Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSeptember 2, 2008 C/C MinutesMeridian Clty Council September 2, 2008 Page 51 of 71 De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to deny VAC 08-001 on Item 12. If there is no discussion -- Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Rountree: I would make a comment, though, I agree with what Councilman Zaremba said, we would have no jurisdiction. I don't disagree with the vacation, but since we have no jurisdiction I think we can't act on it. De Weerd: Thank you. Madam Clerk. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 13: Public Hearing: AZ 06-063 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 38.68 acres from RUT and R-1 zones to C-G zones for Waltman Property (aka Browning Plaza) by Waltman, LLC - 505, 521, 615 and 675 Waltman Lane: Item 14: Public Hearing: PP 08-001 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 52 commercial /office lots and 1 common lot on 38.21 acres in a proposed C- Gzoning district for Browning Plaza (aka Waltman Property) by SLN Planning, Inc. - 505, 521, 615 and 675 West Waltman Lane: De Weerd: Okay. Items 13 and 14 are public hearings AZ 06-063 and PP 08-011. I will open these two public hearings with staff comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is a reconsideration hearing and on reconsideration hearings generally I try to treat them as if they were a new hearing. Given that you have had I think five or six hearings on this matter, it didn't seem the appropriate approach at this time. So, I'm going to do a different version. If you want me to go back and fill in details I can do that. I'm going to try and get you up to speed on the points of consensus versus those that are still outstanding. So, this is the Waltman -Browning Plaza project. It is located on the south side of Waltman, east of The Landing Subdivision and directly north of I-84. The applications before you tonight are annexation and zoning of 38.68 acres to C-G and a preliminary plat for 40 building lots and two common lots. There are two concept plans proposed by the applicant. Here is the first one and here is the second one. Both of the concept plans are referenced in the proposed development agreement provisions. The concept plans all depict retail, hotel, offices, and a variety of other commercial opportunities. Proposed commercial square footage is approximately 400,000 square feet of office, hotel, big box retail, and smaller retail spaces and that's as shown on concept plan one. The number of proposed buildings varies, but there -- we have recommended a minimum of Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 52 of 71 ten buildings are required in the memo from staff dated July 3rd and that is the one that proposes the DA provisions for this property. So, the issues of discussion over the past hearings and the DA provisions that are not outstanding issues include the existing agricultural use is allowed to continue. The applicant will improve Waltman Lane adjacent to and off site. Trips shall not exceed 800 ADT prior to the extension of Corporate Drive. Ruddy Drive shall be extended as a public street into the site and up to Waltman Lane. Pedestrian network within the area. All buildings subject to design review. All buildings generally consistent with the conceptual office and retail elevations: I could go down and show you those. All buildings contain architectural elements and landscaping that break up along facades. Prohibited uses along the western and northwestern property line include drinking establishments, drive-thrus, fuel sale facilities, truck stops and vehicle washing facilities. The hours of operation for the west and northwest property boundaries, again, are limited to 8:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. There is a height limit of two stories and a minimum setback of 25 feet adjacent to the existing residences, with the exception of the proposed hotel. I'll go back to the concept plan. No loading, delivery, or trash areas or obtrusive lighting adjacent to existing residences. Again, as I mentioned before, a minimum of ten buildings. Development generally consistent with either one of the two conceptual site plans. A ten foot wide multi-use pathway. Protect vegetation and trees along the banks of the Ten Mile Creek. Construct a 50 foot wide buffer on the interstate, 20 foot on Waltman, and 25 foot landscape buffer and a six foot tall masonry wall between residential uses and the property zoned C-G. Relocate Waltman Lane further to the south, making the existing right of way, and install a 25 foot wide landscape buffer on the north side of Waltman adjacent to the Haddock property and that was related to concept plan one. Construct two driveways on the south side of Waltman no wider than 36 feet each. No driveway access to Waltman approved west of the Waltman-Corporate intersection. And a maximum of five access points to Corporate Avenue. