Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJanuary 8, 2008 C/C MinutesMeridian City Council January 8, 2008 Page 42 of 81 CenterCal Properties, LLC -Northwest Corner and Northeast Corner of North Eagle Road and East Fairview Avenue: Item 20: Public Hearing: VAR 07-017 Request for a Variance to UDC 11-3H-4 that prohibits new approaches from directly accessing a state highway to allow 3 right-in /right-out access points on both sides of State Highway (SH) 55/Eagle Road and 1 full access point to State Highway 55/Eagle Road located on the east side of SH 55/Eagle Road for Meridian Town Center by CenterCal Properties, LLC -Northwest Corner and Northeast Corner of North Eagle Road and East Fairview Avenue: De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Items 19 and 20 are public hearings AZ 07-012 and VAR 07-017. We will take a moment to transition. Canning: Madam Mayor, I would like to comment that Mr. Kulchak was in the office so frequently I threatened to give him a paycheck, so -- De Weerd: Start charging him rent. Okay. Are you ready, Anna? Canning: Yes, ma'am. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, before I get started on the presentation for this next one, as you know I usually prepare notes to present to Council and I try to keep my summary notes to a page and they are four pages long tonight. I have really struggled with how to give this presentation. So, if at any point you feel I'm going into far too much detail, please, stop me and I just wanted to say that before I started. It's an unusual application and Ijust -- it's been a little bit of a struggle on how to best convey it to you. The project before you tonight is Meridian Town Center. It's located on the north side of Eagle and Fairview intersections and it is on both sides of Eagle Road as shown before you. The applications before you tonight are an annexation, with concept plan and a variance application for access to the state facility. I'm going to go through the annexation request first. The annexation is for 258.39 acres to C-G and that the northeast portion -- I have an ownership map shown here. There are three ownerships associated -- three eventual ownerships associated with the annexation. One is the CenterCal property and that's right at the northeast corner of Fairview and Eagle. The other -- another ownership is for the Walter Kleiner -- Eugene Kleiner -- oh, oh. The Eugene Kleiner family, which will have the eventual -- is proposed as a park site for eventual dedication to the City of Meridian. And, then, the third ownership is partially on Fairview on the east side of Eagle, partially on the north of the CenterCal property and.., then, on the west side of Eagle. We have a fair amount of detail regarding the certainty of the CenterCal property. We have no detail whatsoever on the park at this time. And we have only conceptual ideas of what may happen on what's shown as DA number two. For that reason, because of the difference in specificity for each of the owners -- eventual ownerships, what we have done is divide them into three future development agreements with a contract for each with the city, instead of tying them together. So, I'm going to go through them individually and I will Meridian City Council January 8, 2008 Page 43 of 81 try and -- I promise not to read every word that's on my crib notes, but I do want to give you a flavor for what each development agreement is going to look like. The development agreement number one is for the park and, basically, what we have said is that it will be a park at some point and if that use changes, then, they need to come back to Council. It also deals with a couple stub streets that come into the east side of the property and what needs to be done with those stub streets. It does have a limit of a 26 foot height limit for any structure within a hundred feet of the property line of an existing residence at the time of annexation and we have an exhibit within the staff report that notes where all those existing residences are at this time. The last item on there is one that you will find in common throughout all the DAs. It's the only common item in all three DAs and it -- what it, basically, says is -- the first one says that they need to get a park plan approved by Council and we need to notify the neighbors. What the last one says is once that park plan is approved by Council, rather that -- it allows me some discretion to allow them to develop that that may not be exactly as that future concept plan is shown and what it says is relocation of buildings shall be allowed, provided that the impact to adjoining properties remains the same or is less. So, if it's 20 feet, if there is -- if they eventually get a site plan that shows a building 20 feet from a residence, if they want to move that building., it needs to stay 20 feet from that residence. And, then, any change in use would not be allowed on properties that are immediately adjacent to residences, unless they come back to Council for that approval. But it does allow me to increase or decrease the square footage by 20 percent of any building or collection of buildings, as shown on their eventual concept plan. So, this -- so that set of items is really in each one, so that once there is an approved concept plan, that we can effectively move forward, rather to have every little change approved by Council. So, moving on to the DA number two, which is the Kleiner ownership, that one was particularly tricky in that they really don't have a concept for how it will develop. What you see before you is kind of a -- a general indication of the size of buildings and the necessary parking to support that and it's a mix of residential -- or, actually, it's a mix of office and retail development. So, it gives you a concept for the square footages that we are looking at the kind of parking that would be associated with it, but they don't want to be tied to the concept plans as shown on DA number two at all. So, the provisions of that one read that prior to any land use approvals on the property, the owner needs to extend Records Road through their property, as well as River Valley. And they need to dedicate the right of way and extend those roadways. And it also says that they need to make that dedication within the time required for CenterCal to construct the roadway and related improvements. So, it does kind of tie the CenterCal property to this portion of the Kleiner ownership. It gives a total retail gross flare area of 1.293 square feet -- gross square feet. And there is a list of allowed uses for those retail areas. They just went through our list of uses and pulled out those that would be considered retail. I'm sorry, that's total square feet. The retail would be limited to -- no. was right. I'm sorry. It's 1.3 million gross square feet for retail and, then, 700,000 gross square feet for office. Going down, the applicant asked that they be allowed to swap that out at a ratio of two to one. So, basically, that if they wanted to take 200 square feet of office space, they could convert that into a hundred square feet of retail Meridian City Council January 8, 2008 Page 44 of 81 space and vice-versa. If they took a hundred square feet of retail out, they could add 200 square feet of retail.. They would need -- before they got their first CZC on a piece of property, they need to provide a detailed site plan for that area and that detailed site plan also needs to be forwarded to any potential owner, so that they understand the lot that they are getting. already has a detailed site plan for that area. What we anticipate is a detailed site plan for this before they pull any building permit there -- for this area before they pull any building permit there and, then, these would probably be broken out into two kind of sections within that area. There is a requirement for an allocation plan to be associated with the development agreement, so before you all sign the development agreement, they need to take that 1.3 million and say, okay, in this area we are going to put X number of square feet of retail and X number square feet of office and this area we are going to allocate X number of retail, X number of office, and so forth, so that we have an allocation plan. Now, that allocation plan they are asking that that be allowed to fluctuate. It may be that they take all their retail development and put it in -- in this area and if they want do to that, there is the flexibility to do that, but the number can never get bigger. It's just -- they have a set allocation and they have to redistribute that throughout the whole DA. I hope that makes sense. That was a little tricky. And, then, again, when they have a detailed site plan for an area that I would be allowed to increase any individual building or collection of buildings by 20 percent or decrease it by 20 percent without requiring a new allocation plan. But it's very clear that that 20 percent does not mean they get an overall increase in 20 percent in the allocation plan. It's not intended to be that way. It's only when there is detailed site plan approval, rather than having to go modify the detailed site plan., the allocation plan, and the development agreement. It gives some flexibility for an increase in building. Buffers to residential uses -- our primary concern on this one was the residences in Packard Estates over here. There is one resident here and there is a buffer for that one in this corner and, then, there are several residences in Packard Estates that adjoin the property and those provisions are that development within a hundred feet of Packard Estates Subdivision residential lot line shall be subject to a 25 foot landscape buffer and shall be further limited as follows: Retail building or parking shall be prohibited within a hundred feet of those lots, unless the owner obtains conditional use approval. Office and residential development shall be allowed., provided that residential development shall be subject to conditional use approval. A perimeter drive aisle connected with retail or other uses, an approved public or private road, curb, sidewalk, and/or buffer perimeter landscaping may also be placed in and count toward the hundred foot setback to retail use. No part of a private or public road, including any sidewalk, shall be placed less than 60 feet from the residential lot line., unless the owner obtains conditional use approval. So, we really tried to buffer those existing residences, since the annexation is coming in without a real concept plan for the area. We try and put those assurances that Council tries to give adjoining residences into the DA. And, then, no building over 26 feet in height shall be placed within a hundred feet of Packard Estates Subdivision, residential lot line contiguous with the west parcel. So, we tried to limit it to, basically, a story or story and a half along that west property line. Building size, placement of any building with over 200,000 square feet in retail gross floor area Meridian City Council January 8, 2008 Page 45 of 81 shall require Council approval of a development agreement modification. So, again, we just -- we are looking for those triggers that generally concern Council and large buildings are one of those. So, basically, if they want to do a really big building they have got to come back for a development agreement modification and let Council see that. Eagle Road improvements, to the extent not constructed by CenterCal, owner shall construct improvements as specified in the Eagle Road arterial study along the west boundary of the north parcel prior to occupancy of such parcel and along the east boundary of the west parcel prior to occupancy on such parcel -- I'm sorry, this is the north parcel. This is the west parcel. Owner shall not be responsible for road capacity improvements or road medians, but shall be responsible for the ten foot multi-use pathway, landscaping, and pedestrian level lighting along Eagle Road. And, then, there is a provision regarding street landscaping and setbacks, which, as I was preparing for Council I noticed it has a conflict in it in that we do say street landscaping is required and, then, there is a statement that street landscaping is not required. I did not have a chance to talk with any of the applicants regarding that one. We may just want to leave it to be corrected prior to Council signing the development agreement modification. think it's a relatively minor issue, it just caught me has noticed as inconsistent. Okay. Moving on to the CenterCal ownership, which is this one. I do want to point out some of the provisions of that one, since this concept plan is a little more definitive, although I'm sure the applicant is working on refining it and making it even better, so have been told. There is a collection of buildings with a movie theater as an anchor on this site and, then, these buildings are meant to create kind of a main street feel and that there is pedestrian -- mostly a pedestrian area, but that it does facilitate cars going either direction, but the closeness is meant to be a more pedestrian atmosphere. There are pads along the arterial roadways, which helps to breakup the parking as you see. There is a -- we are -- I'll get into that later. What else is there? I guess that's it. I'll go through some of those development agreement provisions for the third ownership now. All structures shall be subject to administrative design review. Actually, the Kleiner property is subject to that as well. Residential uses shall be developed on the property at a minimum square footage of what is currently shown on the concept plan, which is a little over 200,000 square feet of residential. It's vertically integrated residential. We did allow on the Kleiner ownership for those -- sorry, I'm going back and forth. But on DA number two there is an allowance for any vertically integrated residential to occur. It's a principal permitted use within the C-G zone. So, we are only capping retail and office, not residential on -- on these DAs for both DA number two and DA number