Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003 02-25 Meridian City Council MeetinQ Februarv 25. 2003 The Regular Meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:00 P.M., on Tuesday, February 25, 2003, by Mayor Robert Corrie. Members Present: William Nary, Tammy de Weerd, Keith Bird, and Cherie McCandless. Others Present: William Nichols, Dave McKinnon, Brad Watson, Ken Bowers, Dean Willis, and Will Berg Item 1. Roll-call Attendance: X Tammy de Weerd X Bill Nary X Cherie McCandless X Keith Bird X Mayor Robert Corrie Corrie: All right. I will open the Meridian City Council Regular Meeting, Tuesday, February 25, 2003, at 7:00 P.M. At this time, I'd like to have roll call attendance by the City Clerk, please. Item 2. Adoption of the Agenda: Corrie: Okay. All are present. The second item is the adoption of the agenda. Council, we have -- I think nothing has changed that I know of. Does anybody have any other changes or additions? Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: No changes on the agenda, I would move that we adopt the agenda as published. McCandless: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion been made and seconded to adopt the agenda as published, Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll call -- or, excuse me, all in favor say aye. Any opposed no? All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Item 3. Consent Agenda: A. Approve minutes of February 4, 2003 City Council Regular Meeting: B. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 02-046 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a bus facility in Meridian City Council Meeting February 25, 2003 Page 2 of 46 an I-L zone for Joint School District No.2 by Joint School District No.2 - 2170 West Franklin Road: C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: VAR 02-015 Request for a Variance to extend future access streets beyond 450 foot cul-de-sac length to approximately 755 feet for Joint School District No.2 by Joint School District No.2 - 2170 West Franklin Road: D. Finance Report: Corrie: The next item is the Consent Agenda. We have three items on the Consent Agenda. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we approve the Consent Agenda and for the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest on all papers appropriately. Nary: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll call vote, Mr. Berg. Roll Call: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye. Corrie: All ayes. Motion is approved. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Item 4. Department Reports: A. Mayor's Office: 1. Appointment of Parks and Recreation Director: 2. Appointment of Parks and Recreation Commissioner: Corrie: The next is Department Reports. The Mayor's Office. I have two here on the agenda. I would ask that -- I'm not going to appoint the Parks and Rec Commissioners at this time. I just got them today from the Parks and Rec Commissioners themselves and I want to contact the two for next week. I will bring those two to the Council so at this time I would like to appoint to our Parks and Recreation a new Director. His name is Doug Armstrong. Doug is here with us this evening. Doug is there next to Pauline. Doug, welcome here. My recommendation to the Council is that I appoint Mr. Doug Armstrong as the parks and rec director. Questions? Okay. Mertdlan City Council MeeUng February 25. 2003 Page 3 of 46 Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: No questions, I would move that we confirm the appointment of Doug Armstrong as Meridian city parks and recreation director. De Weerd: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded to appoint -- confirm the appointment of Douglas Armstrong as the new parks and rec director. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll call vote. Roll Call: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye, Corrie: All ayes. Motion is approved. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: Doug I'd like to introduce to the Council. This is Mr. Doug Armstrong and, Doug, if you'd like to say a few words, welcome aboard. Armstrong: Thank you. Just real briefly, I'm just real excited about this opportunity and look forward to getting started. I have some things to finish up where I am, but I look forward being on the job on the 10th. Corrie: Thank you, Doug. We are looking forward to it. Doug is already hitting the ground running, he's going to have a meeting with the Park Superintendents and Rec Superintendents and get us moving right along. Thank you, Doug. Appreciate it. Welcome aboard. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I would like to welcome you as well. It's been long awaited for, so we are anxious to get you on board and Keith is your liaison to the Parks Department, so you have a lot of excellent people to work with and when I said yea, I meant yea. Item 5. (Items Moved from Consent Agenda) Corrie: All right. Thank you. Item Number 5 is items moved from the Consent Agenda. There are none. Item 6. Ordinance No. AZ 02-026 Request for annexation and zoning of 35.94 acres from RUT to R-8 zones for Mertdian City Council Meeting February 25, 2003 Page 4 of 46 proposed Burnev Glen Subdivision by Properties West, Inc. - east of North Meridian Road and north of East Ustick Road: Corrie: We will move onto Item Number 6. Ordinance Number 03-1011. Okay. This is a request for annexation and zoning of 35.94 acres from RUT to R-8 zones for proposed Burney Glen Subdivision by Properties West, Inc., east of North Meridian Road and north of East Ustick Road. At this time I would like to have the city clerk read Ordinance Number 03-1011 by title only at this time. Berg: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. Ordinance Number 03-1011, an Ordinance finding that Wanda White Trust, known as Paula Giles, the owner of certain real property located on the east side of Meridian Road in Section 31, Township 4 North, Range One East, Meridian, to be known as Burney Glen Subdivision, and which lies contiguous or adjacent to the city limits of the City of Meridian, County of Ada, State of Idaho, have made a request for annexation in writing to the Council that said land be annexed to the City of Meridian and zoning designated Medium Density Residential District (R-B), and declaring that said land by proper legal description described below be a part of the City of Meridian, County of Ada, State of Idaho, repealing all ordinances, resolutions, orders, or parts thereof in conflict herewith, and directing the city engineer to add said property to the official maps of the City of Meridian, Idaho, and directing the Clerk of the City of Meridian to file a certified copy of the ordinance and the map of the areas to be annexed to the Ada County Recorder, Auditor, Treasurer, and Assessor and the State Tax Commission of the State of Idaho, pursuant to Idaho Code Section 50-223 and Section 63-2215. Corrie: You have heard the reading of Ordinance Number 03-1011 by title only. Is there anyone from the audience that would like to have it read in its entirety? Hearing none, I will entertain a motion on the ordinance. McCandless: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. McCandless. McCandless: I move that we approve Ordinance Number 03-1011, request for annexation and zoning of 35.94 acres from RUT to R-B zones for the proposed Burney Glen Subdivision by Properties West, east of North Meridian Road and north of East Ustick Road, the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest, with suspension of rules. Bird: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded to approve Ordinance Number 03- 1011. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll call vote, Mr. Berg. Roll Call: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye. Corrie: All ayes. Motion to approve Ordinance Number 03-1011 is approved. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Meridian City Council Meeting February 25, 2003 Page 5 of 46 Item 7. FP 03-005 Request for Final Plat approval of 78 building lots and 9 other lots on 30.17 acres in a R-4 zone for Lochsa Falls Subdivision No.1 by Brahma, L.L.C. - northwest corner of North Linder Road and East McMillan Road: Item 8. FP 03-006 Request for Final Plat approval of 49 building lots and 2 other lots on 11.22 acres in a R-4 zone for Lochsa Falls Subdivision No.2 by Brahma, L.L.C. - northwest corner of North Linder Road and East McMillan Road: Item 9. FP 03-007 Request for Final Plat approval of 67 building lots and 5 other lots on 22.31 acres in a R-4 zone for Lochsa Falls Subdivision No.3 by Brahma, L.L.C - northwest corner of North Linder Road and East McMillan Road: Corrie: Item Number 7 is a request for Final Plat approval of 78 building lots and nine other lots on 30.17 acres in an R-4 zone for Lochsa Falls Subdivision No.1 by Brahma, LLC, northwest corner of North Linder Road and East McMillan Road. At this time I will invite staff's comments first. McKinnon: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. The plat that you see in front of you on the projection screen is Lochsa Falls Phase 1. This is the first part of Lochsa Falls, which was overall the largest subdivision that we have seen in the City of Meridian. This first phase is including the half-mile collector located on Linder Road that's between McMillan and Ustick Road. The half-mile collector is shown on the northern portion of the map. As you stated before, this is a 78 home -- or 78 building lot subdivision, with nine other lots. The other lots consist of landscaping lots and open space lots throughout the subdivision. I have had the opportunity to review the submitted application and the submitted application complies with the Preliminary Plat that was approved by City Council. I'm in receipt of a letter dated yesterday from Becky Bowcutt Planning Services. I'm not sure if you have received the same file copy, I believe Becky has those tonight. I have reviewed the information that Becky has provided and I agree with the information within her letter, to have the bolded sections, that would be Item Number 5, which she states -- do you have a copy of the letter dated February 24th? Okay Item Number 5 is in bold and it's talking about the Meridian City Code that we have that requires a 10-foot gravel shoulder. Just for reference, that's Meridian City Code 12-13-10-9 and that just references the requirement for a 10-foot gravel shoulder and Becky is asking for, essentially, a waiver from that to be allowed to have only a four-foot gravel shoulder, rather than a 10-foot wide gravel shoulder. That is against the Code. The Code does require 10 so that would be a change from the Preliminary Plat. In addition to that, in her letter she has two other items that she's stated that need to be corrected for this plat. Those are on Page 2 of the letter under general requirements. Number 9 underneath general requirements is a reference to the fact that the staff report reflects five-foot sidewalks being required per the Meridian City Code. The applicant correctly points out that they have proposed a four-foot detached sidewalk and a 10-foot asphalt pathway and those were approved as part of the Preliminary Plat and the staff report should be revised, as Becky has pointed out. The Meridian City Council Meeting February 25, 2003 Page 6 of 46 final note that she has for this plat would be that the Meridian Fire Department -- to change their requirement from the 34-foot street section requirement to a 33-foot street section requirement per ACHD. I believe Becky correctly points out, after reviewing the minutes, that Mr. Bowers of the Fire Department stated that a 33-foot section would be acceptable. With that I - that's the report that I have. If you have any questions I will be happy to take them at this time. Corrie: David, you said -- is that Site-Specific Requirement Number 5? McKinnon: Site-Specific Requirement Number 5. I believe that there are two letters that Becky has done. One is just brand new. I'm not sure if you have the same one that I have. Corrie: I don't. Maybe they do. It says here the applicant will comply. McKinnon: Becky, do you have copies for the Council? Corrie: Do you have anymore of these? Bowcutt: I faxed some over to Will. Will said he had them. I ran out of copy paper, I'm sorry. Corrie: Likely story. Okay. Well, she can tell us what it is, then, as well so, Becky. Bowcutt: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, Becky Bowcutt, 1100 East Valli-Hi, Eagle. I will be brief. Item 5. Yes, in the original draft that I sent to the staff it said the applicant would comply and, then, I faxed it also to the applicant for their review. They brought to my attention that they had been working with ACHD and had entered into a License Agreement with them to landscape into right of way. Well, obviously, now ACHD is not going to be purchasing that right of way, but, yet, we are still preserving that right of way as a separate lot. We will have the additional right of way in a separate lot. Then, you will have the landscaping in a separate lot and so that preserves it, so that at some point in time when Linder is improved or widened, that right of way is there and it's in a separate lot, the width that ACHD has requested for their future needs. The applicant intends to landscape out into that area and I guess their concern versus the four-foot and 10-foot gravel is the esthetics. Over time the gravel starts looking poorly, it ends up kind of the gravel sinks and gets muddy and people drive in it and it get ruts and so they felt that they visually would like to have the turf in there, not trees, because we wouldn't want ACHD to tear out, you know, anything permanent and we just have sprinklers and turf. That's all that would be in that area that's preserved for future right of way. The other item -- I just wanted to clarify for the record that we are doing a 10-foot pathway, the four-foot detached sidewalks. That pathway is along the south side of the collector only. It was the Council's desire and ACHD's that we have pedestrian friendly crossings at all intersections and we agreed to directional signage along the ten foot pathway pointing to the community park. I wanted that on the record, so that doesn't get forgotten. Lastly, we requested a letter from Mr. Silva for ACHD, which is pretty standard if we do anything less than a 36 back-to-back. Mr. Silva said that he was still of the opinion that 34 feet was the only acceptable street section and he would not provide Meridian City Council Meeting February 25, 2003 Page 7 of 46 us with a letter, so that's why I have included that last paragraph. If you recall, when we came through for Public Hearing, we had a discussion about the 33 versus the 34-foot. ACHD allows us to go to a 33, it is a standard for a local street, it does give us less asphalt, less drainage, slows the traffic down, and it's just from a planning perspective better than a 36. Mr. Bowers commented I think to the Council -- they asked him specifically if he was okay with the 33. He said yes so I just want to bring that to the Council's attention that we cannot get a letter. I guess I have not asked Mr. Bowers, nor took this up with him. We have just talked with Mr. Silva. That's it. Do you have any questions? Corrie: Council, questions? Bird: I have none. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: On the -- I'm not sure whether this is a question to you, Becky, or to Dave, but on the 10-foot gravel requirement -- and, then, you want it to be four-foot, since this was done as a PUD, there doesn't need to be a Variance or anything right? We just approve that if we want to. Was this done as a PUD? Bowcutt: Yes. McKinnon: Yes, it was, Mr. Nary. Bowcutt: It was through the Landscape Ordinance. McKinnon: It was part of the Landscape Ordinance. It wasn't something that was addressed with the original Planned Development. It is something that's been addressed now at the Final Plat stage. This not discussed originally with the Planned Development. Nary: So we would need to do a Variance? McKinnon: If it had been brought up with the Conditional Use Permit for the Planned Development the answer would be, no, we wouldn't need to do one. I'm not comfortable in saying that we would need to do one, I would defer to Mr. Nichols for some direction on how it should be best handled. Nary: Mr. Mayor, while we are waiting -- I mean I can't think of a particular down side on the four-foot gravel, instead of ten, and with landscaping. I agree that 10-foot of weeds looks pretty crummy very quickly. I drive on Linder Road a lot, so -- I can't think of a particular down side, but I just didn't know process wise if we needed to do something differently. Meridian City Council Meeting February 25, 2003 Page 8 of 46 Nichols: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, Mr. McKinnon was gracious enough to show me the applicable part of the Landscape Ordinance and looking at the issue, the Code says ten feet of gravel if you're preserving a right-of-way corridor. ACHD has issued a License Agreement to allow them to do it. I think if you could just simply say that any landscaping, in lieu of gravel, has to be maintained, sprinkled, curbed and so on, you have achieved what you wanted. I think, in fairness to the applicant, at the time that the development was originally proposed, we didn't know that ACHD was going to take this issue with the road. They really didn't know about the issue until after -- or about the same time as the Preliminary Plat was approved and so it presents a unique situation where, otherwise, they would have either submitted it as part of their Conditional Use Planned Development and it would otherwise be taken care of and be taken care of on any future ones. I don't think we need a variance, because of the -- first of all, ACHD has issued them a License Agreement and, secondly, the intent of the Landscape Ordinance is not violated, because the condition will say they have to maintain that additional turf strip, so -- Nary: Great. Thank you. Corrie: Any other discussion? Okay. Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion, then, on the request for Final Plat approval of Lochsa Falls Subdivision No.1. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I would move the approval of FP 03-005, request for Final Plat approval of 78 building lots and nine other lots on 34.17 acres in an R-4 zone for Lochsa Falls Subdivision No. 1 by Brahma, LLC, at the northwest corner of North Linder Road and East McMillan Road, to include all staff comments, as well as incorporating all comments and requested changes by the applicant as presented in a memo that -- the most current memo that I don't have a date on. McKinnon: February 24th. Nary: February 24, 2003. Bird: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded. Is there any further discussion? Hearing none, roll call vote, Mr. Berg. Roll Call: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye. Corrie: Okay. Motion is approved. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Meridian City Council Meeting February 25, 2003 Page 9 of 48 Corrie: Item Number 7 is a request for Final Plat approval of 49 building lots and two other lots on 11.22 acres in an R-4 zone for Lochsa Falls Subdivision NO.2. At this time I will invite staff's comments on the request. McKinnon: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. This is the second phase of the Lochsa Falls Subdivision. I have, again, a letter -- I'm not sure if you have got this copy, so I'll come to the front, so you guys can all see. You guys have a little bit different -- it's a little different again. The major difference -- the major difference between that letter that you have and the letter that I have -- that was just handed to you by Becky -- is that they, again, request that 30-foot -- 33 foot street section be approved, rather than the 34 as requested by the fire department. I, again, just now checked with Chief Bowers and Chief Bowers stated the 33-foot street section would be acceptable. Again, the applicant correctly pointed that four-foot-detached sidewalks were originally approved with this subdivision and staff has no objection to those changes, Other than that, you have the staff report. If you have any questions, I'll be happy to answer them at this time. Corrie: Comments? Questions? Bird: I have none, Mayor. Corrie: Okay. Thank you. Okay. Does the applicant need to say anything -- let the record show she shook her head no. Council, any questions of staff, or the applicant this evening? Further discussion? De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I move we approve the request for Final Plat of 49 building lots and two other lots on 11.22 acres in an R-4 zone for Lochsa Falls Subdivision No.2 and ask the attorney to draw up Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made -- Bird: Is that to include -- De Weerd: To include all staff comments and the applicant's response. Bird: I agree. Corrie: Thank you. Motion has been made and seconded for approval with comments of staff. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll call vote, Mr. Berg. Roll Call: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye. Meridian City Council Meeting February 25, 2003 Page 10 of 46 Corrie: Okay. Motion for request is approved. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Bird: Who has the current one? Bill needs the current -- Nichols: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nichols. Nichols: If Ms. Bowcutt will fax copies of these letters tomorrow -- or the clerk. Okay, as long as we get them. Okay. Corrie: Let the record show that we are giving him the letters. Corrie: Okay. All right. Number 9 is a request for Final Plat approval of 67 building lots and five other lots on 22.31 acres in an R-4 zone for Lochsa Falls Subdivision No.3. Staff? McKinnon: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. Phase 3 of the same development. This is a little bit to the south of the two developments -- of the two previous phases that we discussed tonight. Again, we have a letter that you don't have a copy of, but it reflects the items that we have already discussed concerning the Linder Road improvements, the four-foot and the 10-foot that we have already discussed; the 33-foot street section and the proposed four-foot detached sidewalks. Staff agrees with the applicant's request that they stated in a letter again, dated February 24th, and I would ask if you have any questions of staff at this time. Corrie: Any comments or questions of staff? Okay. Any further comments from -- all right. Let the record show that there are no further comments from the applicant. Council, any questions of any of the people? All right. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I would move that we approve the request for Final Plat approval of 67 building lots and five other lots on 22.31 acres in an R-4 zone for Lochsa Falls Subdivision NO.3 by Brahma, LLC, at the northwest corner of North Linder Road and East McMillan Road and to apply all staff and applicant's comments - the applicant's comments dated February 24, 2003. Corrie: Motion has been made. Do I hear a second? Nary: Second. Meridian City Council Meeting February 25, 2003 Page 11 of 46 Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded to approve the Final Plat approval for Lochsa Falls Subdivision No.3, with the comments of staff and letter to be included. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll call vote, Mr. Berg. Roll Call: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye. Corrie: All ayes. Motion for request is approved. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 10. FP 03-008 Request for Final Plat approval of 54 building lots and 7 other lots on 15.52 acres in a R-4 zone for Havasu Creek Subdivision No. 1 by Havasu Creek, L.L.C -- west of Locust Grove Road and south of McMillan Road: Corrie: Item Number 10 is a request for Final Plat approval of 54 building lots and seven other lots on 15.52 acres in an R-4 zone for Havasu Creek Subdivision No.1, west of Locust Grove Road and south of McMillan Road. I'd invite staff's comments first. McKinnon: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. It looks like we have a little more housework to do on this one as well. Again, I have a letter that you don't, that should have been distributed to you. I have one extra copy that I can hand to the Mayor right now. I'll address the issues in the letter in just a moment, but I will give you a little background on the project. This is the first phase of the Havasu Creek Subdivision. The area that we are dealing with tonight is essentially the area that I'm highlighting right now that says site. This is the smaller portion of Havasu with the smaller lots within Havasu Creek Subdivision and there is a collector road that comes in -- Brad, could you go to the next slide, please? Rock Creek Drive comes in off of Locust Grove in the area that we were just discussing. As I stated earlier, the lots are a smaller -- are smaller than many of the other lots within Havasu, but there is a variety of building types within this subdivision. The other lots within the subdivision are -- they consist of the landscape lots and open space lots. One of the open space lots that will deserve a little bit of attention tonight and it was addressed by the applicant is Lot 5 of Block 8. It's highlighted down in the southwest corner and I will address the issues that are addressed with that with Becky's letter. I have reviewed the application and the application is in compliance with the Preliminary Plat. The applicant has submitted a letter with the following requested changes that staff does not object to. Item Number 4, again, is a discussion on whether or not they would be allowed to have a four-foot gravel shoulder, rather than a 10-foot gravel shoulder, and we have discussed that. Staff has no objection to that. Item Number 6 and Item Number 7 of the staff report, under the site-specific requirements, relate to the open space lot at Block 8 -- Block 8, Lot 5. In the Preliminary Plat that was shown as a drainage lot and an open space lot and that's also where the sewer line comes through. The original Preliminary Plat had a pedestrian pathway that ran east and west and it was shown as a micro-path, which is just the five-foot wide asphalt path. In conjunction with the sewer line that will pass through Block 8, they have changed that from being a five-foot wide micro-path to a 10- foot multi-use path and asphalt path. Staff does not object to that. The Landscape Plan Mertdlan City Council Meeting Februery 25, 2003 Page 12 of 48 that was submitted by the applicant did not address the changes and so there was some confusion. Staff does not object to having a 10-foot wide paved vehicle pedestrian access in this location and it will continue on through the block to the next lot. The lot that will be in the second phase of this project just to the west of Lot 5 will be a continuation of that same pathway and that same landscape open space lot. Item Number 7 in their letter had some -- stated some confusion of the applicant as to why the Landscape Plan was approved as submitted with the 10 foot wide path, rather than the micro-path. We now have no objection to the micro -- to the micro-path being widened to a 10-foot path, so we just let you know from a staff point of view we have no objection to that. Onto the second page of the request, under general requirements, the first general requirement that we have stated in the staff report would be the tiling of all ditches that are adjoining or adjacent to the project. The applicant pointed out in her letter that there is a users ditch along the northern boundary of this phase of the project with Crestwood Subdivision. They would not like to tile that at this time, because it's -- one, it's adjoining, however, it's not on the property itself and the people in Crestwood Subdivision are using that to flood irrigate and they'd rather have it not be tiled at this time. Staff does not have any objection to that. Item Number 9, again, four-foot detached sidewalks. The staff report reflects five-foot sidewalks. Four-foot sidewalks were approved within the subdivision. Again, the Fire Department comments of 33-foot streets sections and we have no objections to that. With that, that ends my report and I'd ask if you have any questions of staff. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: On the users -- on the users ditch, when would they tile it? Are you going to leave it open-ended or is there a next phase or -- you know, I don't know how you enforce it if it never gets tiled. McKinnon: Mr. Mayor, Councilwoman de Weerd. The way the ordinance is written in the code it would allow for Council to waive the requirement if there is no reason to do that for public safety and for the good of the city. The Crestwood Subdivision in the county is currently using that for flood irrigation. It's much easier to flood irrigate from an open ditch, rather than from a piped ditch with certain boxes where they would have to pull the water from. As Crestwood Subdivision would annex, I guess the burden would fall upon the owners of the property within Crestwood to tile that, if it's seen to be a benefit to the city and the City Council requires that it be done at that time. De Weerd: So this isn't just delaying it, would it be more reasonable to just waive it or delete the requirement? McKinnon: If you'd like to waive the requirement for that, staff wouldn't have any objections to that, but that would only be for the ditch on the north side. De Weerd: I just didn't want to leave an open-ended thing that never had any enforcement or -- you know, if there was a time when it should be tiled, then, we need to state that. Mertdian City Council Meeting February 25. 2003 Page 130f46 Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: David, you said that the ditch -- whose property is it on? Or is it the center of it? Is that the property line or -- is the center of the ditch the property line? McKinnon: Councilman Bird, the question could probably better be answered by the applicant on that. I have been out on site twice to visit the site, but I didn't look for property pins, I don't know where the exact location is. The depiction of the ditch on the Final Plat is nonexistent, so it's probably better answered - their letter states that it's not contiguous. Bird: I'm one that if it's not for safety reasons and I see no safety reasons, I don't know why we have to tile it. You're losing your aquifer by tiling all these ditches and pretty soon we are not going to have any groundwater if we keep doing that, so I have no problem with it. I'm like you. I don't see why we have to tile it. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: And I guess the only other thing -- I thought that was the issue, was that it wasn't on the property. I'm not sure why we would have required it in the first place if it wasn't on their property, but I guess -- and maybe Mrs. Bowcutt can answer that on this one, too, because I guess I just wanted to hear a little bit more about whether there is a safety issue. I mean I don't know if there is or not. McKinnon: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Nary, if I could address just one issue with that. The way our ordinance is written right now, it doesn't state that it has to be on their property, it's just that it's adjoining and I'm not certain whether the applicant is bringing that up just to point out to you as Council that it is, actually, completely on someone else's property and if that's the case, then, it would not truly be adjoining and they wanted to make it very clear that as they develop the subdivision they should not be required to do that by the city in the future. Corrie: Any other questions? De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Bill. Nichols: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, I think you might want to waive the requirement for this particular application, for this particular applicant, but to just completely waive it forever, when there might be a reason down the road to tile it for some additional development or if there is some resubdivision of Crestwood, wouldn't Meridian City Council Meeting February 25. 2003 Page 14 of 46 be prudent. I mean I don't think that it's forever, if you simply waive it for this particular application. Corrie: And, Bill, let me ask you a question. If it's not their property, how can we do it anyway? Nichols: Well, Mr. Mayor, that raises a good question, but I think that there are circumstances in which it may be difficult to get permission to do that and this is a user ditch and it's different than the irrigation ditch that lays within an easement and so this one really -- there is no easement. I mean you're going to find a written easement on this one. It's just a ditch that's been there for a long time. I this particular case it makes it difficult to require it but, by the same token, you are within your power to say if there is a rational basis for requiring something to be done as part of the development application, there should be an effort to do it. We always get into these problems if it's not on their property. Corrie: Thank you, Bill. I wanted to make sure that was on the record. Okay. Thank you. Becky? Bowcutt: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, Becky Bowcutt, 1100 East Valli-Hi, Eagle. As Dave indicated, the same thing arises here with the gravel - 10-foot gravel versus the four-foot gravel along Locust Grove Road. Our intent was to landscape that area and the esthetics of it. Secondly, I just want to clarify with Dave on that Lot 5, we did show a pedestrian path of five foot, but when the sewer was designed to go through there and, then, the storm drainage was designed there, we have what we call a multi- use path, which is typically -- I believe ACHD requires that it be at least 14 feet in width and what we have to do is put a bollard there. We typically have like a slide bollard, so that nobody drives through it and it is pedestrian friendly, but it will serve a triple purpose of access for the sewer main, access for storm drainage maintenance, and, then, pedestrian. The issue of the ditch, it is -- there are approximately eight lots that adjoin us on the north boundary. They are five acres in size. It's Crestwood Estates. There is a small ditch. It's about two feet in width, about two feet deep. That runs about a foot of water. They flood irrigate from their south boundaries to the north. They have emphasized with us in our meetings that their main concern with this development was, one, protecting their ditch, making sure that we didn't mess with it, that they have access to it, and their preference was that we not -- if we go in and pipe it, then, box facilities have to be constructed, they have to have, you know, some type of mechanism, whether it be pumping or slide gates or whatever, but it complicates it and a lot of these residents have been out here for quite a few years and their preference was don't touch our ditch. Where the ditch comes down Locust Grove, we will pipe it across our frontage and, then, it turns and runs on that north boundary. The issue arises because your ordinance talks about any ditch line adjacent or contiguous and so we have always argued about what is the definition. That ditch is on their property and it's -- the only portion that's even close to us, within, I guess, a few inches, is about the first 200 feet and, then, the ditch kind of goes further north and, then, it runs for about 2,000 feet all the way down to the end of Crestwood Estates. It is solely on their property. The way we look at it, that at some point in time those lots will redevelop and at that time that ditch would most likely be abandoned when they go on pressurized irrigation. It's Mertdian City Council Meeting February 25, 2003 Page 15 of 46 not like we are trying to put the burden on them, it's just a ditch that's in use now that won't be in the future, if they have ever re-subdivide, which is likely, since we will be providing stub streets and sewer and water stubs to those -- some of those lots. That's why we have asked that. Dave mentioned the four foot detached sidewalks. Again, we have the same issue with the Fire Department on the 33 versus the 34-foot street sections. Do you have any questions? Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Okay. Becky, on the first 200 feet-- Bowcutt: Yes, sir. Nary: -- is there any -- is the fencing adequate? Is there a safety issue that we need to be concerned with? I guess that would be my only concern. I don't think we need to pipe on somebody else's property. Bowcutt: We will be required to provide perimeter fencing. We have been working with the neighbors on the type of fencing that they want. Our residents -- the new residents will be fenced out from that ditch, if you're worried about like safety, a toddler falling in, there will be a six foot solid fence, excuse me, along the -- Nary: Cedar? Bowcutt: Cedar or some type of fence, perimeter fence. Nary: Okay. Great. Thank you. Bowcutt: Thank you. Corrie: Any questions of Becky? Okay. Okay. Then, I'll entertain a motion for the request for Final Plat of Havasu Creek Subdivision No.1. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Mr. Mayor, I'd move the approval of FP 03-008, request for Final Plat approval of 54 building lots and 7 other lots on 15.52 acres in an R-4 .zone for Havasu Creek Subdivision No. 1 by Havasu Creek, LLC, west of Locust Grove, south of McMillan Road. To include all staff comments, as well as to incorporate all comments of the applicant on the memorandum that was dated February 24, 2003, submitted this evening, with the few amendments, including - and I don't think it's clear in this area regarding the 10-foot - the 10-foot land -- or the 10-foot gravel down to a four foot. To be clear that the condition will also require they maintain the vegetation that is going to Meridian City Council Meeting February 25, 2003 Page 16 of 46 be planted in there, and for the counsel to prepare Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order. McCandless: Second. Bird: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded. Any further comments? Hearing none, roll call vote, Mr. Berg. Roll Call: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye. Corrie: All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 11. Continued Public Hearing from February 18, 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 Number 11 is a Continued Public Hearing from February 11, 2003. AZ 02- 028, request for annexation and zoning of 81.54 acres from RUT to R-8 and L-O zones for proposed Cedar Springs North Subdivision, by Howell-Murdoch Development Corporation, south of West McMillan Road and -- I'm on the wrong one. Sorry about that. Corrie: I've got Gemtone. This is a Public Hearing from February the 18th, PP 02-028, request for 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 Eagle Road and west of East Pine Avenue. Sorry for the mix up there. I will have staff's comments first. McKinnon: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. As you stated, this is a continued Public Hearing and the applicant has, again, requested, just now -- I just went back and talked to the applicant -- to continue this until the March 4th meeting due to the same reasons. If you have no objections to that, I stand for any questions and conclude the staff report. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I move we continue the-- Meridian City Council Meeting February 25. 2003 Page 17 of 46 Corrie: We have got some other things -- anyone else that would like to issue testimony in this Public Hearing at this time? We will entertain a motion for the Council to continue this until March the 14th. Hearing none, Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I move we continue the Public Hearing for Gemtone Center Subdivision No. 5 to March 4, 2003, Bird: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made to continue the continued Public Hearing tonight until March 4, 2003. