HomeMy WebLinkAboutFebruary 26, 2008 C/C MinutesMeridian City Council
February 26, 2008
Page 24 of 77
Rountree: Just a question, Madam Mayor. On any action we take does this require a
resolution, ordinance, or both?
Nary: Resolution.
Rountree: Resolution.. Okay. Madam Mayor, I move that we approve Item No. 9, the
Comprehensive Plan amendment, and instruct staff to prepare a resolution that
indicates approval of these changes. Is there a statutory effective date required on that?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Rountree, we will make
it effective on approval of the resolution.
Rountree: Okay.
Nary: Since this is a text amendment -- or map.
Rountree.: That's my intent, then.
De Weerd.: Okay. Second agree?
Zaremba: Second agrees.
De Weerd: Okay. Any further discussion? Madam Clerk, will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Boston, absent.
MOTION CARRIES: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Okay. Anna, I guess I would ask. This is the end of the Comprehensive Plan
amendments, can we get updated maps in all the appropriate places?
Canning: We have a list.
Friedman: Yes, Madam Mayor, Council Members, we will be meeting with our GIS folks
probably next week and we will sit down. We have a number of amendments that we
need to add to our map, so --
De Weerd: It will be exciting to see a new one and that it exists for a little while.
Friedman: Thank you. We have already had a volunteer to hand carry the new prints
over here, so -
Item 10: Public Hearing.: RZ 07-017 Request for Rezone of 5.29 acres from R-8
zone to C-G zone (1..62 acres) and L-O zone (3.67 acres) for Verona
Meridian City Council
February 26, 2008
Page 25 of 77
Commercial by Primeland Development Group, LLC -Northeast Corner
of West McMillan Road and North Ten Mile Road.:
Item 11: Public Hearing: PP 07-022 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 12
commercial lots and 2 other lots on 18.82 acres in the proposed C-G and
L-O zoning districts for Verona Commercial by Primeland Development
Group, LLC -Northeast Corner of West McMillan Road and North Ten
Mile Road:
Item 12: Public Hearing: MI 07-013 Request for Miscellaneous application to
modify the Recorded Development Agreement for Verona Commercial
by Primeland Development Group, LLC -Northeast Corner of West
McMillan Road and North Ten Mile Road:
Item 13: Public Hearing: RZ 07-018 Request for a Rezone of 12.64 acres from R-
4 to an L-O zone for Bridgetower Crossing Office by Primeland
Development Group, LLC -Southwest Corner of West McMillan Road and
North Linder Road:
Item 14: Public Hearing.: PP 07-023 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 11
commercial lots and 2 other lots on 10.2 acres in the proposed L-O zoning
district for Bridgetower Crossing Office by Primeland Development
Group., LLC -Southwest Corner of West McMillan Road and North Linder
Road.:
Item 15: Public Hearing: MI 07-014 Request for a Miscellaneous application to
modify the recorded Development Agreement for Bridgetower Crossing
Office by Primeland Development Group, LLC -Southwest Corner of
West McMillan Road and North Linder Road.:
Item 16: Public Hearing: RZ 07-022 Request for a Rezone of 7.37 acres from C-
G and R-4 to C-N zones and a Rezone of 5.88 acres from R-4 to L-O
zones for Bridgetower Crossing Commercial by Primeland
Development Group, LLC -east of North Ten Mile Road and south of
West McMillan Road:
Item 17: Public Hearing: PP 07-026 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 8
commercial lots and 1 other lot in the proposed C-N zone for Bridgetower
Crossing Commercial by Primeland Development Group, LLC -east of
North Ten Mile Road and south of West McMillan Road:
De Weerd: All right. Okay. Our next items are 10, 11 -- 10 through 17 and it's RZ 07-
017, PP 07-022, MI 07-013, RZ 07-018, PP 07-023, MI 07-014, RZ 07-022 and PP 07-
026. Iwill open these public hearings with staff comments.
Meridian City Council
February 26, 2008
Page 26 of 77
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, thank you for opening all those items.
For the benefit of any public that may have snuck in that I didn't get a chance to talk to,
we did ask Mayor and Council to consider all of these, because the development
agreements are intertwined and we didn't want to have to repeat testimony with regard
to the development agreements. I will go through each project one by one., so you will
have three projects and three discussions on appropriate development agreements for
those, so -- having said that, we are going to start with the Verona Commercial project.
