Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000 Minutes • ~ ~cE~D June 2, 2000 JUN (p~ ~Q~06 CITY ~r~' 1~:~st;;1~IAN MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING June 6, 2000 p~111ING ~ ZONi1VQ APPLICANT G.L. Voigt /Overland, LLC ITEM NO. REQUEST Preliminary Plat of 17 building lots and 2 other lots on 107.06 acres for proposed Resolution Business Park -south of Overland Road and east of Locust Grove Road _ AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: COMMENTS See attached PZ minutes See attached memo See attached recommendations See attached Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. 1 • MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING--MAY 9 2000 The regular scheduled meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission was call to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Keith Borup. MEMBERS PRESENT: Keith Borup, Sally Norton, Kent Brown, Tom Barbeiro, Richard Hatcher. OTHERS PRESENT: David Swartley, Bruce Freckleton, Brad Hawkins Clark, Will Berg. Borup: We'd like to call to order our meeting this evening. This is a regular scheduled meeting for Planning and Zoning Commission. I'd like to go through attendance of the Commissioner's. First item on the agenda is the Consent Agenda. I would entertain a motion for approval of the Consent Agenda. Brown: Mr. Chairman I would move approval of the Consent Agenda, Items A,B and C, minutes from the March 22"d, April 3~ and April 11th meetings. Hatcher: I second the motion. Borup: All in favor. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Brown: I would like to be excused for the first 7 items. Borup: Okay. Have fun. Item number 1 -and 2 were tabled. I believe we tabled those items wanting to finalize Items 3 through 6. Would we like to skip to Items 3 through 6 and come back or would the Commissioner's like to open and vote on 1 and 2 right now. 3. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT OF 17 LOTS ON 107.06 ACRES IN PROPOSED L-O AND C-G ZONES FOR PROPOSED RESOLUTION BUSINESS PARK BY G.L. VOIGT DEVELOPMENTIOVERLAND, LLC-OVERLAND AND LOCUST GROVE ROADS: Borup: Does staff have any additional comments to make on this. It was continued for the ACHD report. We had the draft report a while back. We have the final report now. Is the applicant here and like to come forward. Do any of the Commissioner's have anything additional they'd like to ask the applicant, other than the ACRD report. Bowcutt: These items were deferred because we were awaiting Ada County Highway District Staff Report as you recall at our public hearing a month or so ago. We had not even received a draft. The staff, I think they went through about 3 versions of the draft and it did go to the highway district Commissioner's last Wednesday at their noon meeting for discussion. To bring you up to date the Commissioner's did recommend Meridian Planning ~ Zoning Commission { May 9, 2000 Page 2 • approval of all the projects involved. They instructed their staff to get with us and the City of Meridian and the school district and see what can be done to exhilarate the upgrade of Overland Road between Locust Grove and Eagle Road. At this point of time, it is on their 2004 plan. They realize that they could have an operational high school as early as 2002. That did concern them. They have also required multiple improvements of my client, which includes constructing a 3~d lane from the east end of our property up to the intersection of Locust Grove and then south on Locust Grove to our southerly boundary. On of the comments that was made by the Commission, that type of improvement can run anywhere from $125 to $175 thousand dollars. If we go in and we construct that 3~d lane and then they come in 6, 12, 18 months later and tear it all out to build their five lane, it makes more sense that we exhilarate the 5 lane and put those monies to use building or helping to construct the 5 lane. Therefore, it would save some public funds. The things that I want to bring to your attention that they placed upon this project, they have asked us to contribute 25% of a signal at the intersection of Locust Grove and Overland. The intersection operates at a level of service A at this time, however, the left hand turn lane operates at a level of service F. According to ACHD's traffic counts the counts at this time do not warrant signalization. In the future they realize they will need a signal there. They understand that the retail that we propose at that corner is down the road is not one of the first 3 or 4 phases that is going to be further down the road then that. Probably co-insiding with some type of a Locust Grove overpass. They accept the fact that a light is necessary, but state they will construct that light when it is warranted. Secondly, they have asked us to contribute $112,500 which would be 75% of the light at our new Millenium Way Overland intersection which is the collector roadway for the high school. That 75% does include the high school or the school district share. My conversations with the school district, they have indicated that they will pay whatever proportionate share the highway district deems is attributed to their traffic volume. There is approximately 5000 trips a day through Millenium Way. Of those 5,000, 3,000 will be from going to and from the high school site. They've asked us to contribute $52;800 dollars to a trust fund for sidewalk along Overland Road. We asked them to allow us to construct the sidewalk versus trust funding for it. The policy of the City of Meridian is they would like to see those sidewalks go in as soon as possible. Their concern was if we placed the sidewalk in at the edge of the new right of way that it could be torn out when the road is rebuilt. Our suggestion was we'll take the sidewalk and meander within our 30 foot landscaped area. Therefore, we will be outside the right of way and would not require any modification. The Commission seemed to believe that's a viable option. They asked staff to get with us and discuss it. We will be building decel lanes at the intersection. They ok'ed all of our approaches on Overland Road. They asked us to upgrade our collector. We shoed a 41 foot collector roadway section for Millenium Way. They indicated they'd like that to be 46 foot section. My client agreed to that. They asked us to provide adequate stacking room for any of the approaches as they intercept with Millenium Way. The only major revision was on Locust Grove. We have this approach right here. They have asked us to move this to offset it from this roadway here to Meridian Planning ~ Zoning Commission May 9, 2000 Page 3 increase that distance of offset. We will shift this building this direction and then shift this to the south and then put parking in there. Our offsets from all of the major intersections for the signal will be installed in the future are acceptable. This was the only thing of significance. This is a multi phased project and the highway district commission liked this-the idea of a long term project. The first phase will be the ice hockey facility. The second phase would consist of 140 units of the total 200 apartments, 2001. The seminary will go in whatever time the high school goes in. All of this is down the road. Your staff placed a limitation on the conditional use permit for the apartments-40 units in the first phase. I brought that up with Ada County Highway District and they said that doesn't make any sense. That is one of the lowest traffic generators on the site. Also, you can't afford to pay all of these trust funds and make all the improvements if you can't begin the projects. 