three. The general configuration of the shops around the plaza should be carried forward. Cross- access easement is required with all the businesses, basically, on -- between Records Road and Eagle Road and I think the applicant has acounter-proposal to that. We asked for one north -- more north-south connection between Fairview Avenue. There is, basically, one here. It doesn't have to be direct, but we just didn't want Records Road to be the only way to get north-south. Staff was in favor of one particular parking layout pattern. No, it's not shown on the presentation, but it is in the staff report. It was just a parking pattern that we felt kind in this area here -- felt broken up and provided good pedestrian access, so we did ask that that be -- wasn't required, but that generally Meridian City Council January 8, 2008 Page 46 of 81 be the kind of parking pattern used in the parking lot. We asked for a path showing -- or a plan showing safe pedestrian routes at regular intervals within the site and, then, prior -- this is the -- probably the most -- the provision that staff has agreed to disagree on with regard -- with CenterCal and that is prior to issuance of the fifth building permit within the DA boundaries, a final plat shall be recorded that dedicates Records Road from Fairview Avenue to the north property line and River Valley Street from Eagle Road to Records Road. All properties within the eastern annex area shall be included on the final plat and that needs to be constructed as well. There is a condition related to Stars in the event the applicant is not permitted to obtain full reimbursement for Stars or to elects not to make such improvement. Applicant shall not be required to construct any off-site improvements, except as necessary to provide access to the DA number three area and may submit an alternative access plan for approval by City Council. This does not negate the applicant's obligation to improve the frontage of the annexation site as noted within the staff report. Almost to the end now. And, finally, Eagle Road along the frontage of the annexation site shall be improved by the applicant and., basically, in accord with the Eagle Road arterial study and, then, again, there is that once we have a detailed site plan it allows me some flexibility to increase square footages of any individual building or collection of buildings. The collection of buildings does come particularly from this property where they do have groupings or collections of buildings that may come together or break apart, depending on the tenants they find. The applicant does have some renderings of the lifestyle. They are not in my presentation. We do recommend that the Council include those from the development agreement. Now I'm going to move on briefly to the variance.. Their variance request is to -- is for four right-in, right-out access points, two on each side of State Highway 55, Eagle Road, and two right-in, right-out, left-in access points, one on each side of State Highway 55, Eagle Road. And those are located approximately a quarter mile north of Fairview Avenue. The applicant is also proposing to construct or reconstruct a full access signalized intersection located at River Valley Street, but that is not part of the variance application, that is the -- the kind of approved location for that access at the half mile. Staff could not make the findings for approval of the variance to Eagle Road. So, if, as Council takes action on that one way or the other, if you can give staff some guidance on how to prepare those findings, we would appreciate it. The Commission recommended approval of the annexation at their November 15th, 2007, Public Hearing. Ashley Ford from WRG spoke in favor as the applicant's representative. John Paul Wardy from CenterCal Properties spoke as the -- also for the applicant, as did Andy Wilk. Lars Anderson of Bach Builders, Chris Brand of Petra, and Mike Ballantyne representing the Kleiners also spoke. No one spoke in opposition. Victor Villagas representing Blue Cross of Idaho and Scott Stanfield from Mason Stanfield Engineering, who is representing Bach Builders, did comment as well. Key issues of discussion by the Commission were the pedestrian and vehicular traffic between the sites across Eagle Road, the extension of Records Road from Fairview Avenue north to River Valley Road and the extension of River Valley Road from Eagle Road east to Records Road. The Commission did not make any significant changes to staffs initial recommendation. The outstanding issues before Council -- there are a couple. One from the Kleiner Meridian City Council January 8, 2008 Page 47 of 81 family, what -- after the Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation Mrs. Wafters realized that she had forgotten to include an analysis of the pathways plan. There is a ten foot multi-use pathway proposed that runs on the west and north sides of the west parcel.. In addition, the state highway ordinance requires a ten foot multi-use pathway down Eagle.. What the representative from the Kleiner family is asking is that if they were to -- there is also a requirement for either a public or a private road running generally north-south through that west parcel. They would like to be able to move the pathway to adjoin the public or private road and to have that count as -- as a suitable location. So, basically, rather than having three north-south pedestrian systems, they'd like to consolidate that down to two. With regard to the CenterCal ownership, I think that -- as I mentioned before, the outstanding issue that staff sees is that the timing of both the Records Road and River Valley east of Eagle. So, we feel it is important to have those roadway connections for the CenterCal development. We recognize that they are not fully within their ownership, but it is within the annexation area and we feel that those -- those improvements need to be tied to the CenterCal property. Since -- we have received a number of written testimony since the staff report. We have a-mail comments from David Kleiner and we have comments from Bach Homes and, again, Bach Homes owns the property to the north of the north parcel and they -- their comments were with regard to the River Valley Road extension and Records Road construction. And Andy Wilk has provided written testimony. I'm not sure that it made it into your packet, but I know he has that to hand out tonight as well. With that I will answer any questions Council may have. De Weerd: Council., questions at this point? Zaremba: What was the fourth thing you told us? Canning: Yeah. Before or after I started stuttering? De Weerd.: Okay. Is the applicant's representative here? Ford.: Happy New Year. De Weerd: Thank you. Ford.: Good evening, Honorable Mayor, Members of the Council. For the record, my name is Ashley Ford., I'm the planning project manager for WRG Design. My office address is 1173 East Winding Creek Drive in Eagle. And I'm pleased to be here on behalf of CenterCal Properties. For our presentation this evening I'm going to cover a few general items and, then, I'm going to turn the remaining time over to CenterCal for a brief Powerpoint of CenterCal talking about the projects that they have done and, basically, who they are. We do have representatives here this evening representing the other property owners. They don't plan to be a part of this presentation. However, they are here for questions. As we did at the Planning and Zoning Commission, first we'd Meridian City Council January 8, 2008 Page 48 of 81 like to thank staff. This has been a project in the making for many months, as many of you know. It's very complex, it's very complicated, and I don't think ever there has been three development agreements with one annexation request ever processed with the city. So, we thank Anna and her staff very much. De Weerd: Her staff has been amazing. Ford: Absolutely. And I have been on the public side and I understand the work that they do, so I'm very grateful. Staff did do a wonderful job in outlining the details. I'm going to discuss the vision and I'm going to keep it very brief and I want to turn the presentation over. We believe the project will be the center piece for the City of Meridian or the new center of gravity for the Treasure Valley residents. We truly believe this development will far exceed what you, the City of Meridian envision for this property. Meridian Town Center is proposed to be a high quality lifestyle center, in lieu of a traditional strip mall or a traditional mall as the Boise Towne Square. Many hear the term lifestyle center and really don't understand what that means. And to us this means a more upscale, primarily outdoor shopping area, with a strong pedestrian emphasis. These are designed to resemble villages or town centers with active and attractive streetscapes, a mix of uses that may include retail, office and residential, both at ground level, but also about the commercial and the office. These projects are really inviting. We want those to park their cars, escape to a place that they can go watch a movie, socialize, shop, they are purposely designed to be pedestrian oriented.. As Andy discussed -- Andy Wilk from CenterCal discussed at the P&Z hearing, we are going after the Leed certification for this project. We don't know what level yet, but we are going after certification. And I'll let him describe this in further detail if you have any questions. And while this is a request for an annexation only, we have provided a concept plan as Anna went through with you, that not only demonstrates that CenterCal has the principles of the Comprehensive Plan in mind, but your vision at heart. And with that summary I would like to turn over the remaining part of this presentation to Fred Bruning, who is the CEO of CenterCal. He will discuss who CenterCal is. He will, then, turn the presentation over to Andy Wilk, who will discuss the issues that we are facing with the site, the variance application, and we will stand for questions. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Bruning: Madam Mayor and Councilors and counselor, nice to be here this evening. Thank you so much for letting us be a part of your snowy evening here. And I know you're probably more interested in -- De Weerd: If you will, please, first state your name and address. Bruning: Oh. That. My name is Fred Bruning and I work with CenterCal Properties. Our office address is 7455 Southwest Bridgeport Road in Tigard, Oregon. We also have offices in EI Segundo and, hopefully, we will soon have an office in Meridian. Meridian City Council January 8, 2008 Page 49 of 81 What I want to do very quickly is show you some of the projects we have done. We have not had the chance to meet many of you at this point, I'd like to meet more as we keep going in the future on this project, but just to show you a little bit about what CenterCal Properties is, our logo there, I'm, basically, the old guy in the bi-.plane over the trees, if you ever had any question about that. We get all of our best leases done inverted. Just some of the projects that we have done recently. I just want to point them out to you. I don't know if you have had a chance to visit some of them or not. This happens to be Bridgeport Village in Tualatin, Tigard, and Durham, Oregon. We, actually, are in three different cities in this project. But it's a lifestyle center. You will know a lot of -- you'll notice a lot of similarities in terms of the village layout, parking surround the theater, smaller buildings, not the large anchor department stores that you would find in a mall or a typical strip center. Maybe we could go to the next slide, Anna. Nice helping us out with this. This is just an aerial view of Bridgeport showing its proximity to Interstate 5 on Bridgeport Road. Since we developed this -- and when we started out this was actually known as -- it was the Durham Pit. It was a quarry. Our working title originally was the Shops at the Pit. Basically, it was in an area that you wouldn't think of for high scale development. There was industrial next door. There was an old rundown motel, an old Shilo Inn. Not much out there. The high end retail in the market was K-Mart and a store called Jiggles. And since we have actually developed this project -- it was about a 250 million dollar project, the area around us has just truly blossomed, new office development. There has been several hundred thousand feet of office, new high end retail to compliment what we have developed. And we think that you will have the same halo effect around our project here in Meridian. Anna, please. This is just one of the views -- and maybe we could just go through a couple of views real quick, Anna. This is a view of the interior. One thing about lifestyle centers is they are all about the facades, the architecture. Typically, one of our lifestyle centers will have more than 50 exterior materials to choose from. We have a lot of outdoor spaces and you can actually do anything from enjoy a glass of wine outdoors by one of the fountains, by the fire, watch your children play under the gazebo. We imported that particular one from Italy. Ice skating is one of the features we are thinking here in Meridian for an outdoor winter activity, complimented by outdoor fireplaces and al fresco dining under sealed canopies, so you can actually enjoy the outside, but still be somewhat warm. It's all about pedestrian, it's all about a feeling of warmth and comfort. And if we could go real quickly, Anna, through just a couple of other projects. This is Cascade Station that we are just opening at the Gateway to Portland at Portland International Airport. This is more of a large big box center. It was, actually, that way by design. The interesting thing about this center, which is a lot of mid size boxes, retail. We also have IKEA, which is a Swedish retailer as part of our Center. But since we actually started this center, over a million feet of office and hotel has developed adjacent to us in an area that the brokers in Portland told us two or three years ago there would