Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJune 5, 2003 P & ZMeridian Planning and Zoning Commission June 5, 2003 Pg 52 of 100 Kirkpatrick: Okay. Centers: Minimum of. Jungle gym and a slide. Then, the applicant is nodding their head and accept that. Rohm: I'll second that. Borup: So, what we are saying is item four, the tot lot is -- Centers: Well, I couldn't say tot lot. Borup: Is that a little tiny lot? Okay. Let's see. We have not voted. We have a motion. All in favor? Any opposed. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Borup: Thank you. Centers: May we -- Mr. Chairman. Borup: Would it be appropriate for a break, is that what you're -- Centers: Please. Borup: -- indicating? Okay. We will take a break at this time. (Recess.) Item 10. Public Hearing: AZ 03-008 Request for annexation and zoning of 34.52 acres from RUT to R-8 zones for proposed Birchstone Creek Subdivision by Centennial Development, LLC -northwest corner of West Ustick Road and North Black Cat Road: Item 11. Public Hearing: PP 03-008 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 89 building lots and 7 other lots on 34.52 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for proposed Birchstone Creek Subdivision by Centennial Development, LLC -northwest corner of West Ustick Road and North Black Cat Road: Borup: Okay. We'd like to reconvene our meeting this evening. Next item is Birchstone Creek Subdivision. Public Hearing AZ 03-008, request for annexation and zoning of 34.52 acres from RUT to R-8 zones for proposed Birchstone Creek Subdivision by Centennial Development, at the northwest corner of West Ustick and North Black Cat. Accompanying that is PP 03-008, request for Preliminary Plat approval of 89 building lots and seven other lots on 34.52 acres on the same property. We'd like to open both Public Hearings at this time and I will start with the staff report. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission June 5, 2003 Pg 53 of 100 Hawkins-Clark: Thank you, Chairman Borup, Members of the Commission. The property is located at the northwest corner of Black Cat and West Ustick Road. Tricia's Subdivision Phase Number 4 is immediately to the south. The annexation request is for an R-H zone. It currently is RUT. This would -- this is, I should say, the first request for annexation within this entire section, which is, I believe, Section 33. The applicant, Centennial Development, is applying for a Preliminary Plat, 89 building lots, eight other lots. It is, as you can see, currently the dominant ground is in two separate tax parcels today. There are two out parcels on the north and south. The one on the north is owned by the Bain family and that is a part of the annexation request, because they are also the property owners of this 21-acre piece here on the western side. The parcel on --the out parcel on the south is not similar ownership and they are not a part of the annexation or plat. Here is the aerial photograph of the general vicinity. The Eight Mile Lateral does begin here at this corner on the south. It courses to the west and, then, does cross underneath Ustick Road and continues west and, then, makes a 90 degree turn and goes northward. That Eight Mile Lateral is a separate ownership. It's not an easement, so it is under ownership by the U.S. government, the Bureau of Reclamation. Here is a copy of the plat that was submitted as a part of the application and we have addressed this plat with our staff report that was transmitted June 2nd, dated June 5th. The property has two -- about two and a half dwelling units per acre. That's gross -- gross land area. The net runs out to about three and a half. Just quickly a few highlights of the layout. They do have one point of ingress and egress off of Black Cat right about at the eight-mile mark and they have one point of ingress-egress on Ustick Road that lines up with a future road in Tricia's Subdivision. The applicant has been in discussions with the Meridian School District. That's about a future elementary school lot and that's what's shown here on the western side. All of the housing types are proposed to be single family detached. They have a range of housing from 6,500 square feet to 13,700. The applicant also did submit a variance application for block length and as I addressed in -- Bruce and I addressed in our staff report. The school, as you can see, is a single block and that does exceed a thousand feet in length. Since they have the Eight Mile Lateral that's here on the west boundary, that is a fairly sizable facility and would require a bridge to cross and, typically, as you know, the school district doesn't want to see public access, other than at their parking lot. We feel that a Variance probably would be supportable on that west boundary. There are a couple of items to point out for you in the staff report. Starting on Page 6, the annexation, we did request that that out parcel, as I mentioned before, here on the north, be included as a part of the annexation. We also did discuss tonight -- it was not a part of our Preliminary Plat conditions, but we are also asking that that be included as a lot within the subdivision as well. Whether they include them as part of the CC&Rs, I believe is a private matter, but in terms of the city's request, we think since they are taking access to that lot within -- from within the subdivision and they