It's located at the northeast corner of Ten Mile and McMillan. It's 18.82 acres and the
existing zoning is C-G and R-8, as you can see on a small portion of the property right
there. The applications before you tonight are a rezone and preliminary plat. The
proposed development includes 12 nonresidential building lots and two others on the
18..82 acres and there are ten buildings shown on the submitted concept plan. The
Comprehensive Plan designation is both commercial and office. We are proposing a
new development agreement specifically for this area, so that we don't have to
reference the old Verona planned development agreements, so that we are asking for a
brand new one that applies only to this area. Just to back up a little bit on those histories
of the DA -- so, this area was proposed as commercial area and was originally subject
to both the Bridgetower Crossing DA and those are the properties currently zoned C-G
and the Corona DA. Those are the properties currently zoned R-8. And they are
currently proposed for both L-O on the east side and, then, C-G on the west side of
those R-8 areas. Staff is tying the developer to the elevations submitted with the
application and those same elevations will be used for each development agreement
that we have discussed tonight. By developing a new DA for this commercial and office
area, staff believes it will allow for more efficient implementation of the DA and more
consistent implementation of the DA over time. So, we are recommending a new
development agreement for this area and it would contain the following provisions: The
proposed commercial and office building shall be constructed with high quality
materials, including, but not limited to, stucco, wood and brick, with substantial stone
accents, four-sided architecture, highlighted main entrances, stamped decorative
concrete, composite or the roofing material, variations in color, roof planes, and parapet
heights. And those are related to the elevations that we will show you that -- we have six
photos. So, those are kind of sample elevations that led to that list, but they will be tied
to these elevations as well. And, then, for this project a minimum of nine buildings with
no one building exceeding 50,000 square feet, shall be constructed on -- within this area
and the maximum allowable nonresidential square footage for the development shall be
225,000 square feet. And the development of the site shall generally conform to the site
plan. Okay. That's the recommendation that's coming forward from the Planning and
Zoning Commission, who did recommend approval at their December 6, 2007, Public
Hearing. Chuck Christensen spoke for the applicant. Gary Payne, a resident of Verona
Subdivision spoke in opposition. There was no one else commenting and no written
testimony. Key issues of discussion by the Commission were they discussed the
impacts of the through traffic entering the surrounding residential neighborhoods and
those were concerns raised by Mr. Payne. The majority of the Commission felt the
commercial project would not impact the residential neighborhoods. Furthermore, it
would provide access for the residents of the Verona community, rather than forcing
them out onto arterials to access the commercial development. They also discussed the
Meridian City Council
February 26, 2008
Page 27 of 77
access points along Ten Mile and McMillan, the history of the commercial lots for the
proposed development, and the planned intersection improvements at Linder and
McMillan. The key Commission changes to the staff recommendation -- they modified
condition 2.15 and deleted the reference to the Fair Housing Act, since there is no
housing in this project. The outstanding issues before City Council -- currently, the DA
provisions read that the applicant should construct a minimum of nine buildings. The
applicant would like that number decreased to five buildings.. And staff is recommending
that the Commission -- or the Council add an additional provision to this DA that drive
access needs to be stubbed to the eastern property line for the two office lots for future
connectivity. Let me get an overall -- these lots are all approved office lots with -- they
still have R-8 zoning on them, but these are approved for office uses. They do -- there is
about four or five lots there that were preliminary platted and, then, just for reference,
because I know this was an issue, the Selway Apartments are on the property just to
the north of that. So, we are recommending that the two lots here on the east have drive
aisle access that connects to those L-O lots, so that we get future connectivity. The
applicant did call me today about this issue and it is an outstanding issue. We do try and
get cross-access where ever possible. One consideration may be that maybe we just
get one of those lots, the southern lot, to provide that cross-access and not worry about
the northern lot, which is closer to the residential development. So, if we could get
cross-access at least on this south lot it would be beneficial to get through traffic among
the commercial development. And with that I will answer any other questions Council
may have.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, questions on this item?
Bird.: I have none at this point.
De Weerd: Okay. Do you want to go through all of these or you want to do them item by
item? Okay. Is there public testimony on this application? I didn't show anyone as
signing up, but is there any testimony desired?