never be a market in that area, just because there was no demand. But the quality of the center I think has provoked the demand.. Anna, please. Again, just a little bit of a facing to the Columbia River you can just see there in the upper corner. IKEA on the eastern side of the site. Gresham Station is another one Meridian City Council January 8, 2008 Page 50 of 81 that we have developed in the Gresham area. We are actually just finishing up our last phase with theater and a specialty supermarket, residential, as you can see. And, again, quite a bit of mixed use. You can see this was one of our earlier phasing models, but it's a light rail, so we actually have two rail stations going through here. We have won quite a few awards on this one from the ICSC. Nyberg Woods is another project we just completed in Portland.. It's a smaller retail center, about 250,000 feet, on what had been an old hotel site that was not profitable. We were actually able to turn it around. One of the things I'm most proud of here is the fact that we took eight acres that is just shown in green on that site and, actually, restored a wetlands to its pristine state. It had actually been degraded and now it's the home to blue herons and otters and all manner of wildlife. And just an aerial view of that particular site. This is one that we are currently working on. It's, actually, almost complete down in Danville, California. You can see the bi-plane up there, the architects do know how to get paid. This is a -- again, evoking a lifestyle center. What you can see is the outdoor lawns, the grass, the play areas for the children, working into the water elements, the paseos, smaller buildings, but still very nice architectural context. This particular site has a Draeger's Market. We have also put in Anthropology restoration hardware -- a very nice mix of tenants to compliment this particular area in Danville where the average household income is about 220,000 in a five mile radius, so quality was the watchword for this project. And., again, all -- this is another project we are doing in Oregon City. You know, when you show all these sites it's a little bit like you're bragging about your children. You know, I apologize, I know it's probably not the most exciting., but it -- we currently have about one and a half billion dollars worth of projects underway right now. In Oregon City we are right at the 205 freeway, right adjacent to the Clackamus and the Willamette Rivers, so our project is called The Rivers. Again, mixed use, residential and office above retail, entertainment, large open space, which can -- you know, again, just provide lots of opportunities for people to recreate and have fun outdoors. Especially in a market here like Meridian where you have a nice season a lot of the time of the year. It's great to be outdoors and not feel like you're enclosed. This is another project we are doing in Utah in the city of Farmington. It's called Station Park. Station Park because we have a commuter rail station that abuts our property, we are helping develop that. This is a view, again, of our center court area, again, with residential and office above retail, facing, again., a theater in the distance. And back to Meridian Town Center and Andy Wilk will tell you a little bit of the details here, but I thought it might be helpful just a little bit more about CenterCal and a little bit about our history on this project and how we came to it. The best part of CenterCal is the Cal part. We are very very fortunate to have a partner, which is I think one of the most reputable funds in the world, it's the California State Teacher's retirement system. We joint venture our projects with Cal'sters and so -- Cal is CenterCal and with that we are able to withstand a lot of the vagaries in the economy. We are not as concerned about the ability to get financing, because our partner is one of the largest financial entities in the world and we self finance construction, do just about everything internally, until we put a permanent loan upon completion on the project. Cal'sters, with 435,000 teachers also has one of the most stellar reputations for being on honorable partner, wanting to build green -- it's just Meridian City Council January 8, 2008 Page 51 of 81 a great partner to have as part of our development effort. When we came to Meridian, Idaho, it was like coming home. I was actually John Price's vice-president of development on Boise Towne Center. That goes back a ways. Back when there were 25 sites and 35 developers and everyone had all the anchors tied up, as you recall. But the market has changed and retail has changed. Since that time retail -- the regional malls were the heartbeat of the industry in the 1980s and retail has evolved. The lifestyle centers are sort of the new generation of retail and when they are done well, they do exceedingly well in terms of sales per square foot and also in terms of customer affinity. In looking at the site, when we came to Eagle Road and Fairview, I said I have died and gone to heaven. This is the most beautiful site. This is absolutely wonderful. I, then, met the Kleiner family and -- and, then, after about two years of discussions, which I understand was a very quick process -- historically the Kleiners have not been in perfect agreement as to what to do with this property and so our challenge to start with was, essentially, to bring a familiar group together and come to a decision to take this piece of land, which is a lovely piece of land, and bring it to its highest and best use. We were able to negofiiate with the different groups of within the Kleiner family and come to an agreement that I think triggers some wonderful things, like the park, you know, the bequest of Eugene Kleiner to not only dedicate, but also outfit the park is a wonderful thing and, hopefully, we can help make that happen with our project. I think in the family mind of David Kleiner and his father Walter, what they have -- we have 51 acres as phase one. That's our CenterCal portion. I think in the Kleiner's viewpoint, what they'd like to see is our project move forward., really increase the value of everything that's left., and, then, lead to a higher and better use and that's why those future phases are a bit inchoate at this point, but our goal is to do such a good job that perhaps we will be the ones doing phase two, three, and four as well and we have already told the Kleiners we'd like to buy the north parcel and extend our development on the site because of our demand that we found. But right now we just have the 51 acres. So, we feel we are in a very unique position right now. We have come to an agreement with the family, which is something that has taken -- I have heard it described the miracle in Meridian. We are also thinking that we can bring a quality of project to the community that really doesn't exist yet, either in Meridian or your large suburb to the east, which, you know, I think would be a really wonderful addition to the overall Treasure Valley and it will bring people on a regional basis. To that end we have to make sure that what we do causes no harm, both in terms of traffic and other things that, you know, will come with a large project like this. But we have hired a gaggle of traffic engineers.. We have also agreed if it's deemed appropriate by the community, that we might even front end all the Star improvements all the way from the freeway up passed our site, which is a costly venture, because we get no interest on that money that we front, we just get paid back over a period of time through a portion of the sales tax, but it's something we felt that we would be willing to do, because it's something that should be done. But at the end of the day what our goal is is to create a project that will actually create wealth for the community, not just for developers. With Cal'sters we are long-term hold, we are not a flip it and we will be gone next week. We are going to build this and own it for many many decades we hope and so we will commit to quality and Meridian City Council January 8, 2008 Page 52 of 81 the deliverability of -- with your approval. And with that I'd like to turn it over to Andy Wilk, who will talk a little bit about the specifics and the -- you know, sort of the comments we have to the staff comments. I know he's blinking already, so just really quick. De Weerd.: Yeah. He has one minute. Wilk: Thank you, Mayor. Hi. De Weerd: You will have five. Wilk: Seven. De Weerd: Five. Wilk: Okay. Thank you, Mayor. My name is Andrew Wilk and I'm with CenterCal Properties and same address as Mr. Bruning. And I got to tell you, Fred and I have worked together for a couple of decades and he's a tough act to follow. So, here comes the boring part of the presentation. I want to thank the Mayor and the Council for reviewing our project, but I really want to take a moment to thank Anna and her staff and the staff in general, because, you know, she struggles with it, because it is complicated and to keep it all straight and I don't know, really, how she does it, because she's managed to keep all of this in order. The Planning and Zoning Commission as well really did a great job on this. We worked very closely with ITD, ACHD, all the other agencies. Greg Williams, our construction executive, has been working with your construction department and Public Works and really getting ahead of the curve on this, so that we can plan appropriately. And we have gotten a tremendous amount of support from the community. We are trying to bring something that's unique, something that's special. And if it's not special, we really don't want to do it. And so the community embraced that idea and it's really helped us to take this to a higher level and we continue to improve, we continue to enhance it, we continue to find new and better and interesting tenants as this evolves. So, actually, I kind of felt empty-handed, because didn't have anything for the retiring chief of police. There were a lot of gifts there. But I do want to -- he laughed, but I do want to congratulate Mr. Siddoway. Steve's been a really -- he's been a good friend and he's worked with us on the park idea and his input's been really valuable as well, because we feel that the park adds a completely new dimension to a lifestyle center that no other lifestyle center that we are aware of in this country has and that is a fully developed public park and we want to integrate those two elements and that really takes that pedestrian orientation to a completely different level. We can see where afamily -- mom or dad might drop off the kids for soccer practice, park the car, and walk right next door, have a cup of coffee, maybe lunch, catch a movie, who knows. And that really gets people out of their car and that's what we started to realize with these lifestyle centers -- and I have got our traffic engineers here -- is that there is a unique mechanism going on there. In a lifestyle center, if Meridian City Council January 8, 2008 Page 53 of 81 people can do more in one place, they will park their car and it starts to create a net decrease in the traffic demand. It's very interesting to see that and we have observed it in realtime exactly in our projects, where we are located, CenterCal Properties -- and Bridgeport Village is a good example, as Ashley had pointed out, we are also trying to seek Leed standard and that's the Leadership and Environmental Design that is trying to look from a socially and morally responsible way, can we develop, can we build, can we operate in an environmentally conscientious way. And that's something that we are working on. As a matter of fact, I went to a conference this morning that ULI had about green building and it's very interesting just to see how that's no longer just a fresh idea, it's really become part of how we do projects and we want to introduce that into our projects. This is a 244 acre piece. We are focused on 51 acres. Now, there are a couple of items that our -- staff and ourselves have agreed to disagree on a few issues. We don't necessarily disagree on principle, as much as we disagree on mechanics. We are looking to initially purchase -- see if I can get this right. This 51 acres here, we do have an agreement with the Kleiners to expand our project, but the exact timing of that - - Idon't know if this is actually working. There we go. Well, anyway. I'm not so good at -- there we go. Oh. Thank you. So, we don't know the exact timing on our ability to get this northerly piece, which is about 30 -- almost 37 acres. So, with that being said, we certainly agree to do the improvements, the frontage improvements. Right now we are talking about front improvements that run from Hickory passed Venture, which is along Fairview. We are talking about frontage improvements that abut our property, as well as Records Road, and., then, we will have amajor -- it may not be a public street, it may be a private drive, but a major connector through here, and we have no problem doing that and the total of that amounts to somewhere between five and seven million dollars worth of improvements. The problem is is that it starts to reach well beyond our borders, because we may not control this property now or at sometime in the future. And so what we differ with staff that we see the value of building that, we believe that those improvements -- and we have discussed this both with ITD and ACRD, that there may be phased-in improvements as the other properties develop. And there is nothing wrong with putting those conditions on other properties in the future, but as they develop those roads will continue to connect. So, that is one comment within the staff report and the Planning and Zoning Commission's findings that we'd like to simply say, yes, we do agree with making those improvements, but we want to make improvements that abut our property. The second issue is having to do with the variance request. We understand staffs position on that. We are asking for -- we are asking for -- that's actually -- that access point is already a given. An access point