40 units is not acceptable. My clients indicate they can not function with 40 units. Ada County Highway District did look at impact fees generated by this project. The school district is exempt from impact fees but all of the uses on the property would be subject. The multi family project would pay $160,000 in impact fees. The retail space would generate over one million dollars. That brings you up to date. Barbeiro: Becky is Millenium Drive to be placed as part of the first phase. Bowcutt: Yes sir. The first phase we are constructing all of the public roadway systems. We'll built Nlillenium Way and put all the sewer, water, 3 phase power and then build this public street here, the rotary and this public street here. We have all ready designed all of those roadways. Barbeiro: Can you remind me of what kind of meetings you've had with the school district in regards to Millenium Drive, the students that will use that and the roadway being the primary road for all of the construction at the high school. Bowcutt: They will be coming up and down that roadway. It will have to be there before they can pull their permit. The highway district has indicated they want to focus all of the high school traffic where that signal is going to be constructed. Barbeiro: As I recall, the conditional use permit for the high school won't be available until the signal is operational. Bowcutt: According to your planning staff the high school does not require a conditional use permit in their R-4 zone. They will just be submitting for building permit. That is why the highway district imposed the 75% of that light-the $112,000 because they would not see that school application come through. All of my users will be conditional use applications. That was the other thing that they liked. Norton: According to the Ada County Highway District we received the draft report and then the final report sometime today. The difference between the two is that instead of Meridian Planning ~ Zoning Commission May 9, 2000 Page 4 paying the $52,000 for the sidewalk on Overland, you will put in the sidewalk in your landscape area. Is that correct? Bowcutt: That's what we requested: Norton: You started to talk about not doing the center lane improvement on Overland in order for Overland to be widened to 5 lanes earlier. Would you go through what you said on that. Bowcutt: In the staff report approved by the Commission it mandates that we construct a 3~d center turn lane for the entire length of our property. It would be from our perimeter to the intersection and then down to our southern boundary here. Three lane on Overland and Locust Grove. Norton: How close is your far east property to Eagle Road? Bowcutt: This is one half mile. In our staff report we are required to construct that. The issue we brought up with the commission is we would like to see the improvements accelerated. We don't want to see the third lane wasted. The elevations will all change. Norton: Did you get any idea how far up the priority list it was going to be moved? Bowcutt: The staff and I had at least four discussions. They indicated that their superiors would not make a decision. We would have to take our plea to the commission and that is what we did. They instructed their staff, you need to figure out a solution and now. With that school coming in 2002, I would anticipate them trying to accelerate it two years-If I had to guess. Norton: Are you under the understanding that that road will be five lanes by the time school goes in 2002. Bowcutt: That is what I hope and I think the commission wants their staff to figure out how to do that. Borup: At this point, something could be worked out that's the way to go. If it can't be worked out then the 3 lanes are going in. Bowcutt: We will end up building the third lane. Those requirements are set down. I did forget to mention, they are going to add additional turn lanes at the Eagle Road Overland intersection and that work should begin in a few months and they indicated they are going to get started on the Meridian Road Overland intersection for that improvement. Borup: Before we proceed I'd like a show of hands how many people are here to testify on this application. We have received public testimony over the last three months so Nteridian Planning a~ Zoning Commission May 9, 2000 Page 5 what we'd be open for is anything pertaining to the ACHD report we will be glad to take any testimony on. Bertell: Steve Bertell. I live at 2535 S. Velvet Falls Way. Mr. chairman and members of the commission, at this time I would like to present to the board a total of 725 signatures from residents from all the impacted Subdivisions, all respectfully asking the commission to at least delay the approval of this development until such a time as Overland and Locust Grove Roads are widened. Those who have signed the petitions are frustrated over having to drive in all ready heavily trafficked roadway on a daily basis. We agree with the ACHD impact analysis statement that the findings of the development would only intensify the all ready major traffic problems in this area. In fact, I parked at the intersection of Overland and Locust Grove the afternoon of March 23~d from 3 PM until 6 PM and I counted 3137 vehicles using that intersection, either crossing or turning from one street to another. This coincides with the ACHD report findings of approximately 11,422 vehicles using Overland Road on a daily basis. This is existing traffic. Also, during that 3 hour period, I witnessed one rear ender accident, one near accident and my wife and I came upon another accident on Overland Road on April 10~h at 5:50 PM. The traffic on these roads will easily double if not triple as a result of this development. The Ada County Highway District has no plans to widen Overland until 2004 since it is in their 5 year plan. No plans to widen Locust Grove south of Overland until sometime outside the 2005 year plan. No plans to install a traffic light there until it is warranted. I don't know what the definition of warranted is. The developer stated they wanted to start the major ice hockey and sports arena this year pending bond approval. The high school could open as early as fall 2002. Don't misunderstand us. We are not opposed to this development, but what we are saying is that we are requesting that Overland and Locust Grove be widened to accommodate the dramatic traffic increase that this proposal would create. If there is a traffic mishap on the freeway, Overland Road immediately backs up. If emergency vehicle needed to get to one of our Subdivisions, it would be difficult at best for that vehicle to get through. Let's not make Overland and Locust Grove roads another fiasco like the Curtis Road extension was. At least consider the opinions of the 725 