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. Opposed no? All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 12. Item 13. Item 14. Continued Public Hearing from February 11, 2003: AZ 02-028 Request for annexation and zoning of 81.54 acres from RUT to R-8 and L- o zones for proposed Cedar SprinQs North Subdivision by Howell- Murdoch Development Corporation - south of West McMillan Road and west of North Meridian Road: Continued Public Hearing from February 11, 2003: PP 02-027 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 197 building lots and 33 other lots on 81.54 acres in proposed R-8 and L-O zones for proposed Cedar SprinQs North Subdivision by Howell-Murdoch Development Corporation - south of West McMillan Road and west of North Meridian Road: Continued Public Hearing from February 11, 2003: VAR 03-003 Request for a Variance to allow blocks 7, 9, and 13 to exceed 1,000 foot maximum block length for Cedar SprinQs North Subdivision by Howell- Murdoch Development Corporation - south of West McMillan Road and west of North Meridian Road: Corrie: Okay Item Number 12. This is a Continued Public Hearing from February 11, 2003, AZ 02-028. This is a request for annexation and zoning of 81.54 acres from an RUT to an R-8 and L-O zone for proposed Cedar Springs North Subdivision, Howell- Murdoch Development Corporation, south of West McMillan Road and west of the North Meridian Road. At this time I will open the continued Public Hearing and invited staff's comment first. McKinnon: Thank you, Mr. Mayor and Members of the Council, if I could direct your attention to the overhead? When you last heard this application there was some direction from the City Council to staff to prepare some maps to -- Corrie: Can I interrupt here for just a second? McKinnon: Absolutely. Meridian City Council Meeting February 25, 2003 Page 18 of 46 Corrie: We have got three of them that's continued, if the staff and the Council approves, I will open all three at one time, to get all the comments at once. All right. Thank you. I'm sorry to interrupt you. McKinnon: Okay. I guess I'll pick back up. You informed us that you had a desire to see the area surrounding the proposed property. This is an aerial showing how the land is developed currently. This shows -- I'll give you a highlight to give you some reference points. Cedar Springs North is this piece of property that's highlighted right now. This shows some of the subdivisions surrounding this property. It doesn't actually show all of them surrounding this property, those subdivisions that are missing from this map, which are on another map I'll show you in just one moment. Include Sundance Subdivision, Sundance Place, Burney Glen, Cobblefield Crossing, this odd shaped piece of property, and in the future, you will be seeing an application that formerly known as Keltic Heights. There are a lot of applications in the area that deal with the North Meridian Area. Give me one second to open up another map for you. This is a map that was prepared by Ada County Highway District to show you all the development in the north Meridian area. On the bottom of the screen you can see Ustick. The top of the screen represents Chinden Boulevard. In the middle bisecting the screen is McMillan. The subject application that you requested this information for, Cedar Springs North, is located centrally just south of the McMillan line. As you can see, there are a number of subdivisions that have been proposed around this. Some have been approved. Some have not been approved. As I mentioned earlier, the Keltic Heights Subdivision is no longer, it's coming back as Paramount Subdivision. We have received an application concerning that project. These are the maps that you requested. I have one more map, if I could borrow this map from you, Brad. Again, just to reorient you -- I'm trying to straighten that out. Chinden Boulevard is on the north, top of the map, and McMillan runs through the center. Ustick Road is on the south portion of this map. All of the hash-marked areas are projects that we have received applications for or applications that we have already processed. The blue hashed parcels of land that you see are projects that have not yet been approved or applied for, but have had discussions with staff concerning applying for projects in those locations. Again, the large hash mark just north of McMillan, Keltic Heights, has not -- has been withdrawn, but Paramount has replaced with a similar, but different configuration. That gives you some idea of the amount of development that we have approved or we are being asked to approve in the north Meridian area, especially those surrounding the Cedar Springs North Subdivision. I have reviewed the minutes from the last hearing that you had and I didn't see any further questions that you had from staff at the last presentation. If you have any at this time, I would happy to answer them. I can go back, if you like, to any of the maps, if you'd like to discuss any of those, or to see a Site Plan of Cedar Springs North Subdivision. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Cedar Springs North is the blue hashed marked -- oh, that's it. Okay so the other blue that's to the east of that, that's -- is that what you proposed? Is that what -- Mertdlan City Council Meeting February 25, 2003 Page 19 of46 McKinnon: That has been discussed, but not yet applied for. Nary: That's this one here? McKinnon: Yes both of the blue-hashed areas. These three right here. Nary: So all the red has either been approved or there are applications pending? McKinnon: That's correct. Nary: And McMillan runs -- McKinnon: McMillan is right in the center, running east and west. Nary: So this would be Bridgetower over here? McKinnon: Bridgetower. North of Bridgetower Corona, which has been applied for, Lochsa, Silverleaf -- Nary: And I'm not sure which one would be a better map, David, but Cedar Springs, to my recollection, is that the school is somewhere over here? McKinnon: There is a middle school right here and there is an elementary school right here. Nary: Okay. McKinnon: So there is interconnectivity that would allow people to get to the schools without accessing the arterials from Cedar Springs North. Nary: And at this juncture we don't have any other schools up in this particular area that are in the planning stage or -- McKinnon: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, if I can just address a couple of the areas that the schools have. This is the elementary school in Bridgetower. In Silverleaf Subdivision that was recently -- and will be before you, I believe, next week, there is a location for another elementary school site adjacent to Chinden Boulevard. A new high school site located within the Paramount Subdivision. An elementary school site within the Paramount Subdivision. An approved -- a previously approved middle school in -- just south of Baldwin Park. We recently approved a new elementary school just for Education Campus, just to the -- just to the east of the Heritage Commons Subdivision, on the other side of Locust Grove Road. Nary: When you say the other side, you mean east -- this side over here? Where the school building -- that new admin building is going to be? That area? McKinnon: That's correct. Mertdian City Council Meeting February 25, 2003 Page 20 of 48 Nary: Okay. McKinnon: In addition to that, there is also another elementary school site proposed within the Havasu Subdivision located about that location. On the south side of Ustick there is Ponderosa Elementary School as well. Nary: I think it's full. McKinnon: It's full. Nary: I'm pretty sure, so -- McKinnon: Just on this map that's, essentially, an overview of the schools in the area. Corrie: David, would you like to speak to the variance as well at this point? They are requesting -- McKinnon: Yes. Let me forward through these slides really quick and I'll go back to my PowerPoint presentation, so I can -- Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, the highlighted arrows on this Site Plan -- first of all, let me orient you. This would be north on the right side of -- this is up on McMillan, over on the right-hand side of the slide. The three block lengths that we are discussing for the variance are the three that are highlighted. This block runs adjacent to the future attached single family dwelling project, on the east side of the project and on the west side of the project. In the original staff report, staff requested that either additional pedestrian pathways or a street be added in those locations and if a pedestrian access were added to break up those blocks, the staff would recommend approval of the variance and the applicant has done as requested by the Planning and Zoning staff, they have added the pedestrian accesses within those blocks in these three locations. The staff does support the request for variance, because it does allow pedestrian interconnectivity, rather than vehicular interconnectivity to break up those block lengths. Staff does not object to a request for the variance, because the variance request was initially made by the staff and given the proposals of how to resolve that. Corrie: Any questions for staff? McKinnon: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, just one other thing that I would add to this. I'm sorry to interrupt, Mayor. There was some discussion in the minutes from the meeting, as I reviewed them today, a question from Mr. Nary regarding a large open space lot within that subdivision and there was a request of the applicant to provide some sort information at this meeting as to how that area would be treated, rather than allowed to remain as a grassy field and I just bring that to your attention. Corrie: Is the applicant here this evening? Or representative? Fluke: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, thank you very much. Darin Fluke, JUB Engineers, 250 South Beachwood in Boise, representing the applicant in this matter. If Mertdian City Council Meeting February 25, 2003 Page 21 of 46 you will recall from the previous meeting and what the Council asked me to do was work on a couple of layouts for the large multi-family portion in the northeast portion of the project, which contains about 11 and a half acres. I worked with that and did a couple of different layouts on it, just trying to see what I could fit on there under the standards of the R-8 zoning designation. As you will recall, that would allow for lot as small as 4,000 square feet in size, so I laid it out with 4,000 square foot lots, using a 42 foot street section and 20 foot alleys where appropriate, and I was able to get it to layout with a maximum of 82 lots and that's really tight. I would say that the maximum you would see on that under the R-8 zone would be about 80 lots, which translates to about seven units to the acre. That does include a half-acre contiguous open space in a large regular shape within that. That would be the maximum that you would see under R-8, but, again, you know, it's possible that if somebody wanted to try something different on it, that they would just make that application and you would have a chance to look at that application as a stand-alone app. In fact, anything that we do decide to do on that piece of property will come back before this body, so-- Corrie: Okay. Anything else on Items, 12, 13, and 14? Fluke: Unless Council had questions I'd just leave it at that. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I guess that -- two things that really remain with -- or remain the question was the area that you just spoke of and, then, the first open space area as you come into that subdivision. Have you given any further thought to that? Fluke: We had. On that particular open space there is sort of the entryway piece and it's more open to the roadway and we would prefer to keep that one open to give it the open feel for the development. If the Council wishes to see a tot lot or some sort of other recreational amenity, I think what we would prefer to do would be to put it in the more irregular shape lot down here in the south end of the development. I just feel like it's a better spot for that type of land use. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: And I do like those types of things, Mr. Fluke. I have driven around town looking at some of these types of areas in some of the subdivisions that have those, because Council Member de Weerd had mentioned two weeks ago that she had thought that those actually were pretty useful to the residents and they have a more secure kind of feel to them, because they back up to the houses and such and I think that's right. I mean from what I have seen I think they are -- they do provide that sort of sense of safety and security. I guess I -- I'm not a person I think that always has to have a basketball court or a tot lot in everything, but I just -- I guess I still have a sense that this type of lot, although you want to use it as a showcase, is a very -- is just a plain patch of Meridian City Council Meeting February 26, 2003 Page 22 of 46 grass that's probably not as viable for that type of gathering type of thing, whether it's picnic tables, whether it's a gazebo, whether it's that of type thing that draws people to use it, to me would make it more usable and more user friendly than just grass. I think most of these sections have that advantage and there is a park that's down the road a little bit and so I mean I understand that, but I guess I'm -- I guess I'm a little torn about that one space, not that I don't think a tot lot or something like that would be advantageous to some of these pieces, but I think that -- I think that patch of grass in the first part would be more usable if there was something more inviting to use it with. At least that's my only comment about that piece. I appreciate your looking into the other corner, because I think that gives us a little bit of comfort as to what kind of development we are looking at and, then, you know, at least gives us a rough idea of what it may be and that's all we are asking, so I appreciate you looking into that, but I don't know whether there is anything more that the rest of the Council would like to see in those lots, other than grass, and I don't know if Mr. Howell has anything he wants to add of what he'd like to see there or what you had planned for that. Fluke: I think he would like to add something. Corrie: Okay. Name and address, please. Howell: Kevin Howell, 3451 Plantation River Drive. Corrie: Since you didn't testify before -- is the testimony you are about to give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Howell: Yes. Corrie: Thank you. Howell: I'm not opposed to putting in amenities up in that -- in that lot. I can set it back a little bit and put a berm and landscape along the berm -- but I have put basketball courts and whatnot in places like that and I don't have a problem with that or putting park benches, picnic tables, tot lots -- well, those I think need to be kept quite a ways away from any main traffic area, so I wouldn't mind putting that somewhere else, but I don't have any problem doing it on that lot. Corrie: Good. I agree, tot lots shouldn't be right against the street there. Too much of a problem. You're right. Any other questions? Nary: They just do that in our park. Corrie: Okay. Any other questions? Howell: Thank you. Corrie: Thank you very much. Is there anyone else here that would like to issue testimony in these three issues of the annexation and zoning, Preliminary Plat, and the Meridian City Council Meeting February 26, 2003 Page 23 of 46 variance? Okay. Council, any other questions on the Public Hearing? Hearing none, I will entertain a motion to close the Public Hearing on 12, 13, and 14. De Weerd: So moved. Bird: Second. Nary: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded to close the Public Hearing on Items 12, the annexation and zoning of Cedar Springs North Subdivision Number 13, the Preliminary Plat, and Number 14, the Variance. Any further discussion? All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: Comments? Discussion? Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: The one comment -- one of the comments I would have is I really appreciate what Dave and the planning department put together for us. That was exactly what we wanted. I mean I think we really need to see that and I think -- at least for the time being, I'd ask that that be part of the information we receive on the future developments in this area. I think it really is vital to us to know really what impact it is having. You know, it almost makes me think -- I'm not sure how much more North Meridian Planning they need to do, because it seems like we are using it up before they can get the plan printed, so -- McKinnon: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, would you like to have a copy of this map that ACHD has presented? Nary: Sure. McKinnon: Okay. I can get you copies of that from ACHD on Friday. Nary: As I have a feeling as this develops more and more and as applications come in, we are probably going to ask the same question, so it probably needs to be included as some sort of addendum or part of your staff reports in this area, because I think we are just going to keep asking it and I don't really think it's fair that we have to delay it all the time. Now that we at least have that data, we can just supplement it, so I think that that was very helpful. I appreciate Mr. Howell being very willing to enhance the open spaces in this development. As I said the last time, I think this is a very nice development. I liked the original Cedar Springs, I think this is a very nice enhancement to the city, and I think enhancing those open spaces will make them more usable, more user friendly, and enhance the development overall. I don't see anything on the outside and I Meridian City Council Meeting February 25, 2003 Page 24 of 46 recognize the expense, but I think overall that the pluses outweigh the minuses significantly. So I appreciate Mr. Howell being willing to do that. I don't have any other real concerns. I think they have answered the questions we have asked. I think they have put together something that's going to be very nice. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I agree with Councilman Nary. I have some concerns, but Mr. Fluke was able to show how connected to the various schools -- this is in a prime location to both an elementary school and a middle school, so I think with those -- I like their open space. Again, I'm kind of a fan of that type of open space. Just a comment for Dave. If -- I agree with Councilman Nary on making sure that we have this in all of our applications, not just the north Meridian. I think it's really helpful to see the connectivity and how these neighborhoods -- or these subdivisions can really turn into neighbors, because they are not just subdivisions. So -- and I also appreciate answering a little bit more about the density and what can be built there, without showing us any pictures, so we get all hung up on the picture, but it is nice to know what kind of density we are looking at and what the possible build will be. I feel comfortable with this project. I think it will be an asset to the community. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Mr. Bird had pointed out -- and maybe Mr. McKinnon with the help of our IT person, they could either get some of that information on a disk or something that we could download and have available simply on our laptop here, so that we don't have to - - we don't have to recreate it every time, it is something that -- whether or not it's just updated periodically, but that might be a way that we could have that available, so we would, again, have that available to see what the different relationships are between these developments. That might work. Corrie: Any other comments? All right. Hearing none. I will entertain a motion on Item Number 12. This is a request for annexation and zoning of Cedar Springs North Subdivision. Nary: Well, I asked the questions, so -- if you think that's going to make me not ask the questions, because I got to make the motion, it isn't going to work. I'll make it. Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I'd move the approval of AZ 02-028, request for annexation and zoning of 81.54 acres from RUT to R-8 and L-O zones for the proposed Cedar Springs North Subdivision by Howell-Murdoch Development, south of West McMillan Road and west Meridian City Council Meeting February 25, 2003 Page 25 of 46 of North Meridian Road, to include all of staff comments, and for counsel to prepare Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order. McCandless: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded for the approval of the request for annexation and zoning. Is there any further discussion? De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: Would you be including the typical language about the North Meridian Planning Area and any road requirements that would be asked as a result of that plan? Nary: Yes. I would include that. I don't know -- is that enough information for Mr. Nichols well? Okay. Corrie: Let the record show he said yes. Bird: Had his thumb up. Corrie: Okay. Any further discussion? Okay. Roll call vote, Mr. Berg. Roll Call: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye. Corrie: Okay. Motion is has been approved. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: Item Number 13 is the Preliminary Plat for Cedar Springs North Subdivision. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I move the approval of PP 02-027, the request for Preliminary Plat approval of 197 building lots and 33 other lots on 81.54 acres in a proposed R-8 and L-O zones for the proposed Cedar Springs North Subdivision by Howell-Murdoch Development, south of West McMillan Road and west of North Meridian Road, to include all staff comments and the only addition that the applicant also submit a plan for the open spaces as to what type of enhancements will be included and the open spaces on the plat -- and I don't have a last date of the plat that was submitted, so that that could be included in the Findings, but for counsel to prepare Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order. The plat is dated February 11, 2003. McCandless: Second. Mertdian City Council Meeting February 25, 2003 Page 26 of 48 Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded. Any further discussion? Roll call vote, Mr. Berg. Roll Call: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye. Corrie: All yeas. Motion is approved. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: Item Number 14 is a variance request to allow Block 7,9, and 13 to exceed the one thousand foot minimum block length of Cedar Springs North Subdivision. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I move the approval of VAR 03-003, the request for a variance to allow Blocks 7, 9, and 13 to exceed the 1,000 foot maximum block length for Cedar Springs North Subdivision by Howell-Murdoch Development Corporation, south of West McMillan Road and west of North Meridian Road, to include all staff comments and my only other comment is that I think it does meet all the standards and requirements of the ordinance for variances as well. McCandless: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll call vote, Mr. Berg. Roll Call: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye. Corrie: All yeas. Motion is approved. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 15. Public Hearing: RZ 03-002 Request for a Rezone of 3.66 acres from L- o to R-15 zones for proposed Scottsdale Villas Subdivision by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc. for Wolfe Commercial Enterprises, LLC, - West Alden Drive, southwest corner of West Franklin Road and SW 7th Avenue: Item 16. Public Hearing: PP 02-029 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 19 building lots and 2 other lots on 3.66 acres in a proposed R-15 zone for proposed Scottsdale Villas Subdivision by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc. - West Alden Drive, southwest corner of West Franklin Road and Southwest ih Avenue: Item 17. Public Hearing: CUP 02-045 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Unit Development for 19 single-family attached units in a proposed R-15 zone for proposed Scottsdale Villas Subdivision by Meridian City Council Meeting February 25. 2003 Page 27 of 46 Pinnacle Engineers, Inc. - West Alden Drive, southwest corner of West Franklin Road and Southwest 7th Avenue: Corrie: Item Numbers 15, 16, and 17 is a request from Scottsdale Villas Subdivision. The first request is for rezone of 33.66 acres from an L-O to an R-15 zone for proposed Scottsdale Villas Subdivision. Item Number 16 is a Public Hearing request for Preliminary Plat of 19 building lots and two other lots on 3.66 acres in a proposed R-15 zone for proposed Scottsdale Villas Subdivision. Item Number 17 is a Public Hearing request for a Conditional Use Permit for a planned unit development for 19 single family attached units for a proposed R-15 zone for proposed Scottsdale Villas Subdivision. At this time I will open the Public Hearing on Items 15, 16, and 17 and invite staff's comments first. McKinnon: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. If you would direct your attention to the overhead to show you the piece of property that we are dealing with tonight? The highlighted portion of the property -- the highlighted portions on this map are somewhat inaccurate. Franklin Road is right here. Southwest 7th is located going north and south on the map. There currently is an office building located on the very northern most portion of land that is highlighted. That is not included with this application. However, all the rest of the property that is indicated in blue is part of the application. Just for orientation purposes, this is the castle day care. It's located on Franklin Boulevard. Brad, if I can ask you to go to the next slide. This gives a little better representation, some photography showing what parcels we are dealing with. As you may recall, just in the last four months we had an application for 4-plexes to go on these lots that are highlighted on the southwest portion of the property and it was determined at that time by the Council that the 4-plexes were not appropriate to be placed next to the single family, single story houses, and it was denied at that time. The applicant and the owner of the property has revised those plans to provide for, rather than 4-plexes, to have attached single-family housing, townhomes, or detached housing. Brad, if I could get you to go to the next slide. As you can see, the Preliminary Plat would break the property up into several smaller single ownership lots with some zero lot line housing that could be built upon those lots. Within the plan itself and those -- the Site Plan submitted by the applicant, there has been some discussion about allowing some of the lots -- right now the proposal is to allow a private street with six of those houses taking access off the private street. Staff does not dispute that that would be an appropriate way of doing that. There is some discussion among the applicant and the owner of the property as to whether or not it would be appropriate allow detached housing with two houses attached at that location, rather than three town homes attached together and staff has no objection to that. I point that out to you, because this is actually different from the next Site Plan that you are going to see. Go forward, Brad. The current proposal that we have shows three connected, three connected, and three connected. The applicant would like to have the option to have one of those houses be detached in each of these locations. Staff has no objection to that. That basically gives you an overview of the project. There are some open space lots. There are some small reductions in standards, because this is a Conditional Use Permit for a planned developed and that's all detailed in the staff report. Just to highlight a few of the issues for each one of the items, starting with the annexation -- not the annexation, but the rezone of this property, currently the property is depicted on the Comprehensive Land Mertdian City Council Meeting February 25. 2003 Page 28 of 46 Use Map as L-O and the reason why it's depicted as L-O is because that was to be reflective of the zoning when we adopted our new Comprehensive Plan. When this property was first adopted -- was first annexed into the city, it was annexed with an R-15 zoning and, then, they decided that the higher and best use of that property would be the L-O zoning and they determined now that the highest and best use of the property would be the R-15 zoning, rather than the L-O zoning. Within the Comprehensive Plan there is numerous text documents that state that the L-O zone is to be a buffer between land uses between higher intensity to lower intensity. One of the odd things about our Code and our Comprehensive Plan is that within the L-O zone an apartment use is a Conditional Use, but a townhouse use and an attached single family house use is a prohibited use. Thus, the request for the R-15 zoning and in the staff report you will find portions of the Comprehensive Plan that do support the type of project that they have requested. In addition to that, I would point out that at the last hearing there was numerous objections to the proposed project for 4-plexes and there was no one at the original Commission meeting in opposition of that, just one neighbor that came to find out whether or not they would be two story homes and she said that if it's not two story, we have no problem with that. It provides the buffer for the neighbors to the southwest, it provides the buffer for the neighbors to the south as well -- I mean to the west as well. On the east side of the property there are 4-plexes currently and putting attached single-family townhouses adjacent to 4-plexes is something that we don't find objectionable. In addition to that, a number of those would be looking into the open space area, rather than into large backyards of single-family homes. To the Preliminary Plat, there is very -- there is several issues that need to be addressed and one of those would be because this was approved as a commercial subdivision, the water connections -- the water connection within the subdivision and the sewer stubs were spaced and set up for commercial properties, rather than residential properties, and so we have stated in the staff report and it's reflected in the recommendation from the Commission that the Public Works Department will work with the applicant to use the ones that are usable and those that aren't usable will have to find ways to make it work and for that Brad Watson would be better addressing those issues. As far as the Conditional Use Permit is concerned, there are several issues to point out. One would be that there is currently a 14 foot wide asphalt path that's dedicated as a common -- that's already set aside as a common lot within the Scottsdale Subdivision, this is where the sewer line comes through, so there will be a pathway leading back to the pond area. This is their open space and one of their amenities. They have got a pathway around the garden pond area and they also have one on the east side of the property as well, which would be accessible to all the members of the property. The open space is hidden back behind, so it can be a private area and staff has no objections to that. With that as a brief overview of all of the information I believe that you need to have in front of you to make a decision, if you have any questions, I'd ask if you have some for me, and turn the time back over to you. Corrie: Okay. Any questions? Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Mertdian City Council Meeting February 25, 2003 Page 29 of 46 Nary: Could you tell me a little more about the pond? Is it a drainage pond? McKinnon: It's going -- it would be the same type of pond as a drainage pond. It would be dressed up a little bit and I can let Clint address that. The applicant is here tonight so he can address that. I wondered - Brad. Will you go forward one more slide? I think we may -- if you could go one more. Okay. We didn't include the Landscape Plan with this, but typically with a Preliminary Plat, we don't request a detailed Landscape Plan. We would expect that with the Final Plat. Nary: Yeah. My expectation is that, obviously, that picture is not drawn to scale, but it appears that that pond incorporates almost the entire area, so there is not much else to do with it. Did you say put a path around it? McKinnon: There is a pathway that is proposed around that. One of the reasons that you don't see the -- the tot lots, is because this is intended to be marketed to the senior housing community, 55 and older, and so there wouldn't be the types of amenities that you would see with kids, it's just to be a walking area and a garden type area for those that live in that subdivision. Nary: Well, it may not be intended for kids, but doesn't that pathway go to the subdivision that's right immediately to the west? McKinnon: It's actually fenced off. Nary: Oh, it's fenced off so that path only goes to that pond? McKinnon: Yes. There is a terminus right there. It runs right into a six tall fence. Nary: Thank you. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: My only question was -- you had mentioned that they wanted a detached. Was that noted at the P&Z hearing? McKinnon: It was noted at the P&Z hearing. It was addressed by the P&Z Commission. I don't know if it made it into the recommendation, but it's reflected in the minutes that they would support that. De Weerd: Thank you. Corrie: Okay. Any questions? Thank you. McKinnon: Thank you. Meridian City Council Meeting February 26. 2003 Page 30 of 46 Corrie: Is the testimony you're about to give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Boyle: It is. Corrie: Name and address. Boyle: Thank you, Mayor. Clint Boyle with Pinnacle Engineers, 12552 West Executive Drive in Boise, Idaho. To start off with - and this might answer some of the questions on the site. I have a few pictures. Since a picture is worth a thousand words, I think I have about 10,000 words there, and I will just conclude with that. De Weerd: Wow. Corrie: However you want to take the chance. Boyle: I do appreciate this opportunity this evening to present this project. We are excited about this project and to work with the staff on it. I appreciate Dave's help on this and the other staff members in Meridian working with us on this project. As far as the staff conditions, just to back up, we are in agreement with the staff conditions and recommendations as they have been presented to us on this project and that applies to the rezoning, the Preliminary Plat, and the Conditional Use Permit for the Planned Development, so we are in agreement, we have gone though those and are in agreement with the staff on those conditions and appreciate their efforts in working with us on this project. To point out a couple of items that Council raised, Councilman Nary, I believe, had some questions regarding the functioning of the open space lots and I do, actually, have a Landscape Plan and that Landscape Plan was submitted, so the staff -- they hopefully have a copy there and they can pull it up very quickly, but the common areas will function as -- the common areas -- the intent behind this project -- let me just back up. We are proposing 19 total units within this project and it is specifically proposed as a senior -- or what was mentioned at the Planning Commission as a seasoned citizen type of development. So these are people that are looking for maybe a nice place to live where they have some fairly low maintenance costs, they don't have to maintain large landscape areas, and the intention behind this is that even though each lot will be under individual ownership, the entire project is going to be maintained by the homeowners association. In other words, all of the lawn areas and landscape areas, including the actual yards for these units, will be mowed, trimmed, pruned, et cetera, by the homeowners association. That makes it easy for the seasoned citizens to head down to Arizona during the winter and not have to worry about their lawn. They can come -- when they come back -- when they come back in the summer during the higher temperature months, when they pull into their drive their lawn will still be green and it will be mowed and will be neat and trimmed. Now, with that -- with these common areas -- these common areas were specifically designed and geared toward the senior community. They have pathway linkages, they are on both sides of the street, therefore, and the seasoned citizens that live within this project will not have to cross a street at all to utilize these common areas. Several of the units actually back directly onto the common areas and we tried to cluster them around the common areas as much as possible. Now, there were a few constraints with this project that we had to deal with Meridian City Council Meeting February 25, 2003 Page 31 of 46 and Mr. McKinnon brought up one and that was the reason I passed out some pictures and that was with regards to the existing -- well, I believe it was called a pathway. It is an asphalt surface that if you were to take this asphalt pathway, you would walk from the street back to a fence, and that would be your pathway jaunt there would be to end up dead-ending into a fence. Will that connect? It is not proposed to connect and it's private property, private lots beyond this, so it's not a micro-path connection to anywhere, so to speak. However, we took that and with that existing common lot that's over an existing Meridian sewer line, which does extend into this other neighborhood, we decided, all right, let's make that function as a pathway that extends back into a common area that has a pathway loop system around it. That's the reason for that design. As far as the pathway, there will be trees planted around this. This will function in the interior as a storm water retention area. It's not going to actually be a lake or a pond per se. It will be grass and lawn in here. If you look at the contours, the storm drainage that we have to handle -- the streets are already dumping into a seepage bed in this location here. So, basically, what we are handling in these storm ponds is some drainage from some of the rooftops and driveways, potentially, that will need to flow back into these storm drainage areas. The reason I mention that is these storm drainage areas are going to be very shallow. The contour depths here that we are looking at are going to be roughly two feet deep as you come down. So it's going to be a very minor and shallow area to handle that drainage. Around these pathways there are several benches proposed and I don't know -- I can't even hardly read the drawing that's on the screen here, but these notations, actually, call out some bench locations and I believe around each of the pathways there are roughly three park benches located around the pathway, so as the senior citizens are walking the loop, if they want to sit and chat or just watch the other walkers as they pass by, they will have an opportunity to do that. It is somewhat secluded and that was done on purpose as well, so that they are somewhat secluded from the hustle and bustle out on the street and they can have an area where they can read or exercise as they'd like, that is somewhat secluded from the busyness out on the street. The utilities -- as Dave mentioned, this originally was designed as a commercial subdivision. The applicant and developer have found it that it has not been extremely marketable as an office project. There was an application previously for some 4-plex units that were two story that would have backed up to -- and this one has me upside down and the streets are upside done on here, but it would have backed up to the single family homes and the Council denied that, they were fairly clear in those minutes as we went through them, that they were looking for a product that was more of a single story type of a unit adjacent to these homes, because the -- the homes that are currently west of this project are all single story. With this proposal, all of the units in the entire project are proposed as single story units. So it fits in very well with the surrounding uses. As Dave mentioned earlier, there was discussion and the developer now is leaning very strongly towards this, that separating what would be three units attached into two units attached with, actually, a single family detached home and the same across the way on the common drive here, and, then, there was also three units originally proposed in this location that he would also like to detach, In other words, the mix that they would like to see in here is two units attached at the most. But there would be three single-family homes in here. And that project type is one that -- the developers looked at other projects, La Playa Subdivision, which is behind the Albertson's there at Meridian and Fairview, you're familiar with that, they have a mixture of product types in there and that's somewhat what they are trying to model this after. Mertdlan City Council Meeting February 25. 2003 Page 32 of 46 The same builder that built the majority of the homes in that project will also be constructing the homes in here, based on the discussions that I have had with the applicant. That was Mars Construction. So it should be a real nice blend. Their common roadway here, as Dave mentioned, is proposed to have six units that have driveways back onto this common driveway. The current ordinance typically would allow, in most instances, only four units. The reason for that is we didn't want the end units here, so to speak, to have to back out onto 8th Street. Again, we are trying to -- as much as possible make this very nice for the seniors, it is a little easier getting in and out when you're backing onto a common drive, rather than out onto the public street. With that and with the addition of the 10,000 words that J submitted with the pictures, I will conclude my remarks and if you have questions I would be happy to go into any details or issues that you have, but, again, we are in agreement with the staff and appreciate working with them on this project and feel it would be a real nice community and neighborhood atmosphere with your approval. Thank you. Corrie: I noticed you had a translation from seasoned citizen to senior citizen, so -- it looks like a good project. Council, comments? Questions? Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: On the street there, is that a stub street or is that going to connect all the way through? The street to -- Alden or whatever it was? Boyle: This is actually connected currently. Yes, it does connect through. If you look at a vicinity map, it is connected presently. Nary: Isn't that going to be kind of a - I mean what you're trying to do is make a very sort of secluded, somewhat senior community, yet that's a cut-through street to get to that subdivision, isn't it? So it's probably fairly busy, isn't it? Boyle: No. It really isn't a cut-through. I mean if you look at the street network, you know, this would be -- 7th Street would be the main kind of corridor for the majority of this housing. This is, you know, somewhat of a minor loop street that connects in there. It doesn't seem to be -- I have been out to the site several times and I'm sure your staff has as well and from ACHD -- it doesn't seem to be an extremely busy or highly traveled street at this point in time. It is a fairly wide street. It was developed to ACHD's commercial standards, so the seasoned citizens that have a problem staying between the lines will have a little extra room to work. Corrie: Careful. Careful. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Mertdian City Council MeeUng February 25. 