Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJuly 8, 2003 City CouncilMeridian City Council July 8, 2003 Page 29 of 59 Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I would move that we approve CUP 03-021, request for a Conditional Use Permit for a planned development for single family residential use with reduced setback lot sizes, lot frontages, and house sizes in a propose R-8 PD zone for the proposed Trailway Park Subdivision by Hillview Development Corporation and for the attorney to draw up the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and decision of order and to incorporate all staff and applicant comments. Nary: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded to approve the request for a Conditional Use Permit 03-021. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll-call vote, Mr. Berg. Roll-Call: McCandless, yea; Nary, yea; de Weerd, yea; Bird, yea. Corrie: All ayes. Request for Conditional Use Permit is approved. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 15: 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 16: 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: Item 17: Public Hearing: VAR 03-013 Request for a Variance to Meridian City Code 12-4-5 requiring- blocks to be not less than 400 feet and not more than 1,000 feet in length for Birchstone Creek Subdivision by Centennial Development, LLC -northwest corner of West Ustick Road and North Black Cat Road: Corrie: Item No. 15, 16, and 17 are public hearings for Birchstone Creek Subdivision. The first -- No. 15 is the request for annexation and zoning 03-008 for 34.52 acres from an RUT to an R-8 zone for proposed Birchstone Creek Subdivision. Item No. 16 is a Public Hearing, request for preliminary plat approval of 89 building lots and seven other lots on 34.52 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Birchstone Creek Subdivision. And Item No. 17 is a Public Hearing, Variance 03-013, request for a variance to the Meridian City Code 12-4-5, requiring blocks to be less than 400 feet and not more than 1,000 feet in length for Birchstone Creek Subdivision. At this time I will open the Public Hearing on all three items and invite staff comments first. Meridian Ciry Council July 8, 2003 Page 30 of 59 Powell: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, as you can see from this map that this adjoins city property to the south, but it's kind of the breakout into this new section here, as bounded by Ustick and Black Cat Road, surcounded by large properties which are undeveloped at this time. Well, undeveloped, other than farms. The proposed subdivision does include a large lof for approximately a nine and a half acre lot for an elementary school. It's bounded by a large irrigation facility here on the west and it also wraps around and comes down here as well in this corner. There are two entrances into the subdivision, one off each major arterial and a fairly well interconnected system of roadways interior to it. There is a pedestrian path that connects this cul-de-sac over to this open space area, so that children get from the cul-de-sac, basically, to the school grounds without having to go all the way down the street and back up. The outstanding issue that -- as you can tell from my new cheat sheets, there is -- no one showed to testify against it or in favor of it at the Planning and Zoning Commission. Three property owners attended and did state that they were in support of the application, although they didn't testify. You do have a revised plat dated the 7th, I believe, of this month, just for your records. The only outstanding issue that really remains on this one is a question of this open space located here. Staff had recommended that the applicant submit a variance for that property and the Planning and Zoning Commission concurred and, then, I didn't realize the Planning and Zoning Commission had already decided the fact and I did tell the applicant that I didn't want them to submit a variance application and I will explain why. The variance was for the minimum five percent open space. This is a straight subdivision. It's not a planned development, so they are required to provide five percent. That five percent is all included within this lot right here. When this is platted, the applicant will develop this as an open space amenity for the subdivision, if and when they do anticipate selling this to the school district. When this is developed as the school district, the applicant will adjust the lot line such that the common facility goes approximately just in this area here and the rest of that property would be deeded to the school. So, in the future, the common lot open space will not meet the five percent requirement. Now, of course, it's still going to be open -- I mean it's still going to be there, it will just be under the ownership of the Meridian School District. So, as this travels through our processing system, though, they do meet the five percent minimum open space, but they have been open about -- I mean they have been honest and forthcoming about what they intend to do with that in the future and the Council may want to recognize at this point that that would be -- if they are in favor of that, you might want to state that that will be okay, because, otherwise, when they go to do a lot line adjustment we may have difficulties approving that, because that lot is the open space requirement for the subdivision. The only -- the applicants worked out a lot of the issues with staff prior to going to the Planning and Zoning Commission. The one thing that's not reflected in this drawing is that this property, which is shown as unplatted, they were going to annex it, but they were not including it in the subdivision. They have agreed and the Planning and Zoning Commission required them to include it in the subdivision. So, it will take access from the subdivision. It's currently the same owners as own the property that is being subdivided. And those were the only outstanding issues. Meridian City Counal July 8, 2003 Page 31 of 59 Corrie: Any questions? Okay. Hearing none, is the representative from the Birthstone here? Is the testimony you are about to give the Council the truth, so help you God? Amar: Yes, it is. Corrie: Name and address, please. Amar: Good evening, Mr. Mayor, Council Members, my name is Kevin Amar, address 114 East Idaho, No. 230, in Meridian. We are here before you for Birthstone Creek Subdivision and, as staff has indicated, we have been able to work out any outstanding issues with staff and we -- by the way, I like the cheat sheet. I don't know whose idea it was, but it was great. It makes it a lot easier to review what those issues might be. I have gone through the cheat sheet, so to speak, and we are still in agreement with all of the outstanding conditions of approval. A couple of items that are not reflected on this plat, unfortunately, is one of the requirements was this cul-de-sac be made permanent. We had initially proposed it as a temporary turnaround until such time as the school puts in their parking area that's going to be in here. It will be a permanent turnaround. In fact, it's going to be on the other side of the street, so it doesn't interfere and conflict with school use of their property and we will build a permanent cul-de-sac in that area, still allowing for access across the Eight Mile Creek should that ever happen. But, in the meantime, there will be fire department ability to get in through there. The other issues were providing an easement through this common space open area for this in the future and also include this in the preliminary plat. We have done all that and, as staff has stated, we don't have any other concerns. One of the questions that we did bring up -- and Mr. Bigham apparently couldn't be here tonight. There is a school board meeting also tonight and he was going to try to make it. At some point they are going to build a school in here and in speaking to him that point could be two years and it could be ten years. He's trying to juggle a lot of different schools and where their growth is coming from and where they are anticipating it to be. But in doing so, we tried to incorporate -- because we know there is going to be a school here, we wanted to have - - what we are going to put in is a permanent park area in the same proximity as where the school playground area would be and we wanted to do that for two reasons. One, we get the full use of the ground and also for the long-term benefit is parents can watch their little kids play on the playground equipment and their big kids play soccer or chase or whatever they do in the open space. It allows the parents to be in one area and see all the open area. The other thing it does is it provides a better visual access back into this -- what will be the future school play yard. We have also provided a couple of pathways that will also be beneficial to the school and to the subdivision. With this park, if you draw a line here, the portion to the west will be dedicated to the school in the future at such time --and we are trying to work that out with the school's attorney, if they want to own it now and grant us back an easement or we need to dedicate that in the future and that really is up to their attorney. We have told them just tell us how you want us to do it and we will do it that way. But immediately we are going to develop all of that open space, so the kids have a place to go play. There will be grass and there will be -- so it will be put into use. We are also going to put a recreation facility on the portion of the ground in this area that will remain under ownership of the homeowners Meridian City Council July 8, 2003 Page 32 of 59 association. So, when school is in session -- this will be fenced off, but there will still be the younger kids will be able to get in there and use the open space area and the parents