Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFebruary 20, 2003 Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meetlng February 20. 2003 Page 2 of 84 B. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: AUP 02-012 Request for an Accessory Use Permit for a Family Day Care for five or fewer children out of home in an R-4 zone for Carrie Herteux by Carrie Herteux -- 2948 West Gemstone Drive: Zaremba: Do we need a motion to table B for not having -- or is that automatic? Borup: Why don't you go ahead and do it. Zaremba: Mr. Chairman, I move we table Item 3-B. Borup: Table or do we just -- Centers: We approved that. Borup: And we did. This is just -- Centers: If we approve it with the Consent Agenda, then, it's just -- Borup: Well, the Findings have not been prepared for us to review at this point. Centers: Oh. I see. Borup: This does not go onto the City Council. Zaremba: We approved the application, but we haven't seen the Facts and Conclusions. Wollen: I apologize about that, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. That will be available for your approval. Borup: Yes. This one is not going to City Council, so-- Zaremba: It was an Accessory Use Permit so I move that we table Item 3-B for consideration on our next meeting. Rohm: I'll second that. Borup: Okay. Motion and second. All those in favor? Any opposed? Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Item 4. Public Hearing Remanded from City Council: MI 02-011 Request to remove certain parcels in Dunbar Estates Subdivision from City of Meridian's area of impact for Packard Estates Dav., LLC by Packard Meridian Planning and Zoning CommissIon Meeting February 20, 2003 Page 3 of 84 Estates Dev., LLC - south of East Ustick Road and west of North Cloverdale Road - said application having been remanded from City Council for further discussion: Borup: Okay. Our first Public Hearing MI 02-011, request to remove certain parcels in Dunbar Estates Subdivision from the City of Meridian's area of impact for Packard Estates Development. This item we heard a while ago, and sent it on to City Council. I believe the City Council did not take our recommendation, they did their own, and, then, after further study, they decided maybe they were wrong and remanded it back to us to look at again. Is that briefly what we are looking at or -- McKinnon: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, that's -- Borup: We'd like to open this Public Hearing and start with the staff report. Go ahead, Mr. McKinnon. McKinnon: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. You should have received two items in your packet this evening, one from Allen Kerkenheimer and I won't spend much time with that, because you do have that. Just to go on to a second item that was in packet was a memorandum dated today from Bruce Freckleton, essentially, going over the items you just discussed. The City Council discussed the item concerning the annexation and up on the overhead in front of you, you can see the item, the subject property we are discussing tonight. The applicant requested that the property be removed from the City of Meridian's area of impact and be allowed to be placed in Boise City's area of impact. In the December meeting of last year, when you met to discuss this, it was presented to you that this property could not be serviced by Sanitary Sewer or water from the City of Meridian. That turns out to be incorrect and so the City Council determined that - - as Chairman Borup stated, that that should have been information that was available to you. They have remanded that back to you and items of varied impact discussions, which -- basically three things in State Code that need to be considered and water and sewer don't fall directly into those, but they do fall into the third. Those basic three are -- is trade area and, then, the others deal with whether or not annexation can take place in a certain amount of time or in a reasonable time and that would be where the water and sewer would come in. The third reason for those -- for the area of impact boundary adjustments would be based on geography. There are really no geographical issues that we need to discuss, it's basically a flat area, there is no geographical boundaries between Boise City and Meridian's area of impact that need to be discussed. The thing that would be is whether or not it's annexable and one of the things that we deal with, with annexations is whether or not those properties are serviceable and as it was, again, presented to you it was stated that it was not serviceable and it turns out that that property is serviceable. You have it in front of you tonight to reconsider, because the information presented to you was inaccurate and just take that into consideration. I know the applicant is here tonight to discuss that and I'll turn that time over to you for questions of staff. If you have any questions that you have for the applicant, they are here tonight. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting February 20, 2003 Page 4 01 84 Borup: Okay. Questions from the Commission? Centers: Mr. Chairman, yes, I don't think it was represented that services weren't available. They would be available in the future as properties developed that become contiguous to this property, but there was a big question mark and, correct me if I'm wrong, there is still a big question mark. McKinnon: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, I'm going to defer to Bruce on that question. Borup: And at the time I think what was stated to us is part of the sewer would be serviced to the south and part to the north it would not both go into the same line. Centers: Right. Borup: And I think my recollection of -- Commissioner Centers is correct, we -- it was not that it was not serviceable, it also would necessitate putting in a trunk line parallel to the City of Boise's trunk line down the same road. That was part of the testimony that we heard at that time. McKinnon: Again, Mr. Chairman, I'm going to defer to Bruce on that. Borup: Mr. Freckleton. Zaremba: I would have to state that my recollection is that I specifically understood that the topography was such that it could not gravity sewer to Meridian, that that was what I based my decision on. Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, there was a question on the serviceability. There was some inaccurate information that was used in the determination of - - that t he applicant u sed in their determinations. T he information I believe was provided out of an old facility plan that we had. The new Facility Plan for our sewer has the sewer deeper in the ground, which was necessary to provide service to this area. We did go back and model this with the correct information and it is serviceable. The South Slough Sewer Trunk project that is underway at this point in time has sewer to this point right here. I believe the applicant has looked at the properties between here and his property to try and come up with a route. The reason that the City of Meridian spent the money on a facility plan is to try and determine the serviceability of the areas and it's proved out that we can serve it. I guess that's what we are kind of hanging our hat on. Borup: Entirely to the South Slough? Freckleton: I don't have a copy of the plan with me and I can't remember exactly what it showed, if there was a break point in here. Meridian Planning and Zoning CommIssion Meeting February 20. 2003 Page 5 01 84 Borup: I thought previously you said part of it would have to -- would have to flow to Ustick Road. Freckleton: The applicant might be able to answer that question, Mr. Chairman. They have done quite a bit of mapping and planning on that. Borup: Okay. We will have to wait for that. Any other questions of the Commission? Does the staff have any comment on the -- Mr. McKinnon, on the -- I was just curious on the Fire Districts. How did they ever come up with the Fire District boundaries? The staff report stated that the middle sections, site two -- well, I might have this backwards now. One of the other Commissioners want to help? I think site two was in the Meridian fire district and the other two were in Boise. One and three were in Boise. Zaremba: I think it was the other way around. Borup: Maybe the applicant would have a comment on that, too, but -- McKinnon: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. I would have to look at that a little bit further. I don't have an answer for you at this time. Borup: Okay. Zaremba: Well, certainly, if they were eventually annexed into Meridian, they would be in Meridian's fire district, wouldn't they? Doesn't annexation change the fire district's boundaries? Borup: It doesn't change the school district's boundaries. Zaremba: That's true. McKinnon: Again, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, I don't have an answer for you at this time. The boundaries that are set are for taxing purposes to determine which agency would get the tax dollars for that and they provide services to those areas. I don't know how they are determined or whether or not they follow individual city areas of impact lines or not. Borup: Okay. Thank you. Would the applicant like to make their presentation? Bowcutt: Becky Bowcutt, 1100 East Valli-Hi, Eagle. M r. Chairman, Members of the Commission, just to inform you of what's transpired on this application. We came before you, we discussed this in length, and we have received information from the applicant's engineer on their analysis of the sewer. If you recall correctly, I indicated that that information was preliminary, that we had not had time to allow your staff to review it or to verify it from my standpoint. Approximately a week before the Council Public Hearing on this matter it came to our attention that the engineer had used, as Bruce indicated, the older Meridian facilities map and when they updated their facilities Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting February 20. 