are proposing to hook up to city water and sewer and pressure irrigation, that they be included as part of the subdivision and the applicant can address that. I believe that we are in agreement on that, but I would ask that on the Preliminary Plat, Item Number 12, that if you, in your motion, choose to approve this, if you include that as a condition that that be added as a lot that's not currently there. Then, on Page 7 there are just four items that we had a couple of concerns about, all of which I think we are now in agreement with. The block length on the bottom of Page 7 and Page 8, I have already addressed. That talks about Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission June 5, 2003 Pg 54 of 100 the school property. I will point out that the micropath issue here at the end of the cul- de-sac where they come in off of Ustick straight in, that we have asked a micropath connection through here, so they can have better access to the open space that they are proposing here, as well as to break up this block length and they have submitted a - -prepared another plat that I think they are ready to submit to you tonight that shows that micropath, so I think that one is taken care of. The Ustick Road sidewalk was another of our concerns. As I mention at the beginning, the Eight Mile Lateral is separate ownership, so, technically, this first 400 feet or so, if you start from their west boundary and move east, about 400, 450 feet, they do not own adjacent to the Ustick right of way. Therefore, that highway district is not requiring them to put a sidewalk in. We had some concern about how that's going to happen in the future, is the highway district just going to -- to taper down Ustick there or are they going to have relocation of the Eight Mile or what? They have contacted the highway district and we received a memo that just said, basically, at this point the highway district doesn't know how they are going to handle that in there. They are -- but they are certainly not requiring a sidewalk in that section and we understand that the applicant has no control over that. That's not their property. I think that's really something that the highway district is going to work out. We will have to work carefully with them on insuring we get a continuous pedestrian sidewalk there. Then, the last two items on the Eight Mile Ustick landscaping and fencing, these five lots here are going to be required to have chain link or some other noncombustible fence, because of the burning of the ditch there. We had concerns, especially with Ustick being a future five-lane road, just the visibility into the backs of these lots. We have received a letter tonight from Shawn Nickels stating that they are going to put in the CC&Rs that those five lots will have some kind of consistent landscaping, you know, across the backs, consistent fencing. That it will have a more unified look from Ustick and it won't just be a hodge podge of fencing and different landscaping and things like that. I think it will help give a better appeal from Ustick Street. Then, the last main item to point out was the open space and there -- this lot that's shown here is -- most of their five percent required open space, that is going to need to be a part of the school property in the future, whenever the school district chooses to construct a school at this site. It would reduce the five percent open space to, you know, probably around two percent or something once the school -- once that exchange of land is made, so within the subdivision itself they would only have, like I say, two to three percent of their open space, but -- and right now there is not anything in the city code that says if you agree to provide a school lot, then, you can have that five percent required open space waived. We don't have anything in code that says that that's allowed. However, obviously, they are going to get a lot more open space in this subdivision with the school in it than without. Granted, they don't have access to that school open space all the time during the school hours and they are not going to be able to use it, but a majority they would, so I guess staffs opinion was that they would have to do a Variance in order to actually have that exchange made. Yes. I would also point out we -- the revised plat that you, I think, are going to receive tonight by the applicant, has this -- this lot that's immediately south of the Bain property that's currently there. They have shifted the open space up, so it's like 130 feet of frontage -- of open space frontage on the street, instead of 70 or 80, I think it is now. They have opened that up and in the future they would probably have about a half an acre of open space that would have a -- they have committed to provide a tot lot there that would be always Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission June 5, 2003 Pg 55 of 100 available to the subdivision, even during school hours. Then, this cul-de-sac that is shown here right now is just shown to be on private property. We have asked that that be a part of the public right of way, permanent cul-de-sac. The Ada County Highway District staff report also mentions the same thing and while not shown, the --our request is that it be a public right of way and we understand they have agreed to that. Then, on the conditions themselves, I think the only one is Number 4 that would