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission heard these items on March 15th, May 3rd, June 7th, August 2nd, October 4th, and December 20th of 2007, and February 21st and March 20th of 2008. Those testifying included Joe Borton and Shawn Nickel from Rose Law Group and Robert Winer in favor. And in opposition were Kathy Floyd, Cindy Jones, Donna Aldridge, and Mike Swenson. Commenting were Curtis Lee, Christie Haddock, Nona Haddock, Nathan Floyd, Joe Lorcher, and Terry Farnham and Rob Haddock. Written testimony was from Art Beny. The Meridian City Council heard these items on April 22nd, May 6th, June 17th, and January 24th and July 8th, 2008. Those testifying were in favor, Shawn Nickel, Roger Stang, Dave Moore, Robert Winer, Ross Erickson. In opposition were Mike Swenson, Kathy Floyd, Nathan Floyd, Nancy Swenson, Donna Aldridge. Those commenting included Gary Inselman, Christie Little, Curtis Lee,.Nona Haddock, Joe Lorcher, Duane Cope, Christie Haddock, Edward Haddock and Robert Haddock. And written testimony was from Donna Aldridge and Duane Cope. The outstanding issues -- there are two for the applicant. The applicant requests that the Council reconsider DA provisions nine and eleven. Number nine states that if the extension of Corporate Drive is completed prior to the split corridor of Waltman Lane, Meridian Road, Main Street intersection, no building construction traffic shall be allowed to use the Waltman Lane, Meridian Road, Main Street intersection until it has also completed. However, construction traffic for the purpose of infrastructure, sewer, water, Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 53 of 71 and road improvements shall be allowed to use Waltman Lane prior the completion of the intersection. And Number 11: At no time shall construction traffic associated with the development of this be allowed to access this site between Ruddy Drive or any other street within The Landing Subdivision. If the Council were to approve the applicant's request -- well, what the applicant is going to request -- and it's a little counter intuitive at first and so I'll try and explain it to the best of my abilities tonight. The applicant's concern is that they want to be able to start vertical construction while the Main Street, Waltman, Meridian Road intersection is still under construction. Part of the testimony that Council heard was regard to that from the .neighbors was that the construction for the intersection itself would create difficulties for them to be able to get in and out of -- to their homes and, then, putting additional construction in that area would make it further difficult. So, what the applicant is proposing is a temporary -- and it would only be temporary -- gate at West Ruddy Drive with key cards for the residents. So, the construction traffic wouldn't use Ruddy, but the neighbors, if they wanted to avoid the intersection improvements and all the construction related to that, could come out Ruddy and go up Linder, essentially, to bypass that construction traffic. So, that's the -- the gist of the applicant's proposal with regard to that provision and I'm sure they will explain it as well. If we did -- ACHD did contact us earlier today saying they weren't going to be able to make it, so we did converse with them with regard to all the applications. We didn't anticipate the Mayor's question on the Overland Village one, but with regard to this, we did speak to them and if we were to -- if Council were to approve the applicant's request to allow construction traffic in exchange for providing a gate for Waltman residents to use Ruddy, ACHD would need the gate removed prior to dedication of the right of way and acceptance of the street connection to Ruddy, which may or may not coincide with the occupancy of any building. So, that was their only comment with regard to the gate. They weren't opposed to it, they just wanted to make sure it was removed prior to dedicating the street. When the -- after the Council asked for this item, staff did meet with the application and we discussed the need for some clarity with regard to some other provisions and it was largely all the provisions related to the conditional use approval and they include number 16, 17, 19 and 20. Staff is recommending the clarifications that were in Ms. Wafters' memo and, then, I have repeated them for you there on the notes. Basically on the number 16 it would read: Except for a potential hotel site at the southwest comer, any structure, housing or use other than office within a hundred feet of the west and northwest boundaries adjacent to residential uses shall require Conditional Use Permit approval, unless the adjacent uses are changed into nonresidential uses. Number 17. That would be -- could be deleted, because it was captured in number 16. We still have the one about the distance for the potential hotel site. Or the limitation on the 100,000 square feet without conditional use approval and, then, the one with regard to restaurants, because number 16 requires a CU for any restaurants, we felt that the seating area -- any outdoor seating areas could be discussed during the CU application for that restaurant use. With that I will fill in as necessary for Council or answer any questions you may have. De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions? Bird: Not at this point. Meridian Clty Council September 2, 2008 Page 54 of 71 De Weerd: Okay. Is the applicant here? Nickel: Good evening, Madam Mayor and Council. For the record Shawn Nickel. 6333 North Discovery Way, Suite 200, in Boise. Here, again, tonight representing the Waltman project. As staff has indicated, we have been in front of you several times now, hopefully, this will be the last time. I think the results of being in front of you and all the conditions and everything that we have put forward in the way of conditions of approval have made this overall a better development. What we are here tonight to discuss are just the two issues that Anna has brought up. The first is with regards to the uses along the -- on the westem boundary. Anna, could you put the other site plan -- this is concept one, which is referenced throughout the -- throughout the conditions of approval. What we -- what we have proposed in those meetings and in negotiation and working with staff and with you guys, we presented -- or I presented past examples of existing commercial developments that have abutted residential areas and used that as an example. We agreed to apply existing and future design review standards