Canning: Madam Mayor, you might ask the applicant.
De Weerd: Oh. Well, they didn't jump up and down either. That's right. I guess I do have
to ask the applicant, uh. Would the applicant like to come forward at this time.
I always thought it was so strange that no one was standing forward.
Larsen: Madam Mayor, Members of the City Council, my name is Cornell Larsen.
Address is 210 Murray in Garden City. I'm here tonight representing the application on
this project. A lot of our comments that were -- are pretty well directed to all of the
projects. A lot of the staff conditions carry through from each project and they go on for
-- for the three hearings you have before you tonight, so I could certainly address those
now or at the end, but in this particular case I can take this one and., then, come back
again and repeat the testimony for each subsequent one after or I can do it once,
whatever you would prefer to -- to do.
Meridian City Council
February 26, 2008
Page 28 of 77
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd.: It would probably be helpful, Cornell, if you could do it -- the specifics on
each one --
Larsen: On each one?
De Weerd: -- as they are presented..
Larsen: Okay.
Zaremba: Thank you.
Larsen: Be happy to do that.
De Weerd: Okay.
Larsen: We have read the staff report and I also have -- just so you know, I have Chuck
Christensen here who is with me tonight with Quadrant and he may need to answer
some questions, if you have questions on platting, because I'm not sure I'm up to speed
on that, but I am on the rest of the project. So, he may need to come up and visit with
you if you have a question there. We have looked at the staff report and we wanted to
suggest some modifications to the conditions -- to the bullet points under the Verona
development agreement. First, I'd like to talk about the building materials. We submitted
many photos to staff and they had picked the ones that you have seen in the staff
report, but we actually submitted probably 30 or 40 photos. So, the photos that are in
the packet are not necessarily consistent with what our long range plan is. We would
like to have a little more flexibility in the materials and type of design of the buildings.
Those buildings were geared towards a smaller user and as we move through the
Verona project we may have the bigger buildings that may have one or two entries, may
have common areas, may have other things, so we would like to have some flexibility
on the types of materials that we might use in the building and, again, we did submit
quite a few photos and staff has selected some good looking buildings and we did some
upgraded buildings on that site and -- in an effort to attract some users to a new retail
area. What we would like to suggest is that we -- after the word four-sided architecture
we add the term where needed.. There may be instances where we have a building that
may not need four-sided architecture, it may need -- may not need glass on all four
sides. But it may need some decoration or some relief on all four sides. So, we'd like to
add the words where needed. The stamp and decorative concrete, we'd certainly like to
use that selectively, not everywhere. We would like some flexibility on the roofing. If it all
has to be composite roofing and the roofing, that, in itself, won't work for us, because we
will probably have some flat roofs and some -- maybe even some metal accents. So,
we'd like you to consider changing that to also allow us to do some flat roofs and maybe
some metal accent roofing. As far as the elevations conforming to the photos that we
have submitted., again, we would just like to have a little more flexibility in those
particular buildings. I believe we submitted pictures from various projects, including
Meridian City Council
February 26, 2008
Page 29 of 77
Silverstone, EI Dorado, Boise Research Center and a lot of the buildings in those
projects are fairly nice and would be fine in this facility as we move forward with this
development. I think staff recommended five -- a minimum of five buildings with no
building exceeding 50,000 square feet and we are okay with that change. What we were
trying not to do is get a whole bunch of small buildings on the site and we would like to
make sure that the minimum number of buildings does give us flexibility for size. As you
probably all know at Silverstone and EI Dorado and some of the other projects I have
been involved in, we have made many lot splits and many lot line adjustments.