need to be omitted completely. That talks about the cul-de-sac on Elmstone Court and if you agree with their proposed revision of the micropath there, then, I think that condition would be taken care of and could be omitted. Then, Item 6 talks about the open space and after the applicant's presentation that would eventually need to be -- the first sentence of number six might need to be amended as well. Then Item 11 we just had an error there. It says that the detail Landscape Plan -- at this point it's just a conceptual, but we have asked that a detailed Landscape Plan be submitted for the subdivision at least 10 days prior to the next hearing, that should be prior to -- or with the Final Plat submittal. That is a correction so, I guess at this point that's all staff has. Borup: Questions from any of the Commissioners? Centers: Mr. Chairman, just one. Mr. Clark, this is all a proposed school site? Hawkins-Clark: That's correct. Centers: And it's just been offered to the school district, they haven't committed whether they will buy it or take it, there is no committal on their part? Hawkins-Clark: That is my understanding. There have been discussions, but Idon't -- correct. Centers: Thank you. Borup: Anyone else? Zaremba: I have two. One of them is on the discussion of the sewer. I guess I'm not quite understanding. I think the applicant is proposing that they connect their sewer lines across Ashford Greens lift station and I can understand that part of it. Is there not eventually going to be a Black Cat sewer line and is the idea that they would eventually disconnect from Ashford Green and reconnect to the new sewer line? Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Zaremba, that's correct. The applicant is proposing to gravity the sewer from this subdivision down Black Cat Road to the Ashford Greens lift station. The line will come out -- the main sewer line will come out this entrance road, so that when the new -- when the Ashford Greens lift station is eliminated and the sewer goes on north, this line would hook into that new gravity line, new gravity trunk line. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission June 5, 2003 Pg 56 of 100 Zaremba: It's the last part of the subject that I didn't see in here anywhere. Should they be required to abandon their connection and reconnect? Abandon the Ashford Greens and reconnect? I didn't see any requirement for that. Freckleton: I guess I'm not following -- exactly tracking with you there. Zaremba: It seemed to me that connecting to Ashford Greens was the end of the subject. Freckleton: It's not the end of the subject. You will see in our comments that we have required that in lieu of them building a dry line sewer across this frontage right here, that they will be putting up 1,500 dollars per lot for that future Black Trunk extension. Those funds will be sitting there, so that when this becomes a city project and the city can draw from those funds, we will take care of disconnecting that line and hooking this new line in. Zaremba: Okay. Freckleton: That's what that 1,500 per lot are going to go for. Zaremba: Okay. The 1,500 per lot isn't for the connection to Ashford Greens. Freckleton: No. That's for the future -- Zaremba: Oh, they have to connect to Ashford Greens and the 1,500 -- Freckleton: Correct. Zaremba: -- covers the future connection to the new sewer. Freckleton: That's correct. Borup: Either that or install a 42 inch trunk line. Freckleton: Which we would rather not do the 42 inch trunk line. It's like -- Borup: Is it even engineered yet? Freckleton: No. That's the problem. I mean it's hard to set elevations and everything at this. point in time. I mean that's not to say it can't be done, but the safest thing to do is what we have proposed. Borup: Okay. Anything else? Zaremba: Yes. I'd probably bring this up, but it's just to get it said and, then, we will discuss it later. On page three of the staff report, the paragraph that's at the actual top of the page mentions that according to the parks department and I guess the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission June 5, 2003 Pg 57 of 100 Comprehensive Plan, somewhere in this neighborhood there is proposed to be a community park of the size 25 to 30 acres. In having this development participate in that is kind of dismissed, because this is only 40 acres. What comes to mind is Lochsa Falls, which only provided part of a park and, then, the next project south of them provided the rest of the park and I would imagine it's going to be difficult for any project to be big enough to set aside a whole 25 or 30 acres and I guess my question is shouldn't we be talking about somehow acquiring or providing 12 and a half acres of park from this project, expecting the next project north to be the other 12 and a half or something in that neighborhood, not necessarily -- Borup: We still have a whole square mile here. Zaremba: Yes, but all of the projects are going to be too small to have any single project come up with a whole park, I would assume. Centers: Well, I think you have to go back to Lochsa Falls and the other project you refer to. They did not -- Zaremba: That's two. Centers: Yes, but they did not -- if I recall correctly --and staff correct me if I'm wrong - -those developers did not donate that park land, the city bought it. Zaremba: That's correct. Centers: And I guess, you know, we can't require -- Zaremba: Well -- and I'm assuming the same here, that it would be a donation. Centers: Yes. But -- Zaremba: Somehow they'd get money back for the land. Centers: I don't -- Borup: You're saying a park site and a school site? Is that the direction you're thinking? Zaremba: Possible. If they are being paid for the park site, it's not much of a loss. Borup: Depends on how much they are being paid. Centers: Well, my point is we haven't heard from anyone that the city wants to buy it. Zaremba: And that's true, too. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission June 5, 2003 Pg 58 of 100 Centers: And I didn't see anything from the parks department, other than the fact that the 20 acre park, there is a dot on the Comp Plan for that 20 acre park and those dots can move. Zaremba: They are flexible. Centers: Right. Right. Zaremba: But I'm just saying the logic here could be through, you know, the whole rest of the square mile. Just throwing it out there. Hawkins-Clark: I guess the only piece I would add to that, Chairman Borup, I mean they are -- that whole issue of public services and a concurrency of when you get services to when you annex is certainly a big question in planning. Paramount, as you may recall, had the 12-acre elementary school site and a 55-acre high school site. The Comp Plan showed a 3d acre park in that square mile and the decision there, of course, was that the amount of open space that the schools provided, you know, would kind of help to, you know, provide that open space without doing the public park as well. I think the distribution of land, as well as a financing issue, but, yes, I did not receive any comments and I know you didn't either, I don't think, from the Parks Department about acquisition. Centers: And I have a question for you, Mr. Clark, again. On the last -- or Page 13 of your staff report, your recommendation, of course, you know what you wrote there. Are you saying that Items 1 and, then, Items 2, 3, 4 and 5 you have worked those out? Is that what you're saying tonight? Or are you still -- Hawkins-Clark: Chairman Borup, Commissioner Centers, that's correct. Yes. We are - - we feel that -- I had a two-hour meeting with the applicant yesterday and I feel like these have all been addressed. As I mentioned, the one item that we are asking to add is 21, a new Condition 21, under pre-plat. That requires the out parcel on the north to be a lot in the subdivision. Centers: Would that be the same as Condition 3 under annexation and zoning? Hawkins-Clark: No. Centers: It would be a separate legal description for the out parcel referred to? Hawkins-Clark: No. It would be a lot -- it would be assigned a lot, block number within the plat. Centers; Okay. Got you. Borup: Anything else? Is the applicant here and would like to make their presentation? Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission June 5, 2003 Pg 59 of 100 Amar: Good evening, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners. My name is Kevin Amar, Centennial Development, address 114 East Idaho, Number 230. I promised staff I'd keep it to five minutes and I'll do my best. We did meet with staff yesterday and there was a list of concerns or questions. One moment, I'm going to pass out a packet. There were a number of items that staff did want to discuss. We were able to address those items with staff and are in full agreement with them at this point. We have no -- we have no contention with the staff report. I would like to go over the new Site Plan and, then, answer some of the questions that were brought up by this body this evening. On the last page of that packet is the new Preliminary Plat and I'll refer to this larger one, just for ease of the members of the audience. I'll try to do it where everybody can see it. In the new Site Plan, there were a number of changes that we did make. We have added this pathway at the location of Elmstone -- connecting Oldstone with Elmstone. Also, an additional pathway was added up to the school site, so there are two additional pathways from what you had on the initial Preliminary Plat that was presented. Those were both added based on recommendations of staff. We also moved the park further to the north bordering the -- what I'm going to call the Bain household, the property would be annexed and also included as a part of the Preliminary Plat. If we moved it further to the north we could increase the width of that, we could also utilize some of those trees in this area that have grown and utilize those into the park, rather than in a backyard. Within that park we will also be providing a playground structure. That playground structure will be able to be used for the residents within the subdivision even while the kids are going to school. There will be a permanent park area -- there will be a permanent park even when the school is developed. This area back here will be developed in currently five percent open space into grass and park and, then, when the school develops, a portion of that grass area will revert back to the school playground. The thought of putting the park in this location would provide the ability for the parents, when the school opens, the older kids will be playing soccer or whatever they may be playing, the younger kids are going to be playing in the tot lot, that will allow the parents to be at one location and watch all their