to all the buildings. We have provided examples of elevations, which have been incorporated into the development agreement. We have agreed to architectural elements proposed by staff. We have provided and agreed to prohibited uses along the residential areas, including the exclusion of drive-thrus, gas stations, and drinking establishment, among the other e other uses. We have agreed that if a building is over 100,000 square feet and within a hundred feet of the west and northwest boundary, that we would apply for conditional use approval. We have agreed to hours of operation. We have agreed to height restrictions and setback restrictions. We have agreed to restrictions on loading, delivery, trash, and lighting areas along those boundaries. And we have proposed to construct a 25 foot landscape buffer and a six foot high masonry wall on the west boundary. It was our intent and understanding that with these concessions it would not be necessary for retail uses to be required to come back and get additional conditional use approval for those uses along these boundaries. So, what we are asking for tonight is clarification and if it is agreed upon, revisions to those appropriate conditions to allow us to move forward with those uses without coming back in for individual conditional use permits. Now, if the use itself is required to have a Conditional Use Permit and, then, we would go through that process. But if it's a principal permitted use in the C-G zone, we are asking that -- because we have -- because all the concessions and the additional conditions that we have placed on ourselves, in addition to what staff has recommended, we feel that those uses are appropriate on these boundaries. Also keep in mind there has never been any opposition or testimony from any neighbors on that westem boundary. The testimony that you have received we have provided. There are additional conditions in there on how we are going to maintain transition and landscaping. So, that's the first -- that's the first issue with regard to the uses. The second issue is -- and I did bring this up at the last meeting -- was the need by the developer and his potential buyers of this property to at least have the ability to pull building permits for the first phase of the development. Now, as we have stated in the past -- and I believe it's still true -- you're probably going to see the first phase being the anchor or big box development in this -- in this development. The concem with the neighbors and the testimony that you heard at the last meeting revolved around the Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 55 of 71 intersection construction of the split corridor and the Waltman off-site improvements that we were required to do for this development. So, we came up and we met with staff and discussed an altemative access point for the neighbors in the event that there was some disruption with the -- with the circulation in and out of the Waltman area. And that would be to utilize the existing emergency access easement that is currently I believe in this area right here that is owned by the city for emergency access to The Landing Subdivision and we would improve that on a temporary basis with -- and we could put a temporary automated gate in that location to keep cross-traffic from The Landing coming through the development, which would increase the congestion and allow for those residents the ability, if they wish, to have another altemative access in and out of their neighborhood. Also keep in mind that we are allowed to do on-site improvements at the same time that the improvements to Waltman and the intersection take place. So, a lot of those improvements are going to have to be completed prior to even starting the building of this -- of this project. So, I think the construction traffic you're going to see will kind of be swapped out with the construction traffic that is working on Waltman and the improvements, are probably going to be more or less finished or in the process when those building permits are pulled for that first phase. So, I don't know how much more -- how much additional construction traffic you're going to see out there. I think providing that altemative access point is a good faith effort on the developer's part to help the neighbors out if that -- if that conflict does ever -- ever occur. So, those are the two issues that we are presenting as part of our reconsideration tonight. We are in agreement and do appreciate all your time listening to us and I will stand for questions that you have. De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions? Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: Two questions. The first is a clarification. Is this a request for reconsideration or this is the reconsideration? Nickel: This is actually the reconsideration. Zaremba: Say that again. Nickel: This is the reconsideration. De Weerd: This is the reconsideration. Zaremba: Okay. Thank you. So, the second question is -- I'm not understanding how the gate at Ruddy would work. Would it be manned so that only chosen people could go through it or -- Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 56 of 71 Nickel: The gate would be accessed by the folks on this side of it through either a key pad or some sort of electronic device that would open and allow access. Zaremba: It would allow them out. Would it also allow them back in? Nickel: It could, yes. Zaremba: Using the same -- Nickel: Yes. Zaremba: -- key pad? Nickel: And, again, it's not -- it's not intended to allow construction traffic, because we do have a specific condition that no construction traffic is to go through The Landing. It would just specifically be for their--for their use in the event that -- Zaremba: And police and fire would have the code as well? Nickel: And the key would be a police and fire would have -- at this point they would have better access than they currently have right now, because I believe it's a locked gate at this point. So, they would have a -- and we would work with them on the type of access that they would require. Zaremba: Thank you. De Weerd: Any other question from Council? Okay. Nickel: Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. I did have one person that signed up as neutral. William Kissinger. Kissinger: Madam Mayor and the Council, loriginally -- De Weerd: If you will state our name and address. Kissinger: Oh. I'm song. William Kissinger. My address is 420 Waltman, Meiridian, Idaho. De Weerd: Thank you. Kissinger: I originally -- when I decided to come out tonight, I wanted just more of a fact finding to find out what they were planning on doing down the street and so, you know -- and Iwas hopeful that I would come up to speed with what appears to be several months of -- of inquiry and so forth, but -- and I started out that, you know, this was Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 57 of 71 neutral, because of the fact I recognized the inevitable, that they develop those -- that property. After all, they have developed all the other comers of Meridian and I-84, so why wouldn't they develop this comer as well. But hearing some of the plan and the timing of those plans, I think I shifted my neutral to more of opposed. I would like to also mention the fact that I appreciate these -- this article coming up as number 13 and 14 or else I wouldn't have got to team all about a Redbox. But that being said, you know, the -- you know, one of my biggest concems is we are about halfway down Waltman, you know, just beyond the storage area and it's a pretty slow road. It's pretty much a dead end and, in fact, as you tum into that it's always kind of a -- you know, a challenge, because coming off of 1st Avenue there you hope nobody blocks your entry, because they are in -- and obeys those signs that says do not block that entrance, because that's the only way in and so we sit there quite frequently and wait for that intersection to clear or some kind person to, you know, make way for us so we can go in and out of that -- down that street. The other thing that I -that it caught me as part of the comments and so forth was the concept plan showed what looks to be maybe 12 to 15 buildings, but, yet, I notice that reading the request that they were having 52 commercial office lots. So, I was kind of, you know, curious about that and so I was really more concerned about the concept plan up west -- excuse me -- east on Waltman on what their plans were and how they are going to widen that and get all that traffic through there and after -- after hearing it, I would ask that the Council consider delaying any plans until the ACHD did whatever they are going to do with that intersection at 1st Avenue and Meridian and so forth, because I can't imagine -- let alone us getting in and out on Ruddy. I can't imagine the construction traffic that would be required to come down that street as it is now. and how that would work, you know, back and forth. So, I would -- I wouldn't see a project like this being able to go forward without at least that intersection work completed before they are able to accommodate that kind of construction traffic. So, that's my comments. De Weerd: Perfect timing. Thank you. Okay. Is there additional testimony? Haddock: Thank you, Mayor, Councilmen. Rob Haddock, 560 Waltman Lane. You have heard from me before, so I'll try not to rehash my -- my prior complaint. I agreed with the counter intuitive comment, not just for that one point, but the entire project. A lot of the language of the development agreement references we won't do certain things to the northwest or west boundary. One of the concept plans had to give some right of way and additional buffer to the north, but north has been deleted from that. So, I guess we had a question whether -- what kinds of use and it sounds like they have got a blank check for the north side is how I read that. So, that's one of my concems. The other concern has been stated already, that the intersection that exists now at Waltman Lane and Meridian Road is not going to accommodate large trucks. In order to do work on the sewer you're going to have to have chips to bed it and, you know, that's not going to be one load a day, that's going to be a constant in and out and, yeah, where one car is waiting for an opening, you know, a truck with atrailer -- dump truck with a pup trailer, for instance, it's not going to happen. So, I'd just like to -- you know, I'd like to see a plan that makes sense. I don't know what the big rush is. Until these road improvements are done nobody is going to come anyway. So, I'd just like to see the Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 58 of 71 road improvements in place and I'm still not happy with a with the whole concept in general. And, yeah, just -- if we have to have more of these meetings, I'd love to move it up on the agenda. I'd hate to recount all the hours I spent in neighborhood meetings, I don't know how many Planning and Zoning meetings and you know how many City Council meetings and it seems like it's always shifting and it was nice that we didn't have to excuse a City Council member this time. I appreciated that. But I guess that's all I have. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Floyd: Good evening. Kathy Floyd. 