2003 Page 6 of 64 sewer map they decided on that South Slough Trunk design that they would lower that sewer line. In doing so, that changed the sewer perspective. When I went before the City Council, my very first statement was that I needed to go on the record to indicate that I had given this information to this body, you guys had made a recommendation in favor of this -- of removal of this project from the area of impact and that information that I had given you was not correct. One issue that we looked at was the fact that based on the topography, the particular piece of property would have to sewer both to the north and to the south, south going to the future South Slough Trunk as it's extended eastward and, then, an extension of the upper leg of the South Slough Trunk in Ustick and that information was not accurate. Based on the accurate information, the entire property can sewer to the South Slough Trunk along the southern border if it were extended, once it bores under Eagle Road. But as we stated in our previous hearings, it would have to go through multiple properties and, then, a pathway of annexation would also have to be found. When the Council reviewed this, one issue that came up was the issue of emergency services. As you well know, the closest current station out there is over here at Ten Mile between Ustick and Cherry Lane for Meridian. The current closest Boise City fire station is at the southeast corner of McMillan and Cloverdale Road and, then, as you know, the subject property is located south of Ustick. Obviously, as of to date, the closest fire station is Boise City. In Mr. Bowers' memo responding to Councilman de Weerd's question, he indicates that a portion of this property is in North Ada Fire District, I believe he says site one and three, and that's North Ada County. And, then, site two is in Meridian Rural Fire District and how that happens I don't know, because it's kind of sandwiched between. So, I don't know what that rhyme or reason is for those boundaries being drawn in that fashion. In the past when we have annexed property into the City of Boise, it is automatically part of their Boise City fire district. Projects I've had in the City of Eagle where we have annexed there were some properties that were in Meridian Rural Fire District and we did have to request to Eagle Fire District to officially annex them under their rules and regulations. But I have never had to go through that process with the City of Boise. The other issue was the issue of water. One discussion that we had was the fact that water would have to be extended in Ustick Road. The ability or possibility of looping that line was in question and what would the impact of that line be as far as serviceability meeting the fire flow requirements if it were a dead end line and sat there without any chance of looping for a many years. I did call United Water, who has a main line in Ustick Road at this time. United Water indicated tome that they have got amain in C loverdale, in Ustick, that they do have adequate capacity to service additional area. In fact, this is one of their best areas as far as pressure and serviceability. According to Bruce's memo, the City of Meridian also believes that even with, I assume, the dead end line issue, that they could provide 1,500 -- well, no? I will let Bruce answer that one, then. This is a tough question. The City Council, like I stated before, it's, obviously, a political decision. The City of Boise is not interested in this property unless the City of Meridian willingly wants to release it from their impact area. The Council did not make a motion to approve or to deny. After some discussion, they said, you know, we feel that the appropriate action is to remand it back to the Planning and Zoning Commission, go back to them, p resent the updated information, because we feel that they may have made their determination or their recommendation based on some of the erroneous Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting February 20, 2003 Page 7 of 84 information and we agreed to that, we thought that was only fair. So, the Council, obviously, does value your recommendation and the question is, obviously, still on the table. If they wanted to completely rule this out, they, obviously, would have just denied our miscellaneous application to be removed from the impact area. We still feel that one has to look at what can reasonably -- who can reasonably provide services to this property and, as you know, Boise City has a sewer main in Ustick, they have a sewer main on our southern boundary in the stub street of the adjoining subdivision and they have indicated that this will gravity flow into their system and they do have capacity and United Water has indicated that also. In order for this property to be developed and utilize Meridian city services, you're well aware we have to request annexation. We are not contiguous to the city limits. However, the city limits are I think to the west side of Eagle Road is the closest city limits at this point in time. So, I guess I will stand for any questions. Centers: Mr. Chairman? Borup: Commissioner Centers. Centers: Mrs. Bowcutt, is Boise City contiguous to this property on the east side? Bowcutt: Yes, sir. Centers: Thank you. That's alii have. Zaremba: I would just say that I agree, we knew that the information