will be able to go there. So, there is going to be an open space dedicated solely to the homeowners association. And speaking with staff, I believe they are in support of it and Mrs. Powell, I guess she can correct me if I'm wrong, but they are in support of doing that joint use facility, they just wanted to be sure that we brought this up before the City Council to make sure that this body is also in agreement with what we were trying to do. We are trying to use the best open space as we can and provide the best product for the end result. I have also provided you with what we do on all of our projects anymore, a list of CC&R's or what will be incorporated into the CC&R's. We do this just -- I guess we feel comfortable putting things in writing, so it makes it easy to see what we plan on doing. On the third page --and I'll get a bigger map, so it's easier to see. This shows kind of the breakdown of where the lot sizes are, so you can see and as far as the colors, the yellow depicts from 6,500 to 7,000 square feet, blue from seven to nine thousand and red from 9,000 and up. So, we tried to depict that even though we are asking for an R-8, there are quite a few larger lots within the subdivision. With that unless, there are other questions, the revisions that you see here do reflect and the map we have up there do reflect all of ACHD's revisions, with the exception of the cul-de-sac and that will be incorporated into the design. So I would stand for any questions should you have any. Bird: I have none. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I guess I'm a little bothered by your disappearing park which you have at -- the fact that -- I mean I guess I look at most of the school sites in Meridian are probably sooner, rather than later. So, it appears to me that within two to three years when you buy that house on the front portion, like at the corner of Ustick and Black Cat area, you know, that park is going to disappear that you think is going to be there, because nothing is going to tell these people that park is going to go away and a school is going to be built there and there is a fence, so they won't be able to use it anymore. Amar: No, there will be a park there. There is going to be a fence here, because the school doesn't want their kids being able to get out. Nary: I understand. Amar: But this portion is always going to be here. Nary: I understand. Amar: And it will be open and this portion is going to be grass and so this park won't disappear, it will, actually, get larger, it's just going to change ownership. Meridian City Council July 8, 2003 Page 33 of 59 Nary: It's just going to have a fence across it and you're not going to be able to access it during school time and you're going to have -- I mean, basically, the park that -- when you buy your house down here or even adjacent to that park, you know, within two or three years half of that park is going to disappear into the school ground with a fence across it and it's no longer a park to the people that live there, it's just school ground, like everybody else is part of the school ground. Amar: I guess I disagree to some extent. That park goes from an acre and a half to six acres of open space. They can't use it when the kids are in school, but the kids that are going to use that park are in school anyway. The tots that are going to go slide down the slide are going to use the tot lot and that's what we are going to continue having there and that's our intention of putting this -- but that's why we want to provide an open space. Nary: Okay. But the intent of the five percent is not to go steal it from the school, but to provide it to the residents within it. Amar: Correct. Nary: And so I think what you're doing, although it makes sense from your standpoint, to me it robs the people that are living there of the five percent open space, which is the intent of the ordinance. You're really borrowing the school's open space to make that, because once that school is going to get built, their five percent open space has gone, it's no longer in the homeowners association, it's the school's property. It would be there regardless of whether or not there are houses there and the people in the front, since it's not even centrally located, those people in the front have as much -- limited access to using it anyway and -- Amar: We initially had this park moved up here -- we initially did have it up here and at the request of staff and other people that was -- and from the police department, it was requested that we move back, so they can see to the back of the school space. That's the reason that it is in that location. As far as these people being robbed of this, well, I'd submit that we are providing a site for the school to build an elementary school. So, these people are going to move here because there is an elementary school. They are going to understand they have that ability. I think there will be more use out of the school site than just out of an acre and a half of park, because there is going to be more opportunity for the kids to go in and play soccer, play basketball, whatever the school -- they have much more facilities than most subdivisions. So, although I understand your concern, I think with this design and talking to the school and talking to staff, it really is the best of both worlds. The kids can't use the park when school is in session, but the kids are at school when the school is in session, so -- Nary: Well -- but once there. is a school, there is no five percent. I mean the whole intent of the ordinance is that there is a five percent of open space within that subdivision and once that school is build it is no longer there. Meridian City Counal July 8, 2003 Page 34 of 59 Amar: I guess I understand that -- Nary: And the school property is the school's property and they are going to -- you know, whatever limited uses they have and whatever limited access they have is totally up to them. So, the people using it, yeah, it's no different than anybody else. But the people within that subdivision don't have that open space that they would normally be entitled to, the same as everybody else in the other subdivisions in the city. They are just getting half of it, because they happen to be next to the school. Amar: I think it's a -- I mean there is opinions here, but other subdivisions, the people also don't have a school sitting in the middle of their property that they may want. So, this really is going to be beneficial to what we see and in talking to the school district, they though it was beneficial, they are able to acquire ground that they need in this area and they were pretty excited about this proposal and I believe staff -- obviously, this board has the final say, but staff is understanding and in agreement with what we are proposing. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: That park land or the open space, you won't be selling it to the school .district, will you? Amar: No. It's going to be deeded. De Weerd: It will be donated, then. Amar: I'm not exactly sure how it's going to work out. The school's attorney has to tell us, either -- they are going to provide us an easement, but we have offset the cost already to account for that. De Weerd: So, they are gaining that green area and they are not going to be charged for it? Amar: Correct. De Weerd: So, you know, Iguess Iwould -- I have a little bit different perspective than Councilman Nary. I think the neighborhood does gain in that open space and it does make it more desirable living behind the school and that sort of thing and your homeowners association is not going to be paying to provide the maintenance to it and you will be doubling -- more than doubling -- tripling your open space that is behind your house or available to your kids, because at Ponderosa I have never seen them block off access to it, it constantly has access, and that's what the open space requirement, when we wrote it, was really to provide that open space of relief from the houses and Meridian City Council July 8, 2003 Page 35 of 59 that sort of thing and I think it's a nice amenity and certainly if they were going to be selling it to the school district, I would have a problem with that, but if they are deeding it to it and it's providing even more of an open space, I don't have an issue with that. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I see where Tammy is coming from, very much so, and I have no problem with it either, but that is not -- it's like our ordinance says, it's five percent green space. That is not -- even though they are saying right now that that is part of this subdivision, as soon as the school is --gets the ground -- and they could buy the ground tomorrow and never build a school for 15 years, you can't tell me that you're not going to start building houses in there faster than they are going to build the school. They do not meet the five percent requirement. I have -- to be truthful with you, I have no problem with that on this deal, because I agree with Tammy, but I have also seen schools -- I have also seen schools lock down where you cannot get through there and if you cannot get through there, then, that green space is no good. So, that's my opinion on that. I mean I would not hold this up for that deal, but our ordinance says that this subdivision by -- on its own -- stands on its own with five percent green space and it doesn't do it, because there is no way that that little L is part of this subdivision. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: You know, we have had other developers adjacent to Settler's park ask for the same thing and we said, no, you're not going to use the public park to take your five percent. You're going to have to find it within your subdivision. I don't think this is any different. I mean I appreciate your creativeness in trying to do it, but if we grant this, we are going to grant this for everybody else that builds it next to a public park, a public school, or something else that they think is good enough open space to meet the requirements. You know, the access to this park to that five percent, even during this time period, I don't think is very good. But trying to get there once the school locks that -- blocks that off, in looking at your picture, you have got apathway -- I don't have a pointer, but you have got a pathway that accesses the -- you got a pathway here, right, that accesses this current green space, but at some point this is going to have a fence, so all of these people in this area, to get to the school -- this is not a street; right? The street's here and the street's here and there is one pathway right there; correct? Amar: Correct. Nary: So, the only way all of these people get to use this park, this -- what you consider to be a park or green space in the future, is to go all the way in the street and drive all the way around. There is no way for them to get there, other than this one little pathway right there, unless the school opens the gate or has an open space or whatever. I don't Meridian City Council July 8, 2003 Page 36 of 59 know what the school is going to do and neither do you. So, eventually all you will have is this little tiny park with some play equipment on it and all the green space access is gone. Amar: Okay. I do know the school is providing an open -- a continual open fence area or gate or pathway into that green space from the subdivision. Nary: But there all houses here, so where would it be? I mean it has to be here. Amar: Correct. Nary: So, you're saying that the school is going to -- but, again, we don't have that here. They are not here, there is nothing committed from them that there is going to be access to here. Amar: I guess they have told me that. Nary: Okay. Amar: Is what I'm here representing. Nary: And I don't disbelieve you, but what I'm saying is we have got to look long term. If we grant this exception that this park can go away and use this as your five percent, we are going to have to grant this to everybody and up to this point we have always said, no, you can't do that, you have to make it yourself within your space and you haven't done it. Bird: Mr. Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? I'm sorry. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I've only got one thing to say. You say -- now this little pocket park in there is going to be given to the homeowners association and we are going to have some tot play equipment in there and stuff. What if the kids, the older kids, at that school -- and I'm sure it's an elementary school that's going out there. What if the 5th, 6th, 7th graders get out there and start damaging that? There is a gate there, they will lock it up, the homeowners association. I sure would if I was a member of the homeowners association and kids were getting in there and vandalizing my equipment. So, I don't know why you can't find acouple -- and don't get me wrong, I know you have got a pencil to this to make it work, but I don't know why you can't take a couple of those building lots and make an open space there and give us the five percent. It's like Councilman Nary said, if we grant this, then, we are starting a precedence that -- it's like at the park, they can come and say, well, you know, we -- you have got a 56 acre park there. We will use that as green space and that's -- no, you're basically -- because that Meridian City Council July 9, 2003 Page 37 of 58 property is going to be property of Meridian School District No. 2 that you're saying is part of your five percent. Amar: But we are providing them the opportunity to purchase that. We are providing them the opportunity to have it -- Bird: Well, you just told us you were donating that part. Amar: Well, this school in here. This could all be houses and I provide my five percent and this could all be houses in here. Bird: That's fine. If you want to do that, that's fine with me, but I'll bet you as a businessman you're not going to do that. Amar: Well, I went to the school district initially and said, look, we want an opportunity to work here together and if we can make this work with the school district and ourselves, would that be open to you and the school district said, yeah, that would be great, we need another in this area and we'd like to acquire it. Bird: By the same token, if you can sell that big lot to the school district for a sum of money, it's much -- it's much better than you going in there and developing it. Amar: The school is paying me cost, pure cost, and I have shown the school district numbers -- and I don't want to get into numbers here, but -- Bird: No. No. And Idon't --and you don't need to. Amar: But there is no profit -- and when I say none, zero. There is no profit being made by the developers on this property. Bird: As a taxpayer, I appreciate it. Amar: It is cost to the school and that was part of the agreement that we had made with the school. Bird: But Ijust -- I want to get across to you that that L coming down there is not part of that subdivision and cannot be counted as the five percent and if we set a precedence here, guys, we have got to do it on everything. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I guess being one of the members that helped write the landscape ordinance, I probably know a little bit more than I should, but one of the discussions -- and (believe it even came into the Public Hearing process, was if some of their open Meridian City Coundl July 6, 2003 Page 38 of 59 space could towards schools if the land was donated and that -- what we found out is you couldn't require that by -- legally, because it would be considered a taking. And so it would have to come from the applicant's side of things and the benefit was -- is the applicant would still be donating the land, they'd still be greening it up, so they would still be doing what they would be required to do under the five percent requirement, but it would be given over to public use, donated or deeded or whatever they worked out with the school district, to bring it over and, personally, I would much rather see that open space and a school there, than see it all houses and see that little spot of green and that's just my personal preference as well. And because I know those conversations went on, I guess I have a different perspective than those that haven't heard those conversations and knew what some of our intent in writing that ordinance was and so that kind of explains the perspective that I'm coming from, in that it's still going to be open space, it's not going to be built on -- it's not going to be houses. You may have yet more limited access to it, but like all the other school yards right now, they are not limited to access, and so I see that this is a benefit to the taxpayers and to the idea of what open space is for. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: You're going to guarantee me that they are not going to build the school up there on that north end and that could be part of asphalt, play ground, basketball courts, could be part of the school, because I don't know where they are going to build it. I don't think they do. I bet they don't have the drawings for it yet. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I'm sorry. Corrie: Were you through, Mr. Bird? Bird: Yeah. 1 was done. You bet. Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: You know, Council Member de Weerd, I mean I do recall those discussions and the like, but they are not donating this property, they are selling it at cost. That's not -- that's not the same thing. Now, that may be what was thought of by the committee, but if you're telling me -- if a developer comes in here and says I'm going to donate this property to the school, I'm going to give it to them as a write-off, and that's a benefit to the City of Meridian, that's a pretty big -- Bird: That's a donation. Meddian City Council July 8, 20D3 Page 39 of 59 Nary: That's a pretty big gift. I think that's a great thing. It does deserve consideration. They are not giving it to the school. They are selling it to them. De Weerd: No, they are donating it. Nary: But the rest of it they are just selling it to them. The rest of it that makes up the park that we have been arguing about is you're selling it to them just like anybody else. You know, and that's fine, they have a right to do that, but l'm not going to give them credit for it. I'm not going to give them the benefit of selling it, just like they could. Yes, you could put houses there and you would have to put five percent open space. Cedar Springs put a school, Cedar Springs is next to the park, and we still made them put five percent open space in it. Lochsa Falls has open space in it. Paramount Subdivision has aschool -- has two schools and a park in it and we still made them put five percent open space in it. We have done it over and over and over and I don't see why this is anymore compelling than the others. It's a nice design. I think -- I don't particularly like where you put your open space. I don't think it's a good location anyway. But if that wasn't the issue, to me, the fact that it disappears is a big issue, that five percent. What will happen is -- and I know you're not asking for it, but other people will come and want and the same consideration and the next thing they are going to say is we want it set up on a -- we want to consider all that to be like a park, so we want to set up our park impact fees, because you have got a school next to it, so we don't have to pay -- we shouldn't have to pay as much, because there is all this green space with the school and, then, we have got to deal with that. I'd rather say no. Go redo it, get your five percent like everybody else has to. I appreciate your providing the school ground at cost to the