520 Waltman Lane. I agree with Rob. The Waltman Lane cannot handle construction traffic. The intersection can't handle it. I think that they are pretty lucky to even get this through, when you look at the agenda items just before us, it's the same problem, they are having to put a bridge through before they can construct and they are not. It's -- this isn't in their section and it's just the same situation and I think as far as trying to rush it even further, it's a bad idea. That's all I have to say. De Weerd: Thank you. Any further testimony? Lavey: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Lavey: The police department has a couple comments. Jeff Lavey with the police department. We actually had some concems greater on this project than the last project and I believe a couple of gentlemen just proved our case as far as blocking that intersection and everything else. This is one of the most difficult intersections there is in the city as far as trying to get through and so we have concems about that. We don't believe it makes sense to start construction until that intersection is completed. We can compromise slightly on the bridge, but we also agree on the bridge, too, that that connectivity would also be beneficial. The other concem that we have -- and it's really kind of a future concem, but you actually have a roadway that's leaving a public roadway, going through a private business, and, then, connecting to a private roadway again and any sort of construction that we -- or, excuse me, any sort of traffic problems that we have in there is not enforceable by our codes, because it's a private roadway and so any of the traffic congestion-type problems, the speeding problems, the only two problems that we can deal with is reckless driving and drunk driving and so when the neighborhoods to the west start complaining, there is nothing that we are going to be able to do about it, because it being a private roadway and, then, what sort of problems is that going to create for the future tenants, the business tenants that actually build there. So, those are just a couple of our concems. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 59 of 71 Canning: Madam Mayor, just to clarify, right now it is private, but it will be public in the long term. Okay. De Weerd: We got the point. Any further testimony? You knew you sat here all night. Sony. Haddock: Christie Haddock. 650 Waltman Lane. Kathy pushed me out of my chair. My concern is I leave several times a day taking kids to school, from school, and various activities and do not want a child flattened, my car flattened, because I cannot see a truck coming down a road that is not wide enough, so it's just the issue of the roads. I need someone to be responsible that nothing bad happens on our lane. Thanks. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Would the applicant like to have wrap-up remarks? Nickel: Thank you, Madam Mayor and Council. Again, for the record Shawn Nickel. Again, to reiterate, we are not asking to pull building permits for that first phase until the intersection begins. Keep in mind that we are allowed to -- that Waltman is going to be under construction through that entire process, because we are required to rebuild Waltman Lane as part of our off-site improvement. So, there is going to be construction traffic along the lane. My contention is that because of -- because those improvements are going to be required, for the most part, before we can begin construction on site of any buildings the infrastructure is going to be in place or is going to be constructed. I don't see that great of an increase in construction traffic from what is going to be there throughout the entirety what the Waltman or split corridor construction and the improvements to Waltman. Again, the access to Ruddy is just to have a secondary access point for emergency purposes for all those involved. Those being on Waltman and also for emergency services. We are not asking for any changes to the north from what was original reapproved by this Council, the only -- the only clarification that we are asking for is the Conditional Use Permit requirements, along the northwest comer and the west boundary of the project. So, with that I will stand for any questions. De Weerd: Council, any questions? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Shawn, I just need to be clear on what you said and I'm not sure I am yet, but part of the conditions that this was approved with and the one that we are reviewing again tonight related to construction and construction activities and whether or not things would move forward with respect to building permits and building on the site until such time as the infrastructure was in place and you've kind of talked around it and I think that's our intent. So, let me try to paraphrase what I think you said. Nickel: Okay. Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 60 of 71 Rountree: I think you said that you wouldn't start building on this site until the intersection improvement started. Nickel: Correct. Rountree: And that you would be building Waltman at the same time the intersection improvements started. Nickel: Correct. Rountree: And that with all of that construction going on, the additional construction that might take place on site would not further exacerbate the construction traffic issue. Nickel: All but the last part. I think what I'm saying is that because we are going to have to do the improvements to Waltman ourself, bring the sewer, bring the water down Waltman, prior to -- we are going to have to do that prior to pulling the building permits on site for the structure, we are going to have to bring them down Waltman and, then, we are going to have to bring them into the site, where ever that first stage ends up being. So, what I'm saying is that that construction traffic's going to be there putting in those utilities and at the same time improving and widening those