residents as well as all of us who live in the 6 impacted Subdivisions. Borup: You feel that the road would be improved on a faster time frame without the million dollars that this project would contribute toward the roads. Bertell: I am a lay man and don't know where the money would come from. We are concerned about- Borup: We are lay men too (Inaudible) and it is not going to come from anywhere other than this type of thing. So, the fastest way to get Overland approved, is to get the money. Since this has been carrying on for several months, we had quite a number of staff recommendations on this project. Do we need a refresher on that. We know staffs recommendation is. I am thinking I mean the applicant either agrees with them or -she mentioned one in her report, so I think I'd like to get Becky back 11p. You had Meridian Planning aid Zoning Commission May 9, 2000 Page 6 mentioned one item as far as staff recommendation on number of apartment units. We've got your response to all of staff comments. That was the only one that stuck out. Were there any others? That was under the CUP, Item number 2 on your response. Bowcutt: The annexation and zoning application, we were in agreement. preliminary plat, I highlighted item 8. The applicant intends to provide landscape easements along Locust Grove and Overland Roads. An association will be formed to govern perimeter landscaping. We ask that that be an easement. I believe that staff had a discussion about it being a separate lot. Borup: Staffs concern was who will maintain it. Bowcutt: At a minimum the landscape buffer shall be placed within a permanent landscape easement designated such on the plat. We would like that to be designated as an easement on the plat and provide an association for maintenance. Item 8, preliminary plat requirements. Item 10, we agreed to pipe the Hunter Lateral as requested by staff. We ask that we be allowed to provide a western fence along the western side of the apartments. Staff made a statement they prefer that it be unfenced if we pipe the lateral. Clarification on Item 13. We have a little access road. It was not intended to be a private drive. It is an access way providing joint access to those buildings. We just want to clarify that our intention was not to construct curb gutter or sidewalk there because it is an alley access. Under the PUD, I highlighted Item 4. We did not provide any RV storage, parking areas for the multi family. Those uses will be prohibited. Only personal cars will be allowed. We do not propose a maintenance building at this site. All maintenance will be contracted out with a maintenance company. We disagreed on Item 7 concerning the parking requirements. Staff asked for 2.3 spaces per dwelling unit. The ordinance mandates 2. I know of no multi family application where staff imposed 2.3. I went to another complex that has garages called the Renascence next to Chinden and Eagle Road. We did that civil engineering for that site. That one has garages and I noticed that people who have two cars but have a single garage, their spouse parked in front of the garage. I think what staffs intention for additional parking was for guests or something like that. Our contention is, it is not necessary with our type of design we have more than what we would ever need in parking. For the Ice Rink, I think there was a difference of eight spaces. Mr. McKeegan got up to discuss that stating that we have substantial amount of overflow parking to the north and there will be very few events where you would find that all parking spaces would be completely utilized. His contention was that adequate parking was provided. Obviously we were opposed to the limitation-it was the limitation of 30 units in the first phase of the apartments. We had asked for the first phase to consist of 140. For the record and for those people in the audience that were not here at the last hearing, we are asking for conceptual approval of this planned unit development, but we are only asking for site specific approval for the ice arena and the 200 unit apartments. All the other users with the exception of the high school will have to come back before the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council. All surrounding properties within 300 feet will be notified. Legal notice will be put in the paper. Each user will have Nteridian Planning a~Zoning Commission Ntay 9, 2000 Page 7 to come back before this body and go through this process again. That is one factor that should be taken into consideration as far as what improvements are done out on these roadway systems when the timing of these lights and so forth. If a user comes in say a year and a half from now, and he will generate a substantial amount of traffic, at that point of time if those improvements aren't out there to support that development, I would anticipate commission having a difficult time of proving it. We've got to start somewhere and we've got to get that collector roadway and this other network of roadways and utilities to provide access to the high school. The only way we can afford to do it is to take these first couple phases and move forward. Borup: Thank you. Any questions from the commission? Barbeiro: We can ask staff questions as a whole or individually. The one that catches my eye right now is the storage areas because that is a city ordinance. Other then that, if you wanted to go down the line with some of the things that Becky disagreed with. Hawkins Clark: Commissioner Barbeiro, members of the Commission the ordinance requirement for storage areas has typically been something that if the developer makes a commitment we have waived at this level. It is not necessarily required a variance. It really particularly when garages are provided. It is something we look favorable at. Borup: At this particular site there is a proposed mini storage unit down the street. Barbeiro: How about the maintenance building. Hawkins Clark: I think when the covenants, correct me Becky if they are not, but typically we -they are going to contract out. That is not ordinance required. I think it is a recommendation. We are fine with that. On the parking issue mainly we were pointing out that the fact that on Valeri Heights no tandem parking was allowed. If your going to allow it here, we just mainly wanted to raise the attention. We certainly aren't looking for more asphalt. I think we concur with the 460 number for required parking. The cross access issue was important. Obviously we'd ask for a revised preliminary plat that shows that, that shows the new Locust Grove Driveways to be submitted for the City Council-prior to the City Council so we can review the revised preliminary plat that reflects these changes. Barbeiro: Becky, in our last meeting, you did tell us that you were going to have a cross access over the Hunter Lateral, is that correct. Bowcutt: Yes, I think our sketched out we were going to make an inter connection between those two buildings and just north of the daycare facility into that little rotary. We make on making that revision and getting that to staff prior to the City Council. Meridian Planning a~ Zoning Commission • May 9, 2000 Page 8 Barbeiro: Brad the recommendation regarding landscape buffers. 