school district, but everyone else had to meet the same standard and I appreciate the creativeness you're trying, but I just don't think it makes sense. Amar: I think the other subdivisions that you brought up, the Paramount, Cedar Springs, those are not 35 acre sites, those were enormous, they were PUD's, they are significantly different that this site. What we are doing, this ground -- Nary: But five percent is five percent. Amar: This ground is dedicated and donated to the school. The school is not purchasing where that five percent is. The school is not trying to purchase it. We are donating that, so there is a benefit. We are providing all of this. And if I'm a businessman and solely out for the money, I'm putting houses in here, because I'm going to make money on the houses. I'm not making money on the school property. I'm doing that as a benefit to the school district, because I made a commitment to Mr. Bigham a long time ago that every time I come in with a new project I'm going to him first and asking him if he needs property. So, to make good on that commitment that I made to Mr. Bigham, I did that, and on a 35-acre site he asked for a third of it. So, I feel like this project is not like those others that you have referenced, it is providing a benefit not only to the City of Meridian, but to the school district, to the homeowners, and it's a win-win situation for everyone. It does meet currently the five percent open space. Meridian City Counal July 8, 2003 Page 40 of 59 When the school goes in, the school, in fact, will go in up here. We are designing the sewer for that right now. It can't go in back here, because it won't have the sewer depth to do that. It needs about eight feet or nine feet of sewer depth and the school will go in here with the parking lots up front. The balance of this property in back, about five acres, will be open space, will be green, and based on sewerability, I can guarantee that. It can't be any other way or the school doesn't get sewer and I know they need to flush toilets. So, I don't think this is similar to what you're saying. I think this does meet the intent of the open space ordinance. It does have five percent from the very first day we start -- from the very first house that's sold it will have five percent and when the school goes in, it will have, I don't know, 20 percent. open space. Schools do not lock off their property. this evening. Corrie: They do. They did it at the Kiwanis Park. Bird: Yeah. Go out and check it out. The majority of that is going to be So, I would request for approval Corrie: They are doing it. And, besides, you're -- I understand what you're saying, but unless we have it in writing that -- what they are saying means nothing. Mr. Bigham may not be here tomorrow and we have somebody else take his place and they won't -- they don't like this. But I agree with Mr. Nary, you don't have five percent -- and you give that over there, you don't have five percent. Amar: I will submit just two questions, then. One, we can condition it that this does provide permanent access to the school site and if that's not the case, then, I would submit that we be tabled and we will look at the opportunity of not selling this property to the school and coming back and mapping and we will still have this same -- that amount of open space and it will be permanent and it will be owned by the homeowners association. Bird: Fine with me. I mean you can't take one of those lots out? What -- without that ground that we are arguing about, how -- what is the tot lot? How big is that? Amar: The tot lot, if you go back -- Bird: Go across there. Amar: This portion here -- Bird: Yeah. Amar: -- is about a half an acre. Bird: Okay. And you have got 22 acres in there? Amar: I'm sorry? Meridian City Counczl July 8, 2003 Page 41 of 59 Bird: You have got 22 acres that you're developing? Amar: Twenty-two acres of development. Yes. Bird: You told me 33. Amar: Correct. There is 35 acres total,~but the way we have to calculate our open space is we have to include five percent open space for the school also, because that's a part of the preliminary plat. So, we have to have about an acre and a half of open space, which this is. Bird: How big is that lot next to it? Amar: This lot? Bird: The blue one. Amar: It is -- Bird: My eyes aren't good enough to read the square footage. Corrie: 7,000 square feet. Amar: That lot is 8,000 square feet. Bird: So, we are talking about a fifth of an acre. Amar: Correct. Bird: I would -- Mayor and Council, I have no problem continuing it like he asked and give him a chance. I think he's got a very, very, very nice development here and, like Tammy, I hope the school district -- he can work something out when the school goes there, but I just don't feel comfortable allowing a school to be counted as the five percent right now. So -- I could be proven wrong. Powell: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Anna. Powell: In my presentation I neglected to bring up the fact that they are requesting a variance and I just want to take just a second to explain what that variance is for. It was for the block length and it is just. related to the school. It's this distance here to the property line here exceeds the 1,000 feet, so we had the Eight Mile Lateral boundary along here and, then, it -- because it was a school site it wasn't appropriate to have a stub street at the back of that property. So, we were in general support of the block Meridian City Coundl July 8, 2003 Page 42 of 59 length variance on that. And could I add just a couple comments regarding the school? The school has had -- the relationships between the school district and the city seem to have been strained over the last few years as far as coordinating the development of these playground areas associated with the schools and how the city can work through the development community to have these combined uses and I do believe the school district is ready to reconsider those things now, along with the parks department is ready to consider them and I was hoping Mr. Bigham could be here tonight to perhaps open up that conversation a little bit. The Comprehensive Plan does talk about school facilities and trying to work with the school district. From the conversation tonight, it appears that you really consider the school to be just like any other use, that it doesn't have this special quality of being kind of an open space use, as well as an intense use on a portion of the property. I was wondering if you could maybe give the applicant or me a little better idea, if we are going to go work with the school district or work on reconfiguring this, maybe your thoughts on how this could better serve as a dual function or if you don't want to consider that at all. I hope that was kind of clear what I'm trying to get from you, but -- Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I think -- I will give you my answer, Anna, and (think I -- sure, we want to work with them, but I can tell you -- and I think maybe at grade schools they don't lock it down like they do a high school, but they have -- to my knowledge the Kiwanis Park has got no access to the Mountain View High School. Now, I want to work with the schools, because we are -- it's tax payers money there, too, and we use -- we use the school green space probably as much as we do the park's green space, because they have got more of it right at this point. Yeah, we want to work with them, we want to, and this is -- I would have no problem these guys go back and bring us a letter signed by Wendell that says that this school is never going to be locked down and I don't know how they can do it in their homeowners ordinance, because they can lock it down if it's going to be their property. I would take a good hard look at that. I mean I like your subdivision, I like your plan, I like the school out there, but I don't think we can start a precedence here. If we do, I think we are opening up a big, big can of worms, unless we can get something -- we will probably have to change the ordinance, so it's more clear where schools are involved and I think that's probably what we need to do, so -- Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Yeah. I guess I'd echo the same comments from Councilman Bird. You know, I guess I'm very apprehensive in borrowing from another public entity the use of that green space to cover their requirements by our ordinance and we have not granted that previously, so I'm not really -- 1 guess I don't see any compelling reason to change that now. Again, I think it a creative way to do it and there probably is some benefit to it, but, Meridian City Council July 8, 2003 Page 43 of 59 again, you know, the school board can change, the school's philosophy could change and we have been talking about providing this multiple use between the school and the park. It wasn't -- it wasn't initially -- at least my recollection was it wasn't really initially a -- for a private development to, then, have a homeowners association park, as well as a public park sort of connected together in this manner. That just wasn't what the discussion was. It doesn't mean we can't do that, we just haven't really gotten there and we haven't seen the school district at one of our meetings in a long time. So, we really don't have anything really outlined as to what we want or what they want or how we make that function, because you have got a public school that has public access and you have got a private park that doesn't. So, you know, kind of -- it doesn't mix together very well without clearing up what those things are. Oh, here. is Mr. Bigham now. On the variance thing, I guess I looked and saw a block length variance,,) didn't even read it any further, I just thought we kind of just did those, but that's what I think we need to iron out is some of those details of how do we make a public private park work