proposed on the applicant's response letter. De Weerd: Okay. So, Council, with that said, Items 9, 10, 11 and 12 on the final plats, we do have concurrence with the applicant. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 14 of 84 Borton: I move that we approve Item 9, FP 07-013, Ten, FP 07-014, Item 11, FP 07- 015, to include the changes on the applicant response letter. And Item 12, FP 07-012. De Weerd: Okay. Do I have a second? Zaremba: I'll second that. And, Madam Mayor, may I ask for an enlightenment, I guess. I don't know if it's really discussion. I noticed that Item 11, the preliminary plat, was originally approved 18 months ago as of tomorrow. Do preliminary plats go stale like CUPs do? If it's 18 months they are within it, but I just wondered is there a deadline? Canning: Yes, sir, there is. It's two years, I believe, now. Zaremba: Okay. So, they are not pushing it. De Weerd: Okay. Any other discussion, Council? Okay. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 13: Continued Public Hearing from May 15, 2007: CPA 07-004 Request for an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to change the land use designation from Industrial to Commercial for Jabil East Comprehensive Plan Amendment by the Joint School District No. 2 - 1303 East Central Drive (Lot 1, Block 1, Jabil Subdivision): Item 14: Continued Public Hearing from May 15,2007: RZ 07-005 Request for a Rezone of 9.21 acres from I-L to a C-G zone for Jabil East Property by the Joint School District NO.2 - 1303 East Central Drive (Lot 1, Block 1, Jabil Subdivision): De Weerd: Okay. Items 13 and 14 are a continued Public Hearing from May 15th on CPA 07-004 and RZ 07-005. Mr. Nary, is it appropriate to hear these two items together? Nary: Yes. Madam Mayor, yes, you can hear them together. De Weerd: Okay. I will go ahead and start these two items, 13 and 15, with staff comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Jabil East Project. It's located at Locust Grove and Central Drive, named after the building that is currently on the property -- or the former owner of the building. The applicant is proposing to change the existing industrial designation on the Comprehensive Plan to commercial. You may Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 15 of 84 remember that a couple weeks ago we addressed the western portion of the previous Jabil property and made a similar change. So, that change in designation would be for the one 34 acre property and that property currently lies within the Meridian city limits and is zoned I-L. So, concurrent with the application the Comprehensive Plan amendment application, the applicant has also applied for rezoning of 9.21 acres to C- G. There is just the one proposed building and that's the existing Jabil building. The applicant is requesting the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and the rezoning from the industrial designation to allow for educational uses on the property. They are allowed in the commercial zones, but not in the industrial. The property is proposed for a new high school, with associated classrooms and office spaces, and may possibly house a university extension. Additionally, the Joint School District service center will be sited here and educational interest -- institutions, as I said, are prohibited in the I-L district, however, they are principally permitted uses within the C-G district. We do have elevations of the -- this is a diagram showing the rezone area, as opposed to the Comprehensive Plan amendment area. These are some photographs of the existing Jabil facility. And I have gone too far. The Commission has recommended approval at their April 19th, 2007, Public Hearing. Ed Daniels, the applicant's representative, spoke in favor of the application and no one spoke in opposition or commented and there was no written testimony. The key issues of discussion by the Commission were the question of if this property ever went back to its original use of high tech manufacturing, would that be an allowed use in the proposed commercial district or would it have to be rezoned. The answer is light industrial uses are conditionally allowed within the C-G zoning district. So, the key Commission changes to staffs recommendation, there were none. To our knowledge there are no outstanding issues before City Council, although just before the hearing the applicant did indicate that they were a little puzzled by one of the conditions of approval. We may need to talk about that. And there has been no written testimony since the staff report. The one condition and question was with regard to dedicating a multi-use pathway. Our currently adopted Comprehensive Plan shows a multi-use pathway running on the -- through the Van Auker property to the west of the school district property, but the -- currently in the process pathways plan, which was originally on the agenda tonight, but we've asked that it be continued to the 26th -- it shows a revised pathway that picks up the pathway coming out of -- I always want to call it Snorting Bull -- Woodbridge. There we go. And kind of come down and follows this facility and goes along the north -- the plat for Woodbridge was called Snorting Bull. De Weerd: Snorting Bull? Canning: Named after, apparently, a former occupant of the field, so -- De Weerd: Did Ron Van Auker name that? Canning: The pathway would -- multi-use pathway would go along the north boundary of the school district property. So, there is one within the proposed update to the pathway network along the north boundary of the site. And with that I will answer any questions, other than related to Woodbridge. Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 16 of 84 De Weerd: Council, any questions? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: Is the applicant here? If you will, please, state your name and address for the record. Daniels: Ed Daniels. 2785 Bogus Basin Road, Boise, Idaho. Madam Mayor and Members of the Council, I think Anna has covered the project pretty well and I don't have any additional comments, I'm not sure if -- Wendell Bigham may. But I can certainly stand for any questions. De Weerd: Okay. Questions for the applicant? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: Wendell, do you have anything to add? I know. I had to ask. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record. Bigham: Wendell Bigham. 911 Meridian Road, Meridian, Idaho. Here tonight representing Joint School District NO.2. Specifically to follow up for a little bit of clarification, so that we don't misunderstand. In Exhibit B, item 1.1 -- 1.3, the applicant shall dedicate a multi-use pathway on site, location to be determined. And we have just found out that that determination is our northern property line running east to west -- by the Meridian Parks Department. Now, it's not something that we would unreasonably take exception to. We have, we believe, at least a five foot sidewalk on the back of the curb and gutter on the south side of Central Drive. I'm not sure of the width of the proposed pathway. However, there is a large berm running east and west along the front of the site, so that if that pathway was desired to be wider than 12 and not be in a straight line, then, it would require a fair amount of work on our part. Not saying that this is something that we would take exception to. As you're well aware, we are currently planning for the construction of a specialized high school there. We have got to make some site improvements. So, it's something that we may very well factor in. Just up until I came tonight I wasn't sure where that to-be-determined location was. De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions? Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I guess my question would be if the existing five foot sidewalk would be turned into a multi-use pathway by making it ten feet wide? Is that what the question is? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, that would certainly be an option and sometimes when they are attached to the roadway they go as narrow as seven feet. Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 17 of 84 So, I'm not sure that Ms. Hess has discussed this with the parks department or if it's been -- all the details have been worked out at this time. Obviously not. Sorry. Zaremba: If it would be less that the 12 feet mentioned by Mr. Bigham -- Canning: Yes. Zaremba: -- that would become a problem. Canning: The most we ever require is ten feet. De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions? Anything you want to add? Bigham: No. Just that we are a little loose on that -- that one item. I'd like the opportunity to be able to work with staff, something that's worthwhile to accomplish, we'd just like the latitude to be able to work with staff. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. This is a Public Hearing. Is there any members of the public who would like to share testimony on this application? Okay. Any additional comments from staff? Canning: No, ma'am. De Weerd: Okay. Council, any further information needed? Bird: I don't. De Weerd: Okay. I would entertain a motion to close the Public Hearings on Items 13 and 14. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I move we close the Public Hearing on CPA 07-004 and RZ 07-005. Borton: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to close the public hearings on Items 13 and 14. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Okay. Any discussion? If there is no discussion, Mr. Zaremba. Meridian City Council June 5. 2007 Page 18 of 84 Zaremba: Madam Mayor -- and just one question of staff. The paragraph number in the Exhibit B, where I would say work with staff on the multi-use pathway -- 1.3. All right. In that case, Madam Mayor, I move that we approve CPA 07-004 and RZ 07-005, with all comments of the staff report, with the one exception that in Exhibit B, paragraph 1.3, we add the comment that applicant and staff will work together to establish the multi-use pathway mentioned. Borton: I'll second with a little bit of discussion. I don't have too much concern with the language -- from my perspective, though, in light of the fact that there is an existing sidewalk along that northern border, I wouldn't have any heartburn to the extent that the applicant and staff could come to an agreement that that existing sidewalk would satisfy the requirements of 1.3. It's not necessarily dedication of a multi-purpose pathway, but it does accomplish providing some pedestrian and bicycle or other form of transportation along that southern -- northern portion of the property, southern portion of the street. So, I don't know if that's an amendment to the motion -- at least that I would suggest that -- Zaremba: I would be happy to clarify the location, but are you suggesting that five feet wide should be adequate? My feeling is it should be a little wider. Is that what we are discussing? I'm happy with the location. Borton: I guess your -- Madam Mayor -- if I could muddy it some more. I'm fine with the five feet and I guess just giving the applicant and staff mixed messages and it becomes an issue, maybe when it comes back to Council -- but a five foot sidewalk along the northern property line as it is is sufficient for me. But I don't think that's the motion, so -- De Weerd: I guess, Councilman Borton, I would put my two cents in with Councilman Zaremba and the area across the street from that is ISP and that will not redevelop. That does not have a sidewalk on that side. As we attract more kids to this site and we increase the pedestrian traffic, whether it's -- it's going to and from or in the midst of breaks or lunches and that sort of thing, a five foot width is not sufficient for a multi- purpose pathway if you're going to put pedestrians and bicycles on there at the same time. That is a relatively narrow road. It will have increased traffic once Locust Grove Overpass is in place. I think -- I think if the school district is willing to work with the Parks Department and seeing how they can make that amenity and a safety feature as well for their facility, we should stick to a minimum, which it sounds like is seven feet, and a maximum, which is ten, and just let them work out the details amongst them. And that's just my personal opinion. As we bring more kids in that area it just concerns me of where the safety aspect and there is not much out there as an alternative and traffic will increase. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 19 of 84 Bird: I think a lot along the lines of Councilman Borton on the deal there. You're putting a high school out there and it's not -- as we all know, there isn't much walkers on a high school. It needs the parking. And you take it out and I'm sure we are going to require the landscaping out there, after you put -- after you make your sidewalks and, then, take parking out around the building, I could live with the five foot sidewalk as it is or I could live with whatever they want to go. If the school district wants to put ten foot in, that's fine with me, but I'd encourage them to, I don't think -- I don't think we need to make it a condition of approval. De Weerd: Well, again, we are putting higher density residential out in that area. There will be foot traffic. And I also think there will be additional students other than just high school students, so -- Borton: Madam Mayor? Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Zaremba: I guess I would clarify or restate that my intent in the motion was that the school district and staff would agree on a sidewalk on -- on a multi-use pathway that is pretty much in the location of the current sidewalk, but that it would be wider, in the neighborhood of seven to ten feet, pending their agreement. That was my intent. De Weerd: Okay. Any further discussion? Borton: The second agrees. And I think that little distinction as the motion has been made as worked out between the applicant and staff, seven feet, eight feet, nine feet, that's between those two. Zaremba: I'd like to say seven to ten. Borton: Seven to ten. Zaremba: As worked out by -- in the location of the current sidewalk. Borton: Second agrees. De Weerd: Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Okay. Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 20 of 84 Zaremba: Let's see. I did make both of those in one motion. De Weerd: Yes, you did. Zaremba: Okay. Item 15: Continued Public Hearing from May 22, 2007: For the Purpose of Reviewing and Considering Fee Changes authorized in Title 9, Chapter 1 Water Use and Service, and Title 9, Chapter 4 Sewer Use and Service of Meridian City Code including Proposed Changes to water and wastewater assessment, water meters and appurtenances, water system itemized damage fees, and water and sewer user rates: De Weerd: Okay. Item 15 is a continued Public Hearing from May 22nd where this proposal was made by our Public Works director and he was asked to come back with some further information. Watson: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. As you mentioned, we discussed this at length on May 22nd. I won't go over all those items as I did on May 22nd. It seemed like one of the things that we were hung up on a little bit was the hydrant meter rental fee and the question was why aren't we putting it higher if we are concerned about people turning those back in. I knew there was a reason and I called our water superintendent Rick Clinton and he said that that fee was implemented in the late '90s. The fear was that if we made it too high, then, contractors would revert back to the days when they would simply find a fire hydrant and steal water. So, it's a delicate balance between getting them to pay for what they use, but yet not charging them too much and that's the -- I -- he had discussed it with me several times over the years and I had simply forgotten what the reason was. And I can answer any questions on that if you would like. I think we'd like to recommend that it remain at five dollars per day per meter as the rental fee, plus they get charged for the volume that they use. We went over assessment fees previously. We also went over user rates. I have put together -- I don't know if you'd call it a fact sheet or maybe just a little bit of an analysis on where some of those cost increases have come over the last several years. I have given that to both the city attorney and the finance director. They have reviewed those today. I would be happy to answer any questions on those. De Weerd: Council, any questions for Brad? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: I guess Brad, have you put together kind of a -- talking points for the staff utility billing and answering any public questions? Watson: To an extent, Madam Mayor, yes, I have. This piece of paper kind of shows where those major increases have come over the last several years and the reason for those particular line items increasing to the extent they have. In a nutshell, the cost of Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 21 of 84 increase is, roughly, the same as the population growth. So, there are a few technical items devoted to engineering that have increased more than the population growth, but, really, that's reflective of the -- kind of the leap that we have made in technology, particularly in the GIS system, adding additional inspectors in the field to cover the growth or the high construction rate that was going on and probably a couple of engineers in there, too. So, we have just kind of matured to a different level in the technical side of things. De Weerd: Okay. But I guess a question and answer, Q and A type sheet, for the website and if this is what staff was given as talking points, you need to dumb it down and that's not to be offensive, it's -- they need to be able to not read a paragraph, but to be able to simplify it, so that it's easy to understand. Watson: I completely understand, Madam Mayor. I got this done this morning. My next task will be -- De Weerd: You know, in engineer-ese, you know, that's one thing, but for the rest of us we kind of like it a little bit simple. Watson: This is more accountant-ese on this one. Bird: I was going to say, this looks like a CPA's, you know, doing. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Zaremba: I would comment that I do appreciate the thorough explanation. For the talking points, one of the things that impressed me is the growth of Meridian as it went over a certain point where the rules changed, but I would certainly mention that in the talking points, because that's a major -- I forget what it was -- 50,000 residents or something like that I think you said. When we went over that the rules changed and that has been a source of some of the increased costs. But I also appreciate the explanation about the fire hydrant meter rental and the background on that and appreciate this work. Thank you. Watson: Thank you, Madam Mayor. Just one more point, if I could bring up -- the effective date. We have had some discussion internally with the attorney's office and the finance department on an effective date for the rate part and we did get some feedback that this rate increase, if it was implemented now, would hit people the hardest during the heaviest use and I think between the three of us we were at least open to the idea of postponing that rate effective date to October 1 st. The rates only -- every other fee has been covered, both tonight and three weeks ago, would be effective August 1 st is what we had proposed. Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 22 of 84 De Weerd: Okay. I guess, Brad, my question is when you came last month and discussed this, you also suggested that it would be reevaluated this fall. So, if in that reevaluation during the fall you would, then, institute new fees in October and, then, possibly again shortly thereafter? Watson: Madam Mayor, I would anticipate -- when I said that I -- what I had discussed with the finance director was reevaluating these during the month of October and into November as the preliminary audit came back. If we followed a fairly aggressive schedule, we would probably be doing public hearings again in January, followed by potential implementation February, March. De Weerd: Okay. Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Who said that? Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Oh. You're never that quiet. Nary: Sorry. De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Nary. Nary: Madam Mayor, I guess to follow up on Brad's comment, when I discussed this with the finance director as well that what she was, I guess, gearing to is on the rate increases, to start pushing some of those towards beginning of the fiscal year and maybe mid fiscal year and looking at those rate adjustments, so that they were more regular. We do some of the trash service adjustments for the fiscal year, we do them in the late summer or early fall for that same purpose, and so she was very amenable to that idea. What I would propose, if that is acceptable to the Council, if you want to pass it by motion tonight, you certainly can do that. We would then -- I would suggest we bring back a cleaned up resolution with those separated dates, because I think it is significant to get the rest of those rates on board and I think the reason Mr. Watson wanted August, that would give adequate time for his department to be able to notify those customers of those rate increases within a short -- fairly short window, but at least give them some notice more than two weeks. If we made it July 1 it would be a little tight. So, we can bring back a resolution with the separated dates for the applicant fees versus the user fees and you can have that on the 19th for ratification or final approval. But I think for the talking points -- and certainly my office can help the finance department in coming up with that. The number of calls that we received -- it didn't understand the difference between the percentage increase as was reported and what the actual increase to dollars and cents is and Mr. Watson's pointed that out much more clearly in this memo. That helps in getting that message out to folks that when most people understand that 30 percent of a water rate increase really meant three Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 23 of 84 dollars, they didn't quite have the same concerns as they did when they thought it was 30 percent. So, we could help with that and help in getting that message out to the different ones, because we get called just as much as -- maybe not as much as the clerk's office, but we get some as well. So, we will certainly help in trying to get that cleaned up. De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Nary. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Brad, I mean putting this back to October 1st time table, are we going to have costs increase and -- because you guys are -- your department's always been one that when you come up with costs, you come up with a cost and make the fee off of that. And is it going to -- I mean -- and are we going to work for the next half of fiscal year in the red? I mean, you know, there is -- you got to be practical. There is good common business sense. And are we losing money? If we are, we better stop it. Watson: Madam Mayor, Councilmember Bird, we took a look at the water budget for this current fiscal year. We've had a lot of positions open for the entirety of that year. They have just recently been filled. So, we have over six months -- almost nine months savings and a handful of positions. We have got some other costs that we have avoided. The other -- I don't know how you look at this, whether it's a positive or negative, because we preach water conservation. But water sales are up this current year. I can't promise you that we won't be a little bit in the red at the end of the year. It depends on how much we sell. The high volume months are coming and if it rains and is cold for the next three, four months, yeah, we will be. But -- and that's what hurt us last year, is it was so wet that we weren't selling as much as we had projected rates to be based on. It's something to keep an eye on. De Weerd: It certainly is difficult to run a break-even type of endeavor when we don't have your crystal ball in order, uh? Watson: Yes. De Weerd: Any other questions? I think, Mr. Bird, staff has done very well in their projections and I think there is a comfort level in the proposal that's in front of you to delay that increase until October. And certainly those things would be evaluated then and this falls, in the winter, October, November. Bird: Madam Mayor? If we are going to reevaluate these in October, why are we even messing with them right now? We are not going to -- we are not going to put anything in place, why are we even sitting here talking about it? You know. And to get back to your point, we don't have a crystal ball, but at least we should break even. Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 24 of 84 De Weerd: We do our best. Okay. So, you feel comfortable with the October date? Watson: Madam Mayor, it's the best I know what to do. And I wouldn't even suggest it, unless the finance director was okay with it. I wouldn't go out there on my own, because she is the finance director and she was okay with it, so I'm okay with it. De Weerd: Okay. Anything further, Council? Thank you, Brad. This is a Public Hearing. Is there anyone who like to provide testimony on this item? Okay. Okay. Council, no further questions or comments, I would entertain a motion to close the Public Hearing. Bird: So moved. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the Public Hearing on Item 15. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 16: Tabled from May 22, 2007: Resolution No. Public Works Rate Chanae: De Weerd: Okay. Item 16 is Resolution 07-5262 that supports Item 15. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we table that to June 19th, so it can be rewritten and clean, so we know what we are passing. De Weerd: To the -- Bird: June 19th. De Weerd: -- 19th? Bird: 2007. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion to table Resolution 07-5262. Zaremba: Madam Mayor, discussion? Just to clarify on what is being cleaned up, I'm sensitive to Councilman Bird's instinct that if we establish the user rates to go up in Meridian City Council June 5. 2007 Page 25 of 84 October 1 st and at the same time we are reviewing them, that may be either confusing or double work and I think my instinct would be to go with the finance director and the Public Works director and say let's establish that. The possibility is if we review them again before they are implemented in October, we might lower them. I mean it could go either way. And I -- I would suggest offering the October 1 st date, even though we are - Bird: That would be in the deal. That's why we want to clean it up. Zaremba: Yeah. I got the impression you were asking us not to do that. Bird: Oh, no. No. Zaremba: Maybe I misunderstood. Bird: No. No. De Weerd: Okay. Any further discussion? Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Thank you, Will. You're wonderful. Zaremba: Keep us moving. Item 17: Continue Public Hearing from May 22,2007: RZ 07-006 Request for a Rezone of 4.38 acres from an R-8 to an R-15 zone for Bellabrook by J.E. Development, LLC - 300 South Locust Grove Road: Item 18: Continue Public Hearing from May 22,2007: CUP 07-005 Request for a Conditional Use Permit approval for multi-family residential use in a proposed R-15 zone for Bellabrook by J.E. Development, LLC - 300 South Locust Grove Road: De Weerd: Okay. Items 17 and 18 are continued public hearings from May 22nd on RZ 07-006 and CUP 07-005. I will ask for staff comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Bellabrook project. It's located at 300 South Locust Grove Road. It's just south of the LOS stake center there on Locust Grove. And the project includes 34 individually owned two bedroom plus condominium villas that would be attached to combinations of two and four dwelling units each. You can see some of the site here. If it looks familiar that's because it is. It was previously annexed and zoned to R-8 and a preliminary plate for 20 single family homes was approved. They have reconsidered that and have this proposal tonight. Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 26 of 84 This is the site layout. It's a little easier to see on the landscape plan. As I mentioned, they will be condominiums or villas and each villa will have a two car garage, with two additional parking spaces available in each driveway. The proposed buildings have two and three story elevations for each group of dwellings. You can see those elevations here in a little perspective down at the bottom of those units. And back to the site plan. There is usable open space in the form of pedestrian walks and gathering courtyard, which creates a centralized community amenity and, then, connecting links to the Five Mile Creek to the east and the regional pathway corridor shown there. The gathering area in the center of the project will include seating, shade areas, or community artwork. Additional common areas include a buffer along Locust Grove Road and landscaping on the eastern strip leading to the Five Mile Creek area. We did process this application as multi-family development. The condominium -- condominiumization of that at a future date -- De Weerd: Say that again. Canning: Condominiumization will just be a staff level approval, so it doesn't -- the project that you see before you is a multi-family, similar to how we would evaluate an apartment complex. And, then, these are oblique perspectives looking over the LOS stake center and, then, over the proposed project and into Woodbridge. And you can see there is some slope relief on this property and you can see the houses are on the uphill side. That's the little figure at the bottom. Then it slopes down to the Five Mile Creek. Here are more elevations of the units. This is the two unit structure at the northeast corner of the property as you leave toward the Five Mile Creek. It's a unique structure in that area. These are the four unit structures. You can see the applicant is proposing a number of colors, as well as roof styles. The Planning and Zoning Commission approved this -- or recommended approval of this application with a development agreement at their April 19th Public Hearing. Shawn Nickel, the applicant's representative, spoke in favor. Jerry Cunningham spoke in opposition. Christie Jordan commented. As did Ronald Hodge. The key issues of discussion by the Commission were private streets versus public streets within the development. And, again, the private streets would be consistent with processing this as a multi-family development. The requirement of a development agreement to incorporate the proposed site plan and the elevations. Key Commission changes to staff recommendation were they did require a development agreement to incorporate the proposed site plan and elevations. The outstanding issues before Council are requirement of the development agreement and the applicant has also submitted prospective views of the proposed structures. I asked them to do that. I would add one final thing on this application. We had another one that came through and I'm always a little unsure of what to do with these projects where they are propOSing to come in under time and condominiumize the structures, because, then, it puts them somewhere between a townhouse and the apartment building, which is what they come in for the approval. The big changes between those two are the public versus private streets, but also, then, the requirement for two -- a parking pad to accommodate two off-street parkings. And I did ask this applicant to provide those to extra parking pad spaces, similar to what a single family house would do or a townhouse would do. And they have Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 27 of 84 accommodated that on this site plan. So, I did want to note that was part of the discussions internally, although it doesn't show up in the -- in the staff report necessarily. And with that I will answer any questions that the Council may have. De Weerd: Thank you, Anna. Council, any questions for staff? Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: If you would clarify for me what the private streets are. Are they what would appear to be driveways or is the whole circle the private street? Canning: Madam Mayor, Commissioner -- Councilmember Zaremba. That was almost the whole -- the whole circulation pattern would be private streets. Zaremba: Thank you. Canning: There are -- so, this is the -- it would be like if you think of this as an apartment complex. This would be the drive aisle. But instead of having -- parking dedicated parking spaces -- oh, sorry. Christie. Got her with the laser there. You would have parking spaces adjoining the garages -- or in front of the garages, similar to what you would have on a single family home. So, again, we tried to accommodate one of the more restricted elements of the single family home or addressing one of those priority needs, but Council frequently talks about it having some visitor parking for folks when they come to the project. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton. Borton: Anna, this was originally zoned for 20 single family; is that -- Canning: Yes, sir. Borton: Okay. De Weerd: Could you also say -- what is the -- the property, then, behind it -- or to the east of it. There is a flag that runs along the southern boundary and, then, a property that sits to the east. That is owned -- a portion of that property is owned by Jerry Cunningham. Let me go up here. He owns kind of the darker green area going down into the flood plane and floodway areas. And, then, a portion of it -- I'm sorry, I have forgotten the gentleman's name that -- he's currently the owner resident of the home there. So, it's an interesting couple pieces of property I have been concerned about the future development potential of this property. I did talk -- I did talk to Mr. Cunningham about how this property could potentially redevelop. He understands that he needs to Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 28 of 84 come in with the current property owner immediately adjacent to Bellabrook here on the east, that they could probably do something similar to what Bellabrook is proposing and visit them on that site. De Weerd: I guess, Anna, my concern with this -- with this plat and they may as well -- Locust Grove is gOing to be a busy road and we are, then, going to have you proving to be building roads and we have yet another access for a number of cars and I guess because that's -- Canning: And, Madam Mayor, again, we discussed this as it was going through the project. It's that awkwardness of being somewhere between a single family residential project where we would typically require stub streets and an apartment complex where we typically don't require stubs, because it's private property. It's a private street network. So, again, it's -- we look for your guidance on this matter, because we are having more of these projects come in and I'm always a little unclear how to guide them, so any pontificating that Council may want to do. De Weerd: And I don't know what you can do, other than we have to look at the long- time of help with that transportation corridor and the safety aspect as well. I know our police department is right down the street, but our fire department is not and they respond to the accidents. Again, that is -- that is a concern, especially when that overpass is completed and what that means in terms of traffic, so -- anything further, Council? Canning: And, Madam Mayor, I should have said guidance, instead of pontificating. apologize. Nickel: Good evening again. De Weerd: Good evening. Nickel: Mayor and Council, Shawn Nickel. 148 North 2nd Street, Suite 101, in Eagle. Here tonight representing the developer for this project. We are excited about submitting this project to you. We believe it is a unique project, unlike what you have seen in the past for multi-family. Unfortunately, I don't like that black and white drawing up there, because it really looks busy. I want to pass out for you guys to review the -- kind of the aerial that staff had -- yeah. Just pull that out, that's -- that really gives you a good idea of what -- of how the project -- thank you -- of how the project looks in color. First of all, this area that this proposed development is in, is on Locust Grove corridor, which is about to become a major thoroughfare as you are well aware. As you know, this is a major thoroughfare in the making, Locust Grove, with the connection to Fairview and the new overpass. It's also a mixed use area that is developing quite rapidly, as you know. In this area there are churches. There is commercial. There is industrial. There is a police station. There is a fire station. There is single family. There is apartments within the general area. It's a mile and a half from downtown Meridian. Three-quarters of a mile from a city park. It's three-quarters of a mile from Meridian City Council June 5. 2007 Page 29 of 84 that new overpass. It's adjacent to a regional pathway system. And it's about a mile and a quarter from the Home Depot area. So, it's right in the middle of the -- of some of the best action in the city. It is an excellent location for a multi-family development, specifically with that Locust Grove thoroughfare becoming so prominent. As you can see. from the pictures that we have provided you, it's not your ordinary multi-family development, it is designed as individually owned condominium units, but it's got the look and the feel of a single family development. And that was a comment that was recognized by your Planning and Zoning Commission and they made comments that it does look and feel like a single family with the individual garages and the individual driveways going into the units. We designed it with 34 units, which will give 1,500 to approximately 2,200 square feet in size for each unit. We designed it to eliminate a garage dominated streetscape, but as you can see on this picture right here with the private loop system, you have side entry garages on the majority of the units, with very few front-loaded garages, provides a nice residential atmosphere. We are asking for a rezone from the R-8 to the R-15. The reason we are asking for the R-15 is specifically to allow this use. Our density actually meets the R-8 density. We are at 7.76 dwelling units per acre. So, we need that R-15 for the type of use that we are proposing. We also would have the Conditional Use Permit for that use. The Comprehensive Plan for this area is mixed use and we are providing access through a private road system. The reason -- the main reason we are doing that is to address -- to address the addressing concerns of the fire department. Otherwise, we would have a service drive, which is what you usually see with a multi-family development. We thought by providing the private road, the addressing is like a single family residential development, it would still have that feel, like I stated -- as I stated. In addition, each unit, as staff indicated, is -- does provide four off-street parking spaces per unit. So, you have got a two car garage for each unit, plus two outside parking on the driveway per unit. With this design we also provided -- 45 percent of the overall site is open space and common areas, including 27 percent of the entire site as usable open space. The open space area includes a 25 foot buffer along Locust Grove for landscaping. It also includes a centralized gathering area with our CUP amenities, a gathering area, some statue art and some pathways. In addition to the pathway system that goes east down towards Five Mile Creek, which is a future or regional pathway system within the city's Comp Plan. We are also providing fencing for the property. We have taken a lot of input and concerns from your staff, including the Planning and Zoning Commission, your planning staff, also the fire department and the police department and also neighbors in the area that have -- we have talked to regarding the visual appearance of this project. What we have -- what we have come back with is the plan that you see in front of you, which is taking into consideration height and bulk of the project, in addition to a better circulation system, less asphalt and more green space and safer access for emergency services and a reduced density from our originally proposed layout. We have proVided the elevations, which I will show you again. You have those in your packet. But these are the elevations that we presented. Again, we are really excited on this project to address your questions and concerns, Madam Mayor, over the Locust Grove corridor. We looked at that early on, because we do have a unique circumstance where this property is like a -- is a backwards pie -- or backwards flag and, then, you have got the flag here for this parcel and, then, you have got another parcel back here, which is mostly in the Meridian City Council June 5. 