portions of Waltman. So, as those trucks -- or as that construction decreases, then, you will be seeing an increase in the construction coming on site to start the foundations and the construction of whatever building would be -- would begin in that first phase. What I'm saying is that you're not going to -- I don't think you're going to have a substantial increase in the overall amount of construction traffic just because of the way that those services have to come down Waltman and how Waltman has to be constructed prior to us actually getting those building permits. Rountree: So, let me try this one more time. Nickel: Okay. Rountree: And let's talk about it as phases. You brought up the word phases. So, the first phase is the reconstruction of Main and Waltman and, correspondingly, the first phase, subset A, is the infrastructure work on Waltman Lane. Nickel: Correct. Rountree: Water. Sewer. Widening. New surface. New striping and connecting, ultimately, with a new intersection on Main. So, at that point, then, phase two, if you will -- I'll just have a two phase project, at that point you would, then, start pulling building permits and start construction on the site, so the infrastructure would be in place. Nickel: Correct. Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 61 of 71 Rountree: Now, in the interim, as the infrastructure is being put in place, you would make yet another access available on Ruddy Lane during that period of time for access of the current residents on Waltman. Nickel: Correct. Rountree: Okay. De Weerd: So, you would not start anything in a phase two, the underground work or anything, until Waltman was improved? Is that what you just -- Rountree: I think I -- that's what I said. That's -- yeah. Nickel: Right. Now, it might not -- it might not be completed, but we are not going to be able to pull a building permit -- I don't think the fire department is going to allow us to pull a building permit until we have water on site for -- for fire protection and we have some sort of access road put in to get in for emergencies. So, again, we are not -- we are not going to be pulling building permits the day that Waltman -- the Waltman intersection starts, but we don't necessarily want to have to wait until everything is approved before we can start pulling our building permits. There is going to be a certain amount we can do during that point, but it's going to depend on how quickly the improvements are to Waltman and those services come down the street and onto the site. Does that make - De Weerd: I think that that's currently what is in the findings, isn't it? Nickel: I couldn't hear you. De Weerd: What are you asking to change? Nickel: Right now the condition -- the way the condition reads is no building permits shall be issued or construction traffic allowed, except for infrastructure improvements, such as water, sewer, and roads on the site until the construction related to the split corridor, Waltman Lane, Meridian Road, Main Street intersection is completed or Corporate Drive is extended across the Ten Mile Creek and is connected Waltman Lane. That's the current condition. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: So, what -- what stage of completeness, if you will -- because I understand a road can be perfectly serviceable and functioning and not necessarily be complete in terms of -- by the terms of the contract, but operating? Operational? Signalized? Nickel: I don't have the -- Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 62 of 71 Rountree: Paved? Gutters? Drains? What are we talking about? Our condition was the infrastructure's in place and you can utilize it, so it's not inconvenient to get in and out of there, because it is right now and without that improvement, unless you cut some kind of a deal with ITD or adjacent neighbors to pioneer another road in there, I don't know how you're going to get construction equipment down there very easy. Nickel: And that's -- that's going to -- that's going to determine when that is -- I mean there is going to have to be a certain amount of -- and I don't know the answer, but there has got to be a certain amount of improvements to that intersection and to that roadway before we are going to be able to get back in there anyway. What we are saying -- and I don't have the answer as to what stage that's going to be at, but the way it's written now we can't do anything until all the improvements are in on Waltman at the intersection and Waltman Lane is constructed in its entirety and what that does is that puts any potential building out an additional year, if they have to wait to that point just to get their building permits and, then, start construction. And that was the reason to offer up the secondary access to relieve that, which I think is good, even if -- even if we don't -- even if we are able to pull a building permit a month before the improvements are complete, we just don't know when that date is. You're going to be able to have a secondary access in and out of that -- out of that site and that can be done -- we can time that to be done at the beginning of the project when the -- when the first part of the improvements to the intersection occur. So, you would have that ability at all times to have that secondary access. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Rountree: The way I view it and the way we approved it and the language that we have there, the impetus is on the developer to get her done. Nickel: Correct. Rountree: You know, if they want to -- if they want to do a three month project in six or eight months, then, that's on them. But I don't see that that Waltman Lane project is that tough a job. That lengthy. I mean it's a tough site to get to, but I mean you can get in and get out of there fairly quickly I would think. Nickel: As far as the Waltman -- Rountree: Yeah. Nickel: -- extension. Yeah. And we are going to be -- Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 63 of 71 Rountree: The intersection is another -- another critter and that's very complicated and going to take a lot of extra work, but it will operate, I believe, the full time it's under construction. Nickel: Correct. And so we have control over the Waltman section. Rountree: Right. Nickel: We don't have control over the -- the intersection and I think you're correct, the -- ACHD or -- ACHD is going to be -- is going to keep that intersection functioning, but we don't have control over that. We do have control and we probably -- with that control we would be able to get the Waltman part done quicker. Rountree: And that's the rub. And that's your rub. You have no control over the intersection. Nickel: Correct. And, obviously, the developer or the builder -- or the developer and the builder would be taking a risk, because they would still be at the mercy of ACRD finishing that -- that entire intersection, lights and everything, prior to occupancy. So, that's -- you know, at some point they are going to have to say, okay, ACHD is far enough along where we can have a reasonable assumption of when it's going to be completed and, then, time their construction. De Weerd: Any other questions for the applicant? Thank you. Nickel: Thanks again for the opportunity. Rountree: Madam Mayor, I do. You heard the staffs recommendations on the changes of the conditions and one of the changes you express concern about was the Conditional Use Permit requirement on the west side and staff offered the change to point number 16. Do you -- and you have those? Nickel: Yes, I do. Rountree: And you're in agreement with that change? Nickel: No. Condition number 16, the way it's revised and written by staff, still requires a Conditional Use Permit approval for any structure that we build along that -- along that western boundary. So, my argument is that by us building - building a wall, building a 25 foot buffer, limiting hours, limiting height, limiting setbacks, trash enclosures, you know, all -- everything, limiting that in the conditions of approval now, you, basically -- and, then, you have got design review, the design elements, we have, basically, taken into consideration what you would review in the Conditional Use Permit. Also, the fact that we have had several neighborhood meetings with no opposition or even testimony from the neighbors to the west. We are also limiting the restaurant -- or drive-thrus, the drinking establishments, the fuel stations, at all times. So, I think we have covered all Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 64 of 71 the bases. It's tacking on an additional three to four months process for conditional use review that the developer is having the heartburn over. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I do want to comment on that one a little bit. The applicant states that they believe that when they offered all those things that it was in lieu of -- of not having the conditional use requirement and I never understood it to be that way through all the public hearing process, all the discussions we have had, and that's why I haven't supported the applicant in that request, but have tried to at least clarify when the CU would be required. De Weerd: Thank you. Nickel: And, again, Madam Mayor and Council, that was the main reason we offered up the buffering and the wall. Why would we do that for an office complex. It would also be compatible to residential. What we are saying is we will build a wall along the whole thing and buffer it to provide transition and noise and sound and visual buffer right at the very beginning. That was the whole reason for doing that. Otherwise, that could have been taken care at the conditional use process and looked at on a case-by-case basis. So, that was our intent was to offer that up and to agree to those other conditions that I spoke of. De Weerd: Okay. Council, any further questions? Thank you. Nickel: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Council? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we approve -- approve. I move that we close the public hearing AZ 06-063 and PP 08-001. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to close the public hearings on Items 13 and 14. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Any discussion? Do I have a motion? Rountree: Madam Mayor, question for Anna. De Weerd: Okay. Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 65 of 71 Rountree: Again, it's back on that point 16. Canning: Yes, sir. Rountree: I think in going over all the other DA conditions we pretty much excluded just about everything over on that side, with the exception of restaurants and commercial establishments. And maybe Redboxes. I'm not sure. I certainly hope so. Canning: I can pull up the full list of approved uses, but most of them do fall under the retail category. If Council is leaning that way, you may want to reconsider adding in -- back in the outdoor seating areas, because those aren't regulated. Likewise, I would be concerns that we maintain the 100,000 square foot size limitation, because without that, then, you could have potentially a very large retail building going in those areas. Rountree: I don't think that's at issue here, but I think something with respect to outside use, not just necessarily a restaurant, it might be -- Canning: A Redbox. Rountree: Yeah. It might be an archery shop or something that has an outdoor display or -- you know, who knows. Bird: A motorcycle shop. Rountree: A motorcycle shop. Scooter shop. There might be a