25 versus 30 and staff would prefer to have a separate lot where the developer would prefer to have an easement. Comment on that please. Hawkins Clark: This issue comes up frequently. It is mainly our concern is the consistency of appearance for principle arterials like what Overland is going to be. I think in this case with the easement going to be maintained the full buffer distance by a single entity, that's fine. Our main issue is when you have single, multiple single lots that all have a easement, each of them can take care of that landscape however they want. Barbeiro: Becky, the property will remain under one ownership, is that correct. Bowcutt: No sir. When you plat it then it would be eligible to sell off the lots to separate owners. What we propose to do is place landscape easements on the plat and then we will have to have covenants, obviously governing the uses on these lots and so forth. On these covenants it would stipulate like lot owner dues. They would not be homeowners association dues, but lot owner dues which would provide for the maintenance of all of the landscaping. It is all maintained the same. We are going to provide a landscape plan so all of it would be the same. You would not end up with a hodge podge. That is not our intention. Barbeiro: Your new plan will account. for 7 handicapped spots at the arena. Bowcutt: Yes sir. Mr. McKeegan when on the record last time that they would add those. Barbeiro: Brad, when we talked about the 30 dwelling units for the apartments, Becky's note was that ACHD thought that the apartments would be one of the lower traffic count generators. Can you comment on that. Hawkins Clark: It was a bad day. Staff has re-thought that. Those are national transportation engineer figures that seem to have been accounted for. This is the only - there are only two projects that are coming in right now and certainly when you look at traffic generation you can't really take into account projects that aren't before this commission. Your really only have two projects that are before you and to put some controls on-your certainly not going to put a control on the ice arena. They are going to have events and that will draw-I think the apartment complexes-we did talk about if they are doing the 140 previously they had outlined a phase one which was more or less the northwest portion of their site B there and it didn't provide for any vehicular access out of that phase one out onto Millenium Way. Every one of those 140 was funneling out through the driveway onto Overland at the west end and not Millenium Way which is the collector. I think we would point out that we would like to see some kind of vehicular access in phase one over to Millenium Way. Meridian Planning ~ Zoning Commission May 9, 2000 Page 9 Bowcutt: I think the applicant indicated at the last hearing he would be willing to revise what they had proposed as their first 140 units because you felt or this commission felt it was critical that they intersect with Millenium Way. So their will be an access. We will go on the record with the first phase will intersect with Millenium Way by that vehicular connection. Barbeiro: The final point was, the gates we discussed in the last one to prevent cross tracking through the residential from the high school over to Locust Grove, the developer suggested putting gates in. Is that something that will be a final item for you or is it still up in the air. Bowcutt: I think they are still under the opinion that they would prefer some type of gates. Borup: This was a gate at which point? Barbeiro: There was to be a gate over the Hunter Lateral crossing to prevent the kids from crossing through the apartments and the developer also considered putting a gate into the entrance off of Overland and just past the entrance off of Millenium Way. I believe there were three gates. Is that correct. Bowcutt: Yes, that was my understanding. We would have to have approval from your fire department to install those. The location would also have to be approved by Ada County Highway District because they want to make sure you have adequate stacking room. Borup: Has that been discussed with ACRD staff? Bowcutt: It was brought up briefly and their comment was we have to have adequate stacking room. They allow you to do it within a private roadway network as long as you have it 50 or 75 feet into the property. Maybe its 100, I can't remember. The last one I had was a mini storage. They don't want 3 or 4 cars turning into the site and then waiting for the gate and sticking out into the roadway. I would recommend that the commission put their subject to Ada County Highway District and fire department approval. Borup: The only other comment I think staff was on the fence -I don't think the staff comments addressed that either way, or did they. (Inaudible)privacy fence (inaudible). There is no concern there is there. Hawkins Clark: No. Norton: I have a question for staff. At our last public hearing I had a question about gates, but has been addressed. My notes say signage of gates would be worked out with staff. Has signage been addressed. Meridian Planning a~Zoning Commission May 9, 2000 Page 10 Hawkins Clark: signage of the gates -of the project. They did have a written response on signage from I believe Idaho Electric Signs and then McKeegan responded for signage on the ice arena in writing. That should be in the packets. Bowcutt: I think we did have a discussion because they had some types of lights on the side of building. Norton: That was addressed on the ice arena, but for the apartment complex- Bowcutt: I did provide some specifications on signage. I believe it was a monument type sign. END OF SIDE ONE Bowcutt: I'll have to check my packet. I believe it was a monument sign. That is what staff has proposed. Borup: I think we'd be comfortable that it wouldn't be anything difference than a monument sign. Anything else. You checking or are you done Becky. Oh. Any final. comments from staff. Hawkins Clark: Commissioner I think the main concern-1 don't know that there is an emergency vehicular access issue has been resolved to our satisfaction. With the school site-schools are allowed in the R-4 without any public hearings. They can just come in when they get this approved and not have any public hearings on the school site and really this is the opportunity to deal with the school site even though the majority of this- Borup: You taking about a secondary access. Hawkins Clark: Yes. What did they say potentially 1800 students or something. We certainly understand and want to support the protecting these neighborhoods from cross through traffic from the school, but there is a stub street here on the west boundary of the site and then there is a stub street here immediately next to the future park site, which would be here. Whether or not those are extended into the site or how that would work, I guess our main issue or concern is that it be dealt with and maybe it can be dealt with at Council level, but somehow there'd be another access into this 55 acre school site other than just Millenium Way, particularly for emergency vehicles. Borup: Have you discussed it to