children, also allowing a larger functional open space and have two separated parks. We are providing on this boundary of Block 5 adjacent to Eight Mile Creek, as brought up by staff, how are we going to -- how are we going to provide for some sort of barrier from Ustick Road. We do have to provide a noncombustible chain link fence in that location. We are also going to require within the CC&Rs that each house will have to provide arbo vitae or ivy, something that will screen that -- screen the backyards and that if people do want to put up a fence, we have a consistent design based on the approval of the architectural control committee. Really, other than that, we -- the other minor changes that we made, we are expecting to add a little more open space up front. This will be in the discussion tonight, this lot -- although it was always being annexed, will now be a lot within the subdivision. We have agreed with staff on that. I don't know if there is anything with staff that we haven't agreed on. With respect to the sewer, we are providing 1,500-dollar hookup, as Bruce said. It will be at our cost and we will go back down and hook into the Ashford lift station, but in the future when they build that sewer trunk line they will be able to tie that in at whatever location they deem I guess the easiest. I took some other notes, so I guess I should read those. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission June 5, 2003 Pg 60 of 100 Centers: Let me ask you while you're there. All of this -- all this area is Block 6, including the park, including the school. Amar: Yes. Centers: Could you read the lot numbers on the park area and, then, the school site? Amar: The lot numbers on the park area is Lot 7 -- or on the park, area is Lot 6, on the school site is part 7. That was done to differentiate the five percent that we will be improving upon development. Centers: And you have two Lot 7s. Amar: There are two Lot 7's. Centers: That one there and that one there. Amar: That is actually Lot 8 or -- whatever it is. We made these changes, but it will be fixed when -- Centers: My bifocals didn't deceive me. Amar: No. No. Centers: Okay so, you will have to change that. Amar: That will be correct. The lot numbering will change, because this portion that says it's not a part will also be a lot. Centers: Right. Right Amar: So, that lot numbering will change. Instead of 23 lots in Block 6, there will be 25 now. With respect to the school site, I did speak with their attorney Mark Freeman today. There has not been a -- there has not been a contract entered into and that was because Mark said he was, quote, swamped and he will have that done next week. We have come to terms and conditions and have reached that, so there is a commitment both on our side and on the school's side to do that. We'd hope have an actual agreement -- written agreement met by this time, but their attorney was unable to accomplish that and he apologized and said I could blame him, though, I don't know that there is a lot of blame to place. I'm sure he's busy. Borup: So, Mr. Amar, you're saying there is an agreement - Amar: Yes. Borup: -- at this point, not just in concept or -- Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission June 5, 2003 Pg 61 of 100 Amar: No. It is an agreement. All we are waiting for is the paperwork to be finalized. Everybody is agreed upon the terms and conditions. Borup: And price. Amar: And price. Yes, sir. We will be -- we will be applying for a Variance for that park space. We would like to use the future school site as part of our park space currently, so when that school site does develop, we will be able to have a larger functional open space. I think with that said, I just really didn't see that there was other issues that we did not come to agreement with staff on. We agree with all the staff comments. We appreciate them being able to meet with us yesterday and we were able to reach those agreements. With that, I will stand for any questions. Oh, actually, one item -- and I don't -- it's probably more of a legal item. We were requesting 89 lots, but with the addition of the one lot we have to read that in as 9l7 residential lots at this point. Centers: Good catch. There is an opening on the staff. Amar: I'm sorry? Centers: Good catch. There is an opening on the staff. Freckleton: Mr. Chairman? Amar: I don't think I'm qualified. Freckleton: Just a clarification on that. I don't think that it will -- it will still be 89, because on the pre-plat they had asmall -- very small, it was the access to the main parcel. What I would propose is that you just basically absorb that small lot into the main lot, so your lot count's going to be the same. Amar: Okay. Centers: Even with the lot to the north? Freckleton: Yes. Centers: Okay. Borup: Oh, that was Lot 4. Right. Amar: Yes. Zaremba: So, the Bains will become Lot 1. Borup: But haven't you eliminated one lot when you made the park bigger? Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission June 5, 2003 Pg 62 of 100 Amar: No, we did not. We were able to make those larger against the school and we included that area into the park space. We had those lots along the school at about 70 Borup: I was having trouble reading your small -- you have increased those lot sizes. Amar: Yes, sir, we did. Borup: Any other questions, Commissioners? Commissioner Zaremba, do you have questions? Zaremba: Yes. The turnaround at the end of Albertson is -- at the moment appears to go on what will be school property. You're going to make that a public road? Amar: That will be a public road. Whether it be on the north side of the road or the south side of the road, that's something I want to coordinate with the school, but it will be public. Turnaround. Cul-de-sac. Borup: Okay. Any other questions? Amar: Just for reference, we did have a neighborhood meeting out here. The people that showed up were the Langley's, the Quenzers, and the Bains and they all supported it. I believe some of them are here tonight, but we did want to have a meeting with them before to try to come up with any potential conflicts. I appreciate your time. Borup: Thank you. Do we have anyone else to testify on this application? If so, now is the time to come forward. All right. Thank you. Centers: Mr. Chairman, I have a question for staff. Have you read Mr. Nickel's memo, dated June 5`"? Today. Hawkins-Clark: Commissioner Borup, Chairman -- Commissioner Centers. Sorry. The other C. Yes, we have. Centers: So, a motion could include your comments and their memo, dated June 5`h agreeing to all your comments and comments therein, with the addition of Item Number 21. Hawkins-Clark: Twenty-one. Centers: Correct. Especially, since we didn't see anyone here tonight protesting to this development. Good. That would eliminate a lot of tweaking. Thank you. Zaremba: Do we have an opinion about this making the southern out parcel an enclave? Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission June 5, 2003 Pg 63 of 100 Hawkins-Clark: Chairman Borup, Commissioner Zaremba, our opinion has always been they're bad. However, we have no control, frankly. Borup: This has been a separate ownership for a number of years, hasn't it? It's not something that was split off just recently. Zaremba: No. I know that. We have been told that we aren't supposed to create enclaves. Centers: Well, what slipped by us a few months ago was this exact example and the Council caught it and required that lot on the north -- Borup: The one on the north. Right. Centers: Same example, to be in the annexation and part of the plat. Zaremba: The one to the north is the same ownership, but the one to the south, the out parcel, is not. It will become an enclave. Centers: Yes. I know. I'm saying that that example got by us and we missed it and staff caught it in time. Borup: And that -- I think we'd rather see that parcel, but I don't know that there is anything that this developer could do or anyone can do to avoid that. That's something that's going to have to come along in the future. Okay. We still have a Public Hearing open. Centers: Yes. I'd move we close it. Zaremba: Second. Borup: Motion and second to close the Public Hearing. All in favor. Any opposed? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Borup: Any discussion? Centers: I think the applicant has agreed to everything the staff wants, so -- Borup: I think they have, yes, which makes it -- does make it easy. One thing I was glad to hear and that was one of the notes I had. That was on the school district -- I mean on the lot for the school district and -- because we have had a previous application that testified that -- I think we gave them credit for it -- testified that they were going to be selling property to the school. As time went on that agreement got fuzzier and fuzzier and at this date, they still don't have an agreement with the school district and I, for one, would have felt different. I mean I went ahead with that project, feeling that there was some credit there for doing that, but Ijust -- and the thought I had on Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission June 5, 20D3 Pg 64 of 100 that, that for me, anyway, in the future, to give credit -- I mean they are asking for open space credit, essentially. For me to give credit at this point there needs to be a definite agreement with the school district and it appears that there is. Centers: Yes and this project -- Borup: And that may be -- and it looks like it probably will be by the time it gets to City Council. Centers: And even if they don't, though, Mr. Chairman, they are dedicating a lot for a park, which means open space. Borup: Right. That wouldn't stay that way. Right. Centers: And if they don't sell it to the school district, I'm sure we will see them back here and we can -- Borup: Well, sometimes -- I mean I would not like to see somebody hold the school district hostage. Centers: Oh, I'm not saying that. If the school district changes their mind -- Borup: Right. Centers: -- I don't want to -- Borup: Okay. Zaremba: Since the area to the north of this is not being developed, do we have it on the Preliminary Plat about the Right To Farm Act? Centers: The applicant is shaking his head, yes, but -- Zaremba: Okay. Centers: -- I don't know. Zaremba: Very fine print. Okay. All right. Are we ready for a motion? Borup: Yes. Zaremba: Mr. Chairman, I would recommend that we forward to the City Council recommending -- I move that we forward to the City Council recommending approval of Item 10 on our agenda, AZ 03-008, request for annexation and zoning of 34.52 acres from RUT to R-8 zones for proposed Birchstone Creek Subdivision by Centennial Development, LLC. Northwest corner of West Ustick Road and North Black Cat Road, Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission June 5, 2003 Pg 65 of 100 to include all staff comments of their memo dated June 5`h, received by the City Clerk June 2"d Rohm: Second. Borup: We have a motion and second. All in favor? Any opposed. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Zaremba: Mr. Chairman, I move that we forward to the City Council recommending approval of Item 11 on our agenda, PP 03-008, request for a Preliminary Plat approval of 89 building lots and seven other lots on 34.52 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for proposed Birchstone Creek Subdivision by Centennial Development, LLC. Northwest corner of west Ustick Road and North Black Cat Road, to include all staff comments of the memo June 5th, received by the City Clerk June 2nd, with the following exceptions. That on Page 12, the current item 20 be renumbered to 21 and would add a 20 that says the Bain out parcel will be platted as a lot within the subdivision. Centers: And they wanted, in Item 20, to simply read -- I thought they said, anyway, that on the Final Plat -- where was that note? Page 11. Yes Page 11. A detailed landscape -- in compliance with the landscape ordinance submitted for the subdivision with the Final Plat. They wanted to cross out at least ten days prior. Zaremba: Paragraph 11 to read -- and this is page 11 -- paragraph 11: Detail landscape in compliance with the landscape ordinance shall be submitted for the subdivision with the Final Plat. Centers: And, then, if you don't mind, Commissioner Zaremba, they need to renumber that park area and the school site area. I read it with my bifocals as Lot 8 and Lot 7 and they have -- it's a duplication number,. so they are going to have to change that. They admitted that. I would like to include -- I would like to include their memo, dated June 5th, that they are in concurrence with all the staff comments and provide the comments within that June 5th memo, if you don't mind. Zaremba: Add that to the motion. Centers: I second. Borup: Motion and second. Any discussion? All in favor? Any opposed? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Borup: Okay. Item Number 12 is -- as mentioned earlier, the applicant has requested this hearing to be continued to June 19th. Any discussion? If not, open for a motion. Centers: So moved. Move Item 12 on our agenda to the meeting of June 19th. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission June 5, 2003 Pg 66 of 100 Mathes: Second. Borup: Motion and second. All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Item 13. Public Hearing: PFP 03-002 Request for Preliminary /Final Plat approval of 3 building lots on 1.55 acres in an L-O zone for Gaudry Seegmiller Subdivision by Gordon N. Anderson -southeast corner ~f East Gala Street and South Millennium: Borup: Item Number 13, Public Hearing PFP 03-002, request for Preliminary/Final Plat of three building lots on 1.55 acres in an L-O zone for Gaudry Seegmiller Subdivision by Gordon Anderson. This is at the southeast of East Gala and South Millennium, part of a project that we have seen several times. I'd like to open the Public Hearing at this time and start with the staff report. Siddoway: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. This is an existing lot in Resolution Business Park Subdivision and they are proposing to split the existing single lot into three lots. It is a preliminary Final Plat combination and is going through applying together, through this process to City Council. You can see the aerial photo with the vacant property. The property to the south has since been developed as Mountain View High School. This is Overland Road along the north. Locust Grove Road is to the west and Eagle Road is just off the photo to the right. This is a copy of the proposed Preliminary Plat. It's more difficult to see the lines on the Final Plat, so I'll just skip to that. You can see that they are proposing three lots, Lot 1, Lot 2, Lot 3 Each one does have frontage and meets the minimum lot sizes for the L-O zone. The•~ did submit a proposed site layout, although that's not specifically up for discussion, but ~t was shown on the Landscape Plan and this is the Landscape Plan that was shown. You should have a staff report with a transmittal date of May 29`n for today's P&Z hearing date. I don't know that there is any real outstanding issues that need to be discussed. We have submitted the site-specific comments, one through eight, as shown. I would like to add a ninth, which would be to submit ten copies of a revised plat and Landscape Plan in compliance with this staff report ten days prior to the hearing with Council. The only other issue I know of is related to item four in the staff report on page three, which talks about a copy of a recorded cross-access and cross-parking easement for the subdivision prior to signature on the Final Plat. As written it was intended to have that recorded specifically for this layout as shown. Then, approached by Becky Bowcutt, who represented the owner of the lot to the south and she's also concerned that they get a cross-access agreement to the south to allow for interconnectivity. I do believe that the original Site Plan submitted with the Resolution Park Conditional Use Permit had interconnectivity through all those parcels. With that, I will stand for any questions. Borup: Questions from any Commissioners?