2007 Page 30 of 84 flood plane. When ACHD was negotiating right of way acquisition with the property owners along Locust Grove, they provided two full returns, one here and one there, and anticipating the redevelopment of both of these properties. So, with that I believe ACHD -- and I don't -- I don't know if it's for sure and I don't know if -- I don't want to put the ACHD staff on -- under the gun here without conferring with her, but I'm assuming ACHD, by providing those accesses at the time of the acquisition of the right of way, did look at the traffic patterns that were going to be anticipated once the overpass was completed and the future connections were made on North Locust Grove out to Fairview ultimately. So, to, again, address your concern -- and I know you always have concerns on these major thoroughfares with access. Keep in mind that this property back here is only about two acres in size of developable area. We did take that into consideration. We did look at what it would take to provide a public street system in here and it just didn't work with our -- our vision of this development, this condominium development, multi-family, with the look and feel that we were trying to get. This is a 50 foot wide flag that would provide future access to that property in the back. The distances are acceptable by ACHD for the distancing in between access points on this type of roadway system at Locust Grove. And I believe that we have made every effort to address that and I don't believe by moving forward with this type of project that when this property comes in to redevelop it's going to negatively impact that transportation system. So, with that I will stand for any questions you have. Again, we are really excited about this. We think it's a great project. Ross Erickson is here. He did the layout and the design and worked with the architect, so any technical questions on that he can address. So, thank you very much. De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. I did have one person sign up on the list as neutral. Paul LeClare at the Woodbridge homeowners association. LeClaire: Thank you, Mrs. Mayor. We are neighbors to this property and we followed it -- other members of our association have been at other hearings and so -- De Weerd: If you will, please, state your name and address first. LeClaire: I will be happy to do that. De Weerd: Okay. LeClaire: Tom LeClaire. 1923 Pratt in Meridian, Idaho. De Weerd: Thank you. LeClaire: And so we are happy to see the development I think. We are concerned about the connecting pathway to the east and we are pretty pleased with what's Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 31 of 84 happened there. When this began it wasn't such an intensive development as it now is and so I think there has been some concern and reaction to this as we thought about it, about the increased traffic impact and we hope that the Council will take that into consideration as they go. One thing just personally looking at the site, a question I have which the applicant or city staff perhaps could respond to, is pretty much -- is the elevation here as it shows pretty much uphill from where all this new asphalt and street ways and driveways are going in. Its pretty much uphill and, then, it's downhill into a flood plane. And so storm water comes to mind as to how it's going to escape from this area and it seems like, you know, if you look at the land now, it's kind of a big swale and it's a great storm water catch basin. And so it's going to have to go somewhere else and we would hate to see our -- our neighborhood -- it's a 50 foot buffer, so it's not so critical maybe for us, but maybe for the church it's a concern, just all this new storm water and where it's going to go. So, that was one. And the traffic impact. Those are two concerns we have had. But no -- I don't think major objections, just like any neighbor, we are concerned about new development nearby. So, thanks for the time and hope that maybe that can be addressed. Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. This is a Public Hearing. Is there anyone who would like to provide testimony on this application? Council, any questions for staff before I ask the applicant for final remarks? You know, I -- Shawn, I guess I'd like to ask Christie a couple questions. Nickel: Okay. De Weerd: Hi. Richardson: How are you? De Weerd: If you will, please, state your name and address for the record. Richardson: Christie Richardson representing Ada County Highway District. 3775 North Adams Street, Garden City. De Weerd: Thank you. I guess I would ask you the same question that I -- or statement that I made to staff is the concern of having two access points in this particular area. Can you maybe address that and tell us what was discussed at Ada County Highway District? Richardson: You bet. I happened to be involved in the right of way acquisition related to this segment of Locust Grove Road and we did spend a considerable amount of time working with the property owners and both our right of way and planning staff to come up with the big picture overall view of what could happen out here on both the east and west side of Locust Grove. And so Shawn recounted correctly that we did -- because this was -- I mean we also had to look at -- at the current term, not future. So, that also plays into -- into those negotiations. And so we did allow an access point in this location just to the south of the project and if you will notice, it does align with another access Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 32 of 84 point on the west side of the road and that meets one of our criteria. And, then, we do, of course, have the separation criteria between access points and so we allowed the access points to the flag lot and, then, again, the access point in this location, observing all of the other driveways and streets within the area. So, we, like you, do want to reduce some of our access points on our arterials as much as possible. In some instances where we are looking at right-of-way negotiations and trying to prevent condemnations and further things -- as long as the access points meet or exceed our policies and in this case I know that was the case, they definitely exceeded. I think those were the considerations that were given. If this were a plat, certainly a subdivision and single family, then, yes, I do believe we would be looking at interconnectivity with stubs streets. Because this is a conditional use application, not a subdivision, it's a little bit different from the highway district's commenting. De Weerd: Could you not look at it in terms of because that road is a better access point, because it would extend to the west, but looking at this access as temporary in nature, that it would need to connect eventually if that were to ever redevelop -- and, again, I don't know anything about the transportation requirements and all of that, but I will tell you what, we spend considerable time on these busy arterials cleaning up messes because of too many access points. And that is a concern that we have to pay attention to. Richardson: Certainly. And you will never hear us complain about the need for or wanting more access control. And so had this come up with other agencies in the past, again, kind of in the subdivision versus conditional use process, where the highway district doesn't, you know, have that plat signing authority and certainly if the city wants to be more restrictive on access, then, the highway district supports that, but we certainly have to work with the policies that we have in place as well. De Weerd: Okay. Any questions for Christie? Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Borton: Christie, your comments remind me a bit about the original time we saw this as a single family dwelling subdivision, where the comments at that point from ACHD, if you recall, requiring a stub street. It would make sense from your earlier comments that there would have been. Canning: Madam Mayor, I can answer that or -- Councilman Borton. They had a street that came and shared a boundary with the eastern property that would have -- Borton: Okay. Canning: -- with a stub on a portion of that. Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 33 of 84 Borton: Okay. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Any further testimony? Okay. Shawn. Nickel: Thank you. Again, for the record, Shawn Nickel. Thanks for the highway district staff to give you that information. I'm glad I said it right. Also, I want to thank the members of the homeowners association for Woodbridge and we do appreciate their time. We have -- I'm sure he knows this, but we have met with several of his neighbors that are immediately adjacent to the property and early on when we started designing this project and we had our neighborhood meetings, we talked with a few over here and the result was this layout that you see today. Our original plan actually had two large bulkier buildings along this boundary and we did want to take some consideration for view sheds and -- when looking north from Woodbridge. And so as you can see, we have provided that. We created a new -- actually, a new architectural design, so it's a two and three story building right here and, again, to try to be considerate to our neighbors. It also helped that we did have that 50 foot buffer between the boundary of Woodbridge and our boundary to provide additional buffering. I do understand the concerns of the transportation and more and more as we move forward in -- in this new decade and the next decade. We are going to see more and more in-fill projects and we are always going to have this issue with -- especially these weird funky former county platted lots or parcels that are under separate ownership and it's hard for us to develop them with that crystal ball that you spoke of earlier trying to figure out how they are going to develop the property. We actually did try to purchase this property -- or the developer did unsuccessfully. One thing we could -- we would agree to do tonight, if it would make your decision easier and in our favor, would be to -- we could provide -- again, you got to look -- I'm joking, but I'm serious also -- you got to look at the area that we are looking at in the future. There is not a whole lot of area that can be developed, so, again, trying to look at that crystal ball and seeing how this will redevelop, we could provide a -- go back down. We could provide an access -- an easement along this portion right here in the event that this property back here was to develop as multi- family and provide access through our project. We would be more than happy to do that, to agree to a condition of that, if that would help the concerns of the Council with multiple accesses out onto -- onto Locust Grove Road. Keep in mind, again, there is only about two acres that can be developed, so if it was developed as single family, there is only going to be a certain number of lots that you could physically get in there, but you could probably get more -- or you could get more multi-family. So, that proposal we are speaking of right here would provide access through our private street system, so they could continue that along and, then, access out of that access point. So, we would be willing to do that if that helps the concerns of the Council. Again, we are -- we think this is going to be a great project and we think you will like it. We just don't know how else we can address that -- that transportation issue. So, I will stand for any other questions. De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions? Bird: I have none. Meridian City Council June 5. 2007 Page 34 of 84 Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: Not really a question, but just a comment and, again, it's one of the things that makes it a tough decision. I constantly ask to see things that are more innovative and imaginative and here we have one. This is great. Different than what others are and I think highly attractive. The issue of the access points is a struggle. Believing that Locust Grove is going to be -- my opinion is that it's going to meet its 20 year design criteria within probably months of the overpass being open. It's going to be a very busy road. I like the suggestion of being able to change that one driveway into a possible access, but, then, that leaves a 50 foot strip along your southern border that has no purpose and if we knew that ahead of time, it would be nice if you could develop that into your property, which you can't do. So, it is a challenge. And I, too, am having difficulty with the transportation aspects of it, but I sure do like the design of it. De Weerd: Any other questions or comments for the applicant? Nickel: Did you want me to address the storm drainage? De Weerd: Yes, please. Nickel: Okay. We are going to retain the storm drainage on site. That's as technical as I can get. My engineer is here if you want to know how we are going to do that, but -- De Weerd: You're following all the rules. Nickel: We are following all the rules and those safeguards are in place with your conditions of approval, so -- De Weerd: Thank you. Nickel: Okay. De Weerd: Anna, anything further from staff? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, just to -- just because I have been thinking about what that other piece of the puzzle might do and I do think this is a pretty good solution if we could have it put in the development agreement, because to put a public street down there is likely far too cost prohibitive to make it worthwhile to develop that small piece of property. It's just -- that would be a lot of money for just not all that many units. And, plus, it would be hard to turn it around and get it out again without -- I mean you're just not going to get many units back there, single family homes, on a public street. So, if it does develop as more than perhaps four units -- you could get four units on flags back there and that would maybe pencil out. So, to get more than Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 35 of 84 four houses back there, you probably would need to do a multi-family development and if in the development agreement it states that they can make use of this, that would be beneficial. To see 50 by 100 foot open space -- or that 50 foot wide open space would qualify as a -- quite literally as a grassy area under the multi-family development standards. Yeah. So, it could become part of their usable open space, because it is wide enough. And I'm guessing that Woodbridge wouldn't mind a 50 foot landscape buffer. Just off the top of my head I'm guessing they won't mind too much. So, I think that that is a possibility to address those concerns. Most of that is already paved. You can see the driveway -- private driveway network. So, what they would be doing is extending the darker gray kind of to there, so that it would look more -- the street portion of it, rather than the driveway portion. And that was all. Thank you. De Weerd: I appreciate that. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I think that would help me in the -- again, with the offer to allow access back there and the director's suggestion that instead of looking like a driveway, it would look like an extension of the public -- of the private street. If that slight design change were made and the thoughts that, then, the 50 foot strip to the south would become some kind of open space. That works for me. De Weerd: Anything further from Council? Shawn, do you want to comment at all on that? I think you have already suggested that that would be acceptable, but maybe you could verify that. Nickel: Yeah. Madam Mayor-- Zaremba: Madam Mayor, I would just clarify for Shawn that I'm thinking a little bit beyond just a cross-access agreement that it would look like a continuation of the private road, rather than a driveway. Nickel: Madam Mayor and Council members, yes, that is our intent and this would be a perfect location, because, as you can see, this building right here does have that side entry garage, so that would just be -- you would extend the pavement -- the private road to stub and, then, that access would remain. So, it would be a perfect location to do that. Yes, we intend to make it look like a stub street, but it would be a private stub street. De Weerd: And you will sign it accordingly. Nickel: And we will sign and address it accordingly. Yes. Absolutely. __I Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 36 of 84 Zaremba: And that would be an advantage to whoever would add buildings to the property in the back, because, then, they would be able to address their properties as well and just adding them to a driveway gives the fire department a problem for identifying where they are going, so -- Canning: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Canning: Members of Council. The applicant's engineer has asked that they be allowed to -- that the development agreement includes some language about having a cost sharing, just to take care of that portion of the roadway and I think that that's reasonable. We have done that before and I know we have worked with Bill, who just happened to step out of the room at the wrong time, on some language that just talks about a reasonable cost sharing mechanism, so that they are not holding them at ransom, but-- De Weerd: If it should be redeveloped in the back, then, that would be assessed at that time? Canning: Yeah. And we will work with Bill and the applicant can work with the legal department on the exact language. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Okay. Anything further? Council, any further information needed? Okay. If there is nothing further, I would entertain a motion to close the Public Hearing. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton. Borton: I move that we close the Public Hearing on Items 17 and 18. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to close the public hearings on 17 and 18. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Okay. Council, what's your pleasure? Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 37 of 84 Borton: My two bits, for what it's worth -- probably two bits~ I really really wrestled with this. And one of the things that makes it really difficult is Shawn has done a fantastic job of presenting this project, like everything else that he works with, and it makes it particularly difficult. On a broader perspective, what I wrestle with is the presentation to us done very well in conjunction with the annexation request that sets forth a particular design and requirements and amenities consistent with an R-8 single, family dwellings, and a lot of the Council's concern and anytime there is an annexation and a desire to see a plat at that time is to make sure that before anything gets included into the City of Meridian that it meets multiple requirements and this particular parcel, at least from my recollection of my thoughts on -- at the time was that particular design, that layout, made sense to me. I don't recall what was specifically discussed, but I believe the shared drive that Anna discussed provided an opportunity for the development of this two acres to single family residential doesn't share that roadway, you'd have your single point of access. This could be a multi-use pathway that connects here, connects -- and allows an ability to use that 50 foot strip on the south side of this particular project. I agree that making it a public street is probably cost prohibitive for that property to the east. That would have rectified the multiple access issues. So, I kind of bought into it at that time and it was presented well and that compilation of project made sense for Meridian. And now it's totally switched, at least in my eyes, to 70 some odd percent greater density, private streets, different access points, creates now an access issue to a property -- or, excuse me, to that strip to the south and we're really challenged with that eastern property to ever get access. The easement issue, which I think, again, is a testament to Shawn probably getting a good sense of some of the concerns of Council is fine on his part from my perspective. I think it's -- I'm not as satisfied with it as I was in its original presentation. I know we had these concerns then and it was a big decision, at least in my mind, to annex it, so I'm not -- I'm not necessarily in favor of this rezone and the CUP application in light of what was presented earlier, which I prefer and I think addresses the concerns of Council that -- Bird: Madam Mayor-- De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I'm sorry. I, too, agree with Councilman Borton. I think that this was a very nice presentation and a nice project, but I think it's too high density. As everybody recalls on the last one, I had quite concerns of even being R-8. But we did accept it and it was, I felt, for that area, a very nice layout. It married in with that -- excuse me -- that two acres behind. I also have some quite concerns as we start giving the R-15s and the R- 40s and everything, we have got about five properties and five acre properties across the road there that is also out now, but they -- they're getting pushed out of their rural lifestyle and I'm sure are entertaining thoughts of -- of selling to developers and there is nothing wrong with that, but if we start giving the high density, then, we get back to what the Mayor said about the traffic on that -- on that Locust Grove, we just -- we are told that there is going to be a new high school built -- some special high school built at the Jabil's old building. We are hoping that we can get a university of some sort -- a program started there. So, I think we are asking a lot of traffic on a -- on a mile of road Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 38 of 84 that probably is at its limit right now and I can stay with the R-8, but, Shawn, this is a nice project, but I don't think this is the place for it. I just can't go above the R-8. De Weerd: Anna, can you tell me what -- they are asking R-15, but they still fall under the R-8 numbers, do they not? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the R-15 request is the first zone that you can request multi-family. The property on the Comprehensive Plan is actually shown as mixed use community, which would allow pretty intense commercial uses and both these properties that have been discussed, as well as the properties on the other side of Locust Grove, are actually approved for mixed use. The townhouses are probably more consistent with that mixed use designation than the single family homes would have been. De Weerd: Okay. But I guess density-wise what is the comparison between this and what was suggested before? Canning: Had 20 units before and they have 34 now. De Weerd: Okay. Okay. Any further comment? Zaremba: Madam Mayor, I guess I would -- it appears that I'm moving into the minority on this project, but I -- I think it's a well designed project, it's an interesting thing, something different from what we have had before, but I could be sensitive to setting a precedent for the R-15s in this neighborhood, which may not be appropriate. But I think the access problems -- and the applicant has suggested ways to solve them and they can be solved and with due respect we don't all have to agree. De Weerd: Well, I guess, Councilman Zaremba, I'll lend my voice to yours. I guess, as Councilman Borton suggested, we look at annexation, we want to look at something that will add something to our community that maybe doesn't exist right now and this is certainly it. It didn't come under annexation and it seems that they have done a lot of the amenities over and I guess compromises that we would have been able to obtain through annexation and they did it regardless. It seems like a -- because we don't have a room full of residents from Woodbridge that they have worked very well with the neighbors. The neighbors feel comfortable about what this will look like. It also makes a statement that they feel it will be compatible to their Woodbridge development, which is a nice subdivision. I haven't spent time trying to find it, but, Anna, in their open space -- because they have designed it the way they have, do they have more open space because of this particular design or is that just a perception? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, there probably is, because they went from two story to three story units, so a lot that footprint is going vertical and they were able to maintain a fair amount of open space on this project. I don't have the exact numbers. Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 39 of 84 De Weerd: And I guess what -- I had a lot of concern and it's a lot because I live and breathe roads and traffic and all of that every day and so it's made me a little bit maybe anal about it, but I do appreciate the easement that has been suggested and a new -- a new idea from -- for the area behind that. It does open up some possibilities for -- for that land holder and -- which they didn't have before and so I think it's a unique product that doesn't exist in our community and with some diligence I think we could also maintain a single point of access for two pieces of property. So, with that said, Council, I would ask for a motion. Canning: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Canning: Can I perhaps, reading the tea leaves, make a suggestion, just if -- if it would be beneficial to Council. I know that sometimes when I am struggling with how an adjoining property will develop, I'll quite frankly ask the applicant to draw it out and show me that it works, because I can't see it right away. Would that be helpful to Council if the applicant went and showed the change that we are talking about tonight and showed how that adjoining parcel could develop in a similar manner with some multi- family? Would that address any of Council's concerns? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Don't make a difference to me. De Weerd: Okay. Other Council? Borton: Probably not. Zaremba: I'm in favor already, so it wouldn't help me. De Weerd: I have a no, probably not, and -- okay. Council? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move that we deny RZ 07-006, the request for rezone of 4.38 acres from R-8 to an R-15 zone. Borton: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to deny Item 17. Any discussion? Hearing none, Mr. Berg. Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 40 of 84 Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, nay; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES. ONE NAY. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Okay. Item 18 for A CUP is immaterial, but we still need a motion. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we deny CUP 07-005. Borton: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to deny Item 18. Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, nay; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES. ONE NAY. ONE ABSENT. Item 19: Public Hearing: CPA 07-003 Request to amend the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map by adding and amending pathway locations for the Pathways Comprehensive Plan Amendment by the City of Meridian Parks and Recreation Department: Item 20: Public hearing: Parks Master Pathway Plan: De Weerd: Okay. Items 19 and 20 are public hearings on CPA 07-003, Public Hearing for the pathway's Comprehensive Plan amendment. I will open this Public Hearing with a statement that it has been requested that this be continued to June 26th. And I will also open the Public Hearing Item 20 for the parks master plan for the pathway and ask for a motion. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I move that we continue the public hearings on Items 19 and 20 to our regularly scheduled meeting of June 26, 2007. Borton: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to continue Items 19 and 20 to June 26. All those in favor say aye. Meridian City Council June 5. 2007 Page 41 of 84 MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 21: Public Hearing: VAR 07-009 Request for a Variance for location of the subdivision identification sign away from the subdivision entrance for Strada Bellissima Business Park by Strada Commercial, LLC - Northwest Corner of South Meridian Road and West Victory Road: De Weerd: Okay. Item 21 is a Public Hearing on VAR 07-009. I will open this Public Hearing with staff comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Strada Bellissima project. It is located at the northwest corner of Meridian and Victory. The application before you tonight is for a variance. The variance is in their request to locate the subdivision sign at the corner of Meridian and Victory, rather than at the subdivision entrance. The entrance is shown a ways back from the intersection and they are asking for the subdivision sign to be located at the intersection. The code is fairly clear on where that subdivision entrance sign needs to be and, therefore, the need for the variance. The applicant actually worded the request best, so I'm going to read that as the proposal. It says the main departure from the signage as delineated in the ordinance is that fact that we intend to move the allowed subdivision identification sign away from the entrance at Victory Road, which will be obscured from view due to the curvature of the road and the location of the future building. So, they'd like to move it closer to Kuna-Meridian Road. The entrance is moved further away from the road for public safety, but due to the road curvature and building design, that location doesn't function well for a sign location. That's it in a nutshell. Here is the proposed sign structure. There are two entrances to the business park. One is -- both serve as entrances into the subdivision as a whole. The offices are located along the two arterial streets and, then, you come in and you will see the house lots there. These are some site photos. So, this is the view of Meridian Road and Victory Road intersection from the subdivision entrance off of Victory. So, there is the intersection where the lights are. Staff did recommend denial. We were not able to make the required finding that the variance would not grant a special right or privilege. Some of those -- the staff report states that some of those conditions are self imposed. The main one being the location of the building. But the curvature of the road and the hill are not. But the location of the building, as stated by the applicant, is kind of their own -- it is within their power to change it, so -- with that I'll answer any questions. De Weerd: Thank you, Anna. Any questions for staff at this time? Bird: Not at this time. De Weerd: Okay. Is the applicant here? If you will, please, state your name for the record. Crawford: Michael Crawford, representing Pinnacle Engineers and Strada Commercial, LLC. Madam Mayor and Council, thank you for your time this evening. Meridian City Council June 5. 2007 Page 42 of 84 De Weerd: Could I get an address? Crawford: 12552 West Executive Drive. De Weerd: Thank you. Crawford: Part of the difficulty with this has been the nomenclature in the code on signs, in that per the code there is allowed to be two entrance signs, one at each entrance, and two -- Anna, can you help me? Canning: Center signs. In a planned sign program. Crawford: Now, if we were to erect the center signs as called out in the code, they would look something like this with all of the tenants listed. Actually, this shows approximately 18 tenants. There will be -- could be up to -- De Weerd: Anna, can you turn on the -- does that work? Canning: I'm having difficulty getting it to work now that we moved to two monitors. De Weerd: Oh. Okay. Canning: I apologize. I need to get with IT and figure out how to work it again. De Weerd: Well, it's hard for the people in the audience to see what we are referring to. Canning: I will make a note to myself. De Weerd: Do we need two monitors? Crawford: So, essentially, you could have two of these signs up, one in the location that we are asking for and one halfway down Meridian Road, if you will. So, we could be -- have a center sign here and a center sign here. And, in addition to that, the entrance sign which we currently have here and the one we are proposing here, would be located at this point. So, there would be four signs around the entire project. What we are asking for, essentially, is to move this sign to this location and eliminate the two signs with all of the tenant listings on them and just have the much cleaner version that we have got up there, essentially, without the individual businesses being listed at all. We feel that's cleaner and better for the area and more to what the citizens would like to see there. Rather than more signs, we are asking for less, actually. At the entrance itself, then, we would have one -- get all my things straightened out here -- small monument sign that would go next to the entrance. This would be the monument sign that would be next to the entrance on Victory. I have copies, if anybody would like them. De Weerd: Well, I think if we don't have copies -- we will need a copy of the monument. Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 43 of 84 Crawford: And with that, basically, I'll stand for questions. De Weerd: Okay. Council, do you have questions? Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weent Yes, Mr. Borton. Borton: I got myself confused a little bit. The big sign here is the one that -- rather than have it originally here, as required, it would be moved to the corner? Crawford: Correct. Borton: And you would, then, use one of the little signs that you just showed here? Crawford: The small monument would be next to the entrance. Borton: The entrance here? Crawford: Yes. Borton: Okay. Okay. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: And the north entrance still would have the sign -- signage that is shown there; right? Crawford: A sign just like that. De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions? Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: Just one. Then there would be no sign called the center sign that lists -- Crawford: Correct. Zaremba: There would be none anywhere. Crawford: None anywhere. We would keep the signage on the buildings themselves. Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 44 of 84 De Weerd: You would certainly want to build that into the agreement. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: Anna, do you know what -- right offhand do you remember what's across the street there at D&B? Do they have -- Canning: What kind of signage they have? Bird: -- signage right on the corner? Do they have signage right on the corner? Canning: Yes, sir, they do. They have a center sign right on the corner, kind of angled at 45 degrees. They have -- I think they have a center sign at their -- hold on just a second. They have center signs at their entrances and I think Texaco has a sign right at the corner. I'm a little unsure. They have several monument signs. They have quite a few signs on that property, as I recall, so -- Bird: Follow up, Mayor. I personally don't have any problem with moving that out now that that is a four-way stop or -- it's got a lighted intersection now. If it hadn't been lighted, I would not be in favor of that. I -- but I'm like the Mayor, within this agreement we have to make sure that our staff can keep so that there is no center ones put in there, because to me that would be too many signs for that little development. But I have no problem with moving it out there if it don't -- isn't a safety hazard and I don't see it being a safety hazard with the lights now. De Weerd: Any other questions? Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: To clarify the requirement to which the director has denied this on in the first place, since I was involved with the committee that wrote the sign ordinance, which eventually was absorbed into the Unified Development Code and, then, modified slightly, the purpose of the center signs was to help the motoring public have at a glance an idea of what businesses were in the subdivision, without having to read the signs on every building as they motored by and there was -- and there was a distinction made between those and the entryway signs and the purpose of both of those kinds of signs and the fact that they are two different kinds of signs, the intent was to help the public identify quickly, not only where the entrances were, but what is in the subdivision. So, I support the decision that the director made in the first place. She made the right decision. But I could also see -- I mean the reason we have the appeals process is sometimes there can be a different decision made and I guess what I'm looking at is Meridian City Council June 5. 2007 Page 45 of 84 what the dimensions of this sign are, as long as they -- as long as the sign would not be in the sight triangle, which it can't be. Bird: Correct. Zaremba: I think I could go along with the applicant's proposal. De Weerd: Okay. Zaremba: I understand the reason for why they are -- why it's written the way it is and why the director had to make her decision, but I could see this as an exception. Crawford: Definitely with the current zoning of L-O, we are all going to be professional offices, although we are looking at a couple of retail possible uses, but that's a whole other matter. But as professional offices it won't be looking for traffic to be coming into be finding them, it would be by appointments normally and so forth and so there won't be a need for a lot of visible signs on the street for passerbys, so it just didn't make sense to us to have everything lighted out by our street. Zaremba: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Bird: No retail. Excuse me. Crawford: Currently. De Weerd: Right now no retail. Crawford: No retail right now. De Weerd: Okay. Anything else for the applicant at this point? This is a Public Hearing. Thank you. Okay. I do have one other person that signed up to testify. Shanna Gardner signed up against. Is Shanna here? We have bored her to death. I apologize. We did have -- Shanna did sign up in opposition. Is there anyone else who would like to provide testimony on this application? Okay. Hearing none, any final comments from the applicant? Okay. Council, any further information needed? Okay. Staff? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, if Council decides to approve the variance request, if you could give us some guidelines on how you would like us to word that finding with regard to not granting right or special privilege and from what I have heard of the testimony so far, perhaps you could adjust that by giving up their entitlement to a center sign, it's not granting a special right or -- just a consideration for Council. Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 46 of 84 De Weerd: Thank you. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: Anna, the only -- the only reason I would support moving it out there from the deal is because of the curvature of the road and I think that that was -- that location of where they had to go in kind was kind of mandatory at the time. That's the only reason. And I certainly don't want to set a precedence by doing this, but I think -- I think this is one instance where we have to -- that I feel it's right to do, but no way, shape, or form do I want to take away from the sign ordinance that we worked so hard to do. Canning: And, Madam Mayor, Councilmember Bird, I think that that's what Mrs. Watters was particularly concerned about is setting a precedent. But, again, with the applicant volunteering not to do a center sign, I don't -- most folks that are asking for allowances in the sign code aren't willing to give up anything generally, so -- they are just asking for additional. And this is -- this is definitely a different circumstance. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Anything else, Council? I would entertain a motion to close the Public Hearing. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we close the Public Hearing on VAR 07-009. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: Okay. Motion and a second to close the Public Hearing on Item 21. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Okay. Any discussion needed or do I have a motion? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I will try the motion, because I want to make it very clear so that we don't set a precedent. I move we approve VAR 07-009 with the conditions of one large sign being moved out in a safe location the southeast corner of the property. One large sign being at the north entrance. And a small monument sign being allowed at the south entrance Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 47 of 84 off of Victory Road. And that will be the only signage allowed for that project. Is that clear? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Bird, if you could specify the only free-standing signs. I'm sure the applicant will want signs on the buildings. Bird: Okay. Free-standing signs. Okay. You know what I meant. De Weerd: Well, we did need clarification. Okay. Do I have a second? Borton: Second. Zaremba: I would second that. Madam Mayor. De Weerd: Okay. Zaremba: Do we need to add to the motion the detail that this is being considered because of the curvature of one of the access roads to this project, makes the identification signage less visible from the more heavily traveled road? De Weerd: I do believe Mr. Bird included that in his comments. Bird: Yeah, I did. Zaremba: Okay. Sorry. I missed that. Bird: That's no problem. Zaremba: Thank you. De Weerd: He probably was mumbling at the time. Okay. Any other discussion? Anna, do you need any further clarification? Canning: No, ma'am. De Weerd: Okay. Borton: The location of those signs is clear? De Weerd: I want to know the definition of safe. Bird: The vision path. Canning: No. I think -- the only thing -- Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the only thing that I wasn't clear on is I don't think we can condition a variance. I would look Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 48 of 84 to Mr. Nary. We could request that the applicant submit a sign plan -- sign plan program consistent with that, but that I wasn't sure if we could actually condition a variance, but-- Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, it probably would be cleaner to at least have a sign plan submitted. We could certainly include it in the language, but it doesn't necessarily have the same effect. All it would be is more of a reference for the future. I mean could they come back in later and ask for an additional sign, ask for a monument sign, I think they could. I don't think they would be barred from it, but certainly if that language is included in the order, then, at least a future Council would know that that was at least your intent at this point not to grant it. Circumstances may change, buildings may change, uses may change, so I don't -- I think you can include it. I don't necessarily think it bars them from requesting it. De Weerd: So, can Council ask that a sign plan be submitted as they approve the Findings for this variance? Nary: Do you think that it's had enough time, Mrs. Canning? Do you think -- I mean I would think that should be problematic to submit that as -- prior to the -- prior to the approval of that they are going to have to submit a sign plan to the planning department is probable reasonable. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I would think that it would be -- they have all the signs ready to go. They probably actually tried to submit a planned sign program and we might have kicked it out, because it needed this variance. I'm getting a nod from the applicant. So, we should be able to have -- we can approve that and have it attached to the Findings if Council and Mayor would like that. Bird: I have no problem adding that to the motion, that they would bring a sign plan. Canning: We don't need to table it. We can just attach it to the Findings. We have to redo the Findings, so -- Bird: Okay. Borton: Second agrees. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Okay. Any further discussion? Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 22: Public Hearing: AZ 07-005 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 1.46 acres from RUT to an R-4 zone for the property located at 1205 West Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 49 of 84 Overland Road for Pfost Property by Thomas & JoAnn Pfost - 1205 West Overland Road: De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Item 22 is a Public Hearing on AZ 07-005. I will open this Public Hearing with staff comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is either the Pfost property or the Pfost property and we have apologize, because we are not sure of the applicant's pronunciation. The application is for annexation. The property is located at 1205 West Overland Road on the south side of Overland, approximately a quarter mile east of Linder. The applicants have applied for annexation and zoning to R-4 for 1.46 acres. The site is currently improved with one single family residential home and accessory buildings. Accessory outbuildings. The home is located in the path of the Overland Road widening project and has opted to request annexation to hook up to city water. Sewer is not yet available, but in anticipation of it being approved, the applicant has -- the annexation being approved, the applicant has already paid the required hook-up fees for the existing residence to obtain city water. Staff is recommending that a development agreement be required to insure that when sewer is available to the property that the home be required to hook up at that time. Don't have any elevations for you, but the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval at their May 3rd, 2007, Public Hearing. Tom Pfost or Pfost -- I'm sorry -- spoke in favor of the application. There was no opposition. No commenting. And no written testimony. There was no key issues of discussion. And no changes to staff's initial recommendation. So, to our knowledge there are no outstanding issues before Council. And with that I will answer any questions you may have. Borton: Thank you, Anna. Council, any questions? Bird: I have none, Mr. President. Borton: Okay. Would the applicant care to come forward? Pfost: I am Thomas Pfost. Silent F. At 1205 West Overland, Meridian. And, of course, it's pretty plain that the reason for the request was the widening of the road took our well and we decided instead of digging another well, to just hook onto city water, since it was just right there. So, that's our request. Borton: Okay. Zaremba: Mr. President? Borton: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I'm -- just for my information, I'm curious why you chose R-4 and maybe not something that would make your property more valuable. Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 50 of 84 Pfost: Well, at this time we are -- it might be a year before we move or the process or whatever and we -- at the time we didn't feel that we wanted to pay the taxes on it. Zaremba: Good point. Pfost: But in the future it probably will be requested. Zaremba: Thank you. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I thank you for going R-4. Borton: Was there a discussion -- and I guess the question is to you or to Anna -- about entering into an agreement to hook up to water without an annexation and, then, annexation could or would occur upon redevelopment of the property? Prost: Well, we just -- well, when requested I did call the city -- well, no, I called the city and annexation was required, of course. Borton: Madam Mayor first. Canning: President Borton, Members of the -- that's okay. I was going to call you Madam Mayor, too. President Borton, Members of the Council, it's pretty unusual, actually. What happened earlier today is fairly unusual. We don't usually provide water and sewer services without the annexation agreement. So, staff probably directed the Pfosts to go ahead and seek annexation. We did talk to them about -- briefly about if they wanted to convert it into an office. At the pre-application meeting we kind of looked at some of the issues associated with that. Part of the issue is that you all generally like to see a concept plan and they weren't prepared to move forward with that at this time, so felt it was just better to come in with a residential designation and somebody could rezone it in the future if they wanted to. Triangles are difficult to develop. Borton: The reason I ask the question -- I guess if the end result is to try and get the city water hook up -- and I understand almost always want that to be in conjunction with the annexation, you know, just thinking out loud, it doesn't make sense to annex it -- it doesn't necessarily have to be the means to get us there, if there is an ability and the rare exception to allow for hook up without annexation, just because once they are brought into the city we lose a lot of our ability to help direct how this parcel might join in and develop with other adjacent parcels. So, I'm not necessarily in disagreement with the end result and desire, but -- and I just throw that out there for Council discussion. Pfost: We would have gone any way. We just went on the advice of the city. Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 51 of 84 Borton: Yeah. Pfost: So-- Borton: Okay. Pfost: We would have been happy the other way. Borton: Okay. De Weerd: Any other questions, Council? Bird: I have none, Mayor. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. This is a Public Hearing. Is there anyone who would like to provide testimony on this application? Council, anything further? Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: Anna, can you give me a quick answer as to why my observation is off base? It might be, I just -- Canning: No, it isn't. It is exactly the issue we faced earlier tonight with an unusual? Shaped parcel. So, this is another unusual shaped parcel they have. I believe -- and I'm going by memory of a meeting that was several months ago. But I believe that both these properties are owned by the same person. They actually take access out at this very narrow point. So, ultimately, it would be best if someone were able to acquire at least three, if not all five, at some point in the future -- six -- to redevelop. One solution might be to zone it R-2. With an R-2 designation somebody would have to pretty much rezone it -- and you have the same ability to request a development agreement with a rezone that you do with the annexation and zoning. So, you're not losing that opportunity there. The R-2 would allow them to continue to have their home on the piece of property, but kind of forces somebody, probably, to rezone it in the future. I doubt people are going to want 12,000 square foot lots on Overland Road as an ultimate development potential, so-- Borton: Okay. Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Nary. Nary: Maybe to add onto that, it seems like there are occasions that over the years we have had properties that have been -- been granted services in a limited capacity, with Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 52 of 84 the anticipation that at some point something else would happen and they sometimes will get lost in the system by that and we don't have another designation -- like some other cities will have an agricultural designation or an open designation or something else that is, essentially, a holding zone that will, then, require them to do something else if they want to do anything different. So, I think Mrs. Canning's suggestion is sound in that it gives, again, the future Council the ability to address this property again, with only a limited amount of services being provided. I wouldn't recommend it if they were requesting both services, because at the point where you are going to be granting water and sewer, you're limited in more on what your future uses are going to be. The only concern is that it has been a standard practice and a policy of the city that once the services are requested, that both services are hooked up at the same time. If you want I guess the Public Works Department to revisit that or have that discussion in context of a different -- either an application or a workshop or something else, that might be something else that the Public Works Department may want some direction on. I don't know if Mr. Grady has a preference, but I know that that is normally the discussion point with applicants is if you want water, then, sewer comes with it and this is how it works. And that was probably the nature of what the discussion was and why we are here. De Weerd: Len? Grady: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I know that in the past, especially when there is a fairly serious water quality issue, I do know that we try to expedite and get them hooked up to water with an annexation agreement. But, certainly, like Mr. Nary mentioned, if that's not what Council wants us to do, then, we can back that off a little bit. I would be interested if that was the case and this one seems to have slipped through the cracks on me as to how he got hooked up so quick. Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Nary. Nary: Another thing, Council, again, I don't think your thought process is incorrect, Councilmember Borton, but there are occasions that you have had, especially on your larger roadways, like Overland or Fairview, where you have applicants who would love to only have service, because that's all they really need, yet the city's objective is to get them into the city, compliant with city standards, sidewalks, gutter, landscaping, buffers, all those other things and your services sometimes are your only means to do that. So, if you want to -- if this Council wants to establish a different practice, then, the staff will probably need some guidance to do that, so that it isn't arbitrary that we are simply making that -- it's difficult from a staff perspective to make that decision individually on every single case on which one they think is more suitable for a piecemeal sort of service application versus one that really require more of the -- the compliance with city standards and sidewalks and those types of things. That's a slippery slope that I just don't want you to fall into is on this individual piece of property it probably makes some sense to grant an exception. If you want to do that, then, I would ask you to find some Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 53 of 84 language that carves out why that's necessary, so that we don't end up in a situation when it's a business or it's an area that we want to get redeveloped that we don't have the -- we don't have to apply the same standard every time. De Weerd: If that's the direction of Council, Mr. Nary-- Nary: Right. De Weerd: -- would you have suggested language for them? Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I mean I think the R-2 designation is probably a good start on that, because it allows for, essentially, says the existing home to remain. There is no changes they are seeking. They are really only asking for service. They are not even asking to enlarge the footprint of the facility or the building. So, something like that certainly is a good reason that limited service might be different than a business that wishes to expand or a business that wishes to change use or a business that wants to relocate or if they wanted to even enlarge this house, which they are not asking to do any of those things, they simply have a well that needed to be replaced and they are not wanting -- not wishing to take that expense and Central District Health probably wouldn't be supportive of them doing that anyway. We have done those limited types of circumstances. I just -- again, if you were looking for a broader rational for staff to look at, then, we want to be more cautious. If you're looking for a very narrow reading for this one, then, I guess I would ask that you keep it fairly narrow, so that we can compare it to the limited residences that we have allowed this to go to. De Weerd: Okay. Anything else Council? For staff? Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I guess just a question of I recently read something that was explaining the water, sewer, trash bills. Technically, they can't be separated. Once you generate a water usage you're billed for the other two. Is there a way that somebody can hook up the water now and be hooked up to the sewer and the bills can be separated? De Weerd: Yes. They are not annexed. Bird: Yeah. We can do it. De Weerd: Len, do you have-- Grady: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, that is correct, we do have some water only accounts and, in fact, I believe we also have, strangely enough, some sewer only accounts, so -- Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 54 of 84 De Weerd: Very limited. Grady: Yes. De Weerd: Thank goodness. Grady: Very very rare. De Weerd: Okay. Anything else, Council? Zaremba: I know we are trying to find the best fit, that we are coming up with a solution that the applicant has not asked for, and I might ask him to comment again. De Weerd: Okay. Canning: As the applicant makes their way, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, can you describe where you are in your best fit? I'm sorry, but I'm unclear as to where you're headed right now. Zaremba: I personally am in favor of approving the request, but we appear to be trying to find another way to do this. De Weerd: Okay. He's walking a long way to answer that one. Mr. Bird or Mr. Borton? Borton: Madam Mayor, I like the R-2 idea. It's a great opportunity for it to come before Council on redevelopment. I guess that might be the question posed to you. Zaremba: I also could support the R-2 instead of the R-4, but I just would ask the applicant -- the other discussion was trying to find ways for you to get service without being annexed at all. Pfost: Uh-huh. Zaremba: You seem to have been willing to be annexed. Pfost: Well, we didn't know whether it was -- well, we didn't ask for a choice, we just asked for I guess a recommendation and they recommended that. Zaremba: Okay. Pfost: But on the agreement in Planning and Zoning, it was an agreement that we'd sign or call a lawyer to sign to agree to sign up for the sewer when it came through. But, again, I didn't know there was a choice there either, so -- Bird: Madam Mayor? Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 55 of 84 De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I am in favor of giving them the one service, but I am not in favor of giving to them if they don't annex. Every time we have done it outside it's always been on the assumption that the minute you became contiguous you come in. I have no problem with -- the water is a lot easier to bill out than the sewer is. So, I have no problem with that and I, too, would like the R-2 zone, but I could live with the R-4 or whatever Mr. Pfost wants to go. That's better than the R-15 anyway. De Weerd: Yeah. I wish we had an R-1. Zaremba: Would you know which would make your taxes cheaper, since that was a part of your decision not to ask for like a commercial zone? Would R-2 be cheaper taxes or would it be the same? De Weerd: I don't think it makes a difference residential. Zaremba: It's either R or not. Okay. Pfost: So, if we -- if we went to the R-2, then, it would condition we would stay on the water and wouldn't have to go on the sewer, then? We'd just keep the well -- or keep the sewer on septic? Borton: Madam Mayor. There would be a development agreement that once sewer is available you hook up. Pfost: Oh. Okay. And R-4 would be -- Borton: The same. Pfost: Oh, the same. Okay. I just didn't know, I guess. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, that's where I wasn't sure where you were on that issue either, so I'm sure J confused the applicant. It's my fault, so -- De Weerd: Are we clear on that? Do you have any questions? Pfost: Just whatever -- whatever would help us in the future with the property, you know, whether it goes commercial or whatever down the road. Just whatever is a benefit to us is what I would go for, but, of course, that's -- Zaremba: But somehow you need water when they pave over your well. Pfost: Yes. Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 56 of 84 Zaremba: Okay. De Weerd: That would be helpful. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Okay. Council, anything further? Bird: Madam Mayor, I do have one. Anna, it isn't a benefit, really, to be R-2 for him, is it? Other than -- I mean you and I both know it's going to come back and be rezoned. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, it's likely to be rezoned regardless. I mean if it were 50 years from now and just that house is still there on a piece of property zoned R-4, you may get somebody that decides to do four townhouses on it. But I think that those properties will get acquired before then. Bird: Staff was the one that recommended the R-4, wasn't it? Canning: The R-4 is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation of medium density residential. Bird: I have no problem with that myself. Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Nary. Nary: Not to get all lawyerly on everybody all the time, but if the desire of the Council is to -- to, I guess, have another look at this property at redevelopment, there are -- and part of your reasoning is to, essentially, create a holding type of zone, it wouldn't violate your Comp Plan to make it an R-2, you would almost assuredly get it in front of you again. There are occasions -- and from a staff's perspective, if we are looking at the future types of options for folks, if their only alternative was an R-2 that certainly is a little different discussion for the planning staff than it is if it's an R-4. There has certainly been occasions of R-4's that have been annexed and zoned and an R-4 came in front of you and you weren't very happy with it. And the variety of R-4s is large and the varieties of R-2 is not. So, that's at least if you want to consider that as an alternative. This, again, is a fairly small piece of property and I think as Mrs. Canning stated, it probably would have to come in front of you in some fashion anyway, but an R-2 would give you more options. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton. Borton: Unless there is additional input needed, I would move we close the Public Hearing on Item 22. De Weerd: Thank you. Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 57 of 84 Zaremba: Second. I second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to close the Public Hearing on Item 22. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton. Borton: In light of the great disagreement that Councilman Bird and I might have and his desire to make density -- being so pro density on this particular issue, discussing R- 4, I got to disagree with him. Zaremba: R-4? I thought it was R-40. Borton: I'm going to request something less dense than what Councilman Bird and his pro density platform are putting forth and I would move that we approve Item 22, AZ 07- 005, request for annexation and zoning from RUT to an R-2 and have a development agreement coincide with that that requires a hook up to sewer as soon as that becomes available. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve Item 22 with the conditions as stated. If there is -- is there any discussion? Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 23: Public Hearing: AZ 07-004 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 2.48 acres from RUT to an L-O zone for Locust Grove Professional Office Building by Ruby/Edwards: Architecture + Design - 1695 South Locust Grove Road: De Weerd: See, now you know why it's suggested not to let these meetings go passed 10: 00. And we apologize for the lateness. Item 23 is a Public Hearing on AZ 07-004 I will open this Public Hearing with staff comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Locust Grove Professional Office Building. It's located at the southwest corner of Locust Grove and Overland, as shown on the zoning map. The application before you tonight is another annexation and zoning request. The application is requesting annexation and zoning of 2.4 acres Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 58 of 84 to L-O and that is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation. The applicant has submitted a concept plan and elevations. The -- just to point out a few features of the concept plan. The driveway is located at the south -- southernmost end of the property to get it away from the Locust Grove intersection, approximately 440 feet south of that intersection. The application before you tonight does include some specific development agreement provisions, including that -- that the development conform to this concept plan. That only principally permitted uses within the L-O zone be allowed and that the hours of operation be limited to 6: 00 a.m. to 10: 00 p.m. That there be just one office building approximately 21,000 square feet and restricted to a height of 35 feet. I can show those elevations there. The structure shall be consistent with the elevations submitted and with variations in the roof line and either eaves, a sloped roof, parapets, and/or cornices, a form of awning over all building entrances. At least 30 percent of the street facing fronts to contain windows and at least two different types of siding and accent materials. And those are largely from our design standards for entryway corridor. It also includes -- the DA also includes a 25 foot wide landscape buffer adjacent to Overland Road and adjacent to Locust Grove, with alternative compliance granted for a concrete landing, retaining walls, and two stairways. This is a sloping site. It slopes to the west I think. Yeah. I'm getting nods from the audience. Yeah. And it also includes a 20 foot wide land use buffer and a six foot tall vinyl perimeter fencing along the south and west property lines adjoining the residences. And that fencing would be installed prior to certificate of occupancy. As mentioned before, the commercial building is 2,100 square feet. It's -- 21,000. It is a single two story structure, so there is just one structure, but it is two stories high. And the Commission recommended approval at their May 3rd, 2007, Public Hearing. Wes Edwards, the applicant's representative, spoke in favor, as did Charles Eldridge, the developer. No one spoke in opposition, but Mike Vaughn from -- the president of Sportsman Pointe homeowners association and Gene Dartelle, a neighbor, and Mike Buffert also a neighbor spoke -- commented on the application. There was no written testimony. Key issues of the discussion by the Commission were the allowed uses within the L-O zone and compatibility with adjacent residences. The hours of operation. The grading of the property, so as to not impact the adjacent residential subdivision. And the provision of additional landscaping to buffer the adjacent residential subdivision from the proposed office building. Key Commission changes to staff's recommendation were that the hours of operation for the site be from 6: 00 a.m. to 10: 00 p.m. and that the applicant construct a fix foot tall vinyl perimeter fencing along the west and south property lines. The outstanding issues of concern for the City Council would be -- again, the residents have expressed concerns regarding compatibility of the elevations and the height of that structure with the homes to the west. And with that I will answer any questions Council may have. De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions for staff? Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 59 of 84 Zaremba: I believe I heard you -- and I see in writing that their height restriction is 35 feet. The residential subdivision next to it would have that same height restriction. Canning: Yes, sir. De Weerd: Okay. Anything further? Is the applicant here? Edwards: Wes Edwards. Ruby Edwards Architecture and Design, 415 West Hays St., Boise, Idaho. De Weerd: Thank you. Edwards: We are pleased to be here with you tonight, Madam Mayor and Council members. We are in agreement with staff. However, Anna, do you have a slide of Exhibit B showing our plat in your file there? Canning: No, I do not. Edwards: Okay. The actual -- would you go back to that last slide that has the zoning -- that one. As indicated in the staff report, it mentions that the acreage is 2.48 acres. That was prior to ACHD acquiring the right of way on the north and the east of our property. The actual property acreage within that new boundary is approximately 1.5 acres. And also as Anna indicated on the previous application before you, that a triangle parcel is very difficult to develop and we have went through many renditions trying to come up with a design that fit the needs of this -- of our client, as well as address the Unified Development Code and this corridor along Overland Road and Locust Grove. We are aware that this is a major intersection once this overpass is complete. We wanted to develop -- there is the plat that I was referring to. As you can see, the amount of right of way ACHD acquired took a significant portion of -- from that 2.48 acres. Anyway, so we wanted to develop a building that was an anchor for this intersection and that the building presented to the streetand not a parking lot to the street. And our -- Anna described our alternative compliance application was to create a public plaza on that corner that would give patrons and employees from this building an opportunity to be outside and be able to go across the street to a retail development for different needs. And also create a pedestrian friendly environment at that corner. As indicated, the property does slope from Locust Grove to the west. Locust Grove being a high point. Approximately eight feet at the north and a little less. We just don't have a complete survey at this time, but it's a little less on the south end. Our client has been in communications with the Sportsman Pointe Subdivision on multiple occasions, both in neighborhood meetings, as well as phone conversations, and we are trying to cooperate with their concerns as best needed with the vinyl fence and landscaping along the western border, so that there is not a visual concern there and there is also -- with the -- a concern with the slope at the entry, if we were to have any icy event and the entrance were to be iced over, that there would be a concern of cars sliding into the neighbor's backyard there. And we are more than willing to address that with -- it would more than likely be a trash enclosure at that location for easy access for the sanitary Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 60 of 84 service company to collect the trash at that point where the trash enclosure would act as a buffer to prevent cars from going beyond that 20 foot buffer into the neighbor's yard. Or bollards would be another option, if that was not an appropriate location for that trash enclosure. But we are more than happy to address any concerns or questions that the Council may have or that the neighborhood may have as well. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Any questions at this point, Council? Bird: I have none. Zaremba: Madam Mayor, just a clarification. Your discussion of the plaza that would be, essentially, on the back of the building, but is -- is that going to be an entrance that's not going to look like the back of the building? Is it going to be dressed up? Edwards: Could you go to the elevations, Anna? Canning: I'm sorry? Edwards: Could you turn to the elevations? Let's see. Zaremba: Probably the Overland elevation. Edwards: It would be the top elevation. It's the curtain wall glass, transparent, where you can see the activity of the building from that corner, from that plaza. Zaremba: There will be a doorway that looks like an entrance? Edwards: Yes. There will be a doorway. Yes. Zaremba: Okay. Edwards: I mean there will be store front and glass to serve as a safety feature for the police as they are trafficking, they could be -- you know, they could see movement inside the building at night as well. De Weerd: Okay. Zaremba: Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. I have a couple of people that have signed up. Mike Ball. Ball: Anna, that's Mike Ball, not Mike Vaughn. De Weerd: I know. I had to pull my notes and say, okay, I thought this says Ball here. Meridian City Council June 5. 2007 Page 61 of 84 Ball: Yeah. It is. I'm Mike Ball at 1629 South Labrador Place. I'm president of the Sportsman Pointe Homeowners Association. Also adjacent to this property. Well, the builder has been very cooperative in coming back to us and the owner with working out agreements for the vinyl fence and also the specifications of how they were going to do this in making sure they have got our input. The only last concern we have, which is the one they addressed at the last, was the elevation coming down from Locust Grove into that parking lot. It's about an eight foot drop. And so we are trying to make sure that elevation is at the bottom, so that the fence line is a full six foot fence and that we have some kind of safeguard in there to where when it is icy or when they do come in that parking lot too fast they don't go right through that fence right into the neighbor's backyard, so -- because that is the narrowest piece of the property down there where the entrance is. But other than that, this -- the homeowners association is very much in agreement with this. It's a very good building. They kept the size limitations and compared to what's there, it's a -- it will be a lot better site, so -- De Weerd: So, did you have a preference on what -- using the bollards or-- Ball: Well, I'd really rather not have a trash can up there, but the neighbor -- or the next gentleman to speak is the neighbor that lives right at the end of that, so I'm going to let it kind of be his choice. But to me bollards would be better and some other site for the trash can -- or trash container location, but -- De Weerd: Okay. Ball: But as a general rule, the homeowners association has worked very well with them and they have been very cooperative and we really appreciate that. De Weerd: That's great. Thank you, sir. Ball: Thank you. De Weerd: Gene Vertel!. Dertelle. Dertelle: Dertelle. De Weerd: Dertelle. Dertelle: Gene Dertelle. 1728 Labrador. Your Honor, Council members. I'm the one that has -- right below the driveway and I have some concerns -- De Weerd: Are you right in here? Dertelle: Right there. De Weerd: No. Right here. Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 62 of 84 Dertelle: The first lot. The first -- De Weerd: So right here? Bird: No. Back. To the west. Right there. De Weerd: Right there. Bird: Right where you're at. De Weerd: Okay. Dertelle: Right. I was concerned in regard to the elevation of that parking lot in regard to a vinyl fence. Now, there is vinyl fences and there is panel fence. They can put rail vinyls, which would definitely not be suitable, but a panel fence -- and also what the grade of that parking lot is. Now, should they raise that parking lot three feet, even though you put a six foot fence up, you have got three feet of car sticking out above it -- or two feet or whatever it is. I'm kind of concerned about that and that grade, unless you're talking about 50 foot, actually, from the road down, and with about an eight foot grade or better -- eight foot drop, that's going to -- and I think councilmember here mentioned about an icy road last time we were here, I believe it was, I'm liable to have him in my dining room. It's a concern. De Weerd: That would be. Dertelle: And another thing is I certainly wouldn't care to have a lot of garbage cans back there either on the end of my property either, you know, so -- De Weerd: They do need to fully enclose it and usually it's more than a fence. Dertelle: Okay. De Weerd: But-- Dertelle: But some type of barrier or something there of curbs in the ground or something raised above, so they can't come on through it. De Weerd: You know, I -- yeah. Would you consider that -- you know, I guess bollards could be one thing, but if you had -- yeah, I wouldn't want the trash enclosure right there either. It's closest to the neighbors and when they back up they make a lot of noise. But would you have any opposition to maybe a partial cinder block wall in that area? agree, a vinyl fence doesn't stop a car. Ball: That's not going to stop it. Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 63 of 84 De Weerd: But if you had bollards and a vinyl fence --I guess I'd like the applicant to maybe think while you're sitting there at some of the solutions that could be posed and we will see what their solutions might be. Certainly we would want them to work with you on and whatever-- Ball: We are more than willing to work with these people. They seem very knowledgeable and acceptable to some of the things we are saying, but we still got to look at this point what could happen. De Weerd: Yeah. That's a big slope. Ball: Thanks. De Weerd: Thank you, sir. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Zaremba: Just to comment on a couple of those subjects. I don't see a trash enclosure described on this site. Typically, it would be closer to the building, to make it useful for the people to use. That being said, I wonder if it would be too difficult to -- in front of these parking spaces just do some pipes that are upright in pretty substantial cement, like they do to protect signs behind -. beside drive-thrus and buried -- vertical pipe anchored in cement that would stop a car, two or three or four of them along there. It wouldn't be that noticeable. De Weerd: An opportunity for public art. Zaremba: Just a comment. But the other is I don't see where a trash enclosure would go. De Weerd: Yes. Zaremba: It doesn't appear to be depicted. De Weerd: That's true. I have one last person who has also signed up. Charles Eldridge. If you will, please, state your name and address. Eldridge: My name is Charles Eldridge. I'm with Specialty Contracting, located at 2525 Stokesbury Place here in Meridian. 83646. De Weerd: Thank you. Meridian City Council June 5. 2007 Page 64 of 84 Eldridge: I am developing the property and appreciate the time that staff has taken to put this together today and the work that's gone into it and for the neighbors for meeting with us on the different issues which we have discussed. Zaremba: I'm sorry, Madam Mayor. Could I ask you to speak a little louder or closer to the microphone. I'm having trouble hearing you. Eldridge: Sure. Okay. The main points that I'd like to discuss with you and point out is as far as the zoning of this area, I think we are all pretty much in agreement that it meets the Comprehensive Plan and in meeting with the neighbors it's a less obtrusive zoning, light office, medical complex, or professional office that meets the needs of that south side of the freeway in that area. We are also agreeable with the hours of operation. I think the access is the concern right now of the neighborhoods the most. We actually had a meeting scheduled prior this evening with a neighborhood meeting also one Monday night as well. Monday night we weren't able to round up enough neighbors to make it a worthwhile process, so they canceled it. But Mr. Ball has worked with us quite frequently on deciding how to best address these issues and things. So, I think the biggest issue that we have -- that we have encountered -- and I think you have heard about and we want to make sure it's resolved and addressed -- I personally did the elevations before contracting this lot and there is an eight foot elevation drop from the exact corner right here, approximately. I'm not a civil engineer or a surveyor, but there is an eight foot drop from this corner to there. And so what we have done is we have sunk the building down in this courtyard area is about eight feet. So, the elevation of the building is no higher than what a single story -- or a double story home would be. So, we have reduced that impact as far as views. Now, it slopes down here and there is, actually, only about a four foot drop from here to here to the property line. So, with our civil engineers, they have a required grade to meet as far as sliding and slipping on that and that will not be a big issue. I think we are -- this will be raised a little bit and this -- we have to meet certain drainage requirements. As far as putting bollards there, I'm not at all in opposition or -- to doing that. I think once we -- if we had a contour plan and perhaps we probably should have had a civil engineer put a contour plan together for us so you could see that. But, once again, we didn't know that was going to be a big issue tonight, or we probably would have. We have attempted two other meetings, like I say, in the last week that we didn't get any attendance at. So, anyway, I think that's a great idea to put bollards or cement posts in there. We would not be objected to that. We talked to -- we have revised this with the neighborhood as far as landscaping -- to put significant landscaping and shrubs in here to reduce the opportunity for streetlights to come in there, along with the fence that we have decided to provide for them or split the cost with them on. We talked originally about doing a concrete fence, but the cost was so prohibitive that they didn't want to do that and I don't blame them at all. So, we have -- we have discussed those issues and I think the best case scenario, in our opinion right now, would be to -- you know, we will be more than happy to put in concrete bollards there, to give that added since of comfort and safety to the neighbors that are to the -- to the west. I would -- I don't think it's going to be a problem with the elevations, but if it is, that would give the added comfort I'm sure. As far as the trash access, we don't really have any liberty to decide that. The trash Meridian City Council June 5. 2007 Page 65 of 84 enclosure people, SSC here in Meridian, in the previous buildings that we have done, they have basically dictated where we can and cannot put that. So, we are willing to put it where ever they require it, but their biggest issue is access, where they can most easily access it without dealing with other cars and issues. And, then, the only other issues -- we talked a little about the topography and the utilities are adequately planned for this intersection, as when working with the Comprehensive Plan when Meridian was doing this corridor -- the Overland and Locust Grove corridor, it was -- it was planned very well for a building of this type with utilities and power and whatever is needed there. Working with the neighbors, they didn't want anything retail, like the Maverick across the street and things, so we feel that this is a good servicing area for medical or professional. So, that's -- and I'd stand for questions. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Bird. Bird: Mr. Eldridge, what is the length from the road back to where you put the fence? Eldridge: Four hundred -- oh, I'm -- Bird: Your entryway in there, how far is your property line or whatever you want to -- a hundred feet? Eldridge: From here to here? Bird: Yeah. Where you drop your -- 125 feet? Eldridge: One hundred point eight five right here. Bird: Oh. One hundred feet. Eldridge: Yeah. Bird: And you're dropping four feet in that -- Eldridge: Approximately four feet from here to here. Bird: That's not much of a grade, is it. De Weerd: Don't talk to the audience, Mr. Bird. What kind of slope is that, then? Eldridge: Like I said, what I -- it is eight feet from here to here, when we used the laser and we shot the elevations on that. Down -- the street goes down considerably here and it goes down considerably here and the slope of the property -- I estimate it to be about four feet from this point to this point on this farthest end. And so our access is 440 feet away from the intersection and that's where we found it would be the best, Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 66 of 84 most useful way, but, basically, I -- you know, that's -- that's the best we can do without a contour map to prove that. 1-- De Weerd: But you're willing to find some mitigation in working with the neighbors to make sure it's suitable? Eldridge: Absolutely. Yeah. Yeah. We would be happy to meet with them at that location and show them with the laser the elevation difference and consult with our civil engineer at that point in time to give them a feeling of ease that this grade does not exceed any of the -- any of the requirements that are allowed as far as public safety is concerned. We do not want any problems with access there. At 21,000 square feet, this building will service, you know, people coming, whether it be dentists, orthodontists, periodontists, endodontists -- it may be a dental center, it may be another medical facility, it may be a professional, and we haven't -- we have got several plans that we are entertaining at this point, as far as -- but that's what we are seeing most of the demand for is something like that and so as far as the busyness of it, we want to make sure that entrance is very suitable as far as the elevations go, that we don't have it too steep where people are hitting their back bumpers on the -- on asphalt. We don't want to ruin the asphalt or ruin the driveway that way, so -- De Weerd: But we do know some drivers and so precautions are good. I did want to add clarification. I heard you say that you were going to share the cost of the fence. The fencing requirement is your requirement. Eldridge: Yes. That is our requirement. We originally discussed with the neighborhood association splitting the cost of a block fence -- De Weerd: Oh, a block fence. Eldridge: A stone fence. And that bid at 70,000 dollars or so, we decided -- and they decided -- De Weerd: Vinyl was good, uh? Eldridge: Yeah. Vinyl was really good at that point, so -- De Weerd: Okay. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: Just to clarify on the vinyl fence, it is a solid fence; right? Eldridge: It is. It's panel. Yes. Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 67 of 84 Zaremba: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Anything further, Council? Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton. Borton: The only thing that really jumps out to me that is of some concern are these particular spaces here. And I don't know if you have got every space you need packed in here. In light of the concern, you know, of coming down here, whether it's light pollution from headlights or the slope on slippery days, these particular spots, assuming they are flat -- I mean they are a four foot slope in a portion -- not the entire one hundred feet. This seems to invite, assuming they are going to be used, someone having to back out right into where people are pulling in and the question as I look at this is if there is an opportunity for perhaps three spots to go away to round this, to have a little more landscaping, also which would -- would address some of Councilman Zaremba's right on the money safety concerns, should someone slide. I don't know if that's an option. Eldridge: Well, I appreciate your concern on that. And we looked at that, too, very -- very detailed and what we have come up with, once again, with it being a triangle site, we have tried our best to accommodate for a 20,000 square foot building, the adequate parking that would be needed. I'm afraid if we eliminated that parking, we would get significant complaints from people across the street that are going to be developing in the future, these people taking their parking spaces and coming over to our building and I'm just afraid we -- we are already really really tight on that and we are -- as you indicated, we are going to lose one to a trash enclosure anyway. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Uh-huh. Borton: And I understand that, but I guess the question -- if I'm suggesting losing four spaces -- Eldridge: Uh-huh. Borton: -- is it a policy, this decision here, suggesting whether or not that makes sense or is it we don't need to meet the parking requirement, we are at the absolute limit and we are not allowed to give up those spots? Eldridge: Well, we would -- in fact, I'm not going to -- we are above the limit, so we would still be able to do that if we lose three spots, but that's only because if we were in Boise city, if we were in Nampa, if we were in any other city but Meridian, the parking is most lenient here, as far as spaces per thousand, and typically when you're dealing with Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 68 of 84 a doctor or a dentist or a physical therapist, they would not purchase or want to be involved in a building that wasn't five spaces per thousand square feet of building. Right now we are at about -- we are considerably lower than that. So, we are really tight. So, that's a good question. But I would -- I really -- that makes it a -- it really hurts the project to do that, to lose those parking spaces. We get enough complaints as it is about lack of parking. I mean our own office building where we are at right now, we are -- you know, one to five hundred is the code for Meridian city and that is -- we have got 11 parking spaces for 3,000 square foot of -- I'm not complaining, Anna, at all, but it is the most lenient -- lenient one and it's difficult to find clients that really want to be there for that. De Weerd: Well, it's just a minimum. You can always do more. Eldridge: I know. That's what we are doing is a little bit more, but we could go down to the minimum is what I'm saying. You're right. 50-- De Weerd: Okay. Anything else, Council? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Is there any further testimony on this. application? Okay. Wes, do you have any closing remarks? Okay. Council, any further information needed? Anna? Canning: Nothing. Other than I take great pride in my lenient parking standards. De Weerd: Well, this is on a future public transportation route. Is that correct, Mr. Borton? Borton: Absolutely. De Weerd: Absolutely. Canning: And within great walking distance of Mountain View High School. De Weerd: Yeah. You could park there. Okay. If there is nothing further, Council, I would entertain a motion to close the Public Hearing. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I move we close the Public Hearing on AZ 07-004. Borton: Second. Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 69 of 84 De Weerd: Okay. Motion and a second to close the Public Hearing on Item 23. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Okay. Any discussion? Zaremba: Let me try. Madam Mayor, I move we approve AZ 07-004, to include all staff comments, plus the requirement for applicant to work with staff and the neighbors to establish either bollards or cement -- either cement bollards or cemented posts in the southwest area of the lot facing the entrance. Bird: The southwest corner, but facing west. Zaremba: Southwest corner facing west. Yes. Bird: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Mr. Berg. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 24: Public Hearing: AP 07-003 Request for City Council Review of an Appeal of the Director's Determination to deny a request for a wholesale trade (food broker) use in an L-O zone for Main Street Marketina by Dale Lindley - 3723 North Locust Grove Road: De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Item 24 is a Public Hearing, AP 07-003. I will open the Public Hearing with staff comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Main Street Marketing project. It's located at 3723 North Locust Grove Road. It's north of Ustick. It's an appeal of a director's determination. The applicant submitted a certificate of zoning compliance for a food broker use within Brockton Subdivision, which is zoned L-O. The property is in Lot 10 of Brockton Subdivision, so it's right up towards the north end of the site. The Unified Development Code does not specifically address food brokers, but it does tell me what I need to do when I come across a use that it doesn't specifically address. It tells me I need to go to this document called the North American Industrial Classification System, which is published by the United States Department of Commerce, which lists every single possible use you could ever imagine. You can -- if there is a use, they have got it documented in this -- in this classification system. And, then, what I need to do is find out what the closest category to that -- how that complies with the Unified Development Code. So, in this case I go find a food broker use and I look at the closest one and it tells me that the closest -- the thing that it's most close to Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 70 of 84 in our code is a warehouse use and warehouse uses are prohibited in the L-O zone. And, therefore, I had to deny this certificate of zoning compliance. Before the applicant gets up there and because it's late at night, if I were just going on reason and didn't have it spelled out how I was supposed to find out what the closest use was, this is an office use. They have got some storage in there. They might have a freezer. But, really, it's an office use where the applicant wants to run their -- their wholesale business, but they keep very limited supply in the office. This is a picture of the building. And this is a floor plan of the structure. So, there is a fairly large storage area with some offices around and a small retail showroom in the front, but it's more of a -- just a showroom. It's not a warehouse use. But, again, my code tells me how to look it up and that's how I looked it up. So, I encouraged the applicants to appeal my decision so that you can make that determination. De Weerd: And with that I'll answer any questions Council may have. De Weerd: Thank you, Anna. Any questions for staff? Bird: I have none at this point. De Weerd: Okay. Is the applicant here? Thank you for hanging in there, sir. Lindley: Thank you very much. My name is Dale Lindley. 2746 South Kingsbury, Eagle, Idaho. Madam Mayor and Council. Thank you for hearing -- Anna struggled with this one and as we sat there and tried to explain to her, I understood it was frustrating for me, because it was pretty blatant that I'm not a warehouse. I don't warehouse product. She used the term as far as wholesale. I'm not wholesale. I'm a broker. And the difference is -- there is just -- the problem is there is very few of us that exist in here. But I do a tremendous amount of business in the Meridian area. I'm a local Meridian person. I was born and raised here. I delivered milk to the creamery we just torn down. I went to high school here. I still live on the same farm that my family raised cattle on, which now is developed and we went back and built a house there. And one of the reasons we chose this area that is very important to us is it's very close to myself and my family, who is part of our business, but also my employees, it's very very close for us to get there. Anna, if you could kick back to the plat, I wanted to clarify one thing. The open space that we were showing there is not going to be for our use. That is going to be for rental space, if somebody wants to come in and rent that space. We are just taking advantage of the size of the lot. Our storage space will be back -- I don't know how to work this thing here, so I'll give it a try. Our storage space will be right here. And also we are hoping to expand our business, so this will eventually become offices and our storage space will be here. But because of the type of business we are in, I think I have provided you with letters from Food Service of America, which is a very big customer of mine. I probably do in excess of 40, 50 million dollars a year in sales to that company alone. So, needless to say, I cannot warehouse that type of stock here. We do a lot of business at Tri City Meats, another Meridian company, and we do with Capital Distributing, another Meridian company, and some of the restaurants and stuff that we do business with here are here in Meridian and school districts, hospitals, et Meridian City Council June 5. 2007 Page 71 of 84 cetera, et cetera. We are a professional service, guys. That's what we are. We are an office building. Our business runs from computers. We need an access door in the back. It makes our life a lot easier from the standpoint that we do a lot of trade shows, we have big equipment in there from the standpoint that I've got freezers and coolers, because I am in the food service business and when they send me a sample, they send me a six number ten case of green beans to show Food Service of America or they will just send me a 50 pound box of meat and I need to show them one pound of meat and - De Weerd: That's quite a sample. Lindley: And, believe me, the food banks loves us. Last week alone the mission came in and picked up about 2,000 dollars worth of product. We make sure it goes to the right places. That product is not sold retail, it is not sold wholesale. It's strictly samples. That's what it's for. But I have to have this equipment to hold it. Also we very much need to have the space for storage and today our world has changed a great deal and there is a lot of food recalls and it is my responsibility as a representative of companies like ConAgra and Danen and Campbells and other meat companies we have out there, that if we get a recall, I got to know where that product's at and we have to get to that storage and we have to be able to get those files very fast to know exactly where that product was sold to, so that we can trace that product where ever it may be in the entire state or within our city. So, I'm asking for us to be what we are. We are not asking for any type of change at all. De Weerd: Well, sir, I certainly can understand why Anna had trouble with this. Lindley: I do, too. De Weerd: But it sure seems pretty cut and dried to to me. Lindley: Thank you. De Weerd: So, how is that for cutting to the quick. I do have people signed up in support of this, but I wonder, Council, if we need to show support or -- but certainly if you have stayed here all this time we would want you to come and talk. Lindley: Oh. That was one thing that we did have a question on. We want a roll top door on this site, strictly from the standpoint for us to be able to get access and stuff. It is nothing -- it is an eight foot. We don't want a curb cut. I don't need a curb cut. It's strictly for access. It makes our life much easier. We are right next to the dump, so nobody's going to see it, it's away from -- away from the road. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, sir. Lindley: You bet. Thank you. Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 72 of 84 Canning: Madam Mayor, can I comment on that last issue, in case other people want to comment? I would be concerned about doing that, because this -- that would invite, should they ever leave this -- this use -- or this building, that would invite a contractor to go in there. That's typically where we see the roll-up doors with an office store front is for a contractor's yard, a small contractor's business, which wouldn't be appropriate with the hours of operation and comings and goings so close to a residential neighborhood. That's, actually, what started the whole investigation into the use is the roll-up doors. So, we have now come full circle, so -- Lindley: May I -- De Weerd: Uh-huh. Lindley: I would have no problem at all agreeing that if -- I'm building this building for an invest for myself, family, et cetera, et cetera. I plan on keeping the building. But I have no -- you can put in whatever you want to, I guess. We would be happy to close that up at anytime that we would -- that we would vacate. And there is also a possibility that if my business expands, I'm going to close it up anyway, because I'm going to need it for office space. It just makes my life so much easier. We do so many food shows -- if I go to a food show for Food Services of America, I'm going to have 20 booths in their -- in their show. I will take out of there a trailer load of Shaping dishes, fryers, you know, ovens, display racks, things like this, for the shows and that's what it's for. And also an access for our equipment, that if one of those freezers goes down, I have got to be able to get it in and out of there. But I would be more than happy to vacate that if at anytime that we would sell. De Weerd: Mr. Nary, is there a way to restrict that to single ownership, on sale it has to be vacated? I don't know how you would enforce that. Nary: Me neither. I don't know how we would force someone to -- De Weerd: Well, that was a short answer. Nary: -- remodel their building on vacating the use of it. Lindley: If we vacated it, we could just put regular swing doors on it or -- it's only going to be an eight foot entrance, so, you know, it's not going to be -- it's a single -- single wide. It's not -- I don't want a curb cut. I don't need a curb cut. We are not going in and out of there. With a curb cut -- a contractor couldn't do it without doing a curb cut, could he? De Weerd: You would be amazed at what they do. Nary: Madam Mayor, this is just a CZC request; isn't that correct? So, there isn't any other recorded type of document against this parcel. Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 73 of 84 Lindley: The developer had no problem with it. I had him write -- you know, write a letter. I think you guys received that also. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: Anna, is the eight foot door -- the roll up your problem? Canning: Yes, sir, that's what -- Bird: What about a swinging eight foot? Canning: I think that that's what we had compromised on with -- Bird: Or sliding. Canning: I think this -- Bird: You know, you can go by -- you can go buy five foot aluminum one side and three foot the other, makes up your eight foot. Lindley: We will make it work. Bird: And you can swing it. But it defeats your purpose. Lindley: What's the difference? Bird: I can go in there and put -- I can put in a cabinet shop and have swinging doors and get in just as good as I can a roll up. I don't see what that roll-up is hurting, to be truthful with you. I just -- we can't -- I mean I don't feel I can stop him from having an opening out there and I can -- as far as me going and setting up a shop, I don't care whether it's a swing or a roll up, I'm going to -- I don't care. So, you know, a roll up to me is much nicer, because you get it up and out of the way when you're bringing stuff through. Lindley: I think we can make it look -- blend into the building better also as a roll up. Bird: I mean in my business we put in a lot of eight foot entrances, five foot of basically a fixed door, you only open it up when you need it, you get in, and the other three foot one with your every day use. But it's still an eight foot opening. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 74 of 84 Borton: Mr. Nary, is the question limited just to this -- seeing the use in the L-O zone? Are we also, then, have an opportunity to make door decisions as part of this? It seems to be beyond the scope of what we were originally deciding. Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I guess -- the reason the door discussion is, I guess, out on the table is because if you were to grant that and the reasoning was that this is truly not a warehouse and whatever limitations you wanted to place on it to assure that it not be used as a warehouse, is within your discretion to do. I agree with Mr. Bird that there is still an eight foot hole in the wall and whatever kind of door is in it is probably not, in and of itself, going to be a deterrent. Now, maybe I'm wrong, but unless another user, who has a similar use to what's being proposed, most other types of users are going to require some change to the interior of some sort. Would that be an opportunity, Mrs. Canning, that the planning staff would be reviewing the use or would that only go to the building department, because it might just be a tenant improvement? Canning: We do sign off on the tenant improvements, but, generally, if there -- if there is no -- if they say it's going from the same use to the same use, then, we can't do anything. But -- or we don't generally do anything. It's hard to catch. I just -- I guess I - - the whole reason this interpretation did come up -- and I'm going to make my case one more time -- is that you got this -- this office building that was approved only as office -- largely because it was adjoining a residential neighborhood and putting roll-up doors to me was just a big flare gun that said this is not an office use and that's why we started questioning what exactly was going in there. Flex space is not allowed in limited office. We get a lot of requests for flex space in limited office and I say no, because it's not really a use that transitions well to residential and I guess to me it may still be an eight foot hole, but when I see a roll-up door I think warehousing, contractors, things like that. I don't think of an office use. I have never worked in an office with an eight foot roll-up door. I mean I just -- I'm sure they exist somewhere, but -- I mean it would be a very unusual building type to have as just as an office. It's very common for flex space. So, I guess -- I feel fairly strongly about this. I thought we had this issue resolved before tonight, otherwise, I would have emphasized it more on my presentation. But my understanding was they had agreed not to ask for the roll-up door, so I didn't bring that up as part of the presentation. I'm okay with -- Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird, do we have a roll-up door on our loading dock for our City Hall project? Bird: You know, I can't remember whether it's a roll-up door or a swinging door. I got a -- Anna, the roll-up doors -- you have no problem with a swinging door? I mean you can take -- you can take a nice aluminum entryway, put obscure glass in it, insulated obscure glass, people can't see in, it looks like a store front, it looks like a lot of offices -- I mean I can take you around to a lot of offices that's got these. Do you have a problem with that? Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 75 of 84 Canning: I think the concern is that it looks like a store front. It would be the -- preferable. Bird: But I'm telling you, you can do the same thing with it. I got eight foot of opening to take stuff in and out. Canning: And that's fine. I understand they need to get material in there. Bird: That's up to the applicant, then. Boston: Madam Mayor? De Weed: Yes, Mr. Borton. Borton: I -- the application, I'm in support of the change. I understand the planning director's need to deny it, but I also agree with Anna with regard to the door issue. There is no eight foot door, as I see it. You know, I understand changing and approving a particular use, but I'd support Anna in that discretionary call as to whether or not the door is appropriate. De Weerd: Okay. Well, this is a Public Hearing, so I have Shawn Morehouse that signed up for. That's really itching to get up here and testify. Morehouse: Shawn Morehouse. Mark Bottles Real Estate. 5418 North Eagle Road. 83713. De Weerd: Thank you. Morehouse: Madam Mayor, distinguished Councilmen, in my job description I have to find places to put clients. Mr. Lindley has been a total office user. Totally understanding that and that's why we found Brockton -- the Brockton Subdivision to put him in there. Can you go back to the plat of the -- he doesn't need to have any open space, any frontage, or anything. So, we looked for something that was really different that we could put him at. So, we found Lot 10 of Brockton Subdivision, which is inside the subdivision park, which is -- Locust Grove is to -- that's Locust Grove right there. And, then, you have Heritage Commons right here. We set the building, since it's kind of like a hexagon, we set the building to match the layout of it here. If you have been to Mr. Lindley's office, which I have been, he has currently now big freezes in his office and it's kind of a bizarre thing, but that's what -- that's what he does. And so what we did is is we designed this building that this door or opening would be right here. Now, it is not atypical of any office, but neither is what Mr. Lindley does as a food broker, because we had to go get denied April 30th, but he is strictly an office user, but, again, he doesn't -- is not an atypical office user and we simply requested -- and I guess what drew the red flag was a roll-top door. Now, that roll-top door, we could go and get permission to do a regular door, eight foot or whatever, swinging glass doors, or Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 76 of 84 whatever, but for ease we just asked for a roll-top door. And I think that's what he's asking for is a roll-top door. Does it matter? No, we could go do a garage door that matches Heritage Commons and we've got -- we've got pictures of it, but we specifically designed this so you could not see it from Locust Grove, that it would be strictly facing there and there has been landscaping recently just planted there. So, you're not -- no one's going to see it and that's why we have requested that. And it's -- and he's not an atypical user of office and so that's why we requested the roll-top door and I'm sure that's why the red flag come up. You see some roll-top doors in retail, but not very often in office, but they are out there. They are out there. And that's why we requested it, because it makes his life a whole lot easier, especially upon a recall of food, which we commonly get lately. De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. I also have Ken Marler that had signed up in support. Marler: Ken Marler. 2390 North Crooked Creek Lane, Meridian, Idaho. De Weerd: Thank you. Marler: I'm here to support Main Street Marketing as a client friend, food service -- food show helper, along with my 36 years of food serving experience I'm very familiar with what a food broker does and what his business is and it is as we have discussed, a professional situation. We do not buy product directly from Dale. He will bring it to our location, show it to us, we will see the food show, we will, then, in turn, order from either Food Service, Sysco, Tri-Cities, whoever our suppliers are. I have known Dale for years. I have never seen anybody transact money or buy or take anything from his location. His job is to show the food products around to the suppliers, to the individual users, the food service users. And that's really about alii have got to say. I'm open to any questions from the restaurant end of the deal about understanding of the food brokerage business if there is any. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Thank you. This is a Public Hearing. Is there anyone who would like to provide testimony? Yes sir. McKay: My name is Dennis McKay. I live at 3816 North Park Crossing Avenue in Heritage Commons. De Weerd: Thank you. McKay: The only concern I had when I saw this was truck traffic, because we do have a nice neighborhood and we don't want to have a lot of problems. Right now across the street is the high school. We have 18 wheelers that park there all weekend long and right by the LOS church, 18 wheelers. Right on Locust Grove. So, when we see this Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 77 of 84 coming in, then, and we are thinking that this gentleman had the kind of business we are talking about, it was a concern. That's why we came down tonight. He's alleviated some of that. I think the only thing I would like to see is to have a regular eight foot garage door put in, instead of the roll up. The roll up does give you the connotation that it's a business -- retail business, warehousing, where if you have an eight foot garage door commercial, it's a garage door. So, that would be my only wish that it would be done. So, I, with Anna, agree that the roll-top just won't look good from the back second story homes looking down on the roll-top door. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. McKay: Thank you. Hart: My name is Dan Hart. 3608 North Park Crossing Avenue. It's also Heritage Commons. The only concerns I had is he never really spoke on how much traffic was going to be coming in and out. And, then, also the possibility of renting out some of his office space, how much traffic that was going to generate. And also I don't know if -- he spoke of trade shows. I don't know if that's actually at his building or not. So, those are my only concerns. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, sir. Ma'am. C. McKay: Hi. My name is Claudine McKay. 3816 North Park Crossing Avenue, Meridian. My concern is setting a precedent. Once we have such a business, who is to say we won't have another business that will grow on. It's like people getting hooked on marijuana and they go onto cocaine. Who is to say they are not going to have a retail business for food. Once we set that precedent, it's -- we have opened the door. So, that's my concern. De Weerd: Thank you. Did you have something you wanted to-- J. Lindley: My name is Jane Lindley. I reside at 2746 South Kingsbury Way, Eagle. De Weerd: Thank you. J. Lindley: Wife and partner of Mr. Lindley. And I'd like to explain to you guys a little bit about our business. When we talk about food show -- sorry. When we talk about food shows, we are talking about loading the trailer with heat lamps and shaping dishes and deep fryers -- you know, small deep fryers for food shows. Our food shows are either held -- typically at the Idaho Center, at the Boise Center on the Grove, or in Jackpot, Nevada. We don't -- De Weerd: They are off site. J. Lindley: They are off site. They are huge events with lots of brokers and lots of food manufacturers. Nobody comes to our office, other than perhaps a UPS delivery on Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 78 of 84 occasion, maybe three or four times a week. We have a UPS truck, as typical as anyone else's business. The open space in our building that we are hoping to lease out, we had in mind an insurance agent, maybe a chiropractor -- I don't know. Something officey, so to speak. We don't have final plans exactly for a building yet, because we didn't know if we were going to be able to be allowed. We are in sort of a time crunch. Our building has been sold where we are currently at and we either need to do this or not do this, to move on. We did make a serious effort to go around, Dale and I, and take some photographs of some -- excuse me -- some very attractive residential garage doors that we are more than happy to pay for or, if all else fails, a tall double door that swings open is perfectly acceptable for us. But we do not sell food. We don't do anything retail. There are two different kinds of food brokers. There is a food service broker, which we are, and a retail broker, who calls on Albertson's. It's not -- it just isn't that kind of a thing. The other people, other than the UPS man, that comes to our door is maybe a factory rep from Campbells, who comes in three or four times a year. Stays in a local hotel. De Weerd: Just to put things in perspective, your traffic generation is probably less than that of a doctor's office. J.Lindley: Far less. Far less. De Weerd: So, just the perspective. J.Lindley: Absolutely. There are a total of five people in our business. My husband, myself, our son, who is also a partner. We have one other sales guy and an administrative person. So, any questions? De Weerd: Council, any questions? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: Thank you so much. Zaremba: Madam Mayor, I -- I don't think the issue from the beginning has been this applicant. That as we have said other times, once you approve a certain configuration of a building, it's there forever. I think I -- I would be more comfortable with a garage door look than a roll-up door look for this. Not because of this applicant, but thinking if the building stands that long, fifty or a hundred years in the future when there is -- they have needed to move into a bigger building someplace, hopefully, who is the next tenant and I think that's what the issue has been all along. Not what the current people are going to do with it, but what does it attract for the future use. And I think I'm ready to chime in and say I think this is an excellent use and an excellent place to put it. I would support not having a roll-up door there. De Weerd: Thank you. Any further testimony? Mr. Lindley, do you want to -- Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 79 of 84 Lindley: We have got no problem with that at all. De Weerd: Okay. Lindley: A garage door will be fine. Not a problem at all. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any further information needed? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: If we don't need anymore public testimony, I move we close AP 07-003. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: Okay. A motion to close the Public Hearing on Item 24. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Okay. Any discussion? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I'm ready to make a motion, but I got a question for Bill. Do we need to state a garage door? Because all we are doing -- I think like Councilman Borton said -- is we are approving the appeal for the cze. So, would it help to state a garage door? Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, yeah, I think it would be helpful to the staff if, in conjunction with your approval, that this would be allowed in this zone for this type of specific use, a limitation on how that use is, then, put in would be appropriate. Bird: Here we go. I move we approve AP 07-003, the request to put wholesale trade building into an L-O zone and to allow a residential attractive garage door, not over eight foot wide, and not facing Locust Grove -- it can be seen from Locust Grove. That takes care of it. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve Item 24. Any discussion? Borton: Madam Mayor? Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 80 of 84 De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: I know I'm in the minority in this. I think the applicant's fantastic. I understand the use. I understand and I'm supportive of the zone -- or, excuse me, the use change, but as I stated earlier, I'm not supportive of any type of garage door, roll-up door, big doors type product at this facility. So, I will be voting no. I understand I'm in the minority, but to the extent it makes additional later on applicants aware that the Council has -- some Council has great concern with that type of product. Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Nary. Nary: And I don't know if this would impact Council member Borton, but rather than attractive, which I think would be difficult to quantify, maybe if the maker of the motion, if he intended it to be compatible with the adjacent residential neighborhood, that at least gives the staff something to compare it to and there probably are maybe not eight foot doors, but I can't imagine in some of Heritage Commons there aren't large SUV or RVs that are probably parked behind doors. So, there is probably something more compatible in the neighborhood that at least would be something the staff could compare and could approve in the CZC. Bird: I have no problem with changing the motion to a compatible garage door, but not over eight foot wide. And the height is going to be determined by the building. I'm sure you're not going to go out and build a 50 foot high building. Zaremba: The seconder accepts that change and adds the comment that I think it's perfectly appropriate that we not be unanimous on this one. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. If there is no further discussion, Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES. ONE NAY. ONE ABSENT. Item 25: Public Hearing: PP 07-009 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 52 residential lots, 2 office/commercial lots and 10 common lots on 19.80 acres in an L-O zone for Meadowlake Villaae North by Touchmark of the Treasure Valley, LLC - Southeast Corner of Franklin Road and Touchmark Way: Item 26: Public Hearing: CUP 07-008 Request for a Conditional Use Permit approval to create 52 residential lots, 2 office/commercial lots and 10 common lots in an L-O zone for Meadowlake Villaae North by Meridian City Council June 5. 2007 Page 81 of 84 Touchmark of the Treasure Valley, LLC - Southeast Corner of Franklin Road and Touchmark Way: Item 27: Public Hearing: VAR 07-008 Request for a Variance to UDC 11-6C-3B4 which limits cul-de-sacs to a maximum of 450 feet for Meadowlake Villaae North by Touchmark of the Treasure Valley, LLC - Southeast Corner of Franklin Road and Touchmark Way: Item 28: Public Hearing: MI 07-006 Request for a Miscellanous application to amend the previously approved Development Agreement for Touchmark Living Center Annexation (AZ 99-021) by amending the approved phase boundaries and various other provisions for Meadowlake Villaae North by Touchmark of the Treasure Valley, LLC - Southeast Corner of Franklin Road and Touchmark Way: De Weerd: Thank you. We have got to do this one. Twenty-five through twenty-eight have been requested to continue, so I will open these four items PP 07-009, CUP 07- 008, VAR 07-009 and MI 07-006. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: I have opened those four public hearings and would ask for a motion to continue. Bird: I move we continue the public hearings for Items 25,26,27,28. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the clerk -- let me explain. I had originally suggested the 10th. That was the applicant's request. Will brought up that he is trying to not have substantial items on that agenda, because you will be in hearings the next day. So, we had suggested putting it to the 3rd. I'm not sure if that works for the applicant, but we could put it that day and if we need to continue it, we can continue it from there. Bird: How about putting it the 17th? That would give them an extra week. Canning: I really am not quite sure which way to go. At least if it's the 3rd it gives us the option to continue it to the 17th. Bird: Madam Mayor, I change my motion to continue the public hearings until July 3rd, 2007. Borton: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to continue Items 25 through 28 to July 3rd. All those in favor say aye. Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 82 of 84 MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 29: Amended Ordinance No. 07-1239 A: AZ 06-020 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 4.65 acres from RUT to a C-G zone for Williams Pipeline by Northwest Pipeline Corporation - 1301 Locust Grove Road: Item 30: Amended Ordinance No. 07-1314 A: AZ 06-057 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 9.91 acres from RUT to an R-15 zone for Jericho Subdivision by Heron River Development, LLC - 6055 & 6185 N. Jericho Road: De Weerd: We need to work on this togetherness. Okay. Items 29 and 30 are ordinances number 07-1239 and 07-1314. Mr. Berg, will you, please, read these ordinances by title only. Berg: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Ordinance 07 -1239A, an amended ordinance for annexation of property located in the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 18, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, 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 C-G in the Meridian City Code, providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County assessor, the Ada County recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, as required by law, and providing for a summary of the ordinance and providing for a waiver of the reading of the rules and providing an effective date. Berg: Ordinance 07-1314A, an amended ordinance for annexation of property being located in the east one half of the northwest one quarter of the northeast one quarter of Section 30, Township 4 North, Range 1 East, 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-4 and R-15 in the Meridian City Code, providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County assessor, the Ada County recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, as required by law, and providing for a summary of the ordinance and providing for a waiver of the reading of the rules and providing an effective date. De Weerd: Okay. You have heard these readings by title only. Did anyone understand it? Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Meridian City Council June 5, 2007 Page 83 of 84 Zaremba: I do have a rookie question. I do not wish to have them read in full, but it's not clear to me what we are amending. I mean -- or what the amendment is. Bird: Wrong legal description. Zaremba: Oh, the legal-- okay. That answers my question. De Weerd: That was simple. Okay. Well, you have heard those read by title only and I don't any see anyone -- Zaremba: Okay. Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Zaremba: I move we approve amended ordinance number 07-1239 and -- Berg: A. Zaremba: -- amended ordinance -- A. And amended ordinance number 07-1314A, with no changes. De Weerd: Do I have a second? Bird: Oh, I second it. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve these two ordinances. If there is no discussion, Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. De Weerd: Okay. That is the end of our agenda. It is 20 minutes after 11: 00. Do I have a motion to adjourn? Zaremba: Madam Mayor, I move we adjourn. Bird: I second it. De Weerd: All those in favor? MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Meridian City Council June 5. 2007 Page 84 of 84 MEETING ADJOURNED AT 11 :20 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) APPROVED: .f """"" 6 /z-6 I 07 Y de WEERD ,,'\\\\\or MEk,:~IIII// DATE APPROVED \' _1 . ~ // ,', :,\""\ ......-..r_....... /....- ,~~" (} ~on ~", ...~. ....~ { ~ ~i'(O~\,/ _ ~ _i.UEDgM-~~/~ -~ ~ II 1L.t.IAM G. BERG JR., Y ERK ,'- ~.(;1l ,,'~ 't? - _" I. . " ~T ....... ,.......,:::? ,A.... --(" .......... '/ '() ~r) t -,e; \ ..../ "'l; '" /....-..... ..11.1 ~...,.::.~.~_..... /7\~"..:::...... //. ^.. "\.~.. ,.........':' ", "--(ll "",!,~~.{ ,', -'//1//. -'\"I!jj~ t 1\\\\\\' .' II Ii . ~ ~ J; 1', ~ \ '