together, because, as Mr. Bird says, the homeowners can lock that park off, too, if they don't want to allow access. You know, those people from the school are going to think that's something that's usable to them and it isn't. Amar: There are some things we can do within the CC&R's and make the City of Meridian a party to them that the homeowners association cannot. According to our attorneys, the homeowners association cannot react that way without approval by the City of Meridian. Homeowners associations cannot go away without the approval of various agencies within different -- within different jurisdictions and we can do the same thing and make the City of Meridian a stipulation to that, which we can do that certainly on this project. Mr. Bigham is here and I think he can answer some of your questions with respect to some of the agreements that we have made. One question I did have, this park right now is five percent of the entire 35 acres, which also is because this school is a portion of that, so there is about a half acre of park that if it were a separate plat would not be needed in order to accommodate five percent of the open space. So, I guess my question is, is the Council looking for five percent of this area or is the Council looking for five percent of just the homes within the subdivision? Because I believe the way the ordinance reads, it's five percent of the entire subdivision. Bird: We don't want any part of your CC&R's. You got that with the homeowners. The City of Meridian didn't want any part of that. Corrie: Glad you said it. Bird: Is there a reason that you guys were going to gate across there yourselves? I mean the school wanted --okay. Amar: The school wants to gate that at the time, but I'm going to leave that to Mr. Bigham. He can answer that better than I. And if you would allow us -- I guess we can do this on the fly also, but I can talk to Mr. Bigham and tell him the issues or we can, like I say, do it on the fly, so -- whatever you'd like to do. Meridian City Council July 8, 2003 Page 44 of 58 Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Do you want to take a five minute break and let him talk to Wendell? Corrie: Yeah. Amar: Okay. Thank you. Corrie: Okay. (Recess.) Corrie: Okay. Amar: We are trying to figure out another way of coming up with five percent, separating the school lot out for the subdivision, because I don't want to provide five percent open space for the school lot. I mean I don't think that's fair on either part and right now I'm providing five percent open space. So, if I cut the school lot out, my five percent is going to be about one acre and right now I have 83/100ths of an acre and I'm sure I can get it up to one acre of open space if I redesign the plat to just show the school as a separate parcel and I can sell that parcel off to the -- I mean it's the same benefit to the school. Bird: I would feel more comfortable with that. Amar: What it will do in the short term is instead of, in the short term, having an acre and a half of open space, there is going to be a half-acre of open space with other open areas throughout the subdivision. So, if we can get approval tonight on that idea, getting five percent open space of the housing subdivision, I guess is my question, we will redesign the plat and we can bring it before you, obviously, to show you what the redesign looks like, but we will provide an acre's worth of open space within the subdivision and not provide open space to that school lot. Bird: How many acres did you say was in the subdivision? Didn't you say it was 20? Amar: Twenty acres. Just a little over. Bird: Twenty-two or something like that? Amar: Yeah. So, there is 1.1 acres for whatever the five percent is. Bird: And I think if you -- I think you take that one lot just to the south there and you have got your 1.2 acres, don't you? Meridian City Council July 8, 2003 Page 45 of 59 Amar: It would take about three of those lots. Bird: Would it take three of them? Okay. Amar: And so what we are trying to do is -- can you go up to the other -- right now we have got entryway landscaping on these areas and also along here that's not a -- that we can count towards our five percent open space, so we can make that a little wider and come up with the 1.1 acres or whatever it is that is just for this portion of the subdivision and, then, we will develop that immediately and meet the city ordinance. Bird: And you will still donate that ground that goes into the L over there to the school? Amar: Well, no. Bird: Is the school and Mr. Bigham -- we can ask him, but is the school going to leave that east side of their properly open, so we have access to that open ground? There will be no fences up there? Amar: You can talk to him. There will be a fence, but there will be an opening in the fence and I think he can address that better than I can. Bird: And they won't be locked down or anything? Amar: I'll defer. Bird: Okay. Amar: I don't want to speak on behalf of the school. Bird: I don't want you to. Thank you. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: And that all sounds well and good. I mean really -- I mean certainly you can do that. You can redesign it, you can separate that out, you have the right to do it, but we can't approve it. I mean we can't approve -- I mean we can certainly approve the concept, because you can do that, you can redesign your property if you choose, but there is nothing we can approve tonight. Amar: I understand that. I guess what I'm saying is approve the concept. I don't want to come back in two weeks and you guys say, well, no, we really didn't like that two weeks ago, we jusf didn't tell you that. Meridian City Council July 8, 2003 Page 46 of 59 Nary: Well, I already told you I didn't like it where it's at anyway, so I'm saying I'm going to vote for it anyway. If you just redesign it and you just take a couple of lots off of the backside there, I don't know that that's better. But you have the right to do that. Amar: I don't think it is better. I think what we have right now we are providing a lot of open space, but I guess what I'm saying is I'm trying to meet the ordinance, I'm still trying to provide -- because I've committed to the school to provide them property, so I'm trying to provide to the school property, I'm trying to meet the city ordinances, and I can do that and in the short term it will be a -- Nary: Well, I can only speak for me, but we have been here before and made conceptual approval of people's ideas and really regretted that, so I won't agree to that. You can redesign it if you want to. If you want us to vote on it tonight, I think you kind of saw where we are going. If you'd like us to continue it, bring back a different design, have the staff review it, we may need to send it back to Planning and Zoning. If it's a significantly revised preliminary plat, we may need to send it back, wouldn't we, Mrs. Powell? Powell: If all that happens is that lots get converted from residential to open space, I'm not sure that we would, but yes, if there is a major redesign of roads and -- then, it maybe necessary. Nary: It just depends on how material the change is, is, really; all it is. So, if you want us to continue it a couple of weeks, you can redesign it, you can bring it back, that's the best I would commit to. I don't know about the rest of the Council. Amar: The redesign would -- the subdivision is going to look the same, short of it will be minus one lot, this lot, that will be separated out from the subdivision and we will work out negotiations with the school to do that. And, then, we will provide about an acre's worth of open space within this portion of subdivision. So, based on Mrs. Powell's definition, I don't believe it would be a significant redesign. Corrie: You will still have the tot lot? Amar: Yeah. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I would continue -- and if he meets the ordinance, I have no problem going for it, as long as you meet the ordinance. Amar: I will meet the ordinance. Meridian City Council July 8, 2003 Page 47 of 59 Mrs. Powell: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, would you be -- I'm not sure that he can just make that school lot go away out of the subdivision. Would you be opposed to him including it as a lot in the subdivision, but not being required to provide the five percent open space for that lot? Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Well, how do we do that? We haven't done that before. We have always included it as part of the plat. So, if it's part of the plat -- Powell: The landscaping ordinance, I believe, allows for alternative compliance and you could you -- you could make a decision that that lot, because of the open space generally associated with a school, that they will maintain in of themselves the minimum of five percent and I think that that would be fairly reasonable that the school would never develop all of that property. Nary: Wouldn't we need the Planning and Zoning Commission, then, to hear that to make that recommendation that it be allowed as .alternative compliance, rather than us just doing it? Powell: Well, no, actually, just I can do it. For some reason the authority rests with me. I'm never quite sure why that is, but it does say that the administrator can approve an alternative landscape requirement. If these are going before you, obviously, we want to get your feedback on that, but in this case I'm not sure that you would have to take it back to P&Z just for that reason. If there are other reasons, then, that would be -- Nary: As long as there is findings that comply with the ordinance, Ithink -- I mean I don't -- at least for me I don't have a big problem, other than I just don't like where it is, and that's not going to change. I don't think my mind is going to change. Amar: I guess we would still meet -- we would meet the ordinance with five percent and that's what I can guarantee you, I guess. Bird: That's all we can ask you. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I guess in my opinion we are going to get less and I like the fact that when we brought the landscape ordinance -- and I know it was a concern that the school district also asked us to consider -- this is finally a step in that direction, that that land would have been donated, deeded, or whatever, but I liked that, it was the right direction to go in, and making up an open space and some of the setbacks and other landscape Meridian City Council July 8, 2003 Page 48 of 59 or drainage areas is not going to make that green space any bigger and so -- but I guess I'm in the minority right now, so do what you need to do. Corrie: I would hate for it to come down to two and two, a tie. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: And I'll try to make this my final word, but I don't see how we are going to get less. The school is still going to be there -- unless the school is going to get smaller. The ground isn't going to change, it's still going to be 35 acres. We are requiring the five percent be contained within the homes. So, we are not going to get less, it's just going to be different. Again, I personally don't like where you're putting it. If that's where it is in two weeks it probably won't change my mind very much, but if everybody else likes it, I have been on the losing side before. I can live with that. But we are not going to get less, the school is still going to be there, we're still going to have green space, we are just not letting them borrow it to use it as the percent that's required for this housing development. I don't see why that's a loss. How you choose to redesign it may be the reason we may approve or deny it. If it looks like you just took a lot out and all it is, is a little bit more grass, we have turned those down, too. So, you know, you can be creative or not, that's your call. I agree you tried to do that with this one, I don't think that sells very well. If you bring it back and it's just a piece of grass, that may not sell very well, either. Amar: I think we will probably just agree to disagree, but what you will get is the same - - in my redesign -- and I may as well be upfront, because I usually am -- you will get the same -- we will cut off this portion of the open space, you will get this same area, it will be a tot lot. This open area or entrance area, whatever you want to call it, will be widened by ten feet or 20 feet or whatever it takes. This will be widened ten or 20 feet. This will be widened ten or 20 feet, so all your areas will be widened ten or 20 feet, so there will probably be some sort of landscape medium in through here and this pathway, instead of being a part of the school lot, will be a part of the subdivision and made a little wider. So, what you're going to get and what I'm going to bring back to you and propose to you is what I have here tonight, with the exception of the medians being wider and the school is still going to be there and the subdivision is still going to look the same, but I will be able to comply with your ordinance. What you won't get is an immediate improvement of all this green space. And so even though the subdivision is going to have the required five percent per ordinance and will meet ordinance, it's going to be a -- in my opinion, not as good of an opportunity as we have now. The school won't get the land donated to them, they will be purchasing that land, and so the taxpayers also -- Corrie: Wait a minute. One time you said you were giving it away and, then, you say they are going to purchase it. Which is it? Meridian City Council July 8, 2003 Page 49 of 59 Amar: Well, if I can't -- if I am not allowed to do what I'm proposing tonight, then, they will purchase it. It's a benefit to me to be allowed what I'm going to do tonight and so I think I should give a benefit back to the school and I think that's what Mr. Bigham is also trying to do is let's cooperate as schools and developers in the city. Cowie: Well, you can take a chance. I mean if it's still two and two, you probably won't get it. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Cowie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I guess one more point is to move that open space into another location -- I guess I like it there, because we have always had this vision, expectation, that as our police department drives through here there is vision into the school lots and I would hate to see them move it and I thought that's what you were kind of suggesting, you don't like where open space is, and that you would like to see it move. I would hope that it wasn't moved, because you do need that vision into the school yard and if -- I just wanted clarity on what you were saying. Nary: Mr. Mayor`? Cowie: Mr. Nary. Nary: When we have had that discussion, though, we have found that would require a redesign, but we certainly have other alternatives than just having a blank space there. It's not centrally located, the people that are in the front end of that subdivision that are up adjacent to Ustick, really, won't be able to use this at all and, you know, you can design it any way you want, it's your development, do it any way you want, but if you come in here with another piece of grass, it's not going to be very popular, and, you know, you can choose to be creative or not -- I'm sorry that we disagree, but it isn't very central, it doesn't allow access to other people, you can redesign it to allow some visibility to the back of the school if you want to, you don't have to. You can do a lot of different things with this ground. It may be limited, but it is 22 acres, that's a pretty good piece of ground. So, you know, telling, you know, we could have made it better, but you guys didn't want it, you know, that doesn't sell very well with me, you know. Amar: I'm not saying that. I'm saying -- I'm trying to meet the ordinance. Nary: And that's okay. We can disagree and that's fine, I don't care. Design it anyway you want to design it, we get to choose whether or not we like it, but I just don't think you're providing adequate -- it's supposed to be usable open space. I don't think it's usable open space when it's really accessible by about a quarter of your subdivision and the other three-quarters of it really can't use it. That doesn't appear to be usable open space to me. You can use it some fashion and you can design it anyway you Meridian City Council July 8, 2003 Page 50 of 59 choose, you just take your chances. I would hope you would be more creative than that, but you can do whatever you want to do. Amar: Okay. Well, one question. When you say another piece of grass, what are you referring to, just so I know what not to do. Nary: Well, it sounds to me like you were going to have a tot lot and take one of those residential lots out and just put grass on it. That doesn't sound like much of anything more than what you got there. That's not being very creative, that's not providing much of an amenity, that, to me, isn't much of any significant change and I just think you could be more creative than just taking one lot out and putting grass on it, so -- that's all. Amar: Okay. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Before we continue this to another -- a later date, as the applicant has asked, this is a Public Hearing, you know, Mr. Bigham is a busy person and there is some questions I'd like to ask him and there might be some people here from the public that wants to testify that can't make it in a couple of weeks, so let's continue on this, because we could sit here and we can sit here and argue for an hour and a half and not get anything accomplished, so I would move that we move on with the Public Hearing and see if anybody else would like to testify. Amar: I would like to say we did have a neighborhood meeting on this and there were three different families that showed up. The Quenzers were -- showed up and Mr. Langley were all the families that showed up and they came to the Planning and Zoning meeting, but they had no concerns. We do have an irrigation ditch, a feed ditch up in the front, that we will have to the in order to provide the Quenzers their -- Bird: You got to the it? Amar: Yeah. Bird: Do you have to the it? Amar: It's a 12-inch private irrigation line that we can't or can leave as on open ditch. Right now it's a concrete ditch. We just have to the it, because it will provide the Quenzers their water. So, yes, thank you. Corrie: Okay. This is a Public Hearing, so, Mr. Bigham, anybody like to testify that won't be able to come back in two weeks or next week. Yes, Wendell. Is the testimony you're about to give the Council the truth, so help you God? Meridian City Coundl July 6, 2003 Page 51 of 59 Bigham: Yes, it is. Corrie: Thank you. Name and address. Bigham: Wendell Bigham, representing the Joint School District No. 2. I wasn't here for the earlier part of the discussion. I apologize. We have now moved our board meetings from Monday to Tuesday nights, so I'm here at the tail end of for hours of board meetings for me, so I will try to remain succinct. I want to try to reiterate just a little history of what we are conceptually trying to do. The school district is finding it somewhat difficult to deal with the small acreage developers, difficult in a structural sense, not in a personality sense. How do we work with the 35 acre lot where we are going to impact 40 percent of the land use for ten or 12 acres for the elementary schools and one of the things I have always maintained all along is trying to avoid the loggerheads. Is this development better with the elementary school in it, than the loggerheads of fighting over -- disagreeing over a percentage of landscaping where Mr. Amar comes to the school district and says we are just not selling you the land and, then, we