Loading...
June 5, 2007 City Council 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 spQke 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 ofthat 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. 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, $0 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 Weercl: 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.