Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMarch 4, 2003Meridian City Council March 4, 2003 Page 9 of 51 Item 7: Continued P ublic H Baring f rom J anuary 28, 2003: C omprehensive Plan Text Amendments regarding Urban Services Policies in the 2002 Comprehensive Plan: Corrie: Okay. Then, Item No. 7. This is a continued Public Hearing from January 28th, 2003, Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments regarding Urban Services Policies in the 2002 Comprehensive Plan. I will continue the Public Hearing at this time and staff comments first. Hawkins-Clark: Thank you, Mayor, Members of the Council. You should have received a memo dated yesterday, March 3, from Mark Estess with Ada County Association of Realtors regarding this item. As you may recall, the staff sent the proposed modifications to the Urban Service language to BCA and ACAR asking their boards to actually review and endorse the amendment to our Comprehensive Plan text. As Mark states in his letter, Ada County Association of Realtors has reviewed it, they are referring the city to the North Meridian Area Plan, which, as you know, has proposed urban s ervice p olicy I anguage i n i t, much of w hich c ompliments and i s s imilar to the city's Comprehensive Plan, but there are a few changes and I did also receive a message from John Eaton with BCA, who although he didn't send a letter in himself, said that he concurred with Mark's letter in terms of their review of our policies. So, what they are asking for is that the city consider holding off on this, essentially, until -- until we can either meet at staff level with them to make this amendment more palatable and consistent with the North Meridian Area Plan or wait until the North Meridian Area Plan goes through. I guess, you know, this item has been continued for months now and I don't know that there is enough issues from Planning and Zoning's staff perspective t o w arrant h olding t his u ntil w e get t hrough t he c omplete N orth M eridian Area Plan process. I think we are -- as you know, we have the Silvercreek Subdivision, Lee Center's project, that you have heard a couple of times and he's going to be next -- on next week's agenda. That's a project that is impacted by this policy of the city. From staffs perspective, we are -- we'd just like time to review ACAR's letter and meet with them again and come back to the Council with a little bit more refinement. So, unless you have questions, that's where we are standing right now. Corrie: Brad, I would feel more comfortable if we had a letter from John Eaton as well, rather than just his word that he approves. We need it on paper, so there can be no misunderstanding down the line. And, I agree, that we need to do it as quickly as possible. Council, any questions? De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I guess this has been kind of my issue. I should address it. We just got this today, so I haven't really had a chance to look at it either, but would appreciate a little bit further information from staff once you have a chance to talk with them further. In looking at the proposed language in the North Meridian Area Plan, I think it's more Meridian City Council March 4, 2003 Page 10 of 51 closely aligned to what we have had in the Comprehensive Plan in the past and it really achieves the goals that have been discussed during the Comprehensive Plan public hearings, as well as it's more in line to, I think, what staff -- staffs concerns and certainly my concems have been. So, this is definitely a step in the right direction, but I would like to have our staff have the opportunity to comment back and maybe we can continue it for another week. Is that going to give you enough time, Brad? I do, as well, think that this is very important that we move it a little bit quicker than it's been going, so -- Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: I think there is -- Nary: Oh. I'm sorry. Hawkins-Clark: Mr. Mayor, Council, I was just conferring with public works, with Brad Watson, and I think we -- since there are, you know, a few disagreements and we probably won't come to full agreement, to be honest with you, in terms staff and as he says in his letter that our proposal was unacceptable to them, so -- but I think we would prefer two weeks to really work that out. De Weerd: Okay. Corrie: The 18th? De Weerd: So the 18th? Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I guess part of my -- more of a process question as well. Since what we have is a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, basically to leave the language as it is, and I'm encouraged by the Association of Realtors suggestion of looking at the North Meridian Plan policies, does it really need to go back to the Planning and Zoning Commission instead, rather than coming back here in two weeks, since we are -- since basically we are going to ignore -- we may ignore their recommendation entirely of leaving it alone. Should it process wise go back there or is it fine just to leave it here? I just don't know. Corrie: Comments? Mr. Nichols. Nichols: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, I think the Planning Commission, if I recall correctly, had staffs recommended language, if I remember right, and voted to stick with what they had proposed before. So, I don't think that we are talking about something that has to go back again. Essentially, you have to make the final decision anyway and if there is alternative language -- I mean they are all within the same ambit, it's not like Meridian City Council March 4, 2003 Page 11 of 51 anything is a huge change, so -- and particularly when you look at what the language used to be. So I would -- my opinion would be that you can go ahead and continue this for two weeks, an opportunity for staff and any other interested parties to be able to put their positions out there and, then, we can think of what it is you want the policy to be. Nary: Thank you. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I believe we have had the conversation on whether it should go back to Planning and Zoning or not and I believe in the Planning and Zoning discussions, since they had not dealt with some of the area of impact issues. like Powder River and Westburough, that they were not aware of why the current language that we have in the Comprehensive Plan right now did not meet the needs and did not have the knowledge of the background and so they did want it to just come back up here and have the conversation at this level. So I think they fully understood it was a little bit above what they have had in front of them. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I guess so -- I was only concerned about process, I wasn't concerned about whether or not they changed it, I just wanted to make sure that we were properly doing that, but I agree with what was said, I do believe it's just a recommendation from them and we agree with it a little differently, so that's just -- Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we continue the Public Hearing for the Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment regarding Urban Services Policies in the 2002 Comprehensive Plan to March 18th, 2003. Corrie: Before I hear a second, is there anyone in the public that wants to issue testimony tonight on this? Okay. I will take a second. Nary: Second. De Weerd: Second. Meridian Clty Council March 4, 2003 Paga 12 of 51 Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded, then, that we continue the Public Hearing, Urban Services Policies, until the March 18th, 2003. Any further discussion? All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried to the 18th. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 8: Continued Public Hearing from February 25, 2003: PP 02-028 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 7 building lots and 1 other lot on 12.081 acres in an I-L zone for Gemtone Center Subdivision No. 5 (formerly known as No. 4) by Thomas T. Wright -west of North Eagle Road and west of East Pine Avenue: Corrie: Item No. 8, a continued Public Hearing from February the 25th, 2003. This is a request for a preliminary plat approval of seven building lots and one other lot on 12.081 acres in an I-L zone for Gemtone Center Subdivision No. 5, formerly known as No. 4, by Thomas T. Wright, west of the North Eagle Road and west of Eagle -- East Pine Avenue. At this time I will continue the Public Hearing and invite stafFs comments first. Hawkins-Clark; Thank you, Mayor, Members of the Council. This item has been continued twice, I believe, on your agenda, but since the applicant was in a process of reviewing a couple of alignment issues with Commercial, I don't believe that you have seen the presentation, so I'll just quickly highlight the preliminary plat that we are talking about. It is Gemtone Subdivision No. 5. I is a small p hase. Eagle Road is off t he screen here on the right-hand side, but Pine Avenue, as you know, now has a signal at the intersection of Pine and Eagle. Commercial Court is a private street. It was part of Elixir Subdivision, which is here to the east. Commercial Street is private, so it's not showing on this Ada county base map data, but it does extend more or less along the north boundary of these lots shown here on the south side. Union Pacific Railroad has the right of way to the south of this project. Commercial Street public extends from the west and stubs into this southerly lot. The existing four phases of Gemtone Subdivision are here to the north and to the northeast. Here is an aerial photograph of the area we are talking about. The curb here is an abandoned rail spur, railroad spur, that creates that -- it chokes down to about a 50 foot wide strip here and, then, they have purchased -- acquired this lot here on the south end. So, it is currently vacant ground. Here is a copy of the plat that is -- was originally submitted to the Planning and Zoning Department in process. The reason it's been continued is largely oriented around the extension of Commercial here on the south side and the city -- city staff comments were responded to by Becky Bowcutt, which is dated yesterday, March 3rd, and we have -- they are in agreement with all of our conditions, so I won't go into most of the conditions that we have proposed, with the exception of the issue of the alignment of Commercial. The initial survey did show the private street to be in an incorrect location, as I understand it. It's -- the street is slightly to the north of where it was originally shown, so the engineer was having difficulty getting the geometry to work on the alignment of the center line of these two streets. You should have received, Ithink -- yeah -- an amended plat that shows the proposed new intersection and I can let the representative go into a little bit more detail on that, but, essentially, they are proposing to move this