what point. Would the emergency break away ballards or something like that. Hawkins Clark: Right. I don't believe the fire department has really specifically addressed it. Meridian Planning a~Zoning Commission May 9, 2000 Page 11 Barbeiro: Brad, we have two opportunities to add emergency access. Is this where the seminary is going? Hawkins Clark: No. Here, right. Barbeiro: With the new LDS church, is there any opportunity to have a emergency access straight through their properly or off of this road here as that roads appears to abut the property of the high school. Hawkins Clark: Commissioner, the LDS church is being built. It is designed. The site is under construction. I don't think there is any opportunity there. Borup: Sounds like here and here are the two stub streets. I don't think the intention is to have a traffic flow through there. Break away emergency ballard would let the fire trucks through and isn't that staffs concern. Do we know where this building maybe sited. Bowcutt: I can answer that question. The only information we received from the school district is that the school would most likely sit back in this location here up against this Hunter Lateral. Obviously the parking lots and field would be back here. There is two existing public streets right here coming into Raven Hills and another one here in Los Alamitos. It is the highway districts intention that those not be connected to the site vehicularly for like student use but be connected for pedestrian bicycle and possibly emergency access. I would assume something like ballards or maybe what they propose there. It depends on the site configuration. I stopped at Mr. Carberry's office today to see if I could obtain a copy of their draft site plan. He indicated that he does not have a copy of it. You got one. He said I don't have one, in fact I think they are still working on it. Your going to have to talk to Skyler at Hummel Architects. I said it would be nice Jim if I could see it to make sure your needs are met as far as secondary emergency access. Until we see where those circulation patterns of the school are located, we don't know what to do. Borup: Maybe at this point we just need to put some requirements in there and let them design around it. Bowcutt: Our agreement with the school district states that we...the seller acknowledges that the above described street, which is our Millenium Way, shall be the sole access route to the school which buyer intends to construct on the premises other than the emergency access here and after set forth. So, (inaudible) if we it we'd want an emergency access through you. Borup: So hereinafter set forth they are not specified. Meridian Planning a~Zoning Commission May 9, 2000 Page 12 Bowcutt: Yeah, it was emergency vehicle access if required. In order to meet uniform fire code. (Inaudible) got a lot of parking lot along here, if they need it and if that is a adequate location, then it makes sense that we do have a secondary emergency access. It would all depend on their site plan and their needs. Borup: What are saying would be secondary. Bowcutt: If you look at- Borup: Okay, the access is still from Millenium right? Bowcutt: Yes sir. Borup: So from Millenium Drive is blocked there is no secondary access. Bowcutt: This is their primary vehicular access. There is landscaping and parking areas- Borup: Okay, your saying they could come down here through the parking lot into the site. Bowcutt: Exactly. So if the school says based on our configuration we need some emergency vehicle access here or here or even link into this drive that wraps around here. That would be an option. If its needed. I have not seen the site plan. Have you seen it. You got a copy of it. Barbeiro: It was the first draft which was two months ago. Bowcutt: Oh. He said they are still working on it. I am going to try to obtain a copy hopefully before we go to the council because I'd like them to see that and I think it would be beneficial if we know what it looks like. Borup: Sounds like the mood of the City and probably the Commissioner's is that there needs to be some type of emergency secondary access. Not a vehicle access but just emergency. Barbeiro: So when building our recommendation we would include additional emergency access through this site to be determined later. Or more specific. Borup: I don't know that we need to be more specific as long as there is another access. Hatcher: One thing to take into consideration when we are discussing emergency access of the future high school site is as Becky has pointed out, if we were to bring in a second emergency access in the approximate location of the ice hockey arena or Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission May 9, 2000 Page 13 possibly at the apartments, first of all the apartments are a congested meandering parking lot. There is no primary means of traffic, just a private roadway system. I don't think that is a valid option. Second, bringing a secondary emergency access in and around the ice skating rink I don't think is a valid option either for the sample fact that if you have a event occurring your going to have high traffic volume there. Playing devil's advocate we have an event at the school that requires emergency vehicles and we have the ice rink letting out. Millenium and all those roads are going to be plugged. When considering an emergency access to the high school, I think we should look at the options of doing emergency break away ballards down at Raven the Subdivision down below with the public road. Borup: What is the purpose of the secondary emergency access. Hatcher: If the fire truck can't get to - Borup: And that would be because of heavy traffic or because of some accident blocking the entire roadway. I assume it would be something blocking the entire roadway and then they would need another access. Hatcher: That is correct and that is why I am saying if we (inaudible) by the ice rink, they are too close together. Borup: Your saying something would be blocking both roads. Hatcher: I am saying if an event at the ice rink was to let out- Borup: That's just heavy traffic. That's not necessarily blocking - Hatcher: Hey, we've all been there. We know what it can really be like. One all ready looks like it is all ready a culdesac if I'm not mistaken. One of the two southern ones- we put the condition on the school district now and let them design accordingly and be done with it. Barbeiro: Couldn't we have a primary and a secondary. Hatcher: You would. Millenium would be your primary. We are talking about the secondary right now. I don't think this site is big enough to need three accesses. Borup: Okay, one of you guys had a motion earlier. Hatcher: I was trying to make a motion to close the public hearing. Norton: I second the motion. Borup: All in favor. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission May 9, 2000 Page 14 MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Barbeiro: Which hearing did we just close. Borup: Technically we closed- Hatcher: Can we close all of them, one through six. Borup: Technically we closed 3, cause that is the only one we opened. I think all the testimony we received was on all the applications, so - Hatcher: Mr. Chairman, I motion that we close the public hearing for Item 4,5,and 6. Borup: Let me open it. Open public hearing for Item number 4. Hatcher: I motion that we close it. Norton: I second it. Borup: All in favor. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Borup: I'd like to open Item number 5. Hatcher: I motion that we close it. Norton: I second it. Borup: All in favor. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Borup: I'd like to open Item number 6. Hatcher: I motion that we close that. Norton: I second that. Borup: All in favor. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Borup: Would you like to handle Items 1 and 2 and then go on to the others. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission May 9, 2000 Page 15 Barbeiro: Can we do both of them at the same time. Borup: They are both two separate items, but get those two out of the way and then get into the other-or those two have all ready been closed, so- Barbeiro: If there is no discussion, I have a motion. I motion that we recommend to City Council request for annexation and zoning of 16.119 acres from RT to CG for proposed Resolution Business Park by G.L. Voigt Development to include staff comments. Hatcher: I second the motion. Borup: Any discussion. Norton: I have discussion. I believe we discussed the CG change to CN change. I'd like to make a friendly amendment to that motion that the CG be amended. Barbeiro: Thank you Commissioner Norton, you are correct and I wish to amend that to be a CN. Borup: Any other discussion. All in favor. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Borup: Item number 2. Barbeiro: Mr. Chairman, I wish to recommend approval to City Council request for rezone of 37.64 acres from R-4 to L-O for proposed Resolution Business Park by G.L. Voigt Development with staff comments. Hatcher: Second the motion. Borup: Any discussion. All in favor. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Borup: We have four more items. Again, comments have been concerning all of them. We have two items on the preliminary plat. No one item, sorry. Barbeiro: The discussion between myself and Commissioner Hatcher has to do with- we would like-here's what we're differing. I would like to see a development agreement between ACRD and the developer prior to any certificate of occupancy of any building. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission May 9, 2000 Page 16 Hatcher: What I was trying to go for on a condition of approval from this board or recommended condition of approval to City Council would be that no certificate of occupancy would be issued to any of the proposed developments of this project until Overland Road improvements have been instructed. If that means the ice rink waits until 2002 or 2003, so be it. Barbeiro: You want a 5 lane road before anything opened. That is going to put a crimp in the developer, but I think if we had a development agreement with ACRD and the developer to have 5 lanes prior to fall 2002 when the high school opened, seeing how the development would be phased, I believe that would be correct and proper with this development. I would hate to see the development held back because the 5 lanes wasn't open for then as a condition they have to ensure that it is at least 3 lanes. If they are going to go out and do 3 lanes then ACHD is going to come in tear it out. That seems like a tremendous waste of public funds. Hatcher: Absolutely. If it boils down to working things out with ACRD. Borup: Oh it does and I agree with what your saying there, but your putting a requirement on the developer that they got no control over. Barbeiro: If we have a development agreement, that is something the developer and ACHD- Borup: ACRD don't do development agreements specifically do they. Just a written agreement. Hatcher: Putting money into a slush fund for future improvement on this project is not acceptable in my opinion. That is exactly what ACHD will do. I have no opposition of the project. In fact it is a wonderful project. Overland Road can not handle any capacity that this project would generate without the required improvements. Barbeiro: So ACHD does not do development agreements so this- Borup: I don't know if that is the terminology they use. I am not sure either way. I just have not heard that used before. Hatcher: Bruce can you comment on how ACHD typically has been dealing with those issues. Freckleton: Commissioner Hatcher and members of the commission Becky was just indicating that she is aware of one that they have done with Touchmark. I know they do non-development agreements when you have a plat and your doing it in phases if you want to record the entire plat without bonding or building the other phase. That is something we would have to address with them. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission May 9, 2000 Page 17 Barbeiro: What would staffs recommendations be to insure that somehow we have an agreement amongst all the parties that this is going to be 5 lanes prior to a large portion of occupancy. I do not want to put a high school there without a five lane road. Hatcher: I personally don't want to stop the project. I don't want to stop construction of any of the projects on the site, but I don't want to see any of them operable until the road is done. Freckfeton: My personal opinion would be unless we've got it nailed down when these things are going to happen, I would not even issue the building permit. Your looking at a can of worms if you issue a building permit and hold up occupancy without some dates being set. Hatcher: Okay so the building permit will not be issued until some sort of agreement is been reached without Ada County so that their construction schedule coincides with the projects construction schedule as deemed by the time line we are discussing. Basically what that does-I would say put one hand behind the developers back. Now we are putting both hands behind with the building permit because there is a lot of negotiations that have to go on between the developer and ACRD to meet these requirements. Barbeiro: P~1r. Chairman wa~ld it be o. ~:, ~,r assistance to re-open the public hearing and get some comments from the developer on this. Hatcher: I don't think it is going to help. Borup: Have you got your thoughts together on what it is that you maybe recommending. Barbeiro: Well, now that I know there really is no such thing as a development with ACRD and my other concerns are that with the new high school, this would also. stop any issuance of a building permit for a new high school to be built which would cause great problems with the school bond election coming up because of the state law requiring the school to allocate the funds for and spend the funds any certain time frame. If they can not get a building permit that may cause problems with the school bonding. Hatcher: Keep in mind as well as it was brought up by staff, school district does not need public hearing. As soon as phase one is done and Millenium Drive is built, that high school can go up. We have no control over that, so any conditions as of brought of that includes traffic, any conditions we want to impose on that high school have