Commercial development, unfortunately, is a little different than residential and we have
to adjust to the user and as a result of that we have to adjust the lot lines according to
some of the users we get. So, that reducing the minimum number of lots will help us to
-- required minimum number of lots will help us to make sure that we can adjust
accordingly. There was a comment on generally conforming to the concept plan. Sort of
as I just explained., as you know, I don't know that our concept plan for Silverstone and
EI Dorado has came out exactly or even close to what he had initially submitted, so we
want to make sure that you understand that it is a concept plan and we do need the
flexibility in order to move forward with a commercial development, so we'd like to have
you add some wording in there that may state that we must meet the requirements of
the current UDC, so that we can have a little bit of flexibility in the -- in the concept plan
and not be locked into it as it's currently designed. Then, the last comment we had was
on the connection to the adjacent property. We have made over time commitments to
the people that have bought in Bridgetower that we would try not to connect those
properties together for traffic reasons and for circulation through the project. We
understand connectivity, but we would -- we might suggest that we make a connection
with a pathway system and it might be in this general area right here. We have an
easement through there that we could certainly make a pathway connection that might
allow users from the adjacent property to come over into this -- into the facility itself and
use whatever buildings or services are in that project. Just a brief overview of the
master plan. We had potentially looked at a gas station facility here. We were exploring
a car wash here. We have some interest in a couple of drive-thru banks, smaller fast
food retail has looked at it. Up in this particular area we do have a commitment for some
medical. We thought we might be able to track down some health club type uses on the
site., potentially. So, those are some of the things we are looking at on this site to maybe
give you a feel for the overall concept that we are in search of there. I believe in a
couple of the earlier staff reports staff had suggested that we move a couple of these
buildings out to the street and we agree to do that, so we get a Kittle bit more
connectivity to the street and a little bit more variety of design. I would be happy to
answer any questions if you have concerns or comments.
De Weeird: Council, any questions?
Bird.: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Meridian City Council
February 26, 2008
Page 30 of 77
Bird: Cornell, with the material that we have listed in here, would that, in your opinion,
disallow tilt up buildings? As I read it, it would disallow tilt ups, which you said EI Dorado
and -- and you took a lot of your pictures out of EI Dorado and Silverstone and
Turnbull's project over there at BRC and most of those are tilt ups.
Larsen: Madam Mayor, Councilman Bird, we have done quite a few tilt up buildings, but
we have usually tried to create a variety of materials on those buildings from the rock to
stone to glass, heavy cornice, a lot of different elements to try to break those -- those
buildings up, so they didn't look like a concrete building and, in general, a lot of times we
put a textured coating on the building, so it looks more like a stucco project. So, we
would hope staff wouldn't eliminate that flexibility, as those have been fairly economical
buildings and pretty good energy buildings as well.
Bird: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Additional questions?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Cornell, you suggested some additional words in one of the recommended
comments from staff on the DA and one of them was four-sided architecture as needed
and that always puts us on the spot, because I would interpret that as needed to be
determined by staff and you would interpret it as to be as needed as determined by you
or your client. So, I know we attempt to wordsmith these things to make them sound
and do what we all agree to do, but that doesn't do it for me. So, we need some better
words there, so you and/or your client and/or our staff have an expectation of what's
going to happen there. So, I don't have a problem with what you're saying that there is
some flexibility there, but when we just make a statement like that it gets us all in a
position of being really angry with one another.
Larsen: Madam Mayor, Councilman Rountree, I understand your concerns. I guess
where we are coming from is that, you know, on occasions we have retail buildings that
have backs to them and we really want to be careful about addressing the backs to
make sure that they look decent. We have other buildings that may have service entries
or locations where we need to get trucks up to them or for whatever reason and we
want to be careful that we don't get into trying to design a bunch of costly facades that
really is of no benefit to -- to the end user. In other words, we have double loaded retail
buildings with glass on both sides, it's very tough for a retail user to have a back room, a
store room, those kind of issues. So, we are concerned, we want the buildings in the
City of Meridian to look very nice, be first class. We do not want to get into a situation
where we are in disagreement with staff, but we wouldn't like to use all buildings -- we
try to design all buildings with four-sided architecture, but sometimes the sites don't
need to be as well done as maybe three of the sides on the building. And I'm not sure
that I have answered your question, but (understand --
Meridian City Council
February 26, 2008
Page 31 of 77
Rountree: I understand your intent and I would ask Anna if she has maybe a better way
of stating that to where everybody knows what's going on.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Rountree -- or
President Rountree, perhaps it could be for retail uses or those that require loading
areas, one facade may be screened in lieu of facade treatment or something like that.
Larsen: Yeah. We are open for that -- any kind of language on that that gives us some
flexibility where we have service equipment or vehicles or we may have an office
building, for example, that may have some generators on the ground, some equipment,
some things like that that we don't necessarily have to spend a lot of money on the
building., because we have got a lot of equipment right next to the building. So, we
would like a little flexibility on that and I think we could work with staff on some verbiage.