here, right-in, right-out; right-in, right-out, left-in; right-in, right-out -- and the reason we are asking for those is we knew from experience that we will not be able to attract the quality of tenants that we want to have for a lifestyle center without having the appropriate access. These tenants are not interested in going to someplace that cannot be easily, conveniently, and safely accessed by their customers. So, we are asking the City Council to grant the variance. We are continuing to work with ITD and ACHD on the mitigations, on the safety issues, on the review of our traffic impact study, but the person that doesn't want to have a site that doesn't work is the developer, because we can't do the penance if we don't have a Meridian City Council January 8, 2008 Page 54 of 81 site fihat won't work and they are going to scrutinize exactly how we do this. So, we would ask that we have the variance granted by Council to do that. And, then, the last piece -- and this really just, again, a mechanical issue, is Council has suggested that we have and would like to make it a condition that we have cross-access agreements. We have no problem having cross-access agreements within our boundaries between tenants and that can be accomplished in a number of ways, but we don't know what's going to go here or over here and because of that we are not sure that that's in our best interest. Cross-access is good.. When Records Road is built, River Valley, and even, perhaps, the extension all the way to Allys Way up to Ustick, those will, obviously, be benefits to traffic flow. But for now we have to focus on what will. work safely within our boundaries. So, those are the issues. I apologize for it being boring and not nearly as colorful as talking about our other projects, but that's what we'd like to do and we appreciate your support and we hope that we can move forward_ It's very important as we continue to negotiate with tenants, key tenants, and to compete with other sites to get those tenants, that we don't lose our momentum. So, that's why we are asking you this evening to grant the variance and allow us to keep that momentum going forward, so that we can complete this project and get started this spring. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you, Andy. Andy -- Wilk: Oh, question? I'm sorry. De Weerd: Council, any questions for -- Bird.: Yeah. Madam Mayor, I do. Andy, run over those exits and entrances again. Wilk: Sure. Other way. There we go. I'm not very good with the technology. This is East River Valley at Eagle Road. That's actually -- Bird: That's at the half mile. Wilk: -- designated already. Right here is a right-in, right-out and we have actually matched the right side and a left side, so that there is some continuity. Even though you can actually cross over, there will be a median that goes through here to prevent that and if I can say this at the Mayor's behest, she has really encouraged us and we agree to try to make that median special and not just a piece of concrete in the middle of the street. So, we are committed to do that along our frontage. The other point is right here. This is, actually, right-in, right-out with alert-in, signalized, and this is a right- in, right-out, again, opposing. Bird: That second one's about a quarter mile from that. Wilk: This one or -- Meridian City Council January 8, 2008 Page 55 of 81 Bird': No. That one there. Wilk: This one right here? That's roughly at the quarter mile. And it's not, actually, a full access, Councilman Bird, it is a right-in, right-out, left-in. Bird.: Left-in. Wilk: But you couldn't make a left turn from here to Eagle Road southbound and you couldn't -- Bird.: But you cross and coming across. Going south you can come in. Wilk: Going south you can come in. Going north you can come in. But you couldn't make a left turn from here going south and you couldn't make a left turn from here going north. So, that would be prohibited.. It's just aright-in, right-out, left-in only. Bird: Basically, for your existing property that you control right now, just those first two entries or the -- Wilk: This is really key right here. Bird: Yeah. Wilk: Especially because we really can't determine the future of this. When that signal goes in that's great, but in order for our site to function properly, that one becomes key. At least in today's context. When this is all fully built out, it's all going to work very well together and flow. And I will tell you that we have done the traffic engineering analysis looking at the entire site. We are not just looking at ourselves. Bird: Thank you. Wilk: You're welcome. De Weerd: Any other questions from Council at this point? Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Zaremba: Several of the examples that were given, which appeared to be doing quite successfully, actually have at least one border that was a freeway with no access at all. We are having so much difficulty with the traffic on Eagle Road that putting more access is a difficult thing to think about. You have projects that have sides with no access, but they seem to be successful. Why is it a problem here? Meridian City Council January 8, 2008 Page 56 of 81 Wilk: If I might -- Anna, can you bring up the very first slide, Bridgeport Village, because that's probably the closest in size and in character. It's the very first slide in the show. Well, I guess it would be the second after the title slide. Sorry about that. This is Bridgeport Village. It's, actually, smaller. This is a little over 30 acres. And what we have here is I-5. We, actually, don't border I-5, this is the off ramp from I-5 and I-5 is right here. This is 72nd Avenue. What we actually did here -- we did about seven million dollars of roadway improvements. Actually, it was more than that, because we went to the other side of the freeway. So, it was quite a bit more. But we moved this intersection. 72nd Street, from here roughly 250 to 300 feet over here and we created three access points. These are all three signalized access points. And the reason why is in order to serve a site of this size, we knew that that would be the only way to make it work and, in fact, what we discovered -- we had done subsequent traffic analysis of this site and our traffic engineer Kittleson said, you know, we want to see what is the distribution among these three driveways, because intuitively you would think this one would probably be the heaviest, this one would be maybe a little lighter, and this one would be the lightest, just understanding the character of the site. What they discovered is it's 33 percent, 33 percent, 33 percent, because their engineering was designed in such a way to distribute the traffic flow. So, if we -- I know it's kind of hard to go back to that other site plan, but imagine, if you will, we have accesses -- and it's just about -- these are some of the renderings. We didn't get to show those, but -- we are going to attach these as exhibits to the development agreement at staffs suggestion. Go back one more if you would, please, Anna. If you look here, we are basically doing the same thing. Access. Access.. These are right-in, right-out on this side. And, then, we have some additional subsequent access, we kind of call the relief valve out the Records Road exit. And this is a full -- existing full service intersection. So, what we are trying to use is that same model that we know works and if we were to do less, it's possible that it would work, but we have proven that it works with what we have done. So, that's why we are trying to stick with that model. Bruning: And if I might add as well, Council, just because I -- De Weerd: If you will just restate your name, please. Bruning: Oh, I'm sorry. Fred Bruning again. I'm sorry. I'm surprised I still remembered at this hour, Councilor, but, essentially, one of the problems with a lifestyle center is also it's more of a village and what we found what works well for a big box center with maybe an IKEA, which is, really, a destination, is you can -- you can get away with a little bit more of it for the villages -- when you're dealing with tenants like the Craig Barrells of the world, what they want to say is, well, how is my customer going to get into me conveniently and if they have to go way up here and come back way down there, they just -- they don't do it. And what you wind up is having something that really fits more of a big box than a small format. One thing also is that our traffic studies have shown us that by having only right-in, right-out and all of the decel lanes coming off the major Meridian City Council January 8, 2008 Page 57 of 81 streets, you, actually, improve the flow of traffic on the major street by not having large cues that are really building up at the -- at the crunch point, so to speak, and just having, you know, people make their own choices and going to the specific part of the center that they want to get to. We think our traffic analysis will bring that out. But it's really more of the nature of the fact that this is more of a villagy-type center than a big box center that mandates that we have the additional access points, I think. And our tenants are the ones who tell us that. It's not necessarily our opinion only. Thank you. Wilk: And, I'm sorry, one other last piece of information and I probably wasn't clear on this -- this particular access point, my traffic engineer John Ringert at Kittleson pointed out., this access point is, actually, part of the Eagle Road improvement plan. We are using that as our guide from ITD. So, that one is, actually, part of the Eagle Road improvement plan. De Weerd: Additional questions? Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Gorton. Borton: Andy, on this quarter mile right-in, right-out, left-in, I understand the concerns and pros and cons and especially the pros with regards to that access, but -- and it's not the right-in and right-out that gives me some hesitation, it's that left-in and the cueing that's going to happen at that. I don't know -- and maybe your traffic engineer has the specifics on it, what the -- the distance of that left-in cue -- how many cars can stack. don't know if -- maybe he has comments on that. It just seems to be a huge cause for concern that it will get used as much as you say, maybe it's a third of the accesses and you're going to have -- Wilk: Councilman Borton, it is a cause of concern and., actually, if I might invite John Ringert from Kittleson, we have been studying this extensively and I'd like him to just describe how it works, because it's actually a -- it's kind of remarkable, because I had the exact same concern about the cueing, not just the cueing there, but the cueing at Eagle and Fairview as well. So, he can explain it better. Borton: Okay. Thanks. Ringert: I'm John Ringert. Traffic Engineer with Kittleson and Associates. 101 South Capital Boulevard, Boise, Idaho. 83702. As Andy mentioned, when we started out the project we looked at what was part of the Eagle Road corridor plan, which did have a signal at River Valley and had aright-in, right-out, left-in here and the reason that had a right-in, right-out, left-in, is to put it in perspective, this is a lot of development. These are big parcels. This is -- that's a half mile in between there. So, instead of having a half mile of a lot of streets -- residential streets and stuff, we really have -- we really Meridian City Council January 8, 2008 Page 58 of 81 have some pretty large parcels on both sides. So, looking at that, a big focus is how is this -- you know, how is this going to operate. One option is you don't have it and we put all the traffic up at River Valley. Well, if you think about a big intersection, you put all the traffic into left-turns and side street and main street left turns, every car you put onto those lefit turn lanes takes away green time from the through traffic. So, that's why you actually -- access is good to some extent. Now, you don't want accesses to the point you're causing a lot of traffic conflicts and that's where you see the degradation of the road. So, with this, there has been a lot of focus really put into the -- how this would operate and that has, actually, led to looking at, as Andy said, a signalization alternative. The good thing about a signal is we can control it. We can actually -- this signal wouldn't take nearly as much -- it would have very little green time if it doesn't have the lefts out and it doesn't have long pedestrian crossings. So, this could be green for almost -- for all the time you got north-south green and for the -- most of the side street greens. So, what you could do is you could control the through, so everybody got through, and you could control that cue. In any case, the left turn, it does work at -- at the quarter mile, but there is a lot of different access scenarios and we are working with ITD to determine what's the best one. So, we are looking at -- you know, looking at what happens with and without these right-in, right-outs, the best way to operate the left-in. We have found that it -- you do take a lot of time off Eagle Road if we tried to run all the lefits for that whole -- for this whole area, as well as you remember we are also catching a lot of the development to the north that will dump into this intersection once we get River Valley connected down to Allys. So, does that kind of explain it? I could give specific numbers, but we are dealing with so many different scenarios working on how we want the access to work with ITD, that I'd hate to quote any number and we find out it's -- there is a -- we are actually going to do something different. De Weerd': I guess while you're up there I guess before the application was filed and just talking conceptually in this area, the thought was to use Star legislation also on the local road and extend River -- to improve River Valley, as well as Records Way and how can that work without that full access intersection at River Valley with a project this size, with just the right-in, right-out, left-in? Ringert: Well, with this project -- I guess when you look at the whole project together, there is really some real critical components. First of all, we have to have River Valley. Records Road becomes really critical, not just for this project, for everything along here. Records to Ustick. This is a real critical connection. The issue has been -- there is about a quarter mile segment that ACRD doesn't have right of way and they really don't have a reason to go get it and so that's the last connection to be made.. So, with this -- this isn't going to come for awhile, but it will come and, obviously, if it could through Stars to make the rest of this connection, that would be great. The connections here -- we will be looking at the phasing. You know, it really matters on what the -- how much you develop over time. Even this part -- even this isn't going to be developed over night. So, as this happens there is going to be thresholds where we need certain improvements down here and that's really -- we are working out the details on that, Meridian City Council January 8, 2008 Page 59 of 81 because there is a lot of fluid things happening, not just with site, but what do you assume is going on on the rest of the site. So, right now we are focused on the package of improvements and, then, what we have done is yesterday at a meeting with ACHD and ITD we are starting to look at, okay, now how do you want us to look at the phasing of this? To be able to nail that down and I think that's what Andy Wilk was talking about, just -- there needs to be some flexibility in the phasing, because there is a lot of fluid things going on with some of these develop -- these parcels and how they are going to access and stuff. So, what gets built when we are still figuring out. But, you're right, at some point you've got to have access up there. Whether that's initially a -- you know, adrive-thru, another development, or it's right -- you know, obviously, the best way is just get Records Road to River Valley completed. De Weerd: Anything else at this point, Council? Bird: I have none. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: You have been meeting with ACHD and ITD. Just a sense from you -- I know you can't give me a yes or a no, but is ITD inclined to allow the points of accesses that you're talking about or are those already accesses that are by title or previous treatment or right of way negotiations from years ago? What's the status? Ringert: Okay. Madam Mayor, Councilman Rountree, as we talked about the -- the River Valley, this was actually going. to be designed and constructed by ITD, got partially -- you know, it got through the about 30 percent planned stage and ITD had some, you know, budget shortfalls. This right-in, right-out, left-in, was part of the Eagle Road construction -- the Eagle Road improvement project that would have been constructed with that. You know, mainly, again, to make sure there was -- you know, there was service for the sites. Ina -- kind of overlaying what you would say a long term access on -- there are a number of deeds that were -- at my understanding along both sides of the road. I think there might be four on each side. You know, I know you - - you have a long history with. -- with ITD and, you know, this have -- you know, the goal in the end is to come up with a good access scheme. So, it's likely that the specific points of access wouldn't be the ultimate. We really haven't worried too much about where those are located, because a lot of times those end up in locations that don't work for today's roadway system. But there are -- there are a number of accesses along there, but that hasn't -- that hasn't been a major part of discussion with ITD. I think ITD is generally -- generally on board with the general access concept. You know, I think they are looking real critically at these right-in, right-outs. One of their questions was is -- you know, when it all comes down to how everything fits together, you know, does one end up changing.. But, you know, that's -- that's our job is the traffic engineers Meridian Ciry Council January 8, 2008 Page 60 of 81 and working with them to figure out -- you .know, making sure everything does operate well. Generally, the right-in, right-outs don't present a lot of complexities on the traffic, if we have decel lanes and stuff. You know, it's when we -- it's the left turns we put most of our focus on to make sure they can work. Rountree: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Ringert: Anything else? Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. This is a Public Hearing. Is there anyone who would like to provide testimony on this application? Richardson: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. For the record, Christie Richardson, program administrator, for the Ada County Highway District, 3775 Adams Street in Garden City. De Weerd: Thank you. Richardson: I have provided the applicant and your staff and yourselves a letter this evening. It's very similar to a letter that we sent to the Planning and Zoning -- prior to the Planning and Commission hearing. I do feel that it's important to read most of these points into the record just for consideration and discussion, so I apologize for doing that, but, again, this is very important to both ACHD and ITD. So, just to clarify, the district has not yet received the required traffic impact study for this development. Yes, we have been in -- in contact with the applicant and the city and ITD and ACHD staff have been meeting but we haven't actually received the traffic impact study. Therefore, our comments at this time are very preliminary and based only on the conceptual site plan. And just for the record., additional comments and recommendations will be submitted once the district has received the traffic impact study and more detailed drawings. Of course, it's important to note that the State Highway 55 -Fairview Avenue intersection is the busiest intersection in the state of Idaho, which is why we have significant concerns. Just as a reminder, ACHD and the City of Meridian recently approved Pinebridge Subdivision, so we also need to take into account the significant amount of traffic that will be generated by that development, not yet seen on the roads, of course. The district does recognize that the existing and projected level of service of the Eagle - Fairview intersection exceeds an acceptable planning level capacity. This intersection was previously identified in the '90s as a future urban interchange. And the last update to a long range transportation plan prepared by Compass, this urban interchange improvement was removed from the plan. Basically, the reason for that was two of the four corners had already developed and that opportunity had been lost. Eagle Road is a state highway and Idaho Transportation Department has limited plans for improvements to the corridor. There are no planned capacity improvements. The Meridian City Council January 8, 2008 Page 61 of 81 applicant is pursuing options to utilize the Stars funding mechanism to add an additional through lane in each direction of travel on Eagle Road from River Valley to Interstate 84. The district is supportive of this effort as the transportation impacts of this development are significant to the regional transportation system. In addition, the district would encourage the applicant to review intersection design alternatives with ACHD, ITD and Compass, concurrent with the high volume intersection study being conducted by ITD. And this is one area just within the last two weeks, I believe, that we received some draft drawings and recommendations for all -- for the entire county and I would certainly hope that we could have more discussion between ITD, ACHD, Meridian staff, and the applicant, to take a further look at some of those recommendations. If the study recommends alternatives to the traditional intersection at Eagle Road and Fairview, which it -- preliminarily it is, the district recommends that the applicant pursue funding of the improvement in conjunction with the other proposed Stars road improvements. So, our specific comments and details about the specific corridors related to this project. So, on the east -- east of State Highway 55, along Fairview Avenue, the applicant has proposed three driveways to Fairview between Eagle and Records. And as a reminder, Records is signalized. The applicant has proposed extending Records through the site as a collector roadway. Again, the discussion focused somewhat on how far and how much do they build. They are proposing -- again, total site plan -- proposing one driveway on Fairview between Records and Venture. And at this time staff cannot evaluate the number and location of access points on Fairview Avenue until a traffic impact study has been reviewed. It's anticipated that any new driveways on Fairview would all be restricted to right-in, right-out, with signalized access and full access only at Records. The extension of River Valley is supported by ACHD. It was identified previously as a future collector road and there are some alignment issues, which can be addressed and not anticipated to be a problem. ACHD does support general connectivity, both public and private, throughout the entire project. With regards to Records, ACHD has worked very hard over the last couple of years to get in place a collector network in this general area between Fairview and Ustick and even north of Ustick. And part of that was acquiring property just off of Ustick so we could get Allys Way started to connect to Records. We realize that the applicant doesn't control all of the property, but the connection is critical to this general area. Regarding the west parcel, again, accesses to Fairview need to be evaluated upon completion or ACHD review of the traffic study and., then, access to Eagle Road, we do have many concerns about this and while the applicant states that the right-in, right-out, left-in access is a part. of the Eagle Road plan, I don't believe the Eagle Road plan suggested signalization at that location and that does pose a lot of concern for the highway district and ITD and, again, until we have the opportunity to review how that might work, we are suggesting that no approval of that occur. Additionally, district staff is not supportive of any of the proposed one-eighth right-in, right-out driveways on State Highway 55. The district recognizes that that ultimate decision on Eagle Road will be made by the city and ITD. However, again, as I mentioned, the district pursued the designation and beginning construction for River Valley and Allys Way and Records Avenue and paid for portions of those roadways in order to provide alternatives to the state system. If access points Meridian City Council January 8, 2008 Page 62 of 81 are granted now, then, ACHD's attempt to truly plan and construct a collector roadway system for an area such as this seems to be degraded. So, tonight we respectfully request the following: First and foremost, that this applicant be continued until such a time that a traffic impact study has been submitted to ACRD and ITD and the appropriate review and comment time be allotted. Without that critical information, both agencies cannot accurately determine the improvements necessary to mitigate the impacts of the development to this area, which may include some off-site conditions. Again, we don't know that yet. If this application is not continued and is approved tonight, then, we would request that the city include conditions in the development agreement relative to the applicant being required to comply with ACHD and ITD conditions prior to receiving approval for building permits and occupancy. The problem we are facing right now is that because there aren't any plats associated with -- with this entire site, with the one time divisions that we understand are occurring and the existing parcel lines, there are some building permits that could be issued for some large buildings that would have significant impacts on their own, because ACRD doesn't have statutory authority for those certificate of zoning compliance and conditional use applications. We would request that the city include our conditions that we don't know yet what those are, as part of the development agreement. Otherwise, it's very possible that roadway improvements would not be constructed as necessary. If this application again is not continued and approved tonight, then, the city should clarify that the applicant is responsible for the improvement of the roadways and intersections regardless of any approval of Star funding. If that funding source is not available, the improvements are still necessary and should be constructed and paid for by the developer. ACRD and ITD have no improvements planned or funded for this area. And, finally, if this application is not continued and is approved tonight, then, we request that the city not approve any details related to access onto either the state system or the ACHD system. The proposed access locations should be approved by both ACHD and ITD and cannot be evaluated fully until a traffic impact study has been completed. Again, once we receive a traffic impact study and a more detailed development proposal we will be able to provide you with specific comments and recommendations at that time. Thank you. De Weerd: Question from Council? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Christie, in your comments, as well your request and your recommendations, you indicate our state friends. Have you counseled with them and is this their position or is this just the position that ACHD thought they ought to take? Richardson: Madam Mayor, Councilman Rountree, they have been a part of the discussions. We haven't specifically sat down and said where do you stand... But, of Meridian City Council January 8, 2008 Page 63 of 81 course, the decisions made on the IDT roads affect what occurs on the ACRD roadways. So, this is only our position and not meant to represent their own. Rountree: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Anything further from Council? Thank you. There was someone in the back, I believe, that wanted -- Ryberg: Good evening, Madam Mayor, City Council. My name is Jim Ryberg. I live at 4075 East Meadow Wood Drive, which is approximately -- hello. Wrong way. Right there. I would first like to go on record to say I'm very for this project. I have been very impressed. I have talked to Mr. Wilk an awful lot. He's been very very forthright, I believe -- in wanting to do something with -- to communicate with the neighbors. I'm a long time resident of Meridian. I, actually, went to Meridian High School and graduated when it was the only high school in town. Used to drive to school when that was a four way stop.. And I'm not even that old. And so other than a few years of living in the bedroom community to the east, I am proud to live in Meridian and love what they are doing here. I guess my -- my only concern and I believe that Anna addressed it a little bit, is with this DA-1 that's going in here with the park. I'm glad that Mr. Siddoway is here. I'd like to see what that park's going to be like this week. But my -- our concern as a neighborhood and Anna addressed it a little bit is on this stub streets that come in through here -- and, then, I don't know if maybe you can put on that original site plan -- is that possible? She -- she talked about the stub streets and I believe that was probably referring to my subdivision and,, obviously, we are talking tonight about north- south traffic and all that kind of stuff. My concern is with the park, if there is any cross- access through that park into my subdivision, we suddenly become an east-west lateral to Cloverdale on streets that are relatively unimproved. Basically, if you get any -- there we go. That will work. Basically, you're looking at an undeveloped subdivision right there. You have got a -- you have got two cities you're going through. We have not been annexed. I would actually request that you do annex us into Meridian, rather than to Boise. However, with this park here, if there is any cross-access, we are going - - down here and into Cloverdale. And so it doesn't seem logical to do that. However, no offense, that is something to me that should be planned and thought out here at this particular time or planning with the parks. Like I said, I mean there is nothing better for me to have a 60 acre park wrapping around my property. I have currently got a 200 plus acre park of sod and I wasn't naive enough when I bought this property ten years ago to know that this probably was going to be developed at some point and, like I said, I'm very very happy to see what they are doing and, you know, they have got a cool lifestyle center going on. I think I have got a pretty good lifestyle center going on right there. And so that's basically, you know, my concern and sort of my neighbors. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Meridian City Council January 8, 2008 Page 64 of 81 Stanfield: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Scott Stanfield, Mason Stanfield Engineering, 314 Batiola in Caldwell, Idaho., representing Bach Builders. They are the land owner that is due north along the parcel that is on the east side of Eagle Road and the westerly half, easterly parcel. Right up here. Right here. We have attended the Planning and Zoning meetings. We have met with staff a few times.. We have met with ACHD. De Weerd: I'm sorry, your time is up. Stanfield: With that said I'll stand for questions. And I believe you have a letter in your packet from Bach Builders. We support the project. Don't get us wrong. Our only concern is access. River Valley Road is along their north boundary, our south boundary. Due to the alignment of the existing intersection, River Valley Road needs to be shoved to the south, south of our boundary. So, we do not have the ability on our property to build our half like you traditionally see in most parcels. So, we are stuck. River Valley Road, as we come in with an application, which we hope to be real soon, is our only legal source of access, because of the ordinance you have against Eagle Road. With that said, this is an annexation and as such we believe you have the right to condition it, regardless of whether they are doing phase one now or all of it now, they are coming in with an annexation for the whole thing. So, we would like a condition that requires, sooner than later, and we'll let your staff hammer out when with the applicant, but sooner than later, require them to dedicate the right of way for that portion of River Valley Road and that no spite strips be created, because I understand that alignment is not fully set yet and if it is pushed too far to the south, then, we need some north-south easements. So, we ask for perhaps the right of way now, with the condition that no spite strips be created. We are not asking for the improvements to be made, that would be out of pocket expense that they would not benefit from with their phase one and we would certainly build our half, plus ACHD's typical 12 foot lane for the other half. We would do that as soon as we come in and started developing our site. Again, not asking for them to spend dollars on construction, but to donate to right of way, as they would be required as they develop anyway. It's nothing that they would not be expected to give sometime later. I agree with the neighbors. I have some history on this piece, too. About 30 years ago my classmate lived at that old dairy right there and this is certainly progress. We would all fan our noses at the dairy as we'd come by twice a day and looking back -- and this is a nice project. Our only concern is just the access point. We have to protect our interests and, quite honestly, we are just stuck. So, with that I think I'd stand for any questions. De Weerd: Thank you. Stanfield.: Thank you, Mayor. De Weerd: Steve? Meridian City Council January 8, 2008 Page 65 of 81 Siddoway: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Steve Siddoway, 269 East Cassidy Drive in Meridian. Two comments from a park's perspective. One regarding the park itself, one regarding the pathway. Regarding the park, the concept planning is underway and we would expect to be bringing a concept plan to you in coming months. Currently in what I'd call more of a detailed bubble diagram stage and still very much under development, but I can say that none of the concepts that are being considered include a through connection from those existing neighbor stub streets through the park. I have reviewed the proposed development agreement conditions and they state that those stubs will either need to be cul-de-sac'd or provide the right of way to complete the north-south street that would -- that would complete the connection between the two. But there is no intent at this time to carry those roads through. The second point regarding the pathway currently planned here, the boundary, I have no problem with a shift in that to align with their proposed road, with the condition that they not start and stop independently -- in isolation of the project. They do need to get to the points where they would connect through to the rest of the system. But within that project shifting it to be in alignment with their road is not a concern. De Weerd: So, that would be working with the parks department to find the appropriate alignment? Siddoway: Yes. That would be fine. And 141 stand for any questions. De Weerd: Council, any questions for Steve? Siddoway: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Thanks, Steve. Butler: Good evening, Council -- Mayor and Council. This was a funny thing to be here. It's good to see everybody. Joann Butler, 251 East Front Street and I'm representing Developers Diversified, who is the owner of this center immediately to the south of the project. So, a long standing Meridian citizen. And if this project goes forward, we welcome CenterCal to the busiest intersection of -- in the state and that's what we do know today. It is the busiest intersection in the state. And Planning and Zoning Commission voiced concerns about circulation, especially in connection with Fairview and, of course, that is our client's concern, too. The traffic in the -- the traffic in the area and how it is going to be accommodated for the existing -- for CenterCal and the existing commercial developments. What we also know is CenterCal appears to be a very responsible party regarding traffic analyses and is working with ITD and ACHD, but we also know that traffic study isn't complete as yet. So, with that, one of the things that when we looked at this and understanding what is before the Council with the annexation and the rezone, it made us question whether or not the Council could make its findings that you have to make for your rezoning and if the city cannot make the finding that the rezoning will not result in an adverse impact on the delivery of services Meridian City Council January 8, 2008 Page 66 of 81 by other political subdivision -- in this case ITD and ACHD, then, it would seem that the rezone itself is premature. And that is your criteria. However, it might be that what the city is looking at is to enable you to make that finding is having a development agreement and the development agreement with conditions of approval are conditions that require and as your code requires that development agreement can be done within one year's time.. If the city is saying that there won't be development until the road plans have been approved that accommodate the intersection designs and accommodate CenterCal and other travelers through that area, well, then, maybe action tonight is appropriate with that development agreement. So, that's our client's concern. Really, what we are asking for is kind of to be involved through the city being made aware of meetings and hearings that are coming up with regard to traffic. We'd ask CenterCal through the city to also -- and I spoke with CenterCal a little bit before the hearing, to be at a seat with their table. We have traffic engineers of our own and would be glad to share our information with them and work collaboratively to see if we can come to -- know they are working very hard and have excellent engineers on this and I know we do, too. And that collaborative exercise could probably get the most information out there fora collective, not only working with the agencies, but working with the commercial neighbors in the area, too. So, I think that's what I'm asking, that CenterCal work closely with its other commercial neighbors to come up with -- and the agencies to come up with a solution for the intersection and the road design and have that as a condition or a portion of the development agreement that development not go forward until that happens. De Weerd: Thank you. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Rountree: Just so I'm clear on the offer that was made, was the offer to assist or provide traffic engineering information and to sit down and craft a solution? Butler: The offer was to have our traffic engineers, who understand their circulation patterns and how Fairview functions today, and how Eagle Road in that area functions today, to review, comment on, provide any information that they can to assist CenterCal in its traffic engineering. Rountree: And are those folks that you're representing willing to move toward implementation if some of the issues are related to the traffic they generate? Butler: We didn't discuss that. I think -- I would imagine -- we did not discuss that. We just -- as I came here tonight they said.., you know, we have traffic engineers, would love to, you know, sit down with everybody and go over that. I'm going to make an assumption, may not be correct, but I'm going to make the assumption that -- Meridian City Council January 8, 2008 Page 67 of 81 Rountree: Better be careful. Butler: That -- De Weerd: She's an attorney. Butler: As approved that the -- that when approved that that particular center met all the requirements of ACHD, ITD, and the city. Things may have changed because of other developments in the area, but I'm assuming that they did meet all the requirements at the time. Rountree: Thank you. De Weerd.: Okay. Additional comment? Mike? Ballantyne: Good morning. Rountree: Not quite. Ballantyne: Not quite. 10:30. De Weerd: You have three minutes. Ballantyne: Michael Ballantyne. 250 South 5th, Boise, Idaho. Just a couple items. You should have received in your packet a request from the Kleiner family. I'm here speaking on behalf of the Kleiner family. You should have received a real simple request for clarification and both Anna and Steve Siddoway discussed that. One was just that -- the property's currently agricultural. As is well known, this is a very reluctant seller and they want to continue to farm the property, receive their agricultural exemption, and there was some question as to whether the ordinance and -- would allow a continued use of the property for agricultural purposes for -- under the urban farm provision.. So, they wanted specific language in there that said, yes, it is an urban farm. The other is the pathway requirement and Mr. Siddoway referenced that, asking that we have two pathways, rather than three, because of additional pathway that Sonya picked up out of the pathways plan and there is some specific language that we ask that that be incorporated into the agreement as well. That's it. De Weerd: Thank you. Any questions for Mr. Ballantyne? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: Okay. Thanks, Mike. Okay. Any additional testimony? Would the applicant like to have the last word? Meridian City Council January 8, 2008 Page 68 of 81 Canning: Madam Mayor, before the applicant comes back up, in considering Mrs. Butler's comments, you know, we are used to having ACHD's conditions of approval attached to most of our applications and we are probably lacking something in the development agreement agreements that ties building permit -- release of a building permit to some sort of ACRD approval. We do on the east side of Eagle between Records and River Valley required a plat prior to the fifth building permit, but that's the only guaranteed time that ACRD would have review, other than a certificate of zoning compliance, which may be too late, so that may need to be added to the DA. Wilk: So, I get 45 minutes, is that right? Okay. Bird: Four or five minutes. Wilk: Four or five minutes. Three or four minutes. I will be brief. Actually, in summation, I think the comments are great. We really like getting that input from our neighbors, from our colleagues. What I would ask is I would urge Council to -- to approve the variance and the zoning and the annexation. In the case of the zoning and annexation, there aren't as many issues to address, obviously, because I think we seem to be focused on the transportation issues and rightly so. So, I would urge City Council to approve the variance -- this allows us the flexibility to continue to work with ITD and ACRD to find the right solution and so if you would be so kind as to do that and we can keep our momentum, we can keep pursuing these quality tenants and the quality project that we ultimately want to produce. So, I thank you for your time. I apologize for the late evening. And if you have any further questions we will be happy to answer them. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Council, do you have questions? Bird: I have none.. Rountree: I have none. Zaremba: I don't have questions, but I do have some discussion. Are we ready for opinions? De Weerd: Discussion. Uh-huh. Zaremba: Okay. One, we have been hearing that this was coming for so long and I'm thrilled to see it coming and I think in overall concept it can be an excellent addition to Meridian and a good place for it. As always, the devil is in the details. I do agree that when they asked to annex 285 -- 258 acres as opposed to only annexing the 51 that they want to develop first, we do have the right to discuss the perimeter and to make requirements that the roads be completed or at least the -- if not the road actually Meridian City Council January 8, 2008 Page 69 of 81 paved, that the easements be established and given to ACHD. On the subject of ACHD and this is from having been in on the Planning and Zoning Commission for so long, while I was there we generally would not pass anything forward to the City Council without seeing ACHD's -- not only report, but approval of their Commission and, one, I'm surprised that our Commission -- that our Planning and Zoning Commission forwarded it without seeing that. My feeling is I would not be able to find for this variance without seeing both ACHD's and, separately, ITD's analysis of the traffic study. So, while I think this is -- this is -- has a future as being an excellent project -- and I'm glad that it is moving along at some point, my instinct is that we need to continue this until we have heard from the agencies. I mean we ask for ACHD's help all the time and this time they have asked us for our help and I think they deserve it. De Weerd': Thank you. Additional comment? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I don't disagree with what Councilman Zaremba has said.. I think that there might be another way to look at it in terms of what we have before us this evening. We have two items, one's the annexation and zoning, and I think most of the issues that have been raised tonight we can -- we can be quite specific in a development agreement with those. With respect to the traffic issues -- and the last comment I heard from the applicant about, well, they need the variance in order to talk to ITD and ACRD. Quite frankly, I don't know that avariance -- or the City of Meridian's position has really made a heck of a lot of difference to ITD. Typically we deal with the variances with our ordinances that relates to state highways after the Idaho Transportation Department has given the access to the applicant. So, if they are using that as an excuse, that's a poor excuse. I guess my position is I could see we may be able to fashion the agreement of the annexation and zoning and development agreement language tonight, but I don't see how we can act at all on the variance with respect to ACHD's comments. Certainly address their issues in the development agreement and wait until after the traffic analysis is done to finalize the verbiage in the development agreement as it relates to traffic and traffic-related issues. We don't have that information and that's not our area of expertise. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I believe what we are saying is supporting each other. Rountree: Yeah. Meridian City Council January 8, 2008 Page 70 of 81 Zaremba: But I -- to put another nail in it, to me, after the City of Meridian and ITD has spent so long working out development along state highways ordinance., it would send the wrong signal to ITD for us to approve this variance before we have heard from them. Councilman Rountree said it, but I agree, I'm not ready to act on the variance for sure. De Weerd: Okay. Additional comments? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird.. Bird.: I agree with both of them, but I do have something different to say. It all of a sudden our last half mile we are going to get serious about entrances and stuff, when you go all the way -- if you go from State Street to Chinden there is 13 or 14 curb cuts on one side and 15 or 16 on the other side. You go just south of this existing thing and count the curb cuts between there and Blue Cross and we are worrying about two curb cuts right now in the deal. I mean I wish we did have the reports. I have never -- I have really never seen ITD come in with a good report to us, if you want to know the truth. ACHD's always been very good partners with us. They have always waited -- ITD is always waiting for us to make the decision, so I can -- I can delay this part. I do believe we can do the zoning, but I have no problem passing the variance either and voting on it. Canning: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Canning.: I just -- I need to be -- accept a little accountability for having this project before you without ACRD comments. Part of the reason that we sort of encouraged Planning and Zoning Commission to make a recommendation was ACHD's painfully backlogged on their evaluation of their traffic impact studies and it was going to be I believe March or April before they felt they could get this evaluated once they got it. And they haven't got it yet. So, it was a significant delay in the project and our general sentiment has been to get things before you in a timely manner and we didn't feel we could do that while still waiting for the ACRD comments. So, I do need to take some of the brunt of that criticism for the Planning and Zoning Commission, so -- De Weerd: Thank you, Anna. Is there any additional information needed from the applicant? Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd.: Mr. Borton. Meridian City Council January 8, 2008 Page 71 of 81 Borton: I as well -- I'm comfortable going forward today with the annexation for sure and the variance as well and one item that -- we haven't closed the Public Hearing and I guess, Andy, I would pose it to you, Christie had made -- had made a suggestion that if we don't delay it and await the ITD or -- and ACHD traffic impact study, that the approval be conditioned upon your agreement to comply with whatever their requirements are. Do you have comment on that? Is that -- is that a problem? Is that a solution? Bruning: Madam Mayor and Councilor, that would -- De Weerd: If you would state your name for the record. Bruning: My credibility is eroding as we go. Fred Bruning. I apologize. Our interest are your interests. We would not do this if we didn't believe the traffic would work and it weren't the right thing. At the same time, Councilor, I agree it's interesting to see the street up and down and say, well, the last two are going to be the ones, because we really think they are going to work better. But conditioning an approval or the variance by saying subject to review and approval of the final traffic study and review of ACHD's comments, would be fine with us, because it keeps the process moving and that's, really, what we are trying to do. We are not trying to make a decision without the right data, we just want to keep rolling along and not being delayed just because of a backlog or not being able to get something moving. De Weerd: And see, Fred., I think that's why Council is considering, you know, taking action., but leaving the transportation element and both the DA and the variance open. We'd like to see you again. But it is that important. Bruning: And we agree. We agree. So, whatever your decision would be tonight, we' will accept it as -- we'd like to, because we're trying to get the project done as quickly as we can, because there are competing factors out there as well. De Weerd: You know, frankly, Fred, I guess I'm surprised that the traffic impact study is not done. I mean we have been talking to you for a long time and Kittleson and really was surprised to find out that this piece was still hanging out there. Bruning: As I am I. But, Madam Mayor, the reason I think it's not done yet is it's not a made as instructed traffic study. There is a lot of those out there. This is a traffic study where we asked Kittleson to get it right and they are taking -- De Weerd: You have support. We heard it tonight. Resources, from what I heard, so -- Bruning: Sure. Again -- anyway, we are happy to get that input, it's just, again, we really want it to be right and I think if you check with the guys at Kittleson what they will tell you is we didn't ask them to come up with a result, we asked them to come up with Meridian City Council January 8, 2008 Page 72 of 81 the right answer, not only for us, but for the community, and that's, really, the only reason we are pursuing Star, because we know in our heart that's the right answer for the community, even though we are really making up for a lot of other people's goofs by doing that. De Weerd: And you're exactly right. Bruning: So, we still stand prepared to do that. De Weerd.: And that is greatly appreciated. And I guess, Christie, one thing I would ask from ACRD, hearing of the backlog, that this -- this also be given a priority, if that is an option, because of their -- their offer to use Star to hopefully achieve some of the transportation goals in that area. Richardson: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, just for your general information, this fall we did implement an expedited review of traffic impact studies. We don't currently charge for that review time of planning and engineering staff. The expedited review charges a small fee and you get bumped up the list. At the meeting this week that was mentioned and we will work with them. Again, we can't expedite anything until we have something to review, but -- De Weerd: Exactly. Richardson: -- we can certainly commit to doing that and have started that process with Kittleson. Good deal. De Weerd: Okay. Council, any further information needed? Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Gorton: Another question, Fred. Up and down. Up and down. I just want to be clear and fair, because one of Christie's comments in her written notes also makes reference to if we go forward tonight and there is a requirement and a condition to comply with all ACRD requirements, it also states that -- that, quote, the applicant is responsible for the improvements of the roadways and intersections, regardless of Star's funding -- funding sources and available., the improvements are still necessary and can be -- should be constructed and paid for by the developer -- I read that to mean the widening from the freeway to the half mile north of Fairview and if that's a requirement of ACRD that that be done regardless, if I'm reading that right, hearing that right, is that an obligation that -- Meridian City Council January 8, 2008 Page 73 of 81 Bruning: I'm Fred Bruning with CenterCal Properties. Got that right this time. You know, the real problem is it's overloading too much cost on the project to do that. I mean if DDR and everyone else up and down the road would pay their fair share of a problem that they have helped create, then, that would be fair. New projects have just recently been developed all up and down the street with no concurrency requirements and so, you know, we feel -- it's a very expensive thing for us to do Star. We get no interest on that money. It's millions of dollars that it costs us, even though we do get reimbursed for the cost, but there is interest carry over time. And so, you know, we feel that that helps us get the job done. To put all those burdens on us, the last project -- you know, the last brick in the -- in the project, we really didn't cause those problems and I -- and so I think it would be unfair to ask us to do that. Now, with respect to other things, like the Records Road improvements, you know, our goal is to buy the north parcel and if we are able to acquire it, we will build that complete road. We have no problem. doing it, but it's hard for us to do it when you don't own the adjacent property. That's our only concern. Gorton: Madam Mayor? And I wasn't asking or suggesting that you do. I was just trying to clarify if that was their understanding and maybe I read that wrong, you guys said you were going to comply. I didn't want to throw you under the bus to agree to something you didn't want to agree to. That's all. Bruning: Well, again, I thought my agreement was to say to -- on the traffic issues, to get all the information in front of the Council, in front of ACHD, have the findings -- I guess if that were a requirement of this regardless of Star, we probably would not be able to build the project. Borton: Sure. Bruning: And so it takes us down the road to a not successful result, but if the requirements are reasonable and fair relative to our project, we will find a way to make it happen and we are hopeful of having the Star funding and getting the -- the bigger project done as well, because it's -- we view that as a gift to the community, not a requirement of our project. De Weerd: And., Council, I guess I would say, you know, I appreciate your continued commitment to Star and we are also working with our legislative representatives to clean up some of the language legislatively and in the Star legislation, so that there is a greater comfort level and certainly more of a surety of that payback for -- that is a large investment and Eagle Road is not the cause of necessarily any one project on Eagle, it is the cause that it's the only north-south functional -- I guess if you call it functional -- connection that has a river crossing, a railroad crossing and an interchange. And so it is hard looking at the last piece of the puzzle and bearing a burden, it's just nice that the last piece of the puzzle has the kind of developers that want to do the right thing and we Meridian Ciry Council January 8, 2008 Page 74 of 81 are eager to -- to pursue those opportunities with you. Anything further from Council? If not, what would you like to do? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd.: Councilman Rountree. Rountree: Seeing no further testimony and I don't hear anymore discussion, I move that we close the public hearings on Items -- sort out my -- 19 and 20. Bird.: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to close the public hearings on Items 19 and 20. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Zaremba; Opposed.. De Weerd: Okay. Motion passes. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Okay. Rountree: We can reopen them. De Weerd: Okay. Discussion? Rountree: Madam Mayor, having closed both hearings, we may potentially want to reopen at least one of them, but I thought that we would close it for a motion to see where we go. De Weerd.: Okay. Zaremba: Madam Mayor, Councilman Rountree anticipates that my objection was to closing the variance hearing. De Weerd: On 20. I know. Okay. And we can always reopen 20. Zaremba.: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. I can wait him out. Rountree: Okay. We will start. Madam Mayor, I move that we approve Item No. 19, annexation and zoning, 258.38 acres for Meridian Town Center, subject to the Meridian City Council January 8, 2008 Page 75 of 81 development of a development agreement. That in addition to those spoken to this evening by staff and included in their comments, also including item number two on page four of the memorandum from Ada County Highway District, January 8th, 2008. And item four and a condition as well with respect to transportation facilities, that the applicant would be responsible for any transportation infrastructure improvements that are a direct result from this application. That there be a dedication of the right of way for the River Valley Road in the northern portion. That the development agreement reflects the shift in the pathway on the western parcel to be adjacent to the roadway and that the specifics be worked out with the parks and recreation department. Direct the developer to work with the adjacent developers to the south and their offer to share traffic and general knowledge of what's going on in the area. The development agreement also addressed the condition with respect to the urban farm classification and that the farming and agricultural activities would -- could be maintained on the parcel until such time as it's developed.. And I don't hear anybody whispering anything else in my ear, so that's my motion. Bird: Include staff and -- Zaremba: I will second that. Rountree: Include staff and comment -- and applicant comments, yes. Zaremba: I will second that, but I would ask for one clarification and that is on the subject of, really, River Valley Road, I would ask that we also include some statement to the effect that either -- either that dedication will be right along their north property line or if it's not, that they work out cross-access with the property owner to the north. Rountree: Madam Mayor, I believe that the concern was that there be no spite strip developed and I would add that to my motion. Zaremba: Second accepts. De Weerd: Okay. Anna, did you have a question? Canning: Yes, ma'am. If the maker of the motion could clarify the timing of the construction of the facilities, because I think no one's arguing about the construction of Records Road and River Valley and the dedication of that right of way, it's the timing of the improvements. So, if I could have some assistance from the motion maker on that. Rountree: From this motion maker's position, the timing of the development of Records Road would be a portion of the roadway adjacent to the parcel subject to development agreement number three would be developed in conjunction with the initial phases of that project to provide emergency facility and access and that the portion of that extended north and River Valley Road be completed -- at least their half of that road be Meridian City Council January 8, 2008 Page 76 of 81 completed at such time as the development occurs on that northern portion of development agreement parcel number two, but that the dedicated right of way be identified and dedicated in such a way as there is no spite strip developed on River Valley Road. Canning: Thank you., sir. Zaremba: The second agrees that the intent was that the pavement could happen later, but that the dedication of the right of way should be in agreement. Second agrees. De Weerd: Mr. Nary, did you -- since you help write this up, are you good? Do you have any questions? Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I mean I'm glad Mr. Willis takes accurate notes. But I do believe -- I think it's -- at least it's clear to me what -- what the intent is, so, yes. De Weerd: Okay. Rountree: And., Madam Mayor, I would add one clarification to ACHD's request in item two, the last line of item two it says -- or the second to the last line and it says this -- within this site are subject to ACHD requirements, I would change the word requirements to project specific comments. De Weerd: Okay. Anything further? Hearing none, we have a motion and a second. Mr. Berg, will you, please call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Okay. Item 20. Rountree: Madam Mayor, I'm not in a position to make a motion on that. My motion would be to reopen it and continue it until such time as ITD and ACHD have been provided the opportunity to review the traffic studies and provide comments to the applicant, as well as the city. Zaremba: That could be a motion that I would second, to reopen the hearing and continue it. De Weerd: Okay. The motion would need to be to reopen. Rountree: Madam Mayor, I move to reopen the Public Hearing on Item No. 20. Meridian City Council January 8, 2008 Page 77 of 81 Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: Okay. We have a motion and a second to reopen the Public Hearing on Item 20. All those in favor say aye. Zaremba: Madam Mayor, I would comment that I don't believe anybody left the room while we thought it was closed. De Weerd:: Excuse me. I haven't -- I didn't hear everyone vote. Any opposed say nay. Bird: Nay. Borton: Nay. De Weerd: Okay. Well, we have -- do I break that kind of tie? Rountree: Yes, you do. Bird: Yes, you do. Zaremba: This is the first tie we have had.. De Weerd: Okay. Well, then, I -- on opening a Public Hearing. I would vote aye to reopen the Public Hearing. MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES. TWO NAYS. MAYOR AYE. De Weerd: Okay. Now that it's open, what would you like to do? Rountree.: For clarification from Will or counsel -- Berg: Specific date. Rountree: -- does this have to have a date specific? Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, you would need to set it for a date specific and I think the testimony was that you don't probably have one, but you can certainly set it 30 days or -- to keep it on track. I know you don't like to continuously continue things either. De Weerd: I guess, Council, the discussion I'd like to pose to you is we had a split vote there -- I do know the direction that the motion maker had to open the Public Hearing, but what I don't know is what the other two -- what direction you're looking at, so -- Meridian City Council January 8, 2008 Page 78 of 81 Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: I'm comfortable going forward today on -- De Weerd.: On the variance. Borton: -- on the variance issue, but understanding it's an important decision and if at least two of the Council members, you know, feel more comfortable -- and I totally respect that, waiting and desiring that -- that traffic impact study before so, then, wouldn't want to stand in the way of making sure that information is provided to help everyone make a decision. So, to that extent. If getting it reset makes it the best opportunity to get it done right, then, I won't stand in the way of it. We look at maybe February 19th. De Weerd.: Council, I guess, just to clarify why I felt inclined to reopen the Public Hearing, is I don't see an issue of -- of approving the variances. You have done that up and down Eagle Road, so I don't know what makes this different. Now, if you had asked me up by Ustick what my opinion was, you heard it, then. I thought it was inconsistent with our ordinance, but we have set precedent -- Bird: And we set it. De Weerd: -- on Eagle Road and this, with the center medians in there., this makes that stretch a lot more -- it's safer than any other stretch where you have approved the variance. And so I just thought it was important to have the dialogue and the ability for the applicant to comment if -- if they needed to. And that is why I voted to open this Public Hearing again. But it is up to you on -- if you want to continue. I felt comfortable that the sections in the DA being open to the transportation elements were key and a lot of the concerns can be taken care of in those. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I, too, agree with what Joe said, I'd like to go ahead. I mean how can you -- how can you -- the last half mile of development on Eagle Road., you're going to change your rules and regulations. Right up to the north of this we allowed them in and David was probably the only one that didn't -- wasn't on -- sitting on the Council at that time. And, then, all of a sudden we are doing this. Now, if we are reopening it, we are going to come back for something. Are we going to come back for a four hour Public Hearing and discuss everything again or what muse does the Council want to hear? Meridian City council January 8, 2008 Page 79 of 81 Rountree: Madam Mayor, let me explain my position. The examples tonight have been use, well, we have got it on Eagle Road in other places. Well, those other places on Eagle Road are exactly why we have the ordinance we have today. We had problems and the city attempted to try to resolve those through ordinance. Every instance that I know of that the city has approved a variance on Eagle Road after the ordinance was a situation where the city had denied access, the applicants continued their transportation studies and impact analysis and submitted them to ITD. ITD, in turn, approved those points of access. The applicants, then, came back to the city and the city, then, varied the ordinance based on ITD's action. I'm not comfortable varying our ordinance without a reason to vary them. We don't have a traffic analysis. Neither does ACHD and neither does ITD. I don't have a problem varying them at some point in time in the future, if that's what comes out of the analysis, but right now I think it's premature. That's my position and that's why. I don't disagree with what Keith's saying, it's already there, we have it in place, but we went through -- we got to where we are because we had issues, not because we are doing something different and we are not changing the rules here anymore than the rules were at application someplace else. I think if we approve the variance tonight without information, then, you bet, we are changing the rules. De Weerd.: Very good point. Do you have a motion? Zaremba: Madam Mayor, I would just echo that, that I think it's premature. I promise to be open minded when this does come back, but I would like to see the analysis from the transportation agencies. My motion would be to continue the variance VAR 07-017 to the regularly scheduled meeting of February 19th, with the hope that there would be some traffic analysis by then. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to continue this item to February 19th. All those in favor say aye. Okay. Those opposed? Bird: Opposed. Gorton: I knew you would be. Bird: Well, you know, Center Pointe and all those have been done since the UDC has been changed.. We never changed anything. We did that before ITD -- De Weerd: But it did go through a process, Mr. Bird, and -- Bird: No different than this. Meridian City Council January 8, 2008 Page 80 of 81 De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE NAY. Item 21: Election of New City Council Officers: De Weerd.: Oh, we still have something left. Okay. Council, the ball is in your court on Item 21. Election of City Council officers. Bird:: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: I guess -- yes. Bird.: Mr. President -- who is going to run it? De Weerd: I will. Zaremba: I move that Charlie Rountree be nominated as president of the Council. De Weerd: Okay. I have a nomination to vote in Councilman Rountree for -- as president. Do I have any further nominations? Gorton: Second.. De Weerd,: I have a second. Okay. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Bird: Madam Mayor, I would nominate Mr. Zaremba as vice-president. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and asecond -- or a nomination and a second. Any further nomination? If not, all those in favor of Mr. Zaremba. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Item 22: Executive Session per Idaho State Code 67-2345(1)(f) - (to consider and advise its legal representatives in pending litigation); Bird: Madam Mayor, I move that we go into Executive Session per Idaho State Code 67-2345(1)(f).