2003 Page 33 of 46 Nary: How long has this -- it was -- from what I recall from what Dave said, this was R- 15, and, then, in the Comprehensive Plan it was changed to an L-O just last year? Boyle: Uh-huh. Nary: And so, then -- and that was like last September or so? McKinnon: Councilman Nary, Members of the Council, I believe in 1999 is when the property was rezoned to L-O and the Comprehensive Plan's land use designation was changed to L-O to reflect that when they adopted the new plan. Nary: And how long has your client owned that property? Or does he even own it? Boyle: It is owned. It is owned by the client. By the Wolfes, and I'm not sure the exact length of time. The client owned it when the Farm Bureau building was developed. I don't know if he had ownership of it when the castle day care was developed. So he's owned it for several years. Nary: And I heard you say it was not marketable as office space, even though it's got a big wide street for commercial and everything else for commercial -- and I guess I just wasn't familiar from what you were saying as to how -- you know, I guess I'm not a real big fan of rezoning things until somebody shows me why it doesn't work the way it was zoned and I guess I haven't heard from you, other than that statement, as to why it's not usable or marketable as a light office, rather than changing it to residential. Boyle: Yes. The issues that have been brought up as far as marketability -- obviously, there is economic reasons now just with commercial and office space in general, you know, after some of the conditions that have occurred recently within the area, as many of you are aware of. The other issue is -- as far as the office development it is back off of the main path. What he's found is the corner lot where the Farm Bureau was marketable, because, obviously, it has some visibility out on Franklin Road, a fairly busy street. The remaining lots that were tucked further back into the property, basically just hasn't been able to find any office users that are willing to locate within the area that don't have some sort of visibility -- better visibility than it has within this interior street system. It's a -- like I said before, a pretty quiet street, it doesn't really connect through to anything, he has just found that it hasn't been marketable as far as an office project. Nary: And in the two years of hearings on the Comprehensive Plan did the client come to ask to have it changed in that process? Boyle: Yeah. On the Comprehensive Plan I don't know that he requested it specifically. The land use map we are talking about, which is one component of the Comprehensive Plan. I will note that immediately adjacent to this is designated on the Comprehensive Plan as high density -- or medium density residential uses and, obviously, there is the same type of developments as far as single family attached in the immediate vicinity, but he - I don't know if he actually presented any information at the time the Comprehensive Plan was going through the process, other than I do know that he originally came in with the application on the 4-plex units and presented that and at that Mertdlsn City Council Meeting February 26. 2003 Page 34 of 46 time, like I said, he felt he had pretty clear direction to come back with something _ some other type of project that incorporated single story type of uses adjacent to these residential homes. And, as Dave mentioned, I mean there clearly are various policies within the Comp Plan related to transitional uses, which are spelled out in the report, and I can also give you references on that. Page 106 talks about some transitional uses and there are other policies within the Comprehensive Plan that clearly uphold the request for the rezone. The land use map, as indicated, does generally represent L-O in this area. There is L-O that is already being constructed in the area and it is on the border and I guess, you know, again, the Comprehensive Plan technically isn't supposed to be deemed to be a zoning ordinance. Those land use classifications are typically more of a general what do we want to see in the area type as of aspect and I have had this discussion -. I will tell you, originally where this originally came up with the rezone request .- because if you look through your minutes, there was a lag here. The Preliminary Plat and Planned Development were submitted and, then, the rezone came in later and that was at staff's request and I think it goes back to a clarification issue and that is within the Planned Development ordinance there is provisions within your existing Planned Development ordinance that says residential PUDs can be proposed regardless of the underlying zone. So, again, we were operating off of that principle. You know, staff said, well, you know, we felt that that was regardless of the underlying residential zone. However -- and that's what they felt the intent was after they reviewed the project more closely. But, again, we were basing it on the premise as stated. That just says regardless of the underlying zone you can propose the residential PUD. So at staff's request we presented the rezone. They deemed that it was in compliance with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan and here we are in front of you tonight with it. De Weerd: Thank you. Boyle: Thanks. It's that and those 10,000 words. Corrie: Okay. Any other questions? Okay. Thank you. Anyone else from the public like to issue testimony? Okay. Council, any questions on the Public Hearing? De Weerd: I have none. Bird: I have none Corrie: I'll entertain a motion, then, to close the Public Hearing on Items 15, 16, and 17, Scottsdale Villas Subdivision. McCandless: So moved. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to close the public hearings. All those in favor say aye. Opposed no? All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Meridian City Council Meeting February 25, 2003 Page 35 of 46 Corrie: Discussion? Comments? Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Well, like Mr. Nary, I -- you know, we worked more years than we needed to to get a. land use map out. And I don't like seeing the zones change, you know, six months after we adopt it, but, by the same token, you have to look at what the developers can sell and what they can do and being in the construction business I know office buildings right now is not real high priority, especially in that location. This is a viable project, I believe, that they have brought forward for us elderly people that -- so I have no -- I have no problem. I think it's a -- it's a nice -- could be a nice -- very nice development and I'm sure it will be. I hope that it is as successful as they think it will be. McCandless: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. McCandless. McCandless: I, frankly, think it's a very well thought out project. I like the concept. I like the use of the property, even though it is going to have to be changed, but I don't see that back in there we have the Farm Bureau building and that day care center, I don't think it's as viable as light office as this type of project would be. I like it. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I will just listen to our seasoned citizens -- our Council members. Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: On a more serious note, I think an in-fill we have to have some flexibility and this really does have a good use and a nice design and I think -- I guess I would support it. Corrie: Okay. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I think this is probably, for this type of development for this particular area, that's probably as good as you can get. I mean there isn't a whole lot else you can do with it. It is on the half mile, it's no different than the other neighborhood center areas that we have promoted throughout this plan for light office. You know, it is smack on the half mile between Linder and Meridian. I mean that's no different than all those other half circles we have placed all over that map as we try to promote light office, small Mertdlan City Council Meeting February 25. 2003 Page 36 of 46 commercial, neighborhood commercial, and I guess I'm still not convinced. I recognize today that there may not be a tremendous market for light office. I recognize the economy is such that that may be the problem, but that doesn't mean we should do something different today just because that economy is in a down turn. I think the principles of the private paths in this land use map in the Comprehensive Plan go to areas just like this. I also -- I mean I recognize that that path that goes to the fence is kind of silly, I recognize that, and probably trying to make it into a swale walking path is probably better than nothing, but I live next to two subdivisions that have those type of indentations with benches and I have never seen a person sit on the bench ever. It is wasted space. It is -- I mean and I'm the one saying put benches and make it inviting, but, I tell you, in a path area that is no bigger than this room, having benches is just a waste of space. So I guess I may be the only one, but I am not is support of this project. I think it is very nice but it just doesn't go there. I think there was intended to be a small office type of commercial development for neighborhood uses right on the main road. That's just no different than the rest of them. I think this project, like Tully Cove off of Linder, same similar type of setup, it's a wonderful project, and I think something that really is needed here in Meridian. I just don't think it's needed there at that location. Corrie: Benches are good for senior citizens. Nary: I agree. Bird: I was just going to say that. Nary: They can come over to our neighborhood and sit on them, because no one else sits on those benches in those little indentations that are no bigger than this room. Bird: Now that I have to do my walk, I'll come over there so I can sit down. Nary: Come on over. Corrie: Hearing no further discussion, I will entertain a motion, then, for the request for a rezone Scottsdale Villas Subdivision. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I would move that we approve the request for rezone of 3.66 acres from L-O to R- 15 zones for the proposed Scottsdale Villas Subdivision by Pinnacle Engineers and Wolfe Commercial Enterprises, LLC, on West Alden Drive, southwest corner of West Franklin Road and Southwest 7th Avenue, and to incorporate staff comments and for the attorney to draw up Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order. McCandless: Second. Mertdian City Council Meeting February 25. 2003 Page 37 of 46 Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded to approve the rezone of L-O to R-15. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll call vote, Mr. Berg. Roll Call: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye. Corrie: Motion is approved three to one. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE NAYE. Corrie: Item Number 16, request for Preliminary Plat for Scottsdale Villas Subdivision. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move that we approve PP 02-029, a request for Preliminary Plat approval of 19 building lots and two other lots on 3.66 acres in a proposed R-15 zone for the proposed Scottsdale Villas Subdivision by Pinnacle Engineers, Incorporated, West Alden Drive, southwest corner of West Franklin Road and Southwest 7th Avenue, the attorney to draw up the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order and incorporated staff comments and applicant comments, which I believe is -- in this one we probably have to have the three detached buildings would be in the Preliminary Plat; am I not right? That would be it. McCandless: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded. Any further discussion? Roll call vote, Mr. Berg. Roll Call: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye. Corrie: Okay. Three to one. Motion approved. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE NAYE. Corrie: Item Number 17 is a request for a Conditional Use Permit. Bird: I'm on a roll. Corrie: For a planned unit development. Bird: Mr. Mayor, I'm on a roll. Corrie: You're on a roll. Bird: Yes, I guess. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Meridian City Council Meeting February 25, 2003 Page 38 of 46 Bird: I move that we approve CUP 02-045, request for a Conditional Use Permit for a planned unit development for 19 single family attached units in a proposed R-15 zone for proposed Scottsdale Villas Subdivision by Pinnacle Engineers, Incorporated, West Alden Drive, southwest corner of West Franklin Road and Southwest 7th Avenue and to include three detached buildings or single family units and for the attorney to draw up the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order. McCandless: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll call vote, Mr. Berg. Roll-Call: McCandless, aye; Nary, naye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye. Corrie: Okay. Three to one. Motion is approved. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE NAYE. Corrie: Thank you, Mr. Boyle. Item 18. Public Hearing: AZ 02-029 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 39.92 acres from RUT to R-8 zones for proposed WatersonQ Estates by Howell-Murdoch Development Corporation - northwest corner of North Linder Road and West Ustick Road: Item 19. Public Hearing: PP 02-030 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 125 building lots and 15 other lots on 39.92 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for proposed WatersonQ Estates by Howell-Murdoch Development Corporation - northwest corner of North Linder Road and West Ustick Road: Corrie: Item Number 18 and 19, I will open the Public Hearing on both of those. Eighteen is the request for annexation and zoning of 39.92 acres from RUT to R-8 zones for proposed Watersong Estates by Howell-Murdoch Development Corporation, northwest corner of North Linder Road and West Ustick Road. Item Number 19 is a Public Hearing for a Preliminary Plat approval of 125 building lots and 15 other lots on 39.92 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for the proposed Watersong Estates. At this time, I will open the Public Hearing and invite staff's comments first, please. McKinnon: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. Just one item of housekeeping before we get into the staff report. Due to some revisions made in the -- made to the Preliminary Plat, they have reduced the number of lots by one, so in making any motions concerning this, if you could reduce the 115 building lots to 114 building lots, we would appreciate that, so that the motion is correct with that being presented to you tonight. As you can see on the overhead that we have prepared and bolded the area that we are encompassing with this new subdivision for Watersong Estates. It's another north Meridian area subdivision before we have our North Meridian Meridian City Council Meeting February 25, 2003 Page 39 of 46 Area Plan in place. This is immediately adjacent to the Bridgetower Subdivision and to the east is the elementary school site, to the northeast is Baldwin Park, and further to the northeast -- it would be north northeast would be the Cooper -- oh, boy -- Cobblefield Crossing Subdivision. If you could go to the next slide, Brad. The applicant has been through numerous iterations of the Preliminary Plat to meet the requirements of the recommendation as far as the annexation goes. I believe the applicant is in support of those items that were recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission and I have reviewed those and found those to be accurate. With the Preliminary Plat, however, the first recommendation that the Planning and Zoning Commission made concerning the Preliminary Plat was in regards to the fact that there are two lots within the subdivision that exceed the block length and there are three lots that exceed the minimum block length. In our Meridian City Code Section 12-4-5 it states that we cannot have blocks less than 500 feet in length and we can't have blocks in a subdivision of over 1,000 feet in length and there was a requirement for a variance to the accompany this Preliminary Plat. As of yet we haven't received an application for the variance for that, for the block lengths and so I believe it would be appropriate tonight to continue this hearing until we have the opportunity to review the variance with this application. Furthermore, into the recommendation, the fourth item under special consideration by the Planning and Zoning Commission, had to deal with a waiver request from the applicant to not have to tile the White Drain and that's something that was made -- it was an allowable request within Bridgetower. The White Drain is located up on the northern portion -- northeast portion of the subdivision. They have requested not to have to tile portion of the White Drain. We do have a Public Hearing tonight. I know the applicant is here and would like to make some statements concerning this application. The applicant has done a good job meeting all of the other requests of the Planning and Zoning Commission. I do have a copy of the revised Preliminary Plat that meets those conditions. However, I don't have a variance to accompany it, so I'll cut my comments short and let the applicant to be heard with my request for a continuance at this time. Corrie: Any questions? Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: So, Dave, that map that you have up there, that's the revised Preliminary Plat that's different than the one we have on our disk; right? That's the one we need to be concerned with? McKinnon: This is the one that we need to be concerned with that's shown. Nary: Okay. McKinnon: This is the correct one. It has been further revised on some of the plat notes on a non-electronic copy that was delivered today. Nary: Okay. Thank you. Mertdian City Council Meeting February 25, 2003 Page 40 of 46 Corrie: Okay. Is the applicant here this evening? You have already been sworn, I believe. No, you haven't either. Sorry. Is the testimony you are about to give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Fluke: It is. Corrie: Thank you. Name and address, please. Fluke: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, thank you, Darin Fluke, JUB Engineers, 250 South Beachwood, representing the applicant in this matter. Well, we do have a bit of a unique situation. We have some short block lengths here, which, as Dave alluded to, we have gone through a number of iterations of this project. Started out with some office lots there along Linder Road. Those were removed before we made the application, changed the layout some. We made an application with a layout that we were comfortable with. It had two approaches to Linder Road. That didn't work, because we have got the middle school across the street from us and the Highway District required that we align with their driveway. The particular location of that driveway didn't allow us to fit another approach, given the minimum offsets that we had to maintain, so we came up with this design. Actually, we came up with another design previous to this. This one was changed in going through the Planning and Zoning Commission's process to make a couple of more street connections, which -- internal to the subdivision, which, then, resulted in a couple of those shorter block lengths that you see. We are getting it coming and going on this one, but we think we have got a layout that works pretty well. We have almost 10 percent open space within this development. Five percent would be required. We are requesting an R-8 zoning designation. Minimum lot size on these lots is no smaller than about 6,600 square foot all the way up to about 12 or 13,000 square feet. That's your range. The average lot size runs about 8,600 square feet in the development. What we would propose for the open space in this one is we'd like to do -- as you see the roundabout and, then, the -- sort of the entryway open space there to the south and west of that. We have proposed sort of an urban plaza type feel on that particular lot that works as an entry feature, as well as a place for people to gather. We don't have a detailed design on that yet and we will have to have that included in on our Landscape Plan. Being across the street from the middle school we don't feel it would be an effective use of the land to provide other recreational amenities, because we are going to have large open spaces there, as well as probably basketball courts and those sorts of things. That's why we have not included that in on this one. We are in the same situation that a number of developments are in within north Meridian with regard to the right of way. We have preserved 23 feet there, which is what they would require for a 96 foot section for a five lane road section -- 96 foot right of way, five lane road section. That would allow for a five foot detached sidewalk and we are showing that as a meandering sidewalk there along the frontage. The Planning and Zoning Commission -- well, let me back up. If you look at the lot there on the north, that does contain the city's White sewer trunk -- White Drain sewer trunk runs through there, as well as an access road for the city. It is graveled at the present time. The Planning and Zoning Commission asked that we pave that access road from Linder Road west approximately 300 feet to where the White Drain leaves the property, thereby facilitating connection with any future path that came along the White Drain, so we would be amenable to that Mertdlan City Council Meeting February 25. 2003 Page 41 of 46 and have amended that Landscape Plan to indicate that. For a development of this size, we have a fair amount of street -- and I would point out that the city noticed this as 125 lots, which is what we did have at the previous iteration. With the boundary problem that we discovered, we lost another lot, and so we are down to 124. I'm not sure where the 114 came from. McKinnon: I believe that was building lots. Fluke: It's 124 building lots, 12 other lots. McKinnon: Thank you. Fluke: So I just wanted to get that on the record. Anyway, I think we have developed a -- or a nice Site Plan here that fits well with what the city has envisioned for that medium density residential designation that you have got on your land use map and it should be fit well and work well with the other developments that you have in the area, including the schools and parks that are in this area. If Council has any questions I would be happy to take those now. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: And you understand that we can't really vote on this without the variance request? Fluke: I do. De Weerd: Okay. Fluke: I think this is the most current plan, just for the record. Nary: Oh, I thought he told us it was -- Fluke: The only thing that's changed is some notes that you don't see on there. The layout is just the same. Nary: Oh. Okay. McKinnon: That's correct. Bird: That's the actual -- this show 124. Fluke: That's correct. 124 lots on that layout, with 12 other lots. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Meridian City Council Meeting February 25, 2003 Page 42 of 46 Nary: Is that one green space -- is this a green space on this portion right here? Fluke: It is. Nary: Is this a stub street to -- Fluke: Bridgetower. Nary: -- Bridgetower? Fluke: Thank you. Corrie: Okay. Anyone else to issue testimony tonight? Okay. Council? Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: How long before the variance on the lot lengths would be -- come though? That's going to determine how long we continue these Public Hearings for. Will, what's the normal on that? Corrie: Four weeks? David, are we looking at four weeks? Berg: Depending on when we get the application. We will get it tomorrow? Notice in the paper 15 days prior to the hearing. Bird: 25th of March? Corrie: Should be good. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: With that I would move that we continue Public Hearing AZ 02-029, request for annexation and zoning of 39.92 acres from RUT to R-B zones for the proposed Watersong Estates by Howell-Murdoch Development Corp. on the northwest corner of North Linder Road and West Ustick Road to March 25th, 2003. Nary: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded. Any further discussion? All in favor of the motion say aye. All no -- excuse me, they are all ayes. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Meridian City Council Meeting February 25, 2003 Page 43 of 46 Corrie: Mr. Bird, for the request -- Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I would move that we continue the Public Hearing PP 02-030, the request for Preliminary Plat approval of 124 building lots and 12 other lots on 39.92 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for the proposed Watersong Estates by Howell-Murdoch Development Corporation, northwest corner of North Linder Road and West Ustick Road until March 25, 2003. McCandless: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded to continue the Public Hearing, the Preliminary Plat for Watersong Estates until March 25, 2003. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: See you the 25th on this one. Okay. Council, the time is 9:00. I will entertain a motion -- Bird: Mr. Mayor? Nary: Well, I was just going to say one thing before we adjourn, but I know Mr. Brundt isn't here, Mr. Thomason is, but I read this article the other day and I know the writer normally doesn't write the headlines in the Statesman and I know the purpose of the headlines is to make them read the article. It sure made me read it, because we never intended what this -- Bird: We didn't? Nary: -- to just a proposed tax increase. Bird: Is that right? Nary: That's exactly right. Bird: I thought that was the statement we were sitting up here all night saying, because that's what the headline said. Nary: Yes. That's what the headline made me think, yeah. I know Mr. Thomason doesn't write the headline, but somebody else does and I guess they should have read the article and attended the meeting, because that was not our intention - sorry he's not here tonight, but -- and, hopefully, I saw -- a gentleman had sent them an e-mail regarding some of the inaccuracies that were in the report, so, hopefully, you can correct that, but I just find it very frustrating to read headlines like that that don't reflect Mertdlan City Council Meeting February 26, 2003 Page 44 of 46 at all what our intentions were and I think we must have said it about a dozen times in the meeting. Bird: But that made you read it, though, didn't it? Nary: It certainly made me read it, but I would bet the majority of the people may not have read it, they only read the headlines. Bird: That's what they -- De Weerd: Well, it's very misfortunate that he has tried to set the tone of a committee that hadn't came in with any bias or predetermined direction. It's -- it is unfortunate. Mr. Mayor, I have one thing I would like to ask of the Council before we leave. Gary had sent us a memo on the sewer system development fee and asked if we would like to see it and comment before he sends it out to BCA. Would there be any need or shall he just go ahead and send it on? Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I was very satisfied with it. I don't know that we have need for further discussion at Pre-Council. I think maybe after we get it back from comment we may have some, but I didn't see a need to before we send it on. McCandless: I agree. Bird: Go ahead and go for it. Send it out. Did you agree with that, Mayor? Corrie: Yes, I did. I just -- I will tell him again, too. Watson: Notify me. Corrie: I have notified you, I will tell him again tomorrow. Anything else? Nary: The only other thing is I appreciate that Valley Times is here and I know Mr. Thomason writes the headlines for the articles that, then, match. Corrie: Okay. I will entertain a motion to close the regular meeting agenda for February the 25th. De Weerd: So moved. Corrie: Motion made and seconded? Nary: Second. Mertdian City Council Mooting February 25. 2003 Page 45 of 46 Corrie: Okay. All those in favor of the motion say aye. All ayes. Motion to close at 9:05 p.m. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:05 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) APPROVED: J / /& / tl3 DATE