Rountree: Thank you. Are you comfortable with that, Anna?
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, yes, I am. I think the reason the four-
sided is in there is related to the concept plan. The concept plan does show very -- kind
of open site plan with individual buildings that kind of would need fairly -- most of them
would require four-sided architecture the way it's currently drawn. I did want to comment
on the need for flexibility in the concept plan and I know that this is difficult for the
development community to commit to a concept plan and we are very mindful of that.
We do try to be very flexible in our interpretation of what's consistent with that concept
plan. Our problem is if you just tie it to the UDC there is nothing to say that they couldn't
come back with one building that's partitioned into five -- you know, one massive
building that's perhaps partitioned into five and that would be consistent with their DA,
but clearly not consistent with what was presented tonight. And I'm not trying to say that
Mr. Vareille will propose that, it's just that those are the kind of issues that come up
when we don't have something to fall back on that says, well, you kind of told us you
were going to distribute this around the site and not just have a sea of parking and one
large building. So, that's why we do ask that you tie it to the concept plan and not just
the provisions of the UDC. We commit to developers on a regular basis that we will
provide them every sort of flexibility that -- that we can afford to help them get toward
the end.
Larsen: Madam Mayor, may I address that for just a minute? We -- when we have a
building in a situation like this regarding the four-side architecture, a lot of times those
are tenant buildings and they may be loaded from two or three sides as a result of how
the building's leasing and so in a case where we have a building out on its own like that
surrounded by parking or if it's out -- one side is up next to the street and it has parking
on three sides, we assume that we are going to need four-sided architecture there in
order to attract tenants and make sure that they are all on a level plane. A lot of tenants
that lease space in buildings now they want to have their own separate identify and they
don't want to look different than the tenant next to them. So, it's important that we do
have the four-sided architecture on a lot of that product. The other item with regard to
Meridian City Council
February 26, 2008
Page 32 of 77
Anna's comments on the concept plan, staff has been very flexible with us in the past on
allowing us to do things to the concept plan that generally conform to it and we have
had pretty good -- pretty good luck in working with them through those issues. Several
of things that Silverstone and EI Dorado have all had to be brought back in for staff to
look at it and it's gone fairly well.
Rountree: Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Anything further, Council?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes..
Zaremba: I was just going to add to the same discussion that the flexibility in the roofing
materials, it would be the same discussion that we already had, but it's the same as the
facades.
De Weerd: Okay.
Larsen: Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Larsen: Now, if you have questions on platting, I would defer to Chuck. Did we have any
issues on -- I guess there is no issues on platting or any of the subdivision stuff, so we
are okay with those.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Larsen: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. At this point -- at this time we are taking testimony on Verona, the
commercial aspect. Is there anyone who would like to provide testimony on this
application? Okay. Seeing none, Anna, we will just go ahead and go to the next item.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I think you can take action, if you'd
like to, on the --
De Weerd; Ten and eleven?
Canning: On ten and eleven and.,. then, we will come back to the development
agreement. I think all the changes that were requested were in the development
agreement, so you can make those modifications later if you want to take up that item
later.
Meridian City Council
February 26, 2008
Page 33 of 77
De Weerd: Okay. So, there is no public testimony on either Items 10 or 11? No further
comment by the applicant? Okay.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd; Council, any further information? Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I would like to discuss the subject of the drive aisle to the east. We had asked
the developers of the property to the east to provide more connectivity than they
intended to. They seem to have been resistant to that and, apparently, they have
conveyed that to the current applicant as well. But I feel the connectivity is important in
spite of the fact that the neighbor is not in favor of it and I would support the staffs
request for a drive aisle connection to the east. It's fine with me if it's on the lower
property or the southern most property. I'm supportive of the staffs request on that.
De Weerd: Council, any further comment on that?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Anna, show us where you -- where the staff kind of has plans to have an access
out.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the staff report says that each drive
aisle should have some sort of stub currently. I guess as a -- as a proffer, I would say,
you know, if we could at least get one, I think that that would be beneficial. And
somewhere on this southern lot would seem to make more sense, because you do have
residential up here. So, bringing that traffic any -- somewhere away from the residential
makes sense. It could come in anywhere along this -- that boundary.