are confronted with the, well, we are just not going to approve your subdivision position. That's adversarial. So, what's the greater good? The greater good is to get green space into the smaller subdivisions and we can talk about where it should go is certainly point of interest. So, philosophically, what I'm trying to do is say this amount of landscaping, whatever it is, while it is on the school district's property, serves the neighborhood better than trying to just deal with the five percent requirement of this. We like going in as a lot and block within the subdivision, it makes our future application a lot easier. This elementary school site is out ten years, 12 years. It's a long ways out there. So, the subdivision will be built out. Is there a way to get the grass space into here? From an organizational standpoint -- I don't know if you told them, Kevin. The parking lot is down here, the circulation is in and out of here. Our X-shaped building is kind of sitting in here like -- well, I can't draw tonight. You know, sitting in this vicinity. This access provides potential -- well, this would probably be the secondary emergency vehicle access. The supervision by the police department is of interest, because this is the green open area that creates the noise at night and there will probably be a playground structure in this vicinity and I think one right about there, you know, haw we separate the playground structures in the back of a school. So, this is going to be grass in our plans. If we want it today, perhaps not in the most attractive, you know, it's just a sea of grass, or do we want to wait 12 years for it to come. Again, my personal thoughts are the grass on the school district's property cannot be in lieu of the five percent requirement, but the other side of that coin is to bring the developer and the school district cooperatively. Can it accommodate some percentage of that five percent? Half of it? Thirty percent of it? Forty percent of it? Because we could be confronted with five percent of this or five percent of this and no school, if we come to loggerheads. So, our thought was what can we do cooperatively to entice the developers to work with the school district? Do we get a better price on the land? Who knows. You know, we go through the land negotiations. It's how do we philosophically work, because we are not always going to see these 200 acres, 400 acre subdivisions. Now, this scliool geographically is very important to us. It's fortunate that Kevin came to us. It's unfortunate that he came to us. It's kind of at the tail end of the sewer in that Meddian City Council July 8, 2003 Page 52 of 59 part of the world. That's very critical to us. So, we will play it pretty straight up. So, we have tried to make cooperative efforts and we are certainly not trying to dissuade any of your concerns, but I think at a minimum we would like the school there. If it turns out that it's five percent of this -- I can't speak for Kevin, you know, that's his concern, that works. The greater good is to get the school here in this larger area and that's what we are trying to participate in. We have not dealt with our attorney in terms of the purchase agreement of the property as to how we legally carve that out. If he donates that little one acre, half acre, whatever that is, two acres, whatever that chunk is to us, that is excellent. If it turns out he has to put the five percent in there, then, we would expect to pay something approaching fair market value for that property. Again, it's very hard to leverage a real good deal when you're only taking half of their land. With that I would stand for any questions. I just wanted you to understand where -- the background of how we came to kind of the solution. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Wendell, as I take it, then, even though we have a fence up there along the east border and probably around the whole school property, it's still going to be open for children, adults, everybody to play after hours, stuff like that. That's the concern. I hope you understand that the concern is our ordinance says you have to have five percent within the deal and if we make -- if every school or every park is built -- subdivisions are built by and they want to use -- you know, we didn't let the Cedar Springs use the Settler's Park for their green space, you know, we can't let that green space there for that deal. And also -- and maybe it's just that the secondary schools, but as I understood, there will be no openings to our Kiwanis Park out at Mountain View. No way to come through that. Bigham: I can address that. Bird: Would you -- you know about it or is that true? Bigham: Uh-huh. Yes. And sort of yes. Bird: Okay. Bigham: I can speak to that if you like. Bird: You bet. I would like. Bigham: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Bird, briefly, what we would do -- certainly, we fence our entire property, we get a little nervous when we lose children. What will happen in this -- initially, I would advocate that the developer be required, if this is acceptable, to fence that area off, so the grass doesn't just run out into our sea of weeds, that we will have to maintain there. The permanent fence will be -- down to here there will be a Meridian City Council July 8, 2003 Page 53 of 59 break in it for a walking path, which would come into the front of the school in the parking lot area here, it will be fenced solid down along here. Our desire would be to have a six foot high chain link fence or a solid slat vinyl fence, which we are going to give that a try, that's at the developer's expense, trying to avoid that six foot cedar fence, six foot high chain link fence, and that no man's land of who maintains it between there. But solid fencing along here and we would, then, fence to this point and we would fence -- I would probably say diagonally across there, with an unobstructed opening -- five foot -- four foot opening with a bollard, so you can't drive your four wheelers through it. It's to provide limited access and easy supervision. We can't totally lock off the perimeter, but we don't like really big holes in it and with a small opening there it would define this area as, if you will, as a tot lot for the underage children in the neighborhood to come to a place and play and, yet, provide playground structures and grass in this area for the older kids in the neighborhood, knowing full well that it's from 8:00 until 3:30 that, you know, we kind of keep track of who comes onto our property and that was the concept behind this and, then, the offset was -- and I understand the ordinances and I'm not advocating that we violate the ordinances, I'm just advocating that if we have an alternative landscape solution or a little different way to think about the greater good -- and I'm worried about the greater good being whether there is a school there or not. Bird: I agree with you. Bigham: That's my concern. Bird: Thank you. Bigham: The second one, Mr. Mayor, Commissioner Bird, if you'd like to give me a call I can talk to you about the Kiwanis Park. Bird: You bet. I'd love to. Bigham: I don't want to take up the time tonight. Or if any of you are interested, I'll let you know kind of what our concerns are.. Bird: I know you got something. De Weerd: Oh, we'd love to hear about it. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Yeah. Mr. Bigham, you know, I think it was probably a year, year and a half ago that we had a discussion at our work sessions that we used to do about having some more cooperative agreements between the school district and the city and using some of the school property as some public open space and trying to define that, because the Meridian Ciry Council July 8, 2003 Page 54 of 59 school had concerns about access and use during school hours and the like and we don't seem to be anywhere on that and that sort cropped up before you came in regards to this, because we really don't have anything particularly defined between this public space that's going to be used by everyone versus that tot lot, which is not usable by everyone and we don't have any real definition between this partnership, which I agree with you is a good thing ultimately and, hopefully, we either have, you know, some alternative means to address that in our ordinance, so we aren't simply throwing it out the window, but we don't have anything, we don't have an agreement with the school district, we don't have any relationship or agreement established between the school district and the city or the school district and what do we do, what protocols exist in dealing with private developments. So, I guess -- I agree with what your concept is, but we don't have anything really on paper to really address that as to how we go forward on that. Bigham: Councilman Nary, you're right, we need to look at it -- and it's kind of -- there are two different components. One is the school district public park joint use cooperative effort, which, I believe, Anna is aware all of my concerns about that. Operationally, on a structural level, it is exceedingly difficult to meet both of our missions. It's absolutely a worthwhile discussion to continue to have. The other side of this discussion is public open space, but not a city park. This is a developer provided park and the school district. To be perfectly honest, we don't want anything to do with homeowners association, irrigation systems, we don't want to share maintenance, we don't want anything to do with the homeowners association. Bird: We don't either. Bigham: So, what we are trying to look at is what's the stop gap, the inner in-fill, what's gets this area a place to play catch the mustard, soccer, until we get around to building this thing in ten or 12 years. I don't have the answer to it. This simply represents our attempt at throwing an option out there -- and it may not fit any of the