to be done during phase one. You could have 5000 high school kids going to high school on a 2 or 3 lane road. Borup: Do any Commissioner's remember what the going to the 3 lanes what that did to the service and what the road could handle. I am not finding that. Do you remember tileridian Planning and Zoning Commission May 9, 2000 ~, Page 18 that Brad at all. What capacity was that going to add. Where I was going or at least the ACRD report is saying that the present configuration on Overland can handle a little less than 3000 additional vehicles. In the same paragraph they are saying that it would add 6. They are over 3000 short without -that's with the current road. I am not sure what the 3 lane would add to that capacity. I don't think it adds a lot of vehicle capacity. It will alleviate congestion. Hatcher: The third lane is a turning lane so it's going to allow people to stack up so that they won't be able to turn left because of on coming traffic. Borup: ACHD's statement is that a traffic signal is not warranted yet because traffic volumes are low enough. Barbeiro: That's Locust Grove and Overland, not Millenium. Borup: No, the side driveway is on Overland. I don't think they are taking the school into consideration on any of these figures. That adds a whole different aspect of it. Barbeiro: I need your assistance on this so we don't shut down the developer, we don't shut down the high school but we insure that there is a five lane road. Something that we don't seem to have a lot of control over. Borup: It is in the hand of ACHC. I don't have an answer to that. I think we can make some recommendations and let City Council icok at it. Hatcher: The way we would want to word it to City Council would be that we recommend approval pending - Barbeiro: ACHD's commitment to widen that road. Hatcher: Commitment is not good enough. It has to be in writing. Barbeiro: Well, can the City work into a development agreement with ACHD as opposed to the developer. Hatcher: I don't think you want to bring the city into this. Borup: Why would the city want to. Barbeiro: We'd have a bigger gun than the developer does. Borup: To do what. Hatcher: We do? Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission May 9, 2000 Page 19 Barbeiro: Sounded good. Borup: Lets go ahead. Lets get a recommendation drafted and put the conditions on you'd like to and --. At this point I assume your going to incorporate staff comments. Barbeiro: I have some comments within those too. Mr. Chairman, I move that we recommend approval to City Council request for preliminary plat of 17 lots on 107.06 acres in proposed L-O zone and C-N zones for proposed Resolution Business Park by G.L. Voigt Development to include staff comments making note of Item 8 on page 6 that we would recommend an easement as opposed to a separately platted buffer- Swartley: Mr. Chairman, Mr. Barbeiro what are you trying to do an easement as opposed to a buffer? Barbeiro: As I read it, the staff wanted to have a separate common lot as opposed to an easement. Swartley: Oh okay. I understand. Barbeiro: That Item number 10 that applicant will go ahead and build a privacy fence, Item number 11, the applicant will built a vehicular access over the Hunter Lateral between site 6 and site A, included in that the developer will put a operable gate there with cooperation of the Meridian Fire Department to prevent student crossing to get over to Locust Grove. Help me out with number 12. The applicant wanted a minimum of 35 foot landscape buffer. We are going to allow them to put a meandering sidewalk as opposed to a sidewalk right up to the easement. Page 8, item 7 allowing them to- Swartley: Mr. Barbeiro could you repeat the numbers 10 and 11 for me please. Barbeiro: Number 10 were we-the developer build the privacy fence. Number 11 in his cross access between site B and site A we put an emergency gate or a gate between the two with the cooperation of the Meridian Fire Department. This is all subject to the recommendation of ACHD and the Meridian Fire Department. Borup: That was on the motion. Hatcher: Road improvements, refresh my memory. We goi^a to tack that onto the preliminary plat or conditional use permit. Borup: I thought you were doing it on the conditional use permit. I think they lumped it all together. The traffic is going to be generated by the conditional use permit project not by the plat. Hatcher: Okay, lets see if I got this right. Meridian Planning a~Zoning Commission May 9, 2000 Page 20 Borup: ACHD's comments addressed everything all together. They combined all their comments as a project as a whole. Hatcher: The last outstanding issue I wanted to add to Commissioner Barbeiro's motion is that a written agreement between the developer and ACRD that coordinates and synchronizes construction completion of a 5 lane Overland improvement prior to the completion of phase one occupancy. The agreement be submitted to the City of Meridian prior to the issuance of a building permit. Norton: I would like to add to that motion that a revised preliminary plat to reflect the changes that have been discussed be submitted to the city prior to the City Council meeting. Borup: I think that was in the staff comments all ready. Hatcher: So you made the motion, we amended it so your going to have to second it. Barbeiro: To include their comments from Commissioner's Hatcher and Norton in the motion. Norton: I'll Second. Borup: Any other discussion. Seeing none, all in favor. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Barbeiro: I wish to recommend approval to City Council request for conditional use permit for proposed planned commercial development consisting of multi family commercial, and LDS seminary in proposed L-0 and C-N zoning by G.L. Voigt Development to incorporate all of our notes from Item number 3. Borup: This was a conceptual concept that was made mention earlier. This is a conceptual approval of the project as a whole. Barbeiro: And to include that page 10, item 11 storage areas that we waive the requirement for storage areas, page 10 item 12 that we waive the requirement for a maintenance building. Borup: Actually that should come under item 5. Barbeiro: Thank you Mr. Chairman. You are correct. (Inaudible) make the recommendation for approval for incorporating all the comments from Item number 3. Hatcher: I will second that. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission May 9, 2000 ~ • Page 21 Borup: All in favor. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Borup: Okay now item number 5 which is the conditional use permit for the apartment complex. Barbeiro: I wish to recommend approval to City Council request for conditional use permit for proposed 200 unit luxury apartment complex to be zoned L-0 for proposed Resolution Business Park by Desert West Properties, LLC to include all comments from Item 3 and Item 4 and from page 10 item 11 the storage areas waiving the requirement for storage areas, page 10 item 12 waiving the requirement for a maintenance building, page 11 CP apartment complex, item number 2 where staff recommends a number of units constructed in phase one be limited to a maximum of 30, make that a maximum of 140. Hatcher: I second the motion. Borup: All in favor. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Barbeiro: Mr. Chairman I wish to recommend approval to City Council request for conditional use permit for an ice arena consisting of office, pro shop, fitness center, restaurant, locker rooms, equipment storage and arenas zoned L-O by Pat McKeegan to incorporate staff comments and comments from Item 3,4, and 5. Hatcher: Before this last issue is voted on, the preliminary plat did we property address the secondary emergency access to the high school. Borup: No we didn't. We spend time talking about it and then did not get it in the motion. We need to address that. We need to go back and amend the motion. Norton: I second the motion on number 6. Borup: All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Barbeiro: Mr. Chairman, I wish to return to item number 3, the preliminary plat for the 1.7 lots and make an amendment to include the or note the developer will work in conjunction with the school district and arrange a secondary emergency access through their property apart from the primary access on Millenium Drive. Borup: Do you want to be more specific. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission May 9, 2000 Page 22 Hatcher: I think you want to be more specific in location. What I just heard you say is a second emergency access through the current development. I would prefer to have a second emergency access through break away bollards down at Raven Hill. Borup: The road is all ready there. The stub street is there. It is all ready dead ended. Hatcher: It is a stub street. You'd have to dead end it with emergency bollards. Barbeiro: Is the school property also part- Borup: That is a separate lot and they will not be coming before us for the school property. Hatcher: It is not part of phase one but it is part of this development. Barbeiro: I would concur. We have a secondary access from the south through one of the two roads that are coming in. Borup: Emergency break away bollards not direct vehicle access. I think that sounds consistent with ACHD wants also. The no vehicle access is consistent. We need a whole site. Hatcher: You have the adjacent Subdivisions. Borup: What do you want, street names. There is only two streets to choose from. Two out of the two. Go over and talk to staff. Let them choose a street and it not come from the north. Bruce, do you have any idea how man times in the last five years the fire department has ever gone through the break away bollard. Okay that's what I felt. Did you hear that comment Commissioner's? Commissioner's: No. Borup: As far as Bruce has understand it the fire department has never had to use emergency access and the break away bollards. I am saying it needs to be there, but its not going to be a traffic issue. Hatcher: The one street we are talking about is East Blue Tick Street. The other road appears to be South Red Cloud Avenue. Borup: The reason I asked that question maybe for anyone living in those areas, the emergency access not be a traffic-it hasn't happened yet in this town, but like anything it is an emergency. It is there for emergency, so its there. Brad did you have some input. The amended motion was to state a southern emergency access. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission May 9, 2000 ~ i Page 23 Barbeiro: A southern emergency access with break away bollards and not regular traffic. Borup: No specific street? Hatcher: No specific streets required. Borup: So, if they can come up with another street, that's fine. Barbeiro: Before we. make the final vote, lets see if staff has anything. Borup: The motion that is in effect now is that there be an emergency access from one of the southern streets, not from the northern. We did not specify beyond that. Did you have anything to add. Hawkins Clark: Commissioner just as a suggestion that was provided which has not been considered. As far as emergency there is here on Locust Grove, as I understand the goal of your discussion as a Commission is to help get emergency access so that Overland is not the only way. Another one on Locust. One suggestion is to provide on the southern portion emergency ingress egress here on the southern portion north of this LDS church that is being built between the retail and the daycare which does access the high school site. Borup: So, that could be a third option. Hawkins Clark: Could be in terms of accessibility and response time for EMS, police, fire. Certainly an argument can be made for greater direct access as compared to going through either Los Alamitos or Raven Hill. END OF SIDE TWO Borup: to work out as far as the access for them. Barbeiro: Okay lets go ahead and say that additional access the developer will work with the school district of the options themselves for along the southwest boundaries. Commissioner Norton, does that work for you? Okay. Hatcher: I second the amended motion. Borup: All in favor. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Norton: Mr. Chairman I would like to have a little more discussion on number 5 with the apartment complex. 140 apartments, does that also include the club house? I'd like to Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission May 9, 2000 ~ S Page 24 amend the motion then to include the club house to be constructed along with the 140 apartments. Borup: Is that different that the original or what the developer was planning. And the club house. Norton: Okay, I'll withdraw that. Borup: Anything or are we ready to move on. Let's take a short break. 7. TABLED FROM APRIL 11; 2000: REQUEST FOR MODIFICATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW ADDITIONAL 77 FOOT HIGH POLE SIGN FOR CHEVRON/MCDONALDS BY EAGLE PARTNER, LLC-603 S. EAGLE ROAD: Borup: This item was tabled to allow more information which I think you've each received in your packets. Do we have any comments, questions or discussion or anybody ready for a motion. Norton: I am ready to make a motion on number 7. I would like to recommend to City Council the request for modification of conditional use permit to allow additional 77 foot high pole sign for Chevron/McDonalds by Eagle Partners be denied based on using the Comprehensive Plan as a guide only and taking into consideration the following: 1. The pylon sign was not addressed in the development agreement with the city on March 9, 1999. 2. This commission made a decision in June rf 199Q that a pylon sign is inappropriate. 3. A Chevron pylon sign doesn't set an appropriate tone for entering the Magic View Subdivision. 4. This pylon sign is too close proximity to a neighborhood. Hatcher: I second the motion. Borup: Discussion. Barbeiro: When we voted in June of 1999 on this issue, the two primary items that I saw were that the light from this sign would be detrimental to the neighbors and that there was presented an ordinance that only freeway frontage could have such a sign. In our last- Borup: Freeway frontage or freeway business. Barbeiro: Freeway business I believe it was. And, as I recall-do we hay/e such an ordinance. I was unable to find such an ordinance saying that freeway business or freeway frontage is a requirement for a pylon sign. Borup: I don't believe so.