Bird: Put up -- excuse me, Madam Mayor. Anna, put up a site for the whole area. Isn't
there a road that goes right up there?
Canning: No. It looks like that. It's an irrigation feature that's been tiled,.
Bird: Oh, that's the irrigation deal? So, you want it to dump over in that --
Canning: This is the road:. I'm sorry. That's a road.
Bird: That's what I thought.
Canning: That's that road..
Bird: Yeah.
Meridian City Council
February 26, 2008
Page 34 of 77
Canning: But, then., you have two lots to the east of it. So what we are trying to do is get
this office traffic to have across-access all along here, so that they are not having to go
onto the arterial roadway and it's very typical from commercial development to
commercial development we try and get cross-access where ever we can.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor. We did -- what we required of Selway is that they have a
western stub from the apartment section into what will be the commercial section and it
would make sense that that would connect to something on the eastern end of this
property.
Bird: Do they come down to the top of that, though? Does Selway come down to the --
north of this project?
Zaremba: It's not the entire thing, but it's about --
Bird: I think it goes right across there, don't it?
Zaremba: Oh. I'm sorry. It ends at Apgar Creek.
Bird: Yeah. So, it goes -- it actually don't butt up to this project at all, so what we
required them to go to the west is up in that subdivision.
Canning.: No. We required anorth-south street along the western edge of their property
--development.
Bird: Okay. North-south.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Bird, you're correct,
this would not connect directly to Selway Apartments.
Zaremba: It would go through the other owner's commercial property.
Canning: Correct.
De Weerd: So, will that other property have access out onto McMillan?
Canning: The preliminary plat for the office lots currently show I believe three access
points to McMillan.
De Weerd: Okay.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Meridian City Council
February 26, 2008
Page 35 of 77
Bird: My concern is that -- is that North Goddard Creek Way road is -- you're dumping
everything out on that, why not just let it dump -- let this project dump out on that one
road between McMillan and Ten Mile? I don't know why you wanted to go out back
through there. And that other project's got all kinds of frontage along McMillan.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, as ACHD progresses in their efforts
we are seeing access controls at the arterial roadways. Possibility of more medians to
control that access where you have driveways versus public streets, we are really trying
to get folks to the public streets, so that they don't have to take the -- necessarily take
the arterial roadway. If, for some reason, you have a dentist here and you want to go
pick up milk at the -- the Rite-Aid there or something, you don't want to have to get out
onto the arterial roadway and that's always staffs goal in asking for the cross-access is
to relieve the congestion on the arterial roadways.
De Weerd: Would the applicant care to comment on this?
Larsen: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Cornell Larsen again.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Larsen: I was just curious.. Anna, did you say there was a road that would just come
down along that boundary of the property?
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council., Mr. Larsen, it's not right along the
boundary, it's a couple hundred feet, probably, a stub. It's about a -- maybe a quarter of
the way over.
Larsen: Madam Mayor, I guess our biggest concern is just the -- I guess our biggest
concern was just that the residents that have purchased from Bridgetower in the past
have been really concerned about that connection and the flow-through traffic and they
have not desired that and we were here expressing their wishes tonight as well, so --
De Weerd: So, these are representations that were provided through your neighborhood
meeting, then?
Larsen: Through the owner, as he's developed these parcels, he's trying to not allow
this through traffic or has indicated to the neighbors that he would prefer not to have
that traffic through there and -- as it feels like it does end up being a detriment to his
neighborhood. And the applicant has indicated to me that they have also discussed that
at the neighborhood meetings.
De Weerd: Okay. Any questions, Council?
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you.
Meridian City Council
February 26, 2008
Page 36 of 77
Larsen: Thank you.
De Weerd: Council?
Rountree.: Madam Mayor. Anna, would you put up the site plan.
Canning: That one or this one?
Rountree: Okay. So, on the eastern boundary of the two commercial lots, I don't see
any provision for a fence or landscaping or whatever. If we are talking about access or
no access, it seems to me if there is no access there ought to be some kind of a barrier
there.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, we -- they seem to be depicting a five
foot landscape buffer for the parking lot.
Rountree: Is that indicated on the plat?
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, no, because we don't usually put just
parking lot landscaping on the plat that the -- landscape easements that we general
show on the plats are either street buffers or land use buffers. So, this wouldn't be one
of those times that we ask for that. It would allow a little more flexibility in the design of
the building.