rules, in which case if it doesn't fit any of the rules, we will certainly -- I'm certainly not asking that you break them, but in the back of our minds we need to be conscious of how do we acquire three and a half to four percent of all land in every square mile for school district use when you can't always deal with -- the big developments bring a whole other set of problems, you know, and how do we deal with the 35 acres. So, this is an option, we are certainly willing to try to work with it out with Mr. Amar, we are desirous to have a school site there. Could we live on a little less land? Yes, we could, but I'm not sure how that -- us giving up the land would contribute to more of his ability to comply the ordinance. Corrie: Anyone else from the public like to testify? Okay. Do you want to continue this, then? Bird: Pd make a motion, Mr. Mayor, if you will accept. I make a motion that we -- oh, did you want to -- Meridian City Council July 8, 2003 Page 55 of 59 Amar: Kevin Amar, for the record. I think we have a compromise that we can -- without a redesign we can still meet the five percent. I have been sitting down here scratching my head trying to figure this out. Still provide the school with what they want and make everybody happy in the end. We can still meet ordinances, so there isn't any concern of setting precedent to revise ordinances or to revise anything else. And that compromise would be this: We do have some opportunity to make this park -- this portion of the park slightly larger and add about 8,000 square feet, which would increase that open space. Based on Mrs. Powell's testimony, we can exclude this from the required open space. Now, if we do that, we need, like I said, about 1.1 acres. So, my compromise would be this: We provide with this park and with other landscaping amenities and buffers and widening entryways, we provide that permanent 1.1 acres of open space for this subdivision, but we also improve this area, so there is going to be an acre and a half of immediate open space of immediate use. Obviously -- I mean we are not counting as the open space, but it's beneficial to the subdivision. So, the compromise would be allow landscaping, more open space than would be required by the ordinance, but still putting five percent of open space for this -- still leaving 1.2 acres or one point -- whatever it is -- 1.1 acres worth of open space within that subdivision. We can still leave the school here, it requires no redesign, really -- I mean we have to widen -- narrow some lots or whatever, but it's easily done and there is no redesign and we still provide our five percent open space, there is no precedent set, the school still gets what they want, and there is still a large play area. And so I would submit that that be a compromise or a working solution or whatever you may want to call it, but I think in the end everybody wins. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: You know, I know we disagree tonight, but I knew you could come up with something that would be much more workable and that does sound very workable. I think what, I guess, I would like to see is I kind of want to see it -- I mean I really don't want to approve what you just said without seeing it. I think there may be -- I guess like Mrs. Powell said, we have the opportunity to provide whatever appropriate conditions may be necessary to make sure we kind of get all of those things taken care of. One of the things that I think is probably going to be necessary, though, at least to me, we put lots of sign on streets saying at some point in the future this is going to be a street. We may want to put something there that at some point this is going to be a school, so that people know that that green space exists now, but it may change in some complexion in the future. Can we continue this a week or two to make sure we get all of the -- to kind of get your pencil and paper done, get conditions that may fit, as well as some findings or some staff report that indicates, you know, why this alternative compliance is appropriate and why it complies with our ordinance, so that we aren't setting precedent. Is that going to work? Meridian City Coundl July 8, 2003 Page 56 of 59 Amar: Ultimately, it's your decision, but, no, I'd rather -- we want to build this yet this year and so two weeks if -- it's two weeks at the end of November when it plays out at the end through construction and, then, don't -- Nary: How about one week, so we can kind of see it? Amar: I don't mind showing it to you. I guess my -- I'm happy to show it to you. I'm very open and I'd much rather you know what I'm doing than not, because I don't like surprises, I like them twice a year, on my birthday and Christmas, short of that, no surprises. So, yeah, we can --one week on Tuesday; right? I've got to -- Bird: Mr. Mayor? Cowie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Mr. Nary, you know, if we -- if we understand his conception, he's doing basically what he said he would, even though it's not counting in the existing sub, he's still going to give us that and, then, he's going to do the extra on the other deal, and who is -- this piece that you're giving that's going to be part of the school property, whose name is it going to be in until -- I mean are we going to -- is the school district going to have it and it be in their -- under their deed? Amar: Are you thinking of this piece? Bird: Yeah. Uh-huh. Amar: It would be -- we'd have to work out -- Mark Freeman is not here. I think he's going to have to answer that question, but in my mind that would be owned by the school immediately. Bird: And you guys would -- Amar: And we would have an easement. Bird: And you would have an easement and take care --and get it planted in and stuff? Amar: Correct. Bird: I think Wendell would like to see that. Amar: And we can fence around that. That's fine. Bird: Why can't -- I would be in favor of passing it tonight on the condition -- Cowie: On the concept? You're -- Meridian City Council July 8, 2003 Page 57 of 59 Bird: Go ahead. Cowie: Excuse me for interrupting, but -- Bird: No. No. You go ahead. Cowie: -- you don't approve anything on a concept before, why would you do it now? Bird: Well, it isn't really a concept, it's drawn out. It's -- we are just going back to the -- we are going back to the old plat with a promise. De Weerd: No. Bird: And I have no problem -- what do you mean? That's exactly what you've got there is just what he said. The only thing he's going to do is widen -- well, yeah, you are going to widen some -- Amar: We will widen this lot by -- Bird: You're widening some entries. I'm sorry. You're right. I have never approved anything on a concept before yet. Nary: Mr. Mayor, I was going to mention, Mr. Bird, I heard him say that last week and I heard him say it again. Bird: Yeah. Nary: I know we don't -- I know it seems like a delay that -- but I really think we need to -- Amar: If we wait a week, that's fine. Nary: And I think that leaves the staff some adequate time to make sure that whatever conditions they feel may be additionally necessary, to give them an opportunity to sign on the -- so I think -- I guess I'd feel safer, I think we might also be safer. I think you have come up with a very good compromise and I appreciate that. Thank you. Powell: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, I think because that ownership is changing, I'd like to see the applicant provide that open space in two different lots. Amar: When we come back there will be a line drawn here, basically. This will be dashed with an easement. It will still be there, but it will be dashed as a easement. This will be another lot, so we are adding a common lot. That will really be the -- could it be wider? That will be wider in these little areas and in here will be wider, but that's the changes that will be back before you. Meridian City Council July 8, 2003 Page 58 of 59 Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: With that, I would move that we continue the public hearings AZ 03-008, and PP 03-008, and VAR 03-013, to July 15th, 2003. Nary: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded to continue the Public Hearing on Items 15, 16, and 17, request for annexation and zoning, request for preliminary plat, and a request for variance on Birchcreek Subdivision until July 15th. Any further comments? All those in favor say eye. Opposed no. The ayes have it. We will have a continued Public Hearing. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: With that, I have nothing else on the agenda, so I will entertain -- De Weerd: Oh. Corrie: You forgot. De Weerd: I forgot to add this -- Corrie: Well, let's see. You will be --okay. Say what you want. Item 18: Fire Station No. 3. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor, I apologize that when we approved the agenda that I failed to remember to add it on the agenda, but I had wanted to bring up the issue of the Fire Station No. 3. When we originally talked to the rural fire commission about Station 3, we had mentioned that we would do what we could to waive the building permit fees and that sort of thing and they are at that stage where they to need pick up their building permit fees -- or building permits and they are being charged and so I would like to see Council's opinion on that, so that the Mayor can work with the building department tomorrow to get that building permit out. Corrie: I think that's good. I think we have to make sure that we are not giving them -- we can't do anything for ACHD and some those people, but the Public Works building guy, Daunt, has a -- he said he would give his part, but he has another one that reads to -- The blueprints and you might have to pick me up. De Weerd: Well, if he had a way to waive the ACHD fee, that would be great. But they weren't asking for that, they were just asking on the city side of things.