that we were given was preliminary and not proven, and we had some discussion about whether to make a recommendation the first time we heard it or whether to continue it until we really had the information. So, we took the risk of acting on what we knew was preliminary information and moving it onto the City Council. So, I'm aware you tried to hide nothing. Bowcutt: Thank you. I wanted to make that very clear. Zaremba: Yes. And we agree. Centers: Oh, I don't know. Bowcutt: Boise City limits are also to the north of this subdivision. That Heather Meadow Estates is also on its northern boundary. Borup: Okay. Bowcutt: Thank you. Borup: Do we have anyone to testify on this application? It looks like not. You need to come on up, sir, if you'd like to. MeridIan Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting February 20, 2003 Page 8 of 64 Smitchger: I'm Virgil Smitchger. This was my property previously and I think that we -- Meridian should leave it where it is at, Cloverdale Road has been a border straight through. We come passed these places and Clover Meadows is there and they are going to have a jog in there now with Meridian and Boise and Boise is on the other side of U stick Road all the way, except t he border, that's t he only property they got, let's keep them on that side of Cloverdale -- I mean Ustick. That's alii have got to say, but I would like to stay in Meridian. Thank you. Adams: Kelly Adams, 3875 East Ustick. For what it's worth, I'd just as soon remain living in Meridian and I'd rather my tax dollars went there, too. Borup: Well, you're not living on part of this -- are you one of these parcels? Adams: No, I'm not, but is the annex just to the boundary that's there on the west? Borup: Yes. Adams: There isn't anything off of Duane or anything further towards Eagle? Centers: The shaded area is what we are talking about. Borup: And at this point we are not talking about annexation, they need to be contiguous before they can. I don't believe you're in Meridian right now either. Adams: I'm in Meridian area of impact. Borup: Right. And that's all they are saying, they are trying to remove that area -- that parcel from the area of impact. Adams: Okay. Thank you. Borup: Do we have anyone else? Stokes: Marvin Stokes, 2870 Duane Drive. My property abuts or adjoins the western edge of this parcel and I guess my -- one of my concerns is that this area historically has been flood irrigated and all of the homes, I believe, on Duane Drive are all serviced by private wells at this time and when I bought the property four years ago I certainly didn't expect that that area wouldn't be developed and I'm not here tonight because I'm anti-development, but I am concerned, though, by moving that boundary line back, that there is very little incentive for the City of Meridian to provide sewer and water services to Duane Drive because of the low density down that street. And like the last gentleman, I also would definitely prefer to see Meridian not give up the property, that area. I have lived in Meridian all my life and I hate to see the city give up that area. Also, Mr. Smitchger, who was up here before, his parcel is on the northeast corner of this and he is not in favor of this issue and would basically be forced into the City of Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting February 20, 2003 Page 9 01 84 Boise. At the City Council meeting there were -- several of the councilmen were concerned about the fact that he would be forced into it by approving this item, so -- Borup: Thank you. Do we have anyone else? Groves: Craig Groves, 3920 East Shady Glen Court in Ada County. Members of Planning and Zoning, I'm going to speak -- I am part of the application, but I'm going to speak on behalf of the existing landowners, Elvina and Bill Grant, as well as Archie and Rosemary Wood. As you remember, they testified at -- the last time they were before this body and the Grant and Wood families own the majority of this property in question here. Mr. Smitchger owned part of it previously, but doesn't currently own any property, except for the little corner up there on Ustick Road. If you remember, the Grant and Wood family testified that they are in a position or in a time in life when they would like to retire and they want to sell their property to one person in one lump sum and the governmental bodies, Boise and Meridian, have divided their property in half, where part of the property is in Boise's area of impact, it's got sewer, it's got water, it can be annexed, it can be everything, and part of it's in Meridian. It's not necessarily that the Grant or Wood families are opposed to being in Meridian, what they are opposed to doing is not being able to sell their property, because of a political body, okay? They would like to move on with their retirement and would like you to consider that in your final decision. Thank you. Centers: Mr. Chairman, I had a question for the staff. Is this entire parcel in our area of impact? The entire parcel? Freckleton: Everything that's shaded is. Centers: Okay. How many acres, without me looking back? I don't think I have that. Freckleton: Seventy-five, plus or minus. Borup: Any additional comments or information from the staff? Zaremba: I know this is hard to predict, but is there any estimated time line in pushing services through to this area? Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, the -- as I mentioned earlier, the city has undertaken the project to bring sewer under Eagle Road to this point right here. Zaremba: That's already being done? Freckleton: It's right to that point right there. We haven't made the bore underneath Eagle Road, but the sewer stops right at Wesley D rive atE agle Road. T he bore is going to be happening here probably -- I'm going to guess a couple weeks they are going to be underway on the bore. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting February 20, 2003 Page 10 0184 Borup: We haven't heard any testimony on the feasibility ofthe trunk line continuing on to this property. Has there been any study on that? Freckleton: I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman. Borup: Any study on the easement to bring the sewer line to this property from Eagle Road? Freckleton: Not by the City of Meridian. We haven't studied that -- looked at the routing. Borup: Okay. Freckleton: You know, as obligated under our impact area agreement, we are required to bring services to that area within 10 years, so -- whether it's extended by a developer or whether it's extended by the City of Meridian. Borup: Okay. Mrs. Bowcutt, do you have any final comments? Centers: Mr. Chairman? So, all of these parcels are just area of impact, nothing is in the city now. Borup: Correct. Centers: And are you saying that even if we don't annex any of these, because they don't want to be annexed or they don't want to be developed, that we, within ten years, have to provide service to this parcel? Is that what you just said? In order to keep it in our area of impact, even if these folks don't want it? Freckleton: The agreement states, I believe, that you have to be able to provide it and that's for the entire area of impact that surrounds the City of Meridian, incorporated city limits. Rohm: Ten years from what date was that? Freckleton: '97. Borup: Well, that wasn't established until later than that. 2001? Freckleton: The county still has not adopted our comp plan either. Borup: Oh. But that boundary was just like 2001, wasn't it? Freckleton: Yes. Correct. Meridian Planning and Zoning CommIssion Meeting February 20, 2003 Page 11 of 84 Centers: But you really didn't answer my question, Mr. Freckleton. If we didn't have any 0 f these parcels annexed and t his property 0 wner wanted to develop, would we have to provide the sewer to it with their assistance? Borup: Well, how can they develop without being annexed? Centers: I know. That's the caveat. Freckleton: No, we can't guarantee it. Centers: Right. So you're saying -- Freckleton: There was earlier discussion about the route of annexation. Centers: Right. Exactly. Freckleton: Yes. That would have to be worked out. Centers: Right. Zaremba: Similar question. I think we heard last time that this parcel is in Boise. Do we know -- is that in the city limits of Boise or is that county? A voice from the audience says it's split. Freckleton: It's split. I believe in that area this line extends due south right down that line. Zaremba: The area of impact line? Freckleton: The area of impact line goes right straight south from there. Centers: Mr. Chairman, I'd move we close the Public Hearing. Mathes: Second. Zaremba: Motion and second to close the Public Hearing. All in favor? Any opposed? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Centers: This is -- Mr. Chairman, could I speak? Borup: Yes. Please do. Centers: Because that was on my Agenda tonight, too. Actually, to me, it -- as the presenter indicated, it's a political situation. I look at it and it really hit me tonight, more so than the last time, as a taking without compensation. The owners of this land had Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting February 20, 2003 Page 12 of 84 the opportunity to sell it if it can be developed. We can't guarantee it will be developed. The owners of this land, who I have a lot of empathy for, or anyone that owns land, if they can't sell it to a willing buyer, that's sad. So, I really think it's like a taking without compensation if we denied it. We say, no, we are going to keep you in the City of Meridian's area of impact, take it or leave it, and there is no money from us. You know, I -- you know, obviously, you know how I feel. I think the people that own this land ought to have the opportunity to sell it. If it's developed down the road, fine. But, who knows, it may not be either with today's economy. Borup: I think that same argument can be made on a lot of different projects and I don't know if that should be the only consideration. The problem you do have here is you have got a parcel of land that is under one ownership and that is in two city's areas of impact. Centers: You're right. A Catch 22. Borup: That, to me, is a little more of a problem. Centers: Well, you know, the difference here, Mr. Chairman, is that Boise City has said we don't even want to talk to you until Meridian releases it. Borup: Yes. Centers: So, that's the difference. And I don't blame them. Borup: Well, I think they could develop the parcel -- their half of their parcel that's in the Boise area. I don't know how much sense that makes, but -- any other discussion, comments from the Commissioners? Mathes: What about the water? Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. Yes. Forgot we were going to get back to that. We did model this -- if we provided service only from Ustick Road, our services are pretty marginal. It doesn't make us real comfortable. Our preference, for several reasons, is to have a loop system feeding the development from two different directions. It provides us redundancy in the system in case something happens with the main. It also gives you a lot better flow characteristics and fire protection. So, another component to that is that we are in the process of acquiring another well site north on Locust Grove north of McMillan that will be able to provide better service to this entire area, so to provide the best service we can, we would like to have that well site and we would like to have this main looped. Now, having that well on line is not essential to being able to provide service, but we would like to be able to have a loop to provide the level of service that we strive for. Mathes: What's the time frame? Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting February 20, 2003 Page 130184 Freckleton: The loop would be dependent on whether this project goes or not to Meridian. Centers: Mr. Chairman, yes, one other comment that I just thought of and no one has disagreed with me when I quoted this before, that single family dwellings in the 14 to 15 hundred square foot range, are a break even for a city when it comes to providing all the services that we have to provide. So I guess -- I think the phrase bigger is not always better and if -- you know, I can't see a lot of loss of tax dollars -- net tax dollars. And, then, of course, I see the owners of the property being able to sell it if they want, so -- thank you. Rohm: Mr. Chairman, the last time this came before this body it seems to me that we were talking about the investment that the City of Meridian had made in its existing trunk lines on the sewer and if, in fact, they were built with the intention of being able to serve the entire area of impact, is there, in fact, an investment made that will go unused, if, in fact, we vacate that and turn it over to the City of Boise? I suppose best asked of staff. Freckleton: Commissioner Rohm, when the area of impact boundary is set and the urban service planning boundaries is out there, we undertook the study to do the facility plan, which is basically you go through it and do a design for the entire impact area to build -- to lay the groundwork for how we would serve that entire area. Part of that study is -- it goes through and it tells you what size lines you have to run in order to provide the service and so I guess the short answer is when you take areas away from the area of impact, yes, you're taking away part of that design. We build in -- capacity into those trunks for the area of impact, so if you take things out of the area of impact, part of that capacity that you have built in is removed so that -- Rohm: It sounds something like a stranded investment, is my point. Freckleton: To a certain amount. Zaremba: Well, the actual capital improvements have not been made yet, it's just planning investment that's been made so far; is that correct? Freckleton: Well, it's capital improvement to Eagle Road, like I said. We built the trunk line to this point. It's planning from that point on in. Borup: Bruce, do you remember what -- and this trunk line would also service to Fairview? Freckleton: A branch of it would. Borup: That's what I -- Freckleton: It branches off and goes south, yes. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting February 20, 2003 Page 14 of 84 Borup: Right. Freckleton: Yes. Borup: And when that was planned for -- what type of development was that planned for; do you know? Or did it get down to that much - that much detail? Freckleton: Oh, sure. Borup: It was actually commercial -- Freckled: Yes. When the plan was developed, we look at the Comprehensive Plan and we look at the type of development and the load that we would receive from that type of development and, if I remember correctly, I think the piece you're talking about is the Kleiner property on the north side of Fairview. Borup: Yes. Then, there are some other properties along -- Freckleton: Right. So, the type of use is calculated into the facility plan, the type of use for the different properties is taken into consideration when we do the sizing and the design. Borup: That was anticipated commercial development? Freckleton: The majority of it. Borup: The majority of that. Freckleton: Correct. Borup: Okay. Well, I think Commissioner Centers' comment on it being a political issue and I think that was some of our discussion last time. I don't know if we ever -- if we had real firm feelings from this Commission. We felt that maybe the City Council may be the ones that -- Centers: Yes. That's the big sell. Borup: I thought we. handled it and they just -- they sent it back to us. Centers: I think I'm firmer on it this time than previously, because of the way I view this. It's just going to sit there and I don't think that's fair to the property owners. Zaremba: Well, I think the City Council was correct to send it back to us for the actual information, but -- Centers: Oh, I'd go along with that. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting February 20. 2003 Page 15 01 84 Zaremba: -- and like Commissioner Centers, having reconsidered, I don't have a problem making the same decision we made before, even for a different reason. Borup: Someone ready with a motion? Centers: Sure. Mr. Chairman, I would recommend that we recommend approval to the City Council for MI 02-011, request to remove certain parcels in Dunbar Estates Subdivision from the City of Meridian's area of impact for Packard Estates Development, LLC, by Packard Estates Development, south of East Ustick Road and west of North Cloverdale Road -- in short, recommend approval, removing that from Meridian's area of impact. Borup: We have a motion. That's it. Mathes: I will second that. Borup: Motion and second. Any discussion? Rohm: I'd just like to ask one question before we vote on this. Is there anything such as an exit fee that -- and I don't mean that to sound -- Borup: Greedy. Rohm: -- greedy, but I mean once an investment has been made to service an area and if, in fact, that's a standard investment, what do you do with that, just -- I mean it's not like you can dig it up put it someplace else and that's my only concern on this issue. McKinnon: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, the short answer on that is no. Rohm: Thank you. Borup: Okay. Any other discussion? Centers: Well, in response, I think the investment there was overall in the major study when they did the study for the trunk line, in which included this parcel or part of this parcel. I don't think there is a major investment on the city's part and I think Mr. Freckleton would admit that. Rohm: Well, they have already punched it to Eagle Road and within two weeks it will be under Eagle Road, which is capable of servicing this parcel in question. Centers: And that's where it stays for ten years until somebody wants it along here. Meridian Piannlng and Zoning Commission Meeting February 20. 2003 Page 160184 Borup: But whether that affects it, I don't think that question has been answered, is would that trunk line be a smaller diameter than it is now if this parcel was not included. And you probably can't answer that. Freckleton: That's a real hard question to answer without putting it through the model. Borup: Right. But I question whether the diameter would change with or without this parcel. Freckleton: It's hard to say. I can't give you an answer on that. Borup: All in favor? Anyopposed? Okay. Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 5: Item 6: Item 7: Public Hearing: AZ 02-033 Request for annexation and zoning of 104.77 acres from RUT to R-8 zones for proposed Parkstone Subdivision by Hillview Development, Corp. - west of North Eagle Road and north of East Ustick Road: Public Hearing: PP 02-033 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 334 building Jots and 34 other lots on 104.77 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for proposed Parkstone Subdivision by Hillview Development, Corp. - west of North Eagle Road and north of East Ustick Road: Public Hearing: CUP 02-049 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Unit Development for 275 single-family dwellings, 52 town homes, 4 office lots, 2 commercial lots, 1 mini-storage lot, 1 pocket park, 1 city neighborhood park and 32 common lots on 104.77 acres for proposed Parkstone Subdivision by Hillview Development, Corp. - west of North Eagle Road and north of East Ustick Road: Borup: Our next hearing -- I think that's probably what most of the audience is here for this evening. That's concerning Parkstone Subdivision. I'd like to open Public Hearing AZ 02-033, request for annexation and zoning of 104.77 acres from RUT to R-8 zones for the proposed Parkstone Subdivision by Hillview Development Corporation. The property is west of North Eagle Road and north of East Ustick Road and two accompanying applications, we'd like to open both those Public Hearings also at this same time, and that is Public Hearing PP 02-033 and Public Hearing CUP 02-049. Those are the Preliminary Plat and Conditional Use for the same property. I'd like to start with the staff report at this time. McKinnon: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. I'm going to give you a brief overview of the project a nd, then, I have got a I ittle bit of housekeeping, some additional memos that you received tonight that I'd like to discuss and, then, I will take questions from you before we open it up to the public. On the overhead in front of