Rountree: So, I guess what I'm getting at -- I'm confused on the landscaping
requirements. If this was an industrial site it would be required to be landscaped with a
buffer.
Canning: Yes. They would have to have a buffer to residential uses. We are not -- it's an
unusual situation. It's zoned R-8, but it's approved for L-O, so we tend to treat it as if it's
nonresidential use.
Rountree: Okay.
Canning: So, we did not require the land used buffer to those properties, because they
are approved for office uses.
Rountree: Okay. Thank you.
De Weerd: But how about on the north side of that? Isn't that residential?
Canning.: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, yes, it is. I suspect that the staff
report already notes that there is a land use buffer required there. I can verify. But there
is a land use buffer required there.
Meridian City Council
February 26, 2008
Page 37 of 77
De Weerd: Okay.
Larsen: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Larsen: Cornell Larsen again. There is a planted buffer along there already currently
existing.
De Weerd: Oh. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Anything further, Council? If there is nothing
further, I would entertain a motion to close the public hearings on Items 10, 11 and 12.
Bird: No. No. Not 12.
Rountree: ten and eleven.
De Weerd.: Ten and eleven.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Rountree: I move that we close public hearings on Items 10 and 1.
Bird: Second..
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to close the public hearings on Items 10
and 11. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIES: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Anna, on the rezone., it had nothing to do with the development agreement., so all
we are doing there is going from a minimum of nine to five; is that right?
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the DA is associated with the rezone,
but you could take action on the rezone without worrying about the DA agreement at
this time.
Bird: I thought the DA come down on the 12. Maybe I misunderstood.
Canning: Correct. So, the rezone -- we can for the development, because there is a
rezone application before you, but the two aren't --
ti
Meridian City Council
February 26, 2008
Page 38 of 77
Bird: Where would you prefer it?
Canning: It needs to be in the DA discussion.
Bird: In what?
Canning.: The DA discussion.
Rountree: Item 12.
Bird: In Item 12.
Canning,: Yes, sir.
Bird.: Right. Okay. So, RZ is just the rezone from five to -- or from nine to five. And from
C-G -- or R-8 to C-G and L-O; right?
Canning: Correct. The latter. Yes.
Bird: Okay. Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird..
B'ird'.: I move that we approve RZ 07-017, the rezone of 5.29 acres from R-8 to C-G and
L-O zone for Verona Commercial by Primeland Development Group and to include all
staff, applicant, and public testimony.
Rountree: Second..
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve Item 10. Is there any
discussion or clarification needed? Seeing none, Madam Clerk, will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, absent.
MOTION CARRIES: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd..: Okay. Item 11.
Bird.: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we approve PP 07-022, preliminary plat approval for Verona Commercial
by Primeland Development Group, LLC.
Meridian City Council
February 26, 2008
Page 39 of 77
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve Verona, Item 11.
Discussion?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor, again, this is a question of where is it appropriate. Would it be
the preliminary plat where we decide whether there will be access to the east or not?
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, if we knew -- Councilmember
Zaremba, if we knew exactly where it needed to be on the plat we could, but I don't think
-- staff didn't have that specificity at this time. We'd like to leave the developer that
ability to move it, so it would be better as a DA provision.
Zaremba: Okay. Thank you.
De Weerd.: Okay. Any further discussion? Hearing none, Madam Clerk, will you, please,
call roll.
Roll-Gail: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, absent.
MOTION CARRIEES: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Okay. Items 13 and 14.
Rountree: Twelve.
De Weerd: Did you want to do the DA's at the end of all of these?
Canning: Yes, ma'am.
Bird: We are going to move 12?
De Weerd: Yes. We are going to consider it at the end of all of these discussions.
Twelve and fifteen we will consider after Item 17.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, one of the things I forgot to mention
when I get to the last presentation is part of the reason we are asking you to defer on
those, the reason they are still intertwined is because although we proposing new DA's
for these projects that are before you tonight, the existing DA remains for the properties
that are not under not the applicant's control. So, that's why they are -- still go on. So,
they are just -- the only complicated thing about this is the development agreements
and so they --
De Weerd: The only complicated..
Bird: Don't confuse me.