lot of those these days that might have some kind of a outdoor facility. I would be more inclined to see a CUP on something like that than just blanketly either retail or restaurant. Be more specific as to what we would want to see that potentially could be a nuisance. That certainly addresses the real issue, but on Item 16 I think that would help me. I don't know if that would help the applicant. I guess the other question I have, if you have some suggested language that might address what we are trying to get at with trying to restrict access in that area for construction purposes, as opposed to the language we have now --the language we have now is certainly easy for us. Canning: And by that, sir, do you mean with regard to just saying the completion of the intersection improvements? Rountree: It's all done before you issue permits. Canning: And you will have to forgive me -- Rountree: I think in all practical purpose it will be done -- it will have to be done with the -- at least Waltman Lane would have to be done before we issued permits. Whether or not ACHD and ITD cast the final approval on the intersection at Main and Meridian and Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 66 of 71 Waltman, that might take quite awhile, but in that process it will be fully functional. So, the word complete may not be the -- Canning: So, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilman Rountree -- Rountree: It's getting late. It's getting late. Having a hard time with that. Canning: So, would you like me to come up with language now or -- I'm not quite sure -- Rountree: I'd love for you to be able to do that, but I can't and I wouldn't expect you to. Canning: Thank you, sir, because it's not one of my better days to begin with and it's certainly late. We can work on that. It sounds like you want -- that the intersection needs to be initiated, at least, and -- Bird: Well, yeah. Rountree: Yes. Canning: And Waltman needs to have all utility work done and needs to have the pavement, curb, gutter done, is what I was hearing. Rountree: I don't know that they are going to curb and gutter it, but the pavement needs to be done so you can provide access in and out of the residences. Canning: Okay. And Ithink -- there, we can check on the pavement. I have got a -- I think they are doing it at least on one side. If you would like me to include that as done. Rountree: Yes. Canning: We can -- we can -- if that's what Council would like us to rework that condition, we can do that. Rountree: Okay. Canning: And, then, on 16, am I hearing that, Council Member Rountree, you would like that reworked to discuss outdoor uses? Rountree: Outdoor uses would be subject to conditional use. Canning: Including seating areas? Rountree: Yes. Canning: And to keep number 19 in there; correct? Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 67 of 71 Rountree: Yes. Canning: We can work on revised conditions to that effect. Did you want us to address the gate issue, sir? Or Council? Or Madam Mayor? Rountree: Do I still have the floor? De Weerd: Yes. Rountree: Certainly. I think that that's a -- that's something that would be beneficial. Canning: And, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, any thoughts on the timing of when the gate should be installed pirior to release of the building permits or did you have other timing? Rountree: I believe the timing of the installation of the gate would be at the time the construction activity was in full swing and access to and fro Main Street and Meridian Road was difficult. Canning: Okay. We will work on something and get it to the applicant. Rountree: Okay. Canning: So, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, it sounds like we need to reopen the public hearing for us to bring these back to you. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: On -- on that gate, I think that's got to be in and working before we start putting infrastructure in down Waltman, because once you start infrastructure down there you're going to have the road tore up and I feel that before -- before they are going to get any building permits we are going to have infrastructure into the site and Waltman Lane has got to be usable, you know. But I'm not including the intersection, because I hate tying them to ACHD and ITD. Because'for them to complete that, they have got a lot of work to go all the way to Franklin. That's my two cents worth. Canning: I can incorporate those thoughts, sir. De Weerd: Okay. Anything further? No? Rountree: I have nothing. De Weerd: Okay. Any questions or needed clarification from staff? Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 68 of 71 Canning: No, ma'am. I think I actually have got it. It scares me tonight, but -- De Weerd: Okay. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I would move, then, that we reopen the public hearing for staff to make the changes in the conditional -- or the development agreement language and bring it back to Council for consideration. Bird: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. All those in favor say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Rountree: I didn't give you a date certain. I'm sorry. Nary: It would be a separate motion to continue it. De Weerd: Yeah. It would be a separate motion. Rountree: Okay. Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I move that we continue this public hearing until September --Anna, help me with the date. Can you do it -- Canning: We could do it -- I guess, sir, the 23rd, since the 16th is a -- Rountree: Workshop. Canning: -- workshop